franco12 wrote:why not just put chandler on the bench? Doesn't sound like AR has won any specific role.

I'm not the least bit surprised that MDA wants to go small

But, I'd rather see what we look like with a traditional starting line up (e.g., a real center).

And then have Douglas, Chandler and AR off your bench.

Papabear Says

Chandler is going to have a break out season. Just watch! and we will still talk about trading him even though he will be playing great. The reason why we have loosing seasons at least part is that the guys do not have time to gel before they get traded or let go. Now some we let go needed to be let go. AR worries me that he may not be a team player.

crzymdups wrote:Chandler is a horrible rebounder for his size. He's 6'8" and super athletic... and he gets fewer rebounds than Trevor Ariza.

I agree with this. Chandler has all the ability in the world to grab AT LEAST 7 rebounds a game, and he hasn't shown that. It's been the one aspect of his game that's been dissapointing, and because of this, I don't really trust him at the PF position ESPECIALLY with an undersized Amar'e playing center and to me, Amar'e is better off playing PF.

martin wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Chandler is a horrible rebounder for his size. He's 6'8" and super athletic... and he gets fewer rebounds than Trevor Ariza.

I agree with this. Chandler has all the ability in the world to grab AT LEAST 7 rebounds a game, and he hasn't shown that. It's been the one aspect of his game that's been dissapointing, and because of this, I don't really trust him at the PF position ESPECIALLY with an undersized Amar'e playing center and to me, Amar'e is better off playing PF.

dude was playing a lot of SG last season.

So? That means he can't go in and crash the boards? If that's the excuse, then it's a pretty crappy one at that.

Allanfan20 wrote:

martin wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Chandler is a horrible rebounder for his size. He's 6'8" and super athletic... and he gets fewer rebounds than Trevor Ariza.

I agree with this. Chandler has all the ability in the world to grab AT LEAST 7 rebounds a game, and he hasn't shown that. It's been the one aspect of his game that's been dissapointing, and because of this, I don't really trust him at the PF position ESPECIALLY with an undersized Amar'e playing center and to me, Amar'e is better off playing PF.

dude was playing a lot of SG last season.

So? That means he can't go in and crash the boards? If that's the excuse, then it's a pretty crappy one at that.

Come on man, we are better than that.

First, you should let me know what the finer points are in the difference between making an excuse and putting something out there that is a reasonable explanation of things.

As a SG, you are most guarding OTHER SGs, no? Meaning you end up way far from the basket? Against other shooting guards, Chandler ranks as one of the best rebounders in the league.

Have you considered rebounds per minute or rebounds as a percentage of his teams total rebounds?

Or are we completely comfortable in saying that someone sucks or is totally awesome after making a split-second, non-relevant and not very well thought out comparison?

With his athleticism, work ethic and offensive skill set he seems a good candidate to be a late bloomer. I think moving him closer to the basket puts him more in a position to suceed. His weaknesses are he's a poor passer and has a below average handle. Putting him closer to the basket might be worth a look.

Position	FGA	eFG%	FTA	iFG	Reb	Ast	T/O	Blk	PF	Pts	PER*
SG	18.3  	.495  	3.0  	37% 	7.7  	3.1  	2.4  	.9  	3.4  	20.5  	15.3  
SF	17.2  	.520  	3.7  	35% 	6.6  	2.5  	2.1  	1.2  	4.2  	21.0  	15.9  
 

Position	FGA	eFG%	FTA	iFG	Reb	Ast	T/O	Blk	PF	Pts	PER*
SG	17.7  	.484  	3.9  	25% 	5.7  	3.3  	2.1  	.4  	3.1  	20.4  	14.3  
SF	17.1  	.544  	4.8  	27% 	8.5  	2.8  	2.7  	.6  	4.2  	22.2  	16.5  

Thats a pretty good sample of games to look at.

Now go back to 82 games and you see some very clear trends, namely that Chandler is a better SG than SF. Look at his #s. His EFG% at SG is lower, but his opponents is lower as well. He rebounds more as a SG, more assists, fewer fouls, and his opponent is held to a lower FG%.

Ive never been married to defining a player by a position. If Ewing was healthy we probably win a title with a 3 guard lineup. Put not only the best 5, but the 5 who play the best on the floor and go from there. Chandler does too many things well to not be on the floor for 35 minutes a game. Not sure I really care where those minutes come

TheGame wrote:The bottomline is Chandler is a SF. He does not have the 3pt range to play SG at a high level and he is not big enough or strong enough to play PF for extended minutes. If Gallo proves that he is a starting caliber SF, then the Knicks will need to trade Chandler for a piece that fits better at the SG spot. We already have Fields developing as our backup SF and AR can also play SF. We don't need 3 of our top 6 players all playing the same position.

Dwyane Wade will never play SG at a high level by your definition.

During the first 3peat Championship wins, Kobe also did not play high level SG because of his 3pt range.

And dont get me started on Jordan and his crap ass 3pt FG% in the first half of his career.

Perhaps we should adjust your definition?