The NBA's Worst
by YaHeard on Apr 1, 2009 6:55 PM PDT
42 comments
Instead of criticizing our own players all day long, let's change it up for a second. The Kwame Brown vs. Andrea Bargnani debate in the other thread sparked some interesting conversation.
Who are the worst or most over-rated players in the association?
This is my list of the NBA's worst/over-rated starting five:
PG - Derek Fisher
Can't shoot (40% career FG%). Can't rebound (3 rebs/36). As a 200 pound PG, can't penetrate into the lane or set up his teammates in the offense. Can't defend anybody in the league, while creating the illusion with his stance that he is actually playing defense. All he can do is spot up and shoot the 3. I suspect he's only starting in the league because he's a Lakers' fan favorite and he's a nostalgia symbol representing the old Lakers' glory days.
SG - Allen Iverson
I hate to put him on this list, I really do. He's amazing to watch, but he's just bad for whatever team he's on. He's the poster boy for undersized, volume scoring, poor-shot-selecting SG's. This year we've seen the Nuggets rise as one of the dominant teams in the West after his departure, and we've seen the Pistons fall from perennial ECF contendors to non-factors after his arrival.
SF - Andrea Bargnani
42.3% FG% from a 7-footer isn't going to cut it, whether he has range beyond the halfcourt line or not. Moreover, he can't defend the rim, can't rebound, can't defend in the post or on the perimeter. His increase in playing time is the root cause of Toronto's fall from grace in recent years.
PF - Udonis Haslem
Can't score in the post or shoot from the perimeter. Can't handle the ball on the perimeter well enough to be a wing. As a 6'8" PF, can't defend the rim or defend the post or guard on the perimeter well. All he can do is crash the offensive boards and hit the 10-footer. He is so over-rated by national telecast announcers for his "energy" and "hustle" that it's sickening. He's the polar opposite of versatility.
C - Tyson Chandler
He's useless on offense without CP3. He's not a great defender either for someone 7'3". Plus he thinks he's the ish.
So who is your worst 5 in the NBA? Let's keep it to starters too
This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!
1 recs |
42 comments
Email
Print
Comments
post that bad huh?
I was hoping that talking ish on other teams’ players would ease the pain of watching our own team. We’re currently down 9 points to the worst team in the NBA, a team that’s TRYING to tank..
"We Deserve"
by YaHeard on Apr 1, 2009 8:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
vujachich (sp?)
idk…he seems bad…and i hate him…
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawk on Apr 2, 2009 2:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Vujacic.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Apr 2, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not going to pick on the players...
but I dislike the refs. Actually, I shouldn’t be mean. They don’t get paid much, and “refs you suck” chants, although fun to participate in, is rather mean. I hope I don’t go to hell.
by Shells on Apr 2, 2009 11:11 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
they get paid under the table
by kmart and maggs and kobe/lebron
;)
You know I spit technique to the freshest freak
Gimme a call you will see results in just a week
With the soul of a LOST HAWK
Is there a heaven for a Rap Cat, let's talk
by LostHawk on Apr 2, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie Bell
Can’t believe that guy is a starting 2 guard.
"We're Menudo," -BB
by eshock on Apr 2, 2009 5:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Charlie Villanueva, too
That guy isn’t even Al Harrington-status yet
"We Deserve"
by YaHeard on Apr 2, 2009 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carmelo = OVERRATED
hate to say this … but Baron Davis too
We Believe
by RunNdGun on Apr 2, 2009 5:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I used to think the same about Melo, but he’s getting so efficient and unstoppable on the offensive end that it’s starting to make up for the other parts of his game
Baron’s kinda tricky. A motivated Baron Davis is pretty tough to beat..
"We Deserve"
by YaHeard on Apr 2, 2009 11:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
melo has really transformed himself this season. I actually put him as underrated. Top 5 players in nba in my opinion right behind lebron, kobe, dwade, cp3
by tafkasam on Apr 3, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d take him over everyone on that list other than LeBron.
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’d say behind wade, and maybe paul too. i guess you’d have to give him the edge over cp3 just for the fact that he plays center, but chris paul is amazing. let’s hope monta learns to play all-world defense in time for tonight.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Apr 3, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All 5 of those guys are amazing. I’d take Howard over anyone but LeBron because he’s younger and dominates both ends of the floor. All those guys are above average defenders and all are elite offensive players, but none of them dominate the defensive end like Howard. He has the most limited offensive game, but still has incredible room for improvement too. Plus I’m not certain his supporting cast is all that much better than those of Wade or Paul and his team is among the NBA’s elite.
