Assani, you have been doing a lot of justifying defense first, efficient players...so I don't get what your issue with Chandler is. He plays a very specific offensive role(rebounding, dunking) efficiently and can D up on anyone. In a league where scorers will abound there is no reason you need to worry about drafting someone who isn't a "third option" on offense in the 3rd round.

You're right. OWS rates the contribution to the offense not the offensive creation skills.

I have no issue with Chandler. I don't mind the pick at all. In fact I even said:


This debate started because imo he wrote:

And then I took exception to the "similar offense" comment as Thorpe has been a #1 option on his team before, while Chandler isn't even close.

btw, question about Ray Allen because living in NY for the past few years I havn't gotten to see a lot of SuperSonic games....

Watching him now, he looks really bad on offense. I understand obviously that hes in a shooting slump and whenever your main asset is shooting and you're missing then of course you're going to look bad. But its not just that...he just seems to short and not explosive(jumping ability, quickness) enough to really attack the bastet either.

So how exactly was he able to be such a huge scorer and legit #1 option back with Seattle? Was his jumpshot just that good that it made up for it?

Assani,

Gotcha. They are much much different players on offense...but you can be equally valuable on offense while contributing very different things. Not sure you are even arguing against that, though.

James

You're right. However, Thorpe got alot more love than Chandler, so I was responding to that.

cowboy2579,

I think that older players are getting a bit undervalued, so thats probably why I gave that pick more love. But I definitely don't mind Chandler one bit. I don't think it was a great pick, but you did well by moving up to get him(as it appears he would've gone) and I like your overall strategy. I think you reached on Rasheed- thats the pick I'm not in love with. But I think you got great value with GP.

ray ray was a tremendous shooter and he was a lot more explosive before the bad ankles. he could surprise a lot of people by getting into the lane and throw in a dunk out of nowhere. now that doesn't happen nearly as often.

I see what you're saying. I don't think I really reached on 'Sheed tho. I think he was the best big 2-way player on the board at that point. Rebounding a bit low for a PF, I agree.

assani, younger players are indeed going to be overvalued in a true basketball sense - but if the purpose of the draft is to draft the team that will be voted as the best team later on, then drafting players that were either clearly dominant statistically at some point or players who are familiar to the voting pool is smart. People can see that Shane Battier plays great D and will give the team that draftedd him credit for that when voting...a player who is similar to battier on offense and defense but from 1984will be viewed as worse by the general public here because so much of defense is judged by the "eyeball test." All things being equal, it definitely makes sense to go for current players IMO.

James

yeah and i think as a backlash against this and in an effort to seem like super smart insiders you guys have confused knowing who was good on defense with knowing who the best players are.

I never brought up the "voting process" in my initial rules thread. I wanted people to draft the best teams possible and not worry about pleasing others. If people are drafting to please others and get votes, then I'd be disappointed by that.

He's just really having an off post-season. I heard rumors about something in his personal life going on but I don't know the specifics. He was a huge scorer because he has all the skills. He can shoot lights out and he can create off the dribble when he needs to. Even during the regular season you saw Ray doing alot of the same things that he did in Seattle but he didn't have to do as much because of Pierce and Garnett. Now what's going on with him now? I have no clue. But yeah for sure in Seattle he was legit and always underrated in my book.

Do our coaches have to have begun coaching an NBA team in 1979 or later?

He was never overly quick or explosive in Seattle imo. Just extremely smooth with the ball and always had the threat of hitting the outside jumper which means he doesn't have to be as quick or explosive to get to the hole as other guys. He would throw down a dunk like someone else said as a surprise and that was sweet. He's a very very good finisher and underrated driver.

Assani and co.- I hope you realize that you are continually wrong in saying that you/I could get Battier in the 4th when posters came out and specifically said they were targeting him w/ their 3rd round pick.

Sure someone similar, fine--but please don't act like there is even the slightest chance he was going to be around b/c there wasn't.

Blahhh been aching for a pick all day...we really need to get this to nicholas!

wow I am late to this but LOL @ the Battier pick seriously (and I am a huge battier fan) but there are sooooooo many better players/fits avaliable it's disgusting.

ahhhhhhhh i really wanna make my pick

Same..I'm ready to make a reach.

+1 ****

he went baseline and dunked tonight.

so true, im back from the celtics game, and mm still hasn't made his pick. what the fc

(this is about chandler being a 3 option)

HUH? YOU ARE WRONG AND I HAD TO EDIT THIS!

I know he wanted tyson chandler, but I haven't seen him on in a while.