Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by BRIGGS:
channing has played great, tim duncan won a championship his first year and has three rings, could have had 5. You could move Tim Duncan to ANY team in the nBA right now--the knicks, the Hawks the Raotors and they become a championship contender and that goes bakc to his rookie year. Hes able to control the game on both ends in the paint, his stats while superb, dont even quantify his true presence on a game--very much like a modern day bill russell.
channing has troubles defending 1-1 and picking up fouls. Duncan is a cinder block in the paint. I dont think its fair to compare the two, Id like to think that Frye can be like a kevin mchale type player with more athletiscm. That certainly isnt bad
no it isn't at all, but I don't see the mchale comparisons, but kevin was a hell of a player tho. But seriously I know this "better than Duncan" post can't be serious, I love frye, but lets not go there, we can hope that one day he has the same effect on the knicks that Duncan has on the spurs....
Mchale was a 6-11 finesse post player with pin point accuracy. Channing is a 6-11 player who also has pin point accuracy, yet more athletiscm. A little different in their styles, but similar type of effect, atleast we hope:>)
McHale had so many moves in the post. He was like Hakeem before Hakeem, but not as quick. He did have the dealy midrang jumpeer with the high release that was almost impossible to block.
If Frye becomes anything close to either of those guys, words will not be able to express how i feel.
on d he desnt warrant any of these comparisons though. TD is a defensive juggernaut, Frye is a defensive liability.
1/7/2006 4:00 PM