[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Some analysis on Walker and Sweetney
Author Thread
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  9:34 AM
Tomvverve, I would like to commend you on supporting your opinion with a thoughtful, coherent, post that uses fact as its basis. It was a good read.

By the way, long posting is great when you actually have something to say!

***

I think you have made an interesting comparison of Walker or Sweetney, coming to the (predetermined?) conclusion that Sweetney is a more efficient player than Walker. That may be true, because efficiency is what Sweetney is all about. Before I address your individual points I'd like to talk about the "noisy" statistics:

Sweetney 04-05 NYK
77 28 19.6 .531 .000 .749 2.20 3.20 5.40 .6 .35 .36 1.40 2.90 8.4

Walker 04-05 ATL-BOS
ATL
53 53 40.2 .415 .317 .534 2.40 7.00 9.40 3.7 1.21 .60 3.45 2.80 20.4
BOS
24 24 34.5 .442 .342 .557 2.30 5.90 8.30 3.0 1.04 1.08 2.92 2.90 16.3
TOT
77 77 38.4 .422 .323 .539 2.40 6.70 9.00 3.4 1.16 .75 3.29 2.80 19.1

Sweetney averaged 19.6 minutes while Walker averaged 38.4 so AW played almost twice as many minutes per game. This works out well for projections.

If we were to double Sweetney's minutes and assume that Sweetney would put up the same kind of numbers playing against starter-level players (A BIG ASSUMPTION.) here is what we get:

Sweetney 04-05 NYK with theoretical doubled minutes
77 28 39.2 .531 .000 .749 4.40 6.40 10.80 1.2 .70 .72 2.80 4.80 16.8

Walker 04-05 TOT
77 77 38.4 .422 .323 .539 2.40 6.70 9.00 3.4 1.16 .75 3.29 2.80 19.1

Sweetney looks pretty good, though I still think Walker wins out. This does beg the question: If Sweetney could produce these kind of numbers over 40 minutes why wasn't he starting?

Sweetney's game begins and ends with offensive rebounding and putbacks.(Ranks #9 in the NBA in Offensive Rebounds Per 48 Minutes at 5.4) Notice the fouls and turnovers in his double -minute projection. Both are high, especially considering Sweetney does not handle the ball much and his foul rate has been occuring primarily against other bench players. What will happen if he has to guard a starting quality power forward every night?

***
quantifying Sweets and Walker in the paint

However, inside shot attempts-- shots taken in or near the paint, dunks, and tip-ins-- show Sweetney to have a decided advantage of his own. A healthy 69% of Sweet's FGAs were taken in the paint, and he converted them at a .635 clip. Walker with the Hawks attempted 43% of his FGs inside and only converted at a .539 clip. With the Celts, he raised his inside shot attempts to 57% of his total FGAs and converted .519 of them. So it's not much of a comparison in terms of efficiency-- Sweetney is much better at converting his shot attempts in the paint, and furthermore places a much heavier emphasis on this part of his game than Walker does. Net effect is that Sweetney is much more efficient offensively. Even if we're just looking at inside FGAs, Sweetney converted a healthy 10% higher than Walker last season. And it's not just Sweetney. Compare Walker's numbers to Maurice Taylor (.627 inside eFG%) and Tim Thomas (.607 inside eFG%). It's not clear Walker would really add anything of value to the team in terms of taking and converting shots in the paint.

I will make this statement: Walker is a much better player than Sweetney, efficiency or not.

Let us remember, during his short 2 season NBA career, Sweetney has been fighting for minutes in one of the NBA's weaker front lines. Were Sweetney of Walker's caliber, don't you think he would have gotten a lot more time right from the start? I think he would have, regardless of how bad the coaching/managment has been.

Make no mistake, if Walker comes here he will be a big-minute player. Will the Knicks be as good a team if Sweetney plays the kind of miuntes that Walker would play(Theoretically)?

Then what happens to the bench? Will the player who steps into Sweetney's role as backup be able to get the job done and produce as well as Sweetney did? I don't see that player in the youngsters, so unless we anoint JYD or Malik Rose as "THE BACKUP POWER FORWARD", we stand to lose twice.
True, but some stats tell much more of the story than others. For instance, it's been correctly pointed out that Antoine's penchant for 3 point chucking makes overall FG% too coarse of a statistic to compare Walker's production down low in comparison to Sweetney's.