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 5:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we’re clearly splitting hairs in the “what’s the order right behind lebron” discussion. all those guys can carry you to a title, no question. i’d say that howard’s supporting cast is substantially better though. especially when nelson was playing so well earlier this year (sad about that injury, it would have been nice to see him running the point all year. i like that guy). turkoglu is a really good scoring option and offsets some of howard’s offensive “deficiencies”. lewis is overpaid, but is still a good third option on a good team. the bench isn’t spectacular (though the hornets’ bench is flat out not good), but the magic are better behind howard than people have been saying, we’ll find out if the term “elite” is deserved come playoff time. if garnett isn’t 100%, i think they can beat the celtics. the city of boston better hope kg comes back quick and is ready, because after they smoke whoever the 6 out east happens to be, they’ll have a battle on their hands.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Apr 3, 2009 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
splitting hairs
absolutely. I think its pretty clear LeBron is in a class of his own and the other 4 are the next tier down, trying to order them is difficult, I’m just saying that if I had to pick one to build a franchise around it would definitely be Howard. Yea, with Nelson that Magic team has a stronger supporting cast, but theyve still been very very impressive without him. (including right now against the Cavs)
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Howard has a limited offensive game in a similar way to Shaq’s. While not pretty, while he doesn’t ‘create his own shot’ in a similar manner to O’neal, if someone does even a remotely competent job of getting him the ball near the basket, that shot he didn’t create seems to go in an awful lot of the time.
by jae on Apr 3, 2009 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i guess that depends on how you define “create”. i’d say that he does a spectacular job of creating his own shot by posting up his man and dunking in his face. i assume you agree with that statement, i’m just adding a bit to what you said.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Apr 3, 2009 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea I didn’t mean ineffective at all. I probably shouldve said “less diverse” rather than “limited”
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 8:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But the worst is...you guessed it
JAMAL CRAWFORD
as much as I love the guy, he’s a CANCER.
Ever notice how he’s never made the playoffs in his 10 year career?
No D and VERY streaky.
We Believe
by RunNdGun on Apr 2, 2009 5:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
one saving grace about Crawford is that he can do what his position is expected to do.
I just wonder who’s better at shooting his team out of a game: Crawford or Iverson
"We Deserve"
by YaHeard on Apr 2, 2009 11:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He can do what his position is supposed to do? Is his position supposed to be at best a moderate efficiency scorer who couldn’t stop a HS Jr. Varsity player from scoring 15?
by jae on Apr 3, 2009 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i disagree with you
about haslem.
Gerald Madkins
by gorillas on Apr 2, 2009 6:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
crawford
We’re stuck with him, and he’s still trying, so we have to work with him. He’s got some intangibles that are good for an NBA player. He should be able to improve on the areas he’s weak.
I do agree that our best interests would be served if he’d opt out, and we could try to sign a big. With the reemergence of Monta, and with Morrow showing so much potential, his skill set is not what is most needed on this team. But that probably won’t happen.
His strengths:
1. He can shoot, yes he’s streaky, but he is a scorer, if he would improve his shot selection, he would be a good shooter. He can create his own shot at will, valuable at the end of shot clocks.
2. He has good handles, and his shake and bake moves to get open are amazing to watch.
3. He’s a great free throw shooter
4. He has a positive attitude, and would do whatever he’s asked of, which is valuable.
5. 6’6" is a good height for a 2 guard, and he’s quick enough.
His weaknesses that he needs to work on:
1. He’s soft. He needs to hit the weights and get a tougher, more hardnosed physique out there.
2. He needs to learn how to play defense better. So do half a dozen players on the warriors. I think defense is something that can be improved a lot on, just by committing to it, and working hard on the fundamentals, and again having a tough-minded approach to stop the opposition.
3. He needs to drive more often. I think he doesn’t drive much because he’s soft and doesn’t like to get pounded on, like Ellis, Magette, Azubuike, and Jackson do regularly. He has the ability to, his shake and bake moves easily give him a step on his defender, again, it takes a tougher mindset.
