As a Wake fan I can assure you that at no point was Rasheed Tim's equal. RW was Dicky V's #1 guy coming out of HS and had all the hype (w/Stackhouse) going into that year. But Duncan more then held his own w/Sheed back when they were both freshman despite Tim being a year and half younger. That Tim is taller longer and heavier are all advantages for a big. Wallace has small hands for a guy his size and can barely palm the ball... thats not so good. And then you get to their mindsets. As crazy as Wallace is felt to be by some, he also seems pretty universally praised and liked by NBA coaches players/teammates and has come through in all sorts of big games Would it have helped Wallace to be more focused? Probably but I feel like I'm only guessing from a distorted view if I'm trying to pick a guys personality apart. Wouldn't every athlete benefit from being more focused in games? For me the best sort of mindset for a teams leader is levelheaded and cool. Of course there have been some emotive leader champions over the years, but Timmy is the sort of cool under pressure type that usually comes out on top. Combining Tim's physical advantages + mindset = the guy who the Warriors were publicly begging to declare the year Wallace came out. I could go on, but it would just be more examples of how these two were never equals. It seems odd for anyone to claim that they should have been. Maybe it's the passionate fan being disappointed with reality (that there guy isn't as good as the other team's guy) and needing to lash out and blame someone? Scapegoating is certainly alive and well in Portland's fanbase as we see here on a daily basis. IMO it's usually not the players fault for someone else being better/more talented, it's probably more on the fan for believing their own ridiculous expectations should be met or the guy is somehow not fulfilling his potential. STOMP
Is that right? You might want to check out the following quotes by NBA analysts, reporters, and fans regarding one Rasheed Wallace: Dwight Jaynes, The Portland Tribune: http://www.portlandtribune.com/sports/story.php?story_id=23027 Jamie Samuelsen, Detroit Free-Press http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080818/SPORTS03/80818064/1 ESPN fan poll questions after Wallace was traded by Portland: http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?event_id=577&action=1&que
Maris, I am not going to get into a debate with you and sidetrack the thread. I was asked a reasonable question as to why I include Shawn Kemp in my Patterson/Wells shit list. I answered. You are free to disagree. End of discussion.
The HOF is rather choosy. About 10 players per decade get in. Sheed's not on my list of likely HOFers currently playing, but he is in the tier of guys right behind those who are sure to get in. A lot of people say the Pistons' championship team had no star players, yet I think they had 3 of the best players in the league: Ben Wallace, Billups, and especially Sheed. Sheed was THE goto guy on winning teams for almost his entire (long, too) career. His teams won. I do think the guy's been an asshat of a personality the whole time, but that doesn't distract me from his passion to win and play the game.
Do you have problems reading? Jaynes called Sheed an embarassment. That is not the same as loser, cancer or underachiever. Besides, Jaynes is a columnist. Columnists by definition throw shit against a wall to see what sticks.
Try reading my entire post, why don't you? The second link I provided contains a quote that speaks directly to Wallace's "underachieving" style of play, and the ESPN poll provides clear evidence that many fans regard Wallace as a loser and a cancer. I think you're the one who has reading problems.
"Many fans" are morons. I bet many of those fans believe in ghosts and don't know where Australia is on a map. Who gives a shit about an ESPN poll? The Detroit columnist talked about Rasheed being "most frustrating". Even assuming we care about the opinion of a columnist, there is nothing there to indicate he thought he was a cancer or a loser. In fact, he admits that Rasheed is very important to the team. You're grasping at straws, man, as ever, in your crusade against Rasheed. Ed O.
You seem to ignore the value of longevity. Most of the time HoF voters do not. I don't think that many would agree that Porter was more important to the Blazers than Rasheed has been in the last half-decade with the Pistons' success. WHAT? Are you kidding? You think that Sabonis was a "far better player"? Man. Can you remind me how the Blazers did without Sabonis the year he "retired"? Ed O.
Obviously not people who disagree with the results, like you. The fact is, polls can reveal what a large group of people think about any number of topics, including dysfunctional NBA players. And since every one of us on this board is a regular fan, I think the opinion of other regular fans on the topic of Rasheed Wallace is enirely relevant. You must have missed the part where he said Wallace was "lazy, passive, and didn't care" on many nights.
Here's Dick Vitale on the subject of Rashweed Wallace: http://espn.go.com/dickvitale/vcolumn010420Shaq-Rasheed.html
Popularity among fans has nothing to do with how much a player helps a basketball team win games. That's pretty clear to rational people. As Masbee said, facts don't support your contention that Rasheed has been a cancer and/or loser. He's been the go-to guy and one of the best defenders on one successful team after another, including an NBA champion. Rasheed being a central player on a number of winners pretty clearly proves that he wasn't a loser or cancer.
Talkhard (AKA "Shooter") was challenged on the credibility of his sources, so he searched around for the most reputable one he could find, and produced: 'Nuff said.
Seems that lots of people disagree, including John Denton of HoopsWorld: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=7083
Well... and the fact that the column was written when the Shaq-led Lakers were facing the Rasheed-led Blazers in the playoffs. Haha. Ed O.
It doesn't matter how many columnists disagree. The facts (you know, the events that happened in the real world) have proven you wrong about Rasheed Wallace being a loser and cancer. He's been one of the most important players, if not the most important player, on excellent teams. If "losing" means winning the NBA championship, I hope these Blazers are losers. I realize that there are other people like you who simply hate Rasheed Wallace to the point of irrationality. There's nothing Rasheed Wallace could have done to disprove being a cancer and loser, to you. Had he joined the Grizzlies and led them to five straight championships, every year you'd still be talking about how he was a cancer and loser. I'm not trying to change your mind; I know your mind was made up long ago, come hell or high water (or, even worse, facts). Just as you find it fun to rant against Sheed, I find it fun to watch you try to scramble to explain away a reality that conflicts with your desired outlook.
Rasheed publicly said he did not vote for George Bush. Anyone still wonder why Talkhard despises him? "Rashweed" - so mature and original!