The tone of this sentence makes me worry that the conclusion to this post was made then the research has been gathered and presented to support the conclusion.
Jump shooting is no comparison. Sweetney attempted 31% of his FGs on jumpers, and only converted at an eFG% of .302. By comparison, Walker with the Hawks attempted 57% of his FGs on jumpers and converted at an eFG% clip of .393. With the Celtics, he dropped his jump shot attempts to 43% of his overall attempts and converted at a steadier .417 clip.

This is actually unfair to Sweetney, who takes most of his jumpshots with no time left on the clock and similar situations when he has to shoot the ball.
However, inside shot attempts-- shots taken in or near the paint, dunks, and tip-ins-- show Sweetney to have a decided advantage of his own. A healthy 69% of Sweet's FGAs were taken in the paint, and he converted them at a .635 clip. Walker with the Hawks attempted 43% of his FGs inside and only converted at a .539 clip. With the Celts, he raised his inside shot attempts to 57% of his total FGAs and converted .519 of them. So it's not much of a comparison in terms of efficiency-- Sweetney is much better at converting his shot attempts in the paint, and furthermore places a much heavier emphasis on this part of his game than Walker does. Net effect is that Sweetney is much more efficient offensively. Even if we're just looking at inside FGAs, Sweetney converted a healthy 10% higher than Walker last season. And it's not just Sweetney. Compare Walker's numbers to Maurice Taylor (.627 inside eFG%) and Tim Thomas (.607 inside eFG%). It's not clear Walker would really add anything of value to the team in terms of taking and converting shots in the paint.

This stat is largely a decription of their roles:

Sweetney's job is to get under the boards, rebound, and put back missed shots. The Knicks do not run plays for him nor does he create the offense.

Walker's role thus far in his career is to create offense for his team and for himself, not establish position underneath the boards.

Comparing Walker and Sweetney's offensive games is tough because they are the proverbial apples and oranges:

Sweetney is more of a prototype power forward. Though he has skill, his game is off the ball and concentrated on the "dirty work". He is very good at this type of work despite his twin deficiencies of being short and not that fast, making up for it in strength and width.

Walker on the other hand, is an offensive player who has been counted on to produce from all areas of the court. In addition, he has played the role of point guard for quite a bit of his career. He has been put in a position by his coaches where he has the green light...indeed even been encouraged to attempt plays that would land most players on the bench. I would say that Walker can make shots and plays that Sweetney cannot even begin to attempt. Does that translate to a high field goal percentage? No.

Walker part 2: what about the jumper?
It's true that Walker's game is more versatile than Sweetney's because he has some semblance of a jumper out to 3 point range.

To qualify Walker's outside game as a semblance of a jumper makes me think that you are intentionally de-emphasizing his strengths.
But how much is gained? His inside offense is considerably inferior to Sweetney's

Now I know it's true. Sweetney is really not part of the offense. His sole job is to rebound, and I don't think he is quite good enough at it to call putting shots back an "offensive game". Dennis Rodman maybe. Not Sweetney.
and his outside offense is not exactly cause for jubilation either. Compare Walker's eFG% on jumpers with some other Knicks from the past season, plus QRich (whose numbers are probably slightly inflated from playing on the run and gun Suns):

eFG% on jump shots (04/05 season)

Walker with Hawks: .393
Walker with Celts: .417
Penny Hardaway: .428
Tim Thomas: .456
Jamal Crawford: .472
Stephon Marbury: .472
Quentin Richardson: .487

Where can I find out where this stat is calculated? I have been to 82games.com and I could not find it.
OK, so what does Walker add exactly? His inside offense is clearly inferior to Sweetney's.

Yikes! Not true.
OK, but he's got a jump shot. How good is his jump shot? Penny Hardaway shot a (somewhat) better percentage last year than Walker did. How much do we like Penny's jumper? Tim Thomas, in a season wrecked by injuries and unfortunate outside circumstances, still managed to shoot a fair bit better from the outside than Walker. JC and Richardson, who are notoriously streaky and unreliable from outside, shot a significantly better eFG% on jumpers than Walker.

