Re: is there...

[Kim Malo <kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 02:36 PM 11/10/2003, Shawn Niles wrote:
> Obviously the above comparison was an exaggeration and only meant to prove 
> a point. What was not an exaggeration is that Pierce is 10 times the 
> player Walker is. As such, the 2 should not be compared. My point was that 
> when you compare players or try and measure one player against another, 
> you should make sure the players are on a somewhat even plane.

Well no, actually Pierce as 10 times the player Walker is an opinion and 
one that would be perceived as an extreme exaggeration by many. Me 
included. Better player? Perhaps, although mostly because in the entire 
package there's too much bad Antoine to offset the good Antoine with a lot 
less bad Pierce to offset the good.10 times better? To try to make that 
meaningful, that would put Walker at oh, Bruno's level by comparison on 
last year's roster. Er, no. Pierce is much better at a few things, part of 
the point I was making, but that's different than better player as a whole.

As to somewhat even plane, that was part of what I was talking about too, 
in saying you were comparing them to the wrong players from outside the 
roster. Pierce and Walker aren't very similar in game or role on a team, 
making comparisons between them inherently a bit of an uneven plane apples 
vs oranges. For example, yes, Pierce is generally a more efficient scorer. 
OTOH, look at Pierce's current offensive woes and forcing things in the 
light of an excellent point announcer Sean Grande made in a fairly 
evenhanded article about the departed Walker on the Cs website 
http://www.nba.com/celtics/news/102903_FromTheBooth.html - for all the bad 
things he did, Walker facilitated Paul Pierce's offensive game. Paul did 
not do the same for Antoine. Current evidence from both backs that.

Kim