<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">The phrase "a man of many talents" means "a man of many skills." A person with potential but without skills is not talented. Such players are sometime said to be "raw talents" (that is, they have physical abilities which could allow him to be great once they pick up more significant skills). As of now, I'd say that Mo Taylor is more talented on the offensive end than Chandler -- no question. I'm not sure if I'd say that Chandler is skilled in any way at this point in his career (I haven't been following his games closely enough), but I do think he has physical abilities which allow him to be effective now, and possibly great in the future if he does pick up the right skills.</div> Ok let me impose a hypathetical question for you. Would you trade Lebron James for lets say Allen Iverson because Iverson scores more points and is a former mvp? Young talent that has shown it has a future in the NBA is much more valuable then a player who is in sort of late 20's and has shown he will be a solid player or has performed well in the past. It is just my opinion this, but when you have a player Chandlers age and ability as well as size compared with Mo williams who Van Gundy is tring to move out of the staring lineup at all costs. Mo is second rate talent.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Pure Skillz:</div><div class="quote_post">Ok let me impose a hypathetical question for you. Would you trade Lebron James for lets say Allen Iverson because Iverson scores more points and is a former mvp? Young talent that has shown it has a future in the NBA is much more valuable then a player who is in sort of late 20's and has shown he will be a solid player or has performed well in the past. It is just my opinion this, but when you have a player Chandlers age and ability as well as size compared with Mo williams who Van Gundy is tring to move out of the staring lineup at all costs. Mo is second rate talent.</div> I agree. I'd take Lebron over Iverson (its a gamble since Iverson is a better player right now) since James has a long, bright future ahead of him. I'd say the same thing with Chandler. I was just clarifying what I believe the word "talent" means (skill, basically). So, I'd say Iverson is overall a more talented offensive player than Lebron, and Mo is a more talented offensive player than Chandler. But since Lebron and Chandler are so young and have so much scope for improvement in their games, they'd be more valuable than Iverson and Taylor respectively for a franchise in the long term.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Pure Skillz:</div><div class="quote_post">Mo williams who Van Gundy is tring to move out of the staring lineup at all costs. Mo is second rate talent.</div> Mo Williams plays for the Bucks. Anyways, I'd take Lebron over Iverson for the fact that he does more on the court than just score. Lebron can pass and is 6'8" compared to Iverson who is 6'0" and basically a one-dimensional player. Now if the question is Kobe or TMac vs Lebron I'd obviously take Kobe or TMac because they've got more talent and experience and you know what to expect from them. It doesn't matter that they're older. Now back to the Rockets situation - they're trying to win a championship. Does Taylor fit into their plans - an experienced scoring forward off the bench? or a young, inexperienced athletic defensive player? Obviously you take age into consideration, but you also have a better idea of what to expect from Taylor. Chandler could become really good, or he could stay at the same level the rest of his career. That may not be a risk that Rockets management want to take at this point in the team's development.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Pure Skillz:</div><div class="quote_post">Ok let me impose a hypathetical question for you. Would you trade Lebron James for lets say Allen Iverson because Iverson scores more points and is a former mvp? Young talent that has shown it has a future in the NBA is much more valuable then a player who is in sort of late 20's and has shown he will be a solid player or has performed well in the past. It is just my opinion this, but when you have a player Chandlers age and ability as well as size compared with Mo williams who Van Gundy is tring to move out of the staring lineup at all costs. Mo is second rate talent.</div> Not every GM thinks of potential first. Look at the Heat. They dealt away two young guys for a shot at the championships for each of the next two seasons. Had they kept Odom and Butler, the team would have been good for the next few years, and maybe really good within 5, but would they be contenders next season? Riley took on Shaq knowing his age problems, but traded for him willingly, knowing that the arrival of Shaq would bring them shots at the championship. In the Bulls' situation, if Paxson set making the playoffs next season as his goal, I would rather take Taylor over Chandler. Taylor is a proven performer who can give you 20 points each game, while Chandler, though he might be good in the next 3 years, cannot give you the same production as Taylor will next season.