How do you think Penny and Tim and Q would have fared at 40 minutes per game? Would they have gotten 9 rebounds and 3.5 assists as well?
And Marbury, who doesn't have much of a game from the 3 point line and has some less pronounced consistency problems of his own, was also markedly better.

Marbury has a fine 3 point game. I think he is a better shooter than Walker.
Plain and simple, Walker is a lousy percentage player. His per game statistics are largely illusory-- he puts up fairly gaudy numbers only because he dominates the ball and takes so many shots.

Once again, you are characterizing him as a selfish player, by saying he dominates the ball. This is simply untrue. The coach put the ball in his hands because the Celtics have had point guard problems throughout Walker's career--and they still do. During the Celtic's recent good years walker averaged about 5 assits per game!

Walker is not the NBA's efficiency poster boy. But perhaps if he can play in a non-tumultuous situation with an excellent PG like Marbury, he won't HAVE to assume guard duties, and he can concentrate and be utilized in a more efficient manner.
In the process, he wastes lots of possessions with missed shots-- inside shots that would be better taken by Sweetney or Taylor or Tim Thomas,

Maurice Taylor is the only one of the aformentioned players who has a post game.
and outside shots that would be better taken by just about any other Knick who plays on the perimeter. All those wasted possessions add up and wind up costing teams points, and ultimately wins.

Any other Knick? Marbury, Q, Houston yes. Crawford? Maybe.
And this is why there is justifiably such a large anti-Walker sentiment. We don't need this guy at all, and we certainly shouldn't give up any of our better players to get him.

We do need him because our front line is destitute. Sweetney is not ready nor is Frye. Therefore our front court is terribly limited. I am not sure about what deal could/should be made, but we really don't have many "better players". It pretty much begins and ends with Marbury.
For a young and healthy player like Sweetney, who averaged a relatively hefty 19.6 mpg over 77 games last season, we can pretty safely project his production linearly in terms of minutes played, within a reasonable amount of minutes. Foul trouble does not seem to have been a major factor in Sweetney's mpg last season-- he averaged 3 fouls in 20 mpg, which projects to 4.5 fouls in 30 mpg. There is some precedent for players playing 30+ mpg and fouling at roughly the same rate, e.g. Ilgauskas (33.5mpg, 4.0fpg) and Jason Collins (31.8mpg, 4.0fpg) last season.

Per 30mpg, Sweetney goes for roughly 12.6ppg and 8.1rpg. Those numbers don't knock your socks off, but the scoring is done much more efficiently than Walker and the rebounding is actually better. And Sweetney could certainly post better per-minute stats with an increased role in the offense, as he tended to be underutilized last season.

I would disagree with you on foul trouble. Jason Collins had trouble staying in the game last year. Krstic has made him into a small role player. Ilgauskus fouls quite a bit, but he produces very well on offense and he is an offensive focus, demanding a double team and skewing the defense. Sweetney does not, and that is why Z is a much more valuable player.
So the complaint is that Walker shoots a lower percentage because he has to create shots.

I don't know that it is a complaint.
1) How do Walker's inside eFG%s compare to other go-to guys on the post?

Amare Stoudemire .706
Antawn Jamison .695
Shaq .685
Eddy Curry .650
Garnett .649
Carlos Boozer .648
Yao Ming .647
Elton Brand .644
Tim Duncan .615
Emeka Okafor .611
Pau Gasol .609
Dwight Howard .593
Rasheed Wallace .592
Lamar Odom .580
Chris Bosh .580
Jermaine O'Neal .574
Carmelo Anthony .560
Zach Randolph .545
Z Ilgauskas .541
Walker (Hawks) .539
Walker (Celtics) .519

Walker is clearly in the basement district for players who create shots in the post and shoulder a heavy offensive load. He did better as a 4th option on the Mavs, but on a team where he's asked to be 1st or 2nd he's very inefficient for a high volume post guy.

