Re: Walker

["smishra" <smishra@ix.netcom.com>]

> First of all a PF should have a much higher FG% than a SG since a PF
takes
> much higher percentage shots (agreed that a SG is expected to have a
> better 3pt fg% and be a better passer).  Look at the league leaders in
FG%
> most of them are big men who play down low (stockton is a notable
> exception). 

Absolutely, a PF must shoot a higher percentage and I hope to see that from
Walker, once the lineup settles next year and he consistently plays 1
position. 
 
> Now let's look at the numbers:
> 
> Walker
> min	2ptfg%	3ptfg%	ft%	asst	to	ratio
> 35.0	43.5	29.6	60.8	197	200	.99:1 (7:7)
> 
> Allen
> min	2ptfg%	3ptfg%	ft%	asst	to	ratio
> 30.7	43.4	38.1	81.3	181	127	1.43:1 (10:7)
> 
> Walker's shooting percentage is abysmal for a big man.  Allen, a jump
> shooter, has just about the same 2ptfg%.  Allen's overall fg% is lower
> than Walker's primarily because Allen takes many more threes but he makes
> 38% of them so that is not hurting his game (33% threes = 50% twos).
> Walker can't shoot free throws; I don't expect 80% from a big man but 60%

> is horrendous.

Walker's shooting percentage is improving as he is maturing and given a
consistent position I think that it will improve.
Walker's free throw % at one time was close 50-53%, he has brought it up to
60.3 so I see an improvement there. I have been looking at some stats and
his FT% for Jan & Feb is about 67%. Now he has to work on it a little bit
to bring it above 70%.
 
> Walker has more assists per game only because he plays more mins per
game.
> Look at their assist to turnover ratios.  Allen is a better passer as he
should be.

Walker is the first option for the C's on offence hence ends up handling
the ball more plus he has bunch of CBAer's to the pass the ball to. Compare
our cast of characters in front line to Vin Baker, Glen Robinson & Armond
Gilliam. 

> Well given the above numbers he wouldn't be a good pg or sg; at least not
> as good as Allen.  I don't think he has the size to defend the decent to
> good centers of the league.  Grant Hill can play the 1-4, Penny Hardaway
> can play 1-3 and 4 in a pinch, Jordan can play 1-3, Pippen can play 2-4
> and 1 in a pinch, Mason can play 1-4.  Granted these are some of the best
> players in the league, but Walker is not even as close to being as
> versatile.  He is simply not good enough of a shooter or a passer.

I am not saying that he will be as good an SG as Ray Allen or a great
center. But Walker can play these positions says something about his all
round skills. Yes Walker can't guard physical opposing center's but they
can't guard him either he averaged 20+ ppg and 11+ rebounds a game when
starting at center <looks pretty good to me..not many centers can do that>.
Walker may not be a great shooter but I disagree that he is not a good
passer.

> 
> As for Baker, how many mins per game, fg%, ft% in his rookie year?  These
> numbers are essential for making a comparison.
 
YEAR  TEAM        G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG STL BLK PPG

93-94   Milwaukee 82 63 31.2. 501  .200. 569   7.6   2.0   60   114  13.5

> Walker is not as great a rebounder as the numbers suggest (though I would
> still say he is a very good rebounder).  He is averaging 5.5 defensive
> rebounds per game which is 26th in the league.  26th in the league for
> offensive rebounds is 2.6 per game which would give him a total of 8.1
> rebounds per game (very good, but not great).  His offensive rebounds are
> inflated because he gets a lot of put backs of his own missed shots.  If
> he really were getting off. rebs. because of his tenacity, then he would
> have a comparable rank for def. rebs.

Walker is a great rebounder and forget the average, he has had games with
21, 19, 17, 15+<multiple times>. When was the last time a celtic had that
kind of rebounding numbers? <you probably have to go about 5 years>.
 
> I don't know of many Celtic rookies that played 35 mins a game.  Look at
> Lewis' 2nd year when he started playing thoes kind of mins in Birds
> absence.  I believe he averaged close to 18 pts and close to 50% fg%.
> What were McHale's numbers the first year he played those kind of
minutes?
> Anyways, Walker is the highest pick since Larry, he should be much better
> than any previous rookies.  Fox, Williams and Shaw all had fairly good
> numbers their rookie years (much better fg%) and their were all picked
> later (much later except for Williams).

I don't have year by year stats of Mchale or Louis, but I watched Louis in
his rookie year. He was good defensively but didn't have an outside shot
and nobody at that time could say that he would be a great player.

Fox:
YEAR TEAM   G  GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG STL BLK PPG
91-92  Boston 81 5    19.0  .459  .329 .755  2.7   1.6   78   30    8.0

Williams:
YEAR TEAM   G  GS MPG  FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG STL BLK PPG
95-96  Boston 64 6    23.0  .441  .300  .671  3.4   1.1   56   11    10.7

Shaw:
88-89  Boston 82 54  28.1  .433  .000  .826 4.6    5.8   78    27     8.6

What good numbers and much better fg%?  

> will turn into a fine forward, but he is not the next great Celtic and
> never will be.  There is no reason why we shouldn't trade him if we can
> get value in return, and I think Baker is equal or better value.
> 
How do you know that? Looking at Karl Malone's rookie numbers  who could
have said that he will be one of the 50 greatest players. By the way Malone
FT% was 48.1 and he played 31 mins per game.  Let's see what Walker does
next season when he has some good players around him and the C's lineup
settles down.
                                                    - Mishra