Batum is a more effective perimeter shooter. Having him on the floor spreads the offense more than GW does. Wallace, on the other hand, is a superior rebounder, which is helpful if/when Aldridge is playing the 5 spot. Batum has no record (that I'm aware of) at playing the power forward, while Wallace has demonstrated that he can do so at a reasonably high level. If the coach plays matchups well, Wallace could be successful at the power forward spot, while I think it's a dream to hope for Batum to be able to do that. I agree that the team adding another big man would be a good move. Ed O.
Batum can be too inconsistent and when you have a player like Gerald Wallace that can step in you make that move. Batum's only advantage over Wallace is 3pt shooting and it's not like Batum has even been a good 3pt shooter this year. With Wallace you get a superior rebounder and a better defender that can also post up and get his own shot. Looks like an easy move to me.
http://www.82games.com/1011/10POR8.HTM#bypos Batum has played 5% of the available PF minutes for Portland this year (according to the above link)--which equates to about 142 minutes (small sample size, yes). In that time, he's put up a PER of 17.5 and allowed a PER of 14.6. Also, looking at his "5-man-lineup" record, the one with the best results (by far) is the Miller-Roy-Matthews-Batum-Aldridge lineup, in which he is clearly the PF. So, there is some history of him playing the 4, and doing so successfully, in certain situations.
Batum is shooting 33.7% from behind the arc this season, Wallace is shooting it 33.6% this season. Wallace appears to rebound better by crashing the boards from the perimeter not from being under the basket. but my whole logic is that they both suck playing the 4 right? So why not put in the guy who is better at playing the 3 and let the other play the 4.
But Wallace has only attempted about 106 3's, while Batum has attempted 249... Wallace doesn't shoot from deep as often, which means that he's not spreading the floor like Batum does. Could Wallace do that, if it were asked of him? Perhaps. But I don't think that we should bank on trying to teach an old(er) dog new tricks. Maybe offensively. But defensively? I don't think so, personally. I don't agree with that premise, though. Ed O.
Surprisingly, Basketball-references shows us that Batum's defensive rebound% is lower than Wallace's (at least in Charlotte) - but is actually much higher than Wallace's on offense. http://www.basketball-reference.com...m=0&p1=batumni01&y1=2011&p2=wallage01&y2=2011
Wallace actually asked to start: http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/index.ssf/2011/02/trail_blazers_gerald_wallace_a.html
Im sure nate and the coaches are going to be putting Crash in all kinds of lineups this week to find out the most effective ways to use him. I just wanna see him do what he does best and hopefully that will translate into W's
Exactly. Wallace was FIRST TEAM all defense last year! How do you not start him? Please, Nate. Start him tomorrow. Look at how much better Matthews played once he joined the starting lineup.
I like Batum, but he isn't consistent enough to have him starting over someone like Wallace. We need to maximize Wallace's potential, and the only way to do that is to start him. Batum is young enough that he'll have plenty of time to start.
