Give me Eric Dampier, Their numbers are very similar, It's actually weird how close the numbers are. The thing that gives the edge to Dampier is his defense. Dalembert is the better shot blocker but Damp is the better defender overall. Dalembert is stupid also, No offense.
If I was about to get gangraped and had to take Samuel Dalembert to survive, I wouldn't. The guy has acheived so much to make it to the NBA, but in reality, isn't anything noticable. He's tall and athletic. That's it.He gets oblierated down low because he's thinner than many SFs. He does block shots off the weakside, but he's still very raw in terms of rotating defensively. He can hit jumpers occasionally, but is still as inconsistent as they come. Plus, for whatever reason it may be, he plays like he's mentally-handicapped (horrible hands)Atleast Dampier is a slightly better finisher, and can actually catch a basketball.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Amare320 @ Dec 7 2006, 10:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There Both Great Centers in this league</div> :HAHAHA: I give it to Damp as well. I agree with Balla 100%, Dalembert is an excellent shot blocker, but he is not a good defender. People look at shot blocking and steals numbers and automatically assume they are good defenders, when half the time (maybe more than half the time), that is certainly not the case. Damp is bigger, he's stronger, he's a much better defender, and I'd give him the ball on an offensive iso before I'd give it to Dalembert (although Damp isn't much to brag about offensively either). In the end, both are extremely overpaid players with the same type of game, to an extent. Dalembert relies on his athleticism and length SO MUCH it's not even funny. Dalembert has some solid fundamental defensive tactics that doesn't really require any athleticism. I'd take Ericka Dampier.
