True, Von has shown that He can score and sometimes score at will however that is it. I can not really say that He would develop His other facets of the game since He only stayed one year with the team. Given two to three more years with the team then a generalization about Him can be made.
We dont know where wafer will wind up in the future and just like some of those dotcom sites, they went up in smoke and some are still thriving today. I mentioned stephen jackson before in another thread. He's a guy who with the spurs was boom or bust. He also came out early and had some maturity issues, but hes a pretty good player. The spurs dont win the 2nd ring without him because he took and made big shots. He also turned the ball over,but he never backed down from the big play or shot. Thats who wafer is to me. He may not be the ball distibutor or even the defender of jackson, but offensively,quickness,and explosion along with some maturity issues are there. Let me ask another question, who would you rather have, jackson or battier right now?
I would argue that teams need both -- the offensive spark off the bench and the guy who relishes doing the dirty work. The thing is, Jackson is more then JUST a scorer, and Battier is more than JUST a defender. Sure, Shane has nights where he does almost nothing offensively that shows up in the box score, but he's also capable of hitting a half-dozen threes and giving you 20 points on a given night, too. And he's proven to be pretty good in clutch situations. Wafer, on the other hand, gives you NOTHING except scoring. And for my taste, he's a bit too streaky to count on as your "instant offense" guy.
Agree on both accounts. If the other team commits a defender to him, he is shut down unless other guys create shots for him, or unless he is able to get out in transition.
Exactly. there are many players like Wafer in the league: athleticism, spped, talent ... but few players like Battier: always think about the team first.
this thread is an example of the pretentious nature of battier fans who think they know more about basketball than the rest of us.
when does that ever happen? The inability to put the ball in the hole can be just as big of a problem as the inability to do anything but score. This comparison is crazy flawed and unfair though. Battier is viewed as the Shaq of roleplayers while Wafer just became contributor on the NBA level. Of course people are gonna lean towards Battier. Generally speaking, to be just an explosive scorer and recieve half the praise Battier gets while having huge holes in your game (like Shane); one would have to a be a near all-star level player. Ben Gordon is probably the closet guy that fits that description. But his problem is his height (6'2) not the holes in his game. If he were 6'5 he'd probably be an all-star. He's not that good of a defender, he doesn't pass well and has never met a shot he doesn't like. Yet he just got like 50mil and (I think) Chicago offered he contract simular last summer that he turned down...how is that possible? He doesn't take charges nor does give great interviews In the end both types are flawed players who absolutely need the other 4 players to cover up those flaws. Quite frankly, I believe circumstances dictate which type is more important. Look at New Orleans. A season ago they were a 2 seed averaging 101ppg. This past season they ended up up a 7th seed averaging 95ppg even with 2 all-stars and Chris Paul having one of the greatest seasons ever by a PG (30.1 PER). They lost Jannero Pargo (to an already weak bench) but added super role player James Posey. Which move do you think had a bigger impact? The gaining of a Battier type(Posey) or the losing of a Wafer type(Pargo)? Another example with Posey is the '08 Celtics. Yes, he was absolutly a big part of their championship but could you see that team winning the chip without Eddie House (Wafer type)? Given the size of the contracts Wafer types recieve, I dont see the need to make this thread/comparison. Unless they're exceptional at scoring (ala Ben Gordon) they all suffer from the same flaw that keeps their value down...lack of playmaking skills. If those guys were actually good passers they'd be viewed on the same level as the Battiers'
Personally, I'm all about efficiency, and not wasting opportunities. I hate the guys who go out there and miss shot after shot, because it shows such selfishness and lack of a winning mentality. I'll take a .447 FG% and .390 3P% over a .410 and .384 every day of the week.
Wafer's percentages are average for a SG.. so how is that being efficient? He also plays like 20 mpg, so I would hope he would average 45% since he's not even taking that many shots or staying on the court that long.. So since you hate guys with 41% FG and 36% 3PT, does that mean you hate Hedo Turkoglu? Does that mean Turkoglu is selfish and lacks winning mentality.. I'm sure that's why his team made it to the NBA Finals.
what do you expect from a guy who compares the trade to larry anderson/jeff bagwell, and bagwell being battier.
