Re: in response to "rookie of the year"

[bis@world.std.com (Adi Inbar)]

"smishra" <smishra@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> In my original post, my argument was not about Walker winning the ROY but
> about being considered for Roy. The players that David Aldridge considered
> for Roy were Iverson, Camby, Allen, Sharif & Kittles and that did not sit
> well with me. 

Agreed - if Kittles and Allen are on the list, Antoine should also be.
My main point, though, is that I don't believe his exclusion has much
to do with who his coach is.

>		Both Allen & Camby are definitely not playing better than
> Walker nor do they have better stats. 

I would argue that, *over the season*, Camby has been playing better.
But Antoine has improved, and maybe by the end of the season he will
be a viable rookie of the year candidate.

>					Regarding Sprewell he was voted in,
> by the coaches the first time and also this time (this time he clearly
> deserves it). 

This was Sprewell's *third* all-star selection.  I think he was voted
in by the fans the second time, and that was the time that he arguably
didn't deserve it.  If you mean that he didn't deserve it the first
time, the year he was all-NBA first team, you'd have a hard time
making that case.

>		Last time after his selection Charles Barkeley remarked that
> he could dribble the ball better than the Western Conference all star
> guards. 

So?  Charles Barkley is a better ball-handler than the large majority
of off-guards.  If being a better ball-handler than Barkley is a
requirement for being an all-star guard, what were Mitch Richmond,
Eddie Jones, Glen Rice, and Joe Dumars doing there?

>	  The fact is Don Nelson enjoyed considerable clout when he was coach
> & GM of Golden State and this has helped some of the players when it came
> to Roy and all star selections, where difference between competing player
> was marginal.  

Again, Rookie of the Year is selected by the media, and they vote for
whoever they like, not whoever has the big-name coach or GM.