Haha Varejao has been effective one year in his career when Lebron drew all the attention. Other than that he's pretty scrubby.
I think Wallace will be right there with LaMarcus as our best player the next month of the season. Batum hasn’t proven crap, he’s always been a below average starter for our team, similar to Joel Pryzbilla. Those are players who have value, they perform better then a scrub replacement player, and those guys are a nice luxury to have off the bench. But you don’t want a player at Batum’s historical production to be a key starter. I’ll believe Batum has improved when I see it on an NBA court. It’s not Nate’s job to maximize Batum’s stats or Batum’s contributions. Nate’s job is to maximize the teams total production. If Batum can play a larger role in a manor that help the team then great, I’ll be excited for him. If he can’t then he isn’t a great player. There are tons of players in the league that can be an acceptable part of the rotation on certain teams in certain situations; they are called role players. Batum has not produced at a level above a role player. It’s ludicrous to jettison our only all-star, who is our best or second best player just to make room for a guy who has never proven he can contribute as much more then a decent bench player or below average starter.
I really don't get the joke apparently? http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/player/hollinger/_/id/2419/anderson-varejao LMAO indeed.
Well the joke is to think that Side Show Bob is even close to the same value as Wallace. And anyone that thinks they are equal talent is kidding themselves.
An elite wing defender vs. an elite big man defender both with roughly 15 career PER? You're right, wing defenders are mostly dime a dozen compared to elite defensive big men. Just in case you don't believe me: http://www.basketball-reference.com...m=1&p1=varejan01&y1=2012&p2=wallage01&y2=2012
you can toss all those "per" at me and I will still say NO CHANCE IN HELL!!!!! You offer this to any GM in the league and they would laugh their ass off. And I was looking at the reference and it's not even close. Wallace has a better per than Side Show Bob
Dude looking at the advanced "PER" it's Wallace at 17.6 to Side Show's 14.8. But if you look at the "TRUE VALUE"; which is actual production; it's not even close. Hell even the rebounding is close, and Bob is a damn big man. This has nothing to do with Beer Goggles. If Wallace was still in Charlotte; I would still LMAO with that idea.
Is "True Value" some new stat I haven't heard of before? Regardless I'm talking about about roles and wins added. Of course Varejao isn't a volume scorer and the focal point of his team's offense, but given what he does and and just how well he does it (plus factoring age and likely rates of decline in the next 3 or 4 years) I think Varejao would probably fill a greater hole in Portland than the one Wallace would create with his departure ... and the sheer gap in "production" isn't nearly as wide as you portray it -- especially since PER mostly measures offensive output and is highly influenced by usage rate. I'm not even saying Varejao is a better player than GW, I'm only saying that their value on the basketball court is roughly equal, all things considered.
Wallace is a better player than Varejao - you only do this if the season is done and you have no chance of getting Oden back - and you better get a pick with that trade.
Okay sounds more understandable... You talked like they were equal value without question, but in actuallity, it has more to do with the direction of the ball club. Personally, Side Show would be a great addition, but not for Wallace IMO. Like his hustle. Him and Noah are of the same cloth, and years back Najera or Foster. So don't get me wrong. I am not negating Side Show hold "0" value. I'm just saying between the two players; I would pick Wallace hands down.
You busted out the "LMAO" comment off of Rasta's proposal, my only point was that the trade isn't exactly worthy of derisive laughter.
It still is a LMAO for me. But I am conceding you made a decent argument. I still wouldn't do it, even if we were in a lossing free-fall. Now Camby for Side show would make more sense.
And maybe that's something the Cavs would consider because Camby does represent a fairly attractice expiring contract, but Cleveland would still want a promising player in return. Maybe that's the rights to Freeland, possibly Batum or maybe they'd settle for Eliot Williams?
Batum, i would think twice about, but not out of the question. I would totally give up Freeland and E.Will for him. It's crazy, but with a line of Felton, Matthews, Wallace, Side Show Bob, Aldridge; would be beasty (Side Show, Wallace and Matthews would be a nightmare on the defensive end). I would still love for Batum and Crawford to come off the bench.
I guess I'd think about it ... I do think Wallace is pretty close to hitting the proverbial wall as a 30 year old (formerly) hyper-athletic wing, so that's something that could potentially really bit us in the ass a year or two from now.
Uncle Vodka (mikerice6) was really in favor of that Orl/Por/Njn trade to open up time for Batum. It'll be interesting if Batum can get the minutes and the touches to continue to develop.
It's definetely something we should be concerned about, but its not an absolute certainty that his game will regress much in the next 5 years. Some players that rely on athleticism have a sharp decline starting at 26 or 27, others maintain their elite play past the age of 35.