The issue of battier comes down to cost, period. giving up rudy gay for him will never me justified to me. does that lump me into some group who doesn't appreciate role players and only appreciates highlight reel players. ridiculous I for one was one of the few people on this board who knew the over excitement of getting stromile swift was going to leave a lot of people disappointed. I caught flack for warning people to tame their expections, I wonder where the OP was on that transaction.
you start a thread saying how some people don't understand basketabll and it galls you that they are hoping a certain player gets signed for a certain amount and drawing a line in the sand between two groups and you want people to discuss basketball? edit: excuse me, between two imaginary groups, this thread is silly
In the end, battier and wafer are bench players unless the starter are good enough to support their holes. People think I dislike battier as a player which I don't. I get frustrated because I watched shane at memphis since his rookie year and he has gone backwards every yr offensively on a team that really needs production from that spot. I expect more from shane than sit in the corners and shoot three when he's butt naked. Shane has the easiest job on the court offensively when yao and tracy are playing. That's one thing I really apppreciate about scola. Scola takes advantage of teams looking at yao and tracy. He moves to the open spots, get easy shots and converts the effeciently. Conversely shane allows his man to check yao's johnson size because he's a stationary spot guy. One of the hardest things to do is find a guy to close out on or defend. When you're moving, cutting and slashing in a offense, bodies get bumped and assignments are blown. That's why Utah get so many layups and backdoor cuts for easy plays. Watch how many easy baskets ariza will get this year. The same easy baskets shane should get. The same easy basket wafer was getting. Shane has a bbiq, but its always evident that a lot of times he doesn't want part of the action on offense. Don't believe me, go look at his road playoff averages. Better yet, do what I do and chart the games. On entry passes, look how many times he threatens the defender. After a rebound or steal, watch how many times he fills the lane. Backside on offense, watch how many dives, shallow cuts, or Z cuts he makes while his man is counting dribbles. Again, in the perfect world, shane would be offensively as good as he was as a rookie. In a perfect world, shane would shoot more than 100 ft's in a season when in memphis he was over 200 atts. In a perfect world, shane would be a good offensive player and retain his defensive attributes. You need Battier types on the squad, you just don't need them playing 35 mins.
lastly, if you want to talk basketball, I don't get why just because a player is athletic, he's not fundamental. Jordan was probably the most fundamentally sound player of his era, as well as the flashiest, therefore the best. Wafer is not a good defensive player, we all know that. beyond that I don't get why people call into question his fundamentals. does he take some shot he shouldn't, maybe, but he's out there to score. the thing I probably appreciated him the most for is his ability to get to the goal, something this team had seen in a long time, rafer would drive, but he couldn't finish. that opened all all kinds of opportunities for this team after tracy went down. battier can't drive and is basically limited to shooting set shots from certain spots, is that fundamental? sure von had the blow up in the playoffs, but that's mostly off the court isuses (although it is very unfortunate it happened on the court). but the guy isn't some slacker who only dunks occasionally, when he is operating in the flow of the offense, he's a very valuable offensive player. and when the offense isn't flowing, he can definitely jump start it. but I guess that isn't fundamental.
And what some dont understand is... its not Rudy Gay as much as it is the actual top 10 pick. That summer Houston was in desperate need of 3 things.....1. Youth 2. Athleticsim 3. Scoring. Does Battier fit any of these things? Of course not, thats why the deal was horrible. And dont give me the "win now" mantra. Win Now means collecting as much talent as possible future be damned. Win Now means attacking your biggest need at all costs (ala the Barkley trade). The 05-06 Houston Rockets averaged 90ppg....scoring was their biggest need. Win Now means taking that pick and getting a legit 18ppg scorer. Look at the love that Brooks, Landy and to a lesser ex. Wafer & Lowry get on this board....they get it cause they're young & athletic. We had 3yrs of watching Mac & Yao play with a bunch of old one dimentional players.