You are comparing him to players who play totally different games for the most part. The only players on that list with any similarity to AW are:

Antawn Jamison .695 04-05 WAS
68 68 38.3 .437 .341 .760 2.40 5.30 7.60 2.3 .81 .24 1.74 2.20 19.6
Lamar Odom .580
04-05 LAL
64 64 36.3 .473 .308 .695 2.10 8.10 10.20 3.7 .66 1.02 2.52 3.30 15.2

Both are good players arguably better than AW, but they are not available to us.
It's worth noting that Sweetney compares favorably to this list, with an inside eFG% last season of .635. Even if we assume that his efficiency would take a dip to around .600 with more minutes and a heavier role in the offense, his percentages in the paint would still be in Pau Gasol / Emeka Okafor territory. Sweetney will always have a tougher time getting his shot off than those guys, but it seems it's quite within his capabilities to be a damaging low post option who can score about 15ppg with high efficiency and draw double teams.

Sweetney does not have a good post game (As of yet.) When he is given the ball down low (Rarely) he usually ends up with a bad fallaway or a oopdy-doop reverse. He cannot be compared to any of these guys.
Even given Walker's negative aspects, one could make a case that he's valuable to certain types of teams. In particular, his ability to handle, pass, and get shots off might be valuable to a team like the Hawks, who had a dearth of go-to options and playmakers last season. (Remarkably, Atlanta still played much better without Walker last season, as Walker's poor -5.7 +/- stat with the Hawks attests.) So would he be of value in this way to the Knicks?

I think the case for his value has already been made and settled i Boston, where they had a two-headed "THE MAN" and he and Pierce got the Celtics to the playoffs more or less by themselves.

He would be of value to the knicks because he would be their best frontcourt player. Maybe Sweetney can play next to him!
My answer is a pretty clear "no." We already have guys who can create shots on the perimeter (Marbury, JC, Nate) and some go-to options on the post (Sweetney, Thomas, Taylor perhaps Frye). We also have plenty of playmakers with Marbs, JC, and Nate.

We have added one potential playmaker (Nate) to last years horrible play-making team (Talk about inefficiency!). I do not have the faith in Crawford that you do.
It's always nice to have another player who can handle and pass, but not if you already have several guys who can do just that and the player you're thinking of adding tends to dominate the ball and post truly lousy shooting percentages across the board.

Its always nice to have another very good player.

oohah

Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
AUTOADVERT
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
7/21/2005  10:27 AM
antoine walker would be a train wreck
type move, a move that will set the franchise back both short and long term--the type of commitment that injures a franchise for years. He's been playing hot potatoe with teams because they knew he had little contract time left and also wanted to *change* him unsuccessfully. This is not a 25 yo AW, this would be a 30 YO walker next season, and a 6 yr contract S+T would keep him with us until he was 36 years old. So many people don't realize just how weak the middle of the east has been, and how a guy like walker gets exposed just so badly by superior players.
Personally Id like to see us groom Frye for the 4 long term. He is NOT a C, he's a 4 man. I don't see how anyone can watch him play and see otherwise--hes going to guard shaq or Yao, BIG Z--he was getting hammered by David Harrison--he's a 4 but I think he can be an effecient 1, maybe not the best rebounder, but a guy I think can shoot 53-55% and score 15-16 points on avg with 6-7 reb in 33-34 min and help be disruptive with his length in a team type defense

Im not comparing Mike Sweetney to anyone, I don't think you can make fair comparisons until a player actually plays big minutes consistently. that being said, I like Mike's role as a 24 impact back up frontcourt player--hes big enough that you can slide Frye to the 5 at times because you have Sweetney who can hold position against almost anyone as can Taylor and James.
RIP Crushalot😞
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
7/21/2005  10:37 AM
Great post by both...one mistake in your stats oohah.

Sweetneys projected fouls would be 5.8 fouls a game (not the 4.8 (carry the 1).

So, we know for a fact one reason sweetney doesn't get the minutes is because of his inability to avoid picking up fouls.

Another stat to look at is Age.

I'm all for Walker coming aboard, and if we can keep sweets, I'm down with that too.

Maybe we dump one of our other PF's.