4. He needs to pass more, once he starts shaking and baking, everyone else stops moving and watch him. He should save those moves for last 5 seconds of he time clock. If he would look to shoot the open jumper, and if its not there drive or pass, the rest of the players would keep moving to receive the passes from him. The reason he is described as a cancer, or a black hole, is because he too often gets the ball, starts shaking, throwing his defender every which way, while everyone on both sides stops to watch. This is simply a frame of mind, an approach to the game that needs tweaking, and he would be a more valuable part of the team.
by mayelamingi on Apr 3, 2009 7:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m not sure what ‘intangibles’ Crawford has, but they certainly haven’t shown up in the win column for the teams he’s played for. His stats suggest that he won’t be a big help, that he’s going to contribute to losses more than wins. Watching him on defense suggests that he won’t be any help at all to winning games. So if watching him and computing the stats suggest that he won’t really help out towards building a winner, and he hasn’t played for a winner, how exactly do you conclude that he’s got intangibles? I guess they really are intangible. They’re so intangible that you can’t even see them show up in improving a team.
Crawford has nearly a decade in the league. He’s at an age when players just don’t get any better than they’ve been (at best, they hold their own). Expecting him to “hit the weights” and somehow transform into a better defender at this point is beyond naive. He won’t learn to defend at this point. He won’t change his game. What you see is what you get, until his skills diminish with age, at which point you won’t even get that. He might improve his shot selection, since that’s not unheard of, albeit rare.
6-6 is a good height for an off guard. Too bad that height alone seems insufficient. Those things that you’d expect height to help like rebounding or posting up players STILL aren’t things he’s good at. Don’t let the roster card fool you. He plays much shorter than he is, always has, and it’s safe to say he always will.
If he was 20 or 21 and showed what he did, I can see why people might be excited. But he’s not 20 or 21.
by jae on Apr 3, 2009 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zach Randolph
New York took him off portland’s hands and a losing portland team made .500 for the first time in a while. They were ten games better without him. New York… they managed to lose and fall apart while banging their head against the table as their post playing PF attempted to be a point guard, almost lost the ball, and then shot a three that missed by about ten feet.
Zach has left the Knicks and they’re playing a much healthier ball game. the clippers on the other hand. Blame it on the injuries if you like, but a bad team is a bad team and the clippers are a VERY bad team.
He puts up nice shiny stats, but the human black hole will suck the life out of any team he joins much like he’ll suck the ball into himself and keep it until a dump truck lands on him and realizes that shooting is futile, and then he’ll pass.
The goal is not to be better, the goal is to be the best.
by ratbastird on Apr 3, 2009 3:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Of course, there aren't many dump trucks on the court...
if you get what i’m saying.
The goal is not to be better, the goal is to be the best.
by ratbastird on Apr 3, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm going to say
Tony Parker. Manu is my boi and I respect Duncan game, Parker is nothing without Timmy D period. When he retire, Tony Parker shooting percentage won’t even be in the mid 40ish. He is pretty much Duncan little dog. lol
I’m got to say Bron Bron. yea I said it. He is great, but ppl are comparing to MJ already. For god sake this guy mid-range games is maybe average at most. His D’s has improve, but his one on one D’s is still pretty bad. If his team is down by 3 in the in 12 second,he can’t closes out a game. ppl says he better than Kobe, but i don’t see it. Kobe is the second best closer behind Jordan and ahead of Isiah Thomas. He isn’t on Magic levels either. But, we all see in 6 yrs how he becomes.
by warriorfan4life on Apr 3, 2009 3:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
gotta disagree with almost every thing you wrote there. lebron is having a historically great season and is in the running for dpoy while kobe has been left in the dust. lebron is the better player in almost every regard right now.
as for parker, well, i guess sleepy just covered it….
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Apr 3, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tony Parker's career FG%: 48.9%
Excellent for a guy his size. This season he’s at a cool .500; he’s also improved his distributing (7.3 ast per 36), scoring (23.0 pts per 36) & and FT shooting (.796). He’s helped the Spurs when he’s been on court just as much as Manu and Duncan have (+5.3 plusminus, +7.0 Roland). If he’s “overrated” it’s not by much. I always hate this category, but if anything I’d say TP is underrated.
As for LeBron … if he’s overrated, we might as well just scrap the whole topic. He’s a better player than Kobe right now, and it’s not close. (And Kobe’s still a fabulous player).
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Apr 3, 2009 5:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
p.s.
For me, the clear “winnah” in this contest is Iverson. How many teams does he have to worsen by joining, or improve by leaving, before people get it? IIRC, when he was traded to Detroit, Atma Bro waxed poetic about how we could all book tickets to Detroit v. Boston in the ECF. It seemed utterly ridiculous at the time (I would have told him so, but we were in the midst of our “cold war”) and even more so now.
