Walker's merits (was Walker vs Pierce; my 2 cents)

["Thomas Murphy" <tfmiii@worldnet.att.net>]

Thanks for the kind words of welcome Josh and Alex (and Joe too previously).

I'll restrict my comments to the point touched on by both of your
statements - the value of Walker's ball-handling and passing skills. You
both make a set of cogent points, the value of which is not lost on me.

Given that however, I believe that the question remains: does Walker's
merits as a passer outweigh his debits as a defender? This is most likely a
judgment call where reasonable people can disagree. You two seem to feel
that Walker's passing abilities translate into a much more efficient
offense - so much more efficient that it negates whatever defensive
liabilities he may have. I see it the other way 'round.

I'll grant you that Walker is more gifted than your average power forward or
even small forward at passing the ball. He has put up nice numbers on
occasion, but then we must remember that the offense essentially runs
through Walker as well. In most ways he is already the point forward of the
team - he simply doesn't bring the ball up court every time (although he
does do this often enough). Has this arrangement really produced a more
efficient offense?

Some players can make very ordinary-looking passes that actually enhance a
team's offense quite significantly. I guess Stockton is the exemplar of this
type of passer. Some players make really flashy or difficult passes but
overall they have far less positive impact on the efficiency of the offense.
At times Jason Williams has seemed ready to devolve into this. (Of course
some players manage to do both, that is be both efficient and flashy - Bird
would exemplify this category).

I think the key difference between efficiency and merely 'flashy' is the
judgment exercised by the passer and as far as I can tell, despite
improvement, Walker has not progressed to the point where his passing more
than marginally enhances the efficiency of the team offense. That is not to
say he won't put up impressive numbers (for a power forward) from time to
time. What I am saying is that these numbers obscure the fact that Walker
achieves these numbers - numbers that an average NBA PG could attain - at
the expense of opportunities for assists at the point guard position. In
other words, as I interpret them, these numbers are not *in addition* to
whatever the point guard might normally attain but rather *instead* of what
the PG might be expected to attain (at least as the offense is currently
structured).

                   00-01     99-00    98-99    97-98      96-97
Anderson    4.1apg    5.1apg    5.7apg   6.25apg*  7.1apg**
Walker       4.2apg     3.7apg    3.1apg  3.3apg     3.2apg
totals            8.3            8.8        8.8        9.55        10.3

*only including 16 games w/Celtics (rest of year w/Portland - 5.4 apg)
**Anderson with Portland entire year

Anderson's assist totals seem to mirror his marginalization from the offense
whereas Walker's increasing totals seem to mirror his increasing dominance
of the offense not only in terms of shot attempts but also in ball-handling
and the triggering of the offense. Of course one needs to attach caveats -
Anderson's injuries this year, Walker's ball-handling duties during Billups'
brief reign as PG etc. But overall I think you can see that - at best! -
Walker's passing has not contributed additional offense so much as merely
shifted where the offense originates.

As far as making his teammates *better* on offense, I think that the
mediocre results of the last four years exposes that fallacy. Boston has not
been an offensive powerhouse - rather we seem to be caught up in the same
trend towards isolation and one-on-five offense that currently plagues
nearly the entire league.

The other side of the coin in this assessment is whether you think Walker is
really that terrible of an defensive liability. Even if you are convinced by
my assessment above you would be well within your rights to dissent with my
overall conclusions if you feel that the value of Walker's passing skills -
even if overrated - still outweigh any defensive deficiencies he may have.
Defense is notoriously difficult to assess, particularly in a system as
convoluted as the Poultrino Press (tm). (Of course one must keep in mind
that Pitino has consistently pointed to his players' defensive
deficiencies - Walker's in particular - in defending his press. This may be
just so much sPintino BS, but it is something to be considered). One must be
careful not to confuse defensive ability with athletic ability but one must
also beware confusing effort with results. I could work just as hard as any
NBA player and not obtain results due to my lack of athletic ability (and
height). In the past Walker has not exhibited much defensive desire. Given
Bentz' comments on Walker's effort in Charlotte that may have recently
changed, but the results don't seem to have changed much.

Although hefty, Walker is consistently overmatched and physically dominated
by skilled PFs. He also lacks the quickness and footspeed to either strip
the ball or draw charges from PFs - also reasons why Pitino does not have
him cover less physical shooting forwards. As I see it, these problems
distort the entire defense (at least Pitino has allowed them to) because
*every one* of Walker's teammates must be ready to compensate for his
defensive deficiencies - whether it be in terms of match-ups (the center
covering physical PFs and therefore getting into foul trouble) or
double-teaming/switching (again leading to foul trouble, mis-matches, and
dunk-a-ramas). These special measures taken to protect Walker defensively
and keep him out of foul trouble are at least partly indicative of the
seriousness of Walker's defensive deficiencies.

Granted, there are going to be players on the opposition who deserve special
attention. This is accepted. But when we discuss Walker's liabilities on
defense we go beyond this truism because his teammates must attempt to
compensate for him - dramatically, as noted above - in *every game*. Not
just the game against Karl Malone or Tim Duncan, but even games against
Othella Harrington or Dale Davis. The need to cope with the opposition
player of note *in addition* to Walker's man places that much more stress on
the defense of a team that is not composed of world-beaters on D as it is.

Sure, Bird was not a demon on D either, but as he himself said, he could at
least move his feet fast enough to force his man into either Parish or
McHale, i.e. keep is man in front of him either to the left or right. In
other words, Bird didn't *typically* require the type of measures discussed
above with regard to Walker - and Bird was a bit more special on the
offensive end as well. Not that Walker has to be compared to Bird on
offense, but the fact is that Walker doesn't even compare to Bird on
*defense*!!

When I watch Pierce I see a player who CAN hold his own on D. Add to that
the fact that Pierce seems to be a natural shooter whereas Walker simply is
not, and that Pierce is young and hence can be expected to mature into an
even better player who makes better decisions and I think the case is
hands-down in favor of retaining Pierce whether or not Walker is dealt. Now
as to whether or not Pierce is currently motivated by Coach P, it is a valid
point to suggest that Walker may be suffering from the same lack of
motivation. But Pierce has at least demonstrated that he *can* play D when
motivated - Walker has never done so to my knowledge. So even if both
players are currently demotivated, one cannot argue that when properly
motivated Walker's defensive ability would rival Pierce's - this is simply a
fallacious argument. Defense is (at least) half of the game, even if we have
precious little means of measuring it. Hence to my mind Walker remains a
seriously incomplete player.

Cheers -TomM