Gerald Wallace or Josh Howard

Which is the better player?I would take G-Force. Look at his numbers: 15 ppg, 8 rpg, 3 spg, 2 bpg, 53% shooting as a Guard/Forward is impressive also.

 

I'd take Howard obviously, as he's the second best player on teh Mavs, and does everything well, that Dirk doesn't.Plus, look at the record, when Josh goes over 20 points, the Mavs don't lose.He does everything well, and is learning to shoot the 3 ball, and the mid range shot.He's not just a drive and slash player anymore.

 

I'd still take Wallace, he's a very solid defender/rebounder.

 

Definatly Gerald Wallace. He scores as much, shoots 53% from the field and is a huge defensive presense (2.5spg, 2bpg). Not to mention he has an elite effciency rating.

 

Either way you're getting a solid player, I'd say it's a win-win

 

It's obvious that Gerald Wallace is the better player, and he's only 23 to Howard who is 26.

 

Gerald Wallace, because he's turning into a great scorer and he's leading the league in steals. Also he's 23 and has more upside than Howard

 

god damn I didn't realize Gerald was so young

 

I didn't realize Howard was so old.

 

I didn't realize Gerald Wallace was so good. Does he have an outside shot or close to one?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mavsfan1000 @ May 3 2006, 12:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't realize Gerald Wallace was so good. Does he have an outside shot or close to one?</div>Its not great but its becoming more and more consistant. He can hit the mid range pretty decently now.

 

Not really, he gets most of his points inside, he's like Desmond Mason in terms of scoring. Thus his high shooting percentages.

 

See, and if he developed an outside shot, I'd give it to Wallacet too.But right now, I'd still take Howard, who can shoot the mid range, and has a surprisingly good 3 ball.Plus he's probably just as good a defender as Wallace, and while averaging less, he's doing it on a very talented and deeper team, something I think needs to be taken into account

 

Wallace is a better defender than Howard.I'll take Wallace. freak athlete, superb defender, good scorer, good rebounder. More versatile, he can play 3 positions.

 

Great topic comparison here.I'd take Gerald though. He is an excellent rebounder, freakishly athletic and he has improved his range. He can slam it on anyopne and uses his athleticism and overall talent to score on offense. He is an excellent defender and shoots at a high percentage because he attacks so much.

 

As far I've seen Howard, though, he doesn't play as well in the second half and crunch time.

 

On Dallas I would rather have Howard. He spaces the floor better and isn't limited offensively. Either one would be nice but I think Howard is more of an offensive threat.

 

I'd take Josh Howard simply for his abilty to score in other ways. Sure maybe Howard won't snatch 2 steals and swat 2 shots a game, but he is still a good defensive player and a better rebounder. Wallace scores because he is an athletic freak, Howard scores because he has offensive ability. There is a big difference being the 2nd best player on the Mavs than being the 2nd best player on the Bobcats.

And trust me, I am definitely not one to base a player's ability on stats or compare players with stats, but all I am saying is Gerald Wallace would not be putting up 15 ppg or whatever on a lot of teams. Josh Howard is a rising star and a future All-Star in my opinion. Gerald Wallace can be an All-Star caliber player if he developes a jump shot though.

 

Exactly...the fact that they are on 2 very different teams makes a HUGE difference.Wallace doesn't have to play with the pressure Howard does, especially since Howard is the 2nd best player on an elite team, while Wallace is toiling away on a bad team.