Who would you pick? I want to see everyone else's opinions, then I'll post my reasons. DEBATE :brucelee:
Haywood. he has size. rebounding and shot blocking. dalembert and chandler will get harrassed by big power guys all day.
Dalembert, easily. Haywood is only a good rebounder. Chandler doesn't get enough playing time, and Dalembert is an excellent rebounder and shot blocker.
Hmm close comparison. I'd probably go with Chandler, he has good height, plays great defense, also rebounds and shot-blocks well. He does struggle some offensively, but so do Haywood and Dalembert. Chandler has so much potential too, but he just hasn't developed it yet.
I'll go with Dalembert, simply because of the potential. But if I had to choose one of the three to play on my team right now, I would pick Haywood. He has a more polished offensive game than the other two (not saying much though), and he is a decent defender.
Now - Haywood because of size, rebounding, toughness, and strength. Future - Chandler because he is already an excellent rebounder and shot blocker. He needs to buff up a little bit more, but he still has a lot of room to improve his offensive game.
I would take Dalemburt. Hes already a great rebounder and shot blocker and is really working on getting a better offensive game
I choose chandler because if he gets the chance he can do really good. His blocking and rebounding are intact. playing on a team like the hawks who need a big man he could display and improve on offense.I like dalembert too but that butter finger shet i dont like. I just don like haywood lol
I'm going to go with Chandler, the way he effects the baby bulls on and off the court is tremendous, he is the king of the young, of the future centers. On the court, his size helps him alot with defense, and for those saying Haywood has good offensive game, as a Wizards fan i'm here to tell you that you are wrong, he has a huge footwork problem. I mean look what Chandler getting injured did to the team after the first round game against hte heat.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GArenas @ May 30 2006, 05:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm going to go with Chandler, the way he effects the baby bulls on and off the court is tremendous, he is the king of the young, of the future centers. On the court, his size helps him alot with defense, and for those saying Haywood has good offensive game, as a Wizards fan i'm here to tell you that you are wrong, he has a huge footwork problem. I mean look what Chandler getting injured did to the team after the first round game against hte heat.</div>Haywood isn't too good offensively, but I'd rather have his offensive game right now when you compare it to Dalembert's and Chandler's.
Chandler. He is capable of getting 20 rebound games when he gets playing time. U couldnt say that about the others. He is a good shot blocker as well as the others. But, Chadler doesnt look to score at all. He doesnt really get the ball on offense and when he does, he still doesnt try to score. Im not really fond of any of these players but i guess i would go with tyson. mainly for his rebonding...
Definatly Tyson Chandler, he's still really young and can play a little defense not to mention he's like 7'1" or 7'2"...Haywood is slow and won't give you anything better than what your seeing now. Sam Dalembert is an idiot who plays out of control and hurts his team.
Ok, here are my reasons: Haywood is a slow big man who has terrible footwork inside. He's improving with his FTs, has no jumpshot, except for a little hook shot he likes to attempt 5-10 ft away from the basket. Doesn't get the playing time he deserves, he's shown flashes of good offensive game and is a good defender in the paint. Not to mention he has a HUGE wingspan. Dalembert has low basketball IQ, at times he's lost on the court, doesn't know what the play is, and doesnt think before he reacts. He has long arms, like Haywood and Chandler, thats why all three of these guys are known for shot-blocking. His offensive skills are terrible, gets all of his points from dunks basically. His 'decent' defense is also overrated by many people, his type of 'D' is blocking shots, and thats it. Not much of a defender overall. Chandler has the most potential out of all these guys but so far he's the one who's developing his game the worst. Great rebounder and shot blocker, and isnt afraid to get physical inside. He isnt a slow stiff like Haywood is, but he does have an attitude that affects his play. Solid man-to-man defender, and is the quickest out of all these guys as well despite being taller than them. I would take Chandler, but Haywood is the one who's actually capable of producing good stats in limited minutes. So, Haywood for now and Chandler for the future.
Haywood because he can finish, score when deep, rebound. Most of all, he's simply tougher than Chandler and Dalembert combined
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ May 30 2006, 07:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Definatly Tyson Chandler, he's still really young and can play a little defense not to mention he's like 7'1" or 7'2"...Haywood is slow and won't give you anything better than what your seeing now. Sam Dalembert is an idiot who plays out of control and hurts his team.</div> Although I was for Chandler, and I agree with what you said about Dalembert, why do you say that about Haywood. His speed, sure he gets tired easier than some players but he's not slow. Also, he's showed lots of potential with us Wizards, he just needs to develop as a center.
I just don't know how anyone can pick Dalembert. He gets all his points off Iverson lobs / dishes, and can't create for himself at all. He could catch the ball 5 feet from the hoop with a 6'5 guy on him and do nothing. Defensively, although he is a great help - defender, he couldn't d - up a chair. All he can do is block weak shots. He's a black Shawn Bradley... With less skill