DFish is a great choice, too. (Hit a couple of big, open threes on network TV and a lot of people tend to forget that you suck in every other facet of the game). And if you only count this board, you gotta consider BD, JRich, Barnes, and Foyle…
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Apr 3, 2009 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i miss when iverson was good. he might not have ever been as good as people said, but he was electric to watch and led a sixers team with a pretty mediocre supporting cast to the finals. although, he probably picked up a lot of bad habits on those sixers teams. he was the only guy wearing a philly jersey who could score and everyone else was just there to support him with defense and rebounding (something they did really well). it’s easy to think you’re the only scorer on the floor when for a fair portion of your career you actually were.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Apr 3, 2009 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I was never a huge Iverson fan and he’s pretty clearly overrated now and has torn more than his share of teams apart, but the guy was flat out amazing in his prime. Yes that sixer team was perfectly built for him, but he was still one of the most entertaining players to watch and you cant question his toughness or drive.
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 5:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True...
I always say the two most “beautiful” players I’ve had the pleasure of watching, post-Jordan, are Nash and Iverson. They both had/have a preternatural sense of space, pace, angle, and control that bordered on choreography. They’ve also both dropped off pretty significantly from their peaks; and even at their peaks, they both had flaws — Iverson’s inefficiency, Nash’s lack of D, the mediocre rebounding of both — that were big enough to prevent them from ever winning rings.
Thing 1
by Sleepy Freud on Apr 3, 2009 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"beautiful" players...
To me, i can enjoy some players as being entertaining and fully understand the fact that they aren’t that good. Iverson is the perfect example of this. I always enjoyed watching him play. Dude is exciting.
To a lesser degree I’d put Crawford in this category. I remember when I heard about the trade writing that, while I knew it was a bad move, I was excited to watch him play. I had fun watching that 50pt game, and I smile when he breaks someone’s ankles (I also smile when I see him in a suit but that’s my rational side).
On the other side of that coin is a guy like Tim Duncan. I know how great he is but I’ve never enjoyed watching him play.
I’m kind of a sucker for offense in that way. When it comes to entertainment value I’ll take the pre-Shaq Suns or the We Believe Warriors over most teams. The worst thing to happen to basketball in recent memory was that Robert Horry hip-check. If the Suns could have won it all that year we would have seen the rest of the league trying to play that style instead of seeing the Suns broken up to conform to a more “normal” style of basketball.
The We Believe Warriors were super entertaining because not only were they up-tempo offensively but they forced boatloads of turnovers by playing active exciting defense (not great defense but very exciting). Man we never should have traded J-Rich… (just checking to see if anyone is still paying attention)
Thing 2
by olympicmike on Apr 3, 2009 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
(I also smile when I see him in a suit but that’s my rational side).
“rational” side. ;-)
……c’mon you were begging to be mocked with that one, and if it wasnt me then golden boy wouldve come along and said something much more crude and offensive.
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 11:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was gonna say Tony Parker and then I saw that he’s shooting over 50% from the field . Thats pretty amazing. I still think his game is fairly limited and he gets a little more credit than he deserves for the Spurs’ success, but he also gets a lot of people dumping on him for being overrated.
Thing A
by sam23 on Apr 3, 2009 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In my biased opinion...
Fisher shouldn’t be on the list. He is no all-star, but is a solid player who has started in 3 NBA finals and has three rings (one as a reserve). Not many players can claim that that are in the league right now. And anybody within the Laker organization will tell you that he was mainly responsible for calming down Kobe when he was clamoring for a trade last off-season. The other four are pretty solid picks, however. I think you could throw Amare in there. Puts up great offensive numbers when Nash is in the lineup, but does nothing else and if he doesn’t get the ball dude is a total cancer.
by LakerFan24 on Apr 7, 2009 1:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
basically
“I suspect he’s only starting in the league because he’s a Lakers’ fan favorite and he’s a nostalgia symbol representing the old Lakers’ glory days.”
which you just verified is truth by saying “but is a solid player who has started in 3 NBA finals and has three rings (one as a reserve).”
by saintdee on Apr 7, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Saying that Fish is a solid player who has started in 3 finals is saying that he is NOT overrated. Rather, he is apparently good enough to lead a team to 3 Finals. And nail clutch shot after clutch shot when it matters most. To say that he is overrated crosses the line of common sense, because nobody is pretending that he is an elite point guard. He would probably be rated about in the middle of the pack of NBA point guards at best. But he has started more playoff games than the entire Warrior organization put together (including the general manager). So you can’t say he’s overrated.
by LakerFan24 on Apr 7, 2009 5:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
