605Tyson Chandler: was Re: nice methods
- Feb 8, 2002I hate to mention this, but can we change the Subject of the posts
when the topic changes?
I personally don't have too much of an interest in Tyson Chandler,
but I would love to read more about the mathmatical methods used
here. Changing the subject prevents everyone from reading through
--- In APBR_analysis@y..., Ed Weiland <weiland1029@y...> wrote:
> --- "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, HoopStudies wrote:
> > > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Ed Weiland
> > <weiland1029@y...> wrote:
> > > > Tyson Chandler has a chance to be a special
> > player. It
> > > > may take another year or two, but the talent is
> > > > obvious. I've don't think I've ever seen a
> > player this
> > > > tall who was as athletic.
> > >
> > > You've said this before. Given how rarely the
> > Bulls are on TV, it's
> > > no surprise I haven't seen him, but I am really
> > curious, though. Who
> > > do you think he is most similar to? Most people
> > say "tall"
> > > and "athletic" and they are referring to Kevin
> > Garnett. Is that
> > > realistic?
> > I'm curious too. I've only seen him once, in the LA
> > Pro Summer League
> > (actually I think it was called the Dada Summer
> > League this past summer).
> > At that point he was extremely raw and the two
> > crossroads for him that I
> > saw led to (a) Kevin Garnett and (b) Brad Sellers.
> > It was absolutely too
> > early to tell which way he would end up.
> Garnett is probably a stretch. One spin on draft day
> tried to sell Chandler and Curry as a future
> Shaq-Garnett tandem, which is pretty ridiculous, IMO.
> I doubt Chandler will ever develop Garnett's
> all-around game. He just doesn't seem to have the same
> personality. He seems more like a Webber/Barkley type
> personality-wise. That being an OK guy who sometimes
> rubs folks the wrong way. Not exactly an MJ when it
> comes to leadership. That's just my initial take on
> him though. I could easily be way off the mark here. I
> was concerned about Chandler being another Brad
> Sellers at first too. I doubt that will happen.
> Chandler is more athletic than Sellers and he doesn't
> play soft. Reckless yes, but not soft.
> Comparing him to other guys who skipped college in
> their rookie years, right now his offense comes up
> short compared to Garnett, Kobe and T-Mac. It seems
> that most of Chandler's points come from put backs,
> alley-oops and other high percentage shots. He's said
> to have good range, but I've yet to see it during a
> game. He also commits a ton of turnovers. On defense
> he looks pretty good. He uses his height and quickness
> very well. He does get burned on occasion, but that's
> to be expected from any rookie, let alone one straight
> from the preps. Also, he doesn't look completely
> overmatched, as Jonathan Bender did his first couple
> of seasons. Most of Chandler's problems seem to come
> from being tentative on the court. That's a common
> problem with rooks and it usually corrects itself in
> As far as comparing him to one guy, I would say
> Stuart's assessment "A taller, quicker David Robinson
> with no offense" is about as accurate as any. I
> suppose the more pessimistic types would call him a
> Brad Lohaus who can jump.
> > People who have seen him more often, throughout the
> > season, are in a much
> > better position to evaluate. But unless he starts
> > making some obvious
> > Kobe-type teenage strides, it could easily be 3-4
> > years before we know
> > where he'll end up. Or maybe it'll only take 1-2
> > years as Ed Weiland
> > says.
> Keeping in mind of course that Ed Weiland is just a
> fan and possibly an overly optimistic one at that, one
> might be better off trusting the experts here. Since
> Chandler has moved into the starting lineup, I'm
> guessing he'll get about 1000 more minutes this
> season. At season's end we should have a better idea
> of what he's going to become.
> Ed Weiland
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>