I want to keep TT.

Train wreck? Ask boston last year if acquiring walker was a train wreck...let's try not to be TOOO mellow dramatic.

All in all, Sweetney has a bunch of If's, if he's in shape, if he plays smarter...and because he's young, you have to assume he will.

Will Walker change? I dunno. Are his flaws part of his personality and what make him that unique talent in teh league? yes.

But we already have walker in TT, 6-10, can post up, hit the outside shot. However, we lose rebounds.

I think everyone forgets Walker averages almot 10 rebounds a game for his entire career. Good teams, bad teams. entire career.

So, does bringing 10 rebounds a game to our team for about $6 mill a year is a bad thing, then I think we are looking at the wrong stats.

Sweets can hit his free throws...another HUGE bonus for me.

So I think it's not about sweets v. walker as it is, could we use walkers swagger and rebounding?

I say yes.

keep them both, they tie.
all kool aid all the time.
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  11:13 AM
Sweetneys projected fouls would be 5.8 fouls a game (not the 4.8 (carry the 1).

Dammit!
I'm all for Walker coming aboard, and if we can keep sweets, I'm down with that too.

Maybe we dump one of our other PF's.

I want to keep TT.

That would be a best case scenario and I like it. I also see no reason that they can't play at the same time.
All in all, Sweetney has a bunch of If's, if he's in shape, if he plays smarter...and because he's young, you have to assume he will.

Right now our front court is all ifs.
Will Walker change? I dunno. Are his flaws part of his personality and what make him that unique talent in teh league? yes.

But we already have walker in TT, 6-10, can post up, hit the outside shot. However, we lose rebounds.

We also lose assists. TT averaged 1.4 to Walker's 3.5.
So, does bringing 10 rebounds a game to our team for about $6 mill a year is a bad thing, then I think we are looking at the wrong stats.

You are correct. I think folks are exaggerating the negative stats, and purposefully turning a blind eye to the good stats, wins, and recognition from his peers (Selected 2 time to the all star team by the coaches, seems to be loved by his teammates.).
So I think it's not about sweets v. walker as it is, could we use walkers swagger and rebounding?

I say yes.

Right twice.
keep them both, they tie.

We don't have Walker...yet

oohah








Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
7/21/2005  12:50 PM
Jerome James
Antoine Walker
Q Richardson
Jamal Crawford
Stephon Marbury

were going to give up 108-110 pts every game and shoot as a team in the LOW 40s and will BE close to the lowest rebounding team in the league. We will lead the league in 3, fast break opportunities going the other way.

if you could draw up a team that would lead the league in ineffciency, this could be close, and thats at both ends.
RIP Crushalot😞
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
7/21/2005  1:00 PM
definitely not me.

They take two of our PF's or one PF and Penny or they take nothing.

We have enough PF's and Lee will eventually be starting.

Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:

we had a solid offseason. even if jerome james is a bust, i feel we are going in the right direction. fans need to be appeased immediately. basketball goes in cycles and its best right now if we build with youth and be patient. no some fools want to drive a train wreck through with A walker and mark blount for draft picks sweetney and ending contracts. why are we even having these converstaions. slow and steady progress--lets be patient and opportunistic.. just like larry brown--lets hire him but be oprudent, we dont need to tell everyone that we made larry brown the highest paid coach. pay him market value for 3 years and 7.5mm per makes him the 2nd highest paid coach--i think for a guy wearing diapers right now, thats reasonable.
You keep repeating this but can you name ONE poster who wants to give up draft picks for Walker or wants to take back Blount's contract?
all kool aid all the time.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/21/2005  1:25 PM
Posted by rvhoss:

definitely not me.

They take two of our PF's or one PF and Penny or they take nothing.

We have enough PF's and Lee will eventually be starting.

Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:

we had a solid offseason. even if jerome james is a bust, i feel we are going in the right direction. fans need to be appeased immediately. basketball goes in cycles and its best right now if we build with youth and be patient. no some fools want to drive a train wreck through with A walker and mark blount for draft picks sweetney and ending contracts. why are we even having these converstaions. slow and steady progress--lets be patient and opportunistic.. just like larry brown--lets hire him but be oprudent, we dont need to tell everyone that we made larry brown the highest paid coach. pay him market value for 3 years and 7.5mm per makes him the 2nd highest paid coach--i think for a guy wearing diapers right now, thats reasonable.
You keep repeating this but can you name ONE poster who wants to give up draft picks for Walker or wants to take back Blount's contract?
He's basically making up things about what people with a different view from his think ("they want to give up 2 first rd picks and take back Mark Blount") to bolster his claim that we shouldn't acquire Walker. I still don't get the logic.
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
7/21/2005  2:33 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by rvhoss:

definitely not me.

They take two of our PF's or one PF and Penny or they take nothing.

We have enough PF's and Lee will eventually be starting.

Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:

we had a solid offseason. even if jerome james is a bust, i feel we are going in the right direction. fans need to be appeased immediately. basketball goes in cycles and its best right now if we build with youth and be patient. no some fools want to drive a train wreck through with A walker and mark blount for draft picks sweetney and ending contracts. why are we even having these converstaions. slow and steady progress--lets be patient and opportunistic.. just like larry brown--lets hire him but be oprudent, we dont need to tell everyone that we made larry brown the highest paid coach. pay him market value for 3 years and 7.5mm per makes him the 2nd highest paid coach--i think for a guy wearing diapers right now, thats reasonable.
You keep repeating this but can you name ONE poster who wants to give up draft picks for Walker or wants to take back Blount's contract?
He's basically making up things about what people with a different view from his think ("they want to give up 2 first rd picks and take back Mark Blount") to bolster his claim that we shouldn't acquire Walker. I still don't get the logic.


I just dont think you understand sign and trade my friend. The Celtics would want HEFTY compensation from us--they have 0 to do with antoine walker OTHER than they have the ability to S+T him. That MEANS they are going to take ASSET[S} as in plural, as in pick, young player and getting rid of the player they hate[blount]. It doesnt take brain science.

I guarantee anyone that if we trade and start Antonie walker at PF with what we have we will NOT make the playoffs and that will excerbate as he gets older. And if we back in with 38 wins, to me, that isnt the playoffs--playoffs at a minimum is 41-41--were NOt going to be 41-41 with walker playing 40 minutes
RIP Crushalot😞
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/21/2005  3:11 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by rvhoss:

definitely not me.

They take two of our PF's or one PF and Penny or they take nothing.

We have enough PF's and Lee will eventually be starting.

Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:

we had a solid offseason. even if jerome james is a bust, i feel we are going in the right direction. fans need to be appeased immediately. basketball goes in cycles and its best right now if we build with youth and be patient. no some fools want to drive a train wreck through with A walker and mark blount for draft picks sweetney and ending contracts. why are we even having these converstaions. slow and steady progress--lets be patient and opportunistic.. just like larry brown--lets hire him but be oprudent, we dont need to tell everyone that we made larry brown the highest paid coach. pay him market value for 3 years and 7.5mm per makes him the 2nd highest paid coach--i think for a guy wearing diapers right now, thats reasonable.
You keep repeating this but can you name ONE poster who wants to give up draft picks for Walker or wants to take back Blount's contract?
He's basically making up things about what people with a different view from his think ("they want to give up 2 first rd picks and take back Mark Blount") to bolster his claim that we shouldn't acquire Walker. I still don't get the logic.


I just dont think you understand sign and trade my friend. The Celtics would want HEFTY compensation from us--they have 0 to do with antoine walker OTHER than they have the ability to S+T him. That MEANS they are going to take ASSET[S} as in plural, as in pick, young player and getting rid of the player they hate[blount]. It doesnt take brain science.

I guarantee anyone that if we trade and start Antonie walker at PF with what we have we will NOT make the playoffs and that will excerbate as he gets older. And if we back in with 38 wins, to me, that isnt the playoffs--playoffs at a minimum is 41-41--were NOt going to be 41-41 with walker playing 40 minutes
Who doesn't understand the sign and trade? How much the Celtics want depends on how eager they are to get rid of him without looking like idiots who gave up a first rd pick for him just to lose him for nothing in return. If the Celtics want multiple draft picks and want us to take back Blount, we pass on the deal. You're acting like someone here actually wants to give up all that for Walker.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 07/21/2005 15:12:29]
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
7/21/2005  3:34 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by rvhoss:

definitely not me.

