Re: KNIGHT and THE CHIEF

[Adam A Suchocki <Twilight@world.std.com>]

probably going to be a lot of people who sasy the same thing, but here
goes...

Chief was a star in college, and dropped as far as 9 in the draft because
of his school losing NCAA sanctioning.  His first year in Golden State was
somewhat limited due to lack of playing time, but the numbers were still
significantly better than Knight.  By his second year, Parish was butting
up very good center numbers, and continued to put up very good numbers for
the rest of his career despite never being a primary option.  He was very
strong and was a much better interior defender than Knight, and simply
put, could not be pushed around underneath the hoop like Knight.  Parish
was a better shot blocker and, despite Knight's speed, ran the floor
better than Knight.  Although Cchief had the famous rainbow jumper, he was
a very good post up player right out of college,  Knight is not in any way
a low post threat.  I would trade a dozen Knight's for one young Robert
Parish to put on this team.

adam


On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 DEVONlOUS@aol.com wrote:

> everyone says that knight is not truely a legitimate or starting center, but
> as I recall was the Chief really that fantastic? or at least in the early
> years?... The're both the same type of players.. In my opinion Knight is and
> will be as the chief was.. both not superstars like Ewing or Robinson, but
> get the job done and can became or will become successful as a roll player
>