They take two of our PF's or one PF and Penny or they take nothing.

We have enough PF's and Lee will eventually be starting.

Posted by Bonn1997:

[quote]Posted by BRIGGS:

we had a solid offseason. even if jerome james is a bust, i feel we are going in the right direction. fans need to be appeased immediately. basketball goes in cycles and its best right now if we build with youth and be patient. no some fools want to drive a train wreck through with A walker and mark blount for draft picks sweetney and ending contracts. why are we even having these converstaions. slow and steady progress--lets be patient and opportunistic.. just like larry brown--lets hire him but be oprudent, we dont need to tell everyone that we made larry brown the highest paid coach. pay him market value for 3 years and 7.5mm per makes him the 2nd highest paid coach--i think for a guy wearing diapers right now, thats reasonable.
You keep repeating this but can you name ONE poster who wants to give up draft picks for Walker or wants to take back Blount's contract?
He's basically making up things about what people with a different view from his think ("they want to give up 2 first rd picks and take back Mark Blount") to bolster his claim that we shouldn't acquire Walker. I still don't get the logic.


I just dont think you understand sign and trade my friend. The Celtics would want HEFTY compensation from us--they have 0 to do with antoine walker OTHER than they have the ability to S+T him. That MEANS they are going to take ASSET[S} as in plural, as in pick, young player and getting rid of the player they hate[blount]. It doesnt take brain science.

I guarantee anyone that if we trade and start Antonie walker at PF with what we have we will NOT make the playoffs and that will excerbate as he gets older. And if we back in with 38 wins, to me, that isnt the playoffs--playoffs at a minimum is 41-41--were NOt going to be 41-41 with walker playing 40 minutes
Who doesn't understand the sign and trade? . If the Celtics want multiple draft picks and want us to take back Blount, we pass on the deal. You're acting like someone here actually wants to give up all that for Walker.

How much the Celtics want depends on how eager they are to get rid of him without looking like idiots who gave up a first rd pick for him just to lose him for nothing in return

The Celtics have 0 rights to Antoine Walker other than the ability to S+T him so they cannot be eager to lose something they do not own.

the celtics have a stockpile of 1st round picks and made a conscious effort to make a playoff run and they did, so in essence the value of the pick vs. the cash they made was worth the value of the trade at the time.


As for what we will have to give the Celtics--a pick and or a prospect OR both, an ending contract + mark blount --thats the deal brother.
RIP Crushalot😞
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
7/21/2005  3:37 PM
yeah, but a pick + prospect + expiring deal is worth every penny of the SHIMMY

ughh, can you imagine him doing that at 35 years old?
jaydh
Posts: 22890
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
7/21/2005  3:48 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:

Who doesn't understand the sign and trade? How much the Celtics want depends on how eager they are to get rid of him without looking like idiots who gave up a first rd pick for him just to lose him for nothing in return. If the Celtics want multiple draft picks and want us to take back Blount, we pass on the deal. You're acting like someone here actually wants to give up all that for Walker.

its not that someone here wants to give that, Boston will only deal if they are getting that, otherwise they let walker walk. which i am fine with.
jaydh
Posts: 22890
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
7/21/2005  3:49 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

yeah, but a pick + prospect + expiring deal is worth every penny of the SHIMMY

not to me its not
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  4:11 PM
its not that someone here wants to give that, Boston will only deal if they are getting that, otherwise they let walker walk.

This is speculation. I don't think Boston will let Walker go rather than get something for him.
yeah, but a pick + prospect + expiring deal is worth every penny of the SHIMMY
ughh, can you imagine him doing that at 35 years old?

I don't care for showboating antics, but the antics of Walker are tame compared to so many players, who you see nowadays "cutting their throats", jumping on top of sideline tables, grabbing their nuts and making other obscene gestures.

It just goes to show that most of them never learned how to play with the other kids.

By the way, Walker stole the Shimmy from Mark Jackson (I think enyspree pointed this out recently.), remember when Jackson used to do the "helicopter dance" and everybody jumped all over him? To me it is cute by comparison to what these hoodlums do nowadays...why in my day...

oohah



[Edited by - oohah on 07/21/2005 16:12:59]
Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
7/21/2005  4:26 PM
Posted by oohah:

[quote]its not that someone here wants to give that, Boston will only deal if they are getting that, otherwise they let walker walk.

This is speculation. I don't think Boston will let Walker go rather than get something for him.

It would be very expensive for the Knicks, not just what they will have to give up--picks player taking on blount, and the overpayment to walker , but also in the prize we get an additionally whammy of his chemistry breaking play at the expense of players we can develop.
Certainly a destructive deal IF we do it.
RIP Crushalot😞
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
7/21/2005  4:40 PM
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by Bonn1997:

Who doesn't understand the sign and trade? How much the Celtics want depends on how eager they are to get rid of him without looking like idiots who gave up a first rd pick for him just to lose him for nothing in return. If the Celtics want multiple draft picks and want us to take back Blount, we pass on the deal. You're acting like someone here actually wants to give up all that for Walker.

its not that someone here wants to give that, Boston will only deal if they are getting that, otherwise they let walker walk. which i am fine with.
That's fine but don't pretend that the "young posters" as Briggs calls them want to give up picks and take back Blount.
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  4:46 PM
It would be very expensive for the Knicks, not just what they will have to give up--picks player taking on blount, and the overpayment to walker , but also in the prize we get an additionally whammy of his chemistry breaking play at the expense of players we can develop.
Certainly a destructive deal IF we do it.

Pray tell, what is this chemistry the Knicks have that Antoine Walker would be breaking? The last time the Knicks had any real chemistry Isiah traded Van Horn.

Also, if we do get Larry Brown, do you think he will want to go to war with the front line we have?

I don't think so.

oohah


Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
jaydh
Posts: 22890
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
7/21/2005  5:01 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by Bonn1997:

Who doesn't understand the sign and trade? How much the Celtics want depends on how eager they are to get rid of him without looking like idiots who gave up a first rd pick for him just to lose him for nothing in return. If the Celtics want multiple draft picks and want us to take back Blount, we pass on the deal. You're acting like someone here actually wants to give up all that for Walker.

its not that someone here wants to give that, Boston will only deal if they are getting that, otherwise they let walker walk. which i am fine with.
That's fine but don't pretend that the "young posters" as Briggs calls them want to give up picks and take back Blount.

if thats what the "young posters" want, then thats fine. it would definately go against the current structure of our team.
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  5:04 PM
Stats are good.
Vibes are good too. SOmetimes they're called intangibles. Sometimes they're called leadership qualities, heart, on-court presence, body language. Decision-making, court smarts, basketball IQ.

They're both valuable and complimentary parts of evaluating players.

To me, a guy like Walker is downgraded because of the vibes or intangibles. To me they detract a lot from his game and make me not want him on the Knicks.

Can't always measure it in numbers, but doesn't mean it's not there.

Marv, What is it that is so bad about Antoine Walker? Sure, he comes off very c0cky. And I have nevr liked him either. But could it be that he is the type of guy you love when he is on your team and hate when he is on the other team.

As far as I can tell, he was the leader of the Celtics team that got to its highest potential in recent years. Pierce was the best player, Walker was the heart. And the fans in Boston hated the Walker trade to the Mavs and it was a veritable love-in when he returned.

I think it is a credit to AW's basketball IQ that he was essentially made point guard for a few years in Boston and had better point guard numbers than Charlie Ward. You don't run a playoff team through a stupid player. He does make stupid moves at times, he is not without his pitfalls.

Maybe It's because so many of us hated Walker in the first place that no one can see him here. I'll bet everyone would love to see Paul Pierce though.

oohah


Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
oohah
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/7/2005
Member: #887
7/21/2005  5:09 PM
Is a "young poster" some type of code for Kiddie Porn?

oohah



[Edited by - oohah on 07/21/2005 17:09:56]
Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
Some analysis on Walker and Sweetney

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy