PDA

View Full Version : Wally World....


Drbio
07-03-2002, 11:26 AM
Wally asks for the max....SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!


Agent: Szczerbiak will seek maximum salary

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Press


MINNEAPOLIS -- Minnesota Timberwolves guard Wally Szczerbiak will seek the maximum salary when contract talks begin later this month, his agent said.


Szczerbiak




Agent Gary Wichard said Tuesday that Szczerbiak's performance in three seasons with the Wolves, including his All-Star appearance last season, his off-court contributions and the salaries paid to comparable players, all point to a six-year, $83.6 million deal, the maximum for a player of his experience.


"This isn't any sort of 'line in the sand.' We're in this thing together,'' said Wichard, who anticipates talking with Wolves vice president of basketball operations Kevin McHale in the next few weeks. "Wally has been as important to his team as any of the guys who came out (in 1999). Of that class, let's take a hand count of All-Stars.''


Charlotte's Baron Davis and the Los Angeles Clippers' Elton Brand, both 1999 picks, were added to the 2002 NBA All-Star Game as injury replacements. Szczerbiak was voted to the West squad by the conference coaches.


The Hornets offered Davis a six-year, maximum-salary extension Monday. Brand is seeking the same deal this summer.


The Wolves might not be able to afford Szczerbiak. In 2003-04, the first year of his extension, Szczerbiak would make an estimated $10.6 million. That's a big chunk considering Minnesota already will have $39 million allocated to forward Kevin Garnett ($28 million) and guard Terrell Brandon ($11.1 million).


Paying Szczerbiak the maximum would make it very difficult for the Wolves to avoid the league's luxury tax, which goes into effect when a team's payroll is in excess of approximately $54 million.


Szczerbiak is already signed for 2002-03 at $2.9 million. Last year he started all 82 games, averaging a career-high 18.7 points.


McHale, who said last week he hoped to sign Szczerbiak and Garnett to extensions, was out of the office and unavailable for comment Wednesday, team spokesman Kent Wipf said.

Fidel
07-03-2002, 11:47 AM
That franchise is kinda f***** up. Because of the inflated contracts of Brandon and Garnett they really donīt have any options. Maybe they should try to move Garnett.

Hoopsmeister
07-03-2002, 12:46 PM
<< Wally asks for the max....SHOW ME THE MONEY!!! >>



It may just be a negotiating tactic of his agent. If its not, if Wally seriously believes he can get the max, then he's an idiot.

madape
07-03-2002, 04:18 PM
Maybe Wally is just trying to force the Wolves to trade him.

Hoopsmeister
07-03-2002, 05:12 PM
<< Maybe Wally is just trying to force the Wolves to trade him. >>



What team is going to touch Wally if they think he might demand the max?

Bayliss
07-03-2002, 05:33 PM
<< What team is going to touch Wally if they think he might demand the max? >>



The Clippers? i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Drbio
07-03-2002, 08:21 PM
The Clips entire payroll won't match what Wally is asking for.

MFFL
07-03-2002, 09:44 PM
Man I don't see Wally getting more than 5-6 million a year. He excels at a position where it's possible to get cheaper production.

I really see the NBA moving to a position priority system in regards to salary (like the NFL). The big men and the point guards will get all of the money. The SG and SF will be paid significantly less as a position.

Rhylan
07-03-2002, 10:18 PM
It sucks to be Wally because of the max-fest last year. I mean, would you rather have Wally or Allan Houston? Wally, probably. He's also a better player, period, than Antawn Jamison, although you're talking different positions. The problem is that the max-deal is a new thing, so teams are overusing it to keep their stars.

I'd say he's worth about $7 mil per. He is an All-Star, after all, and he can fill up the basket. But there is a glut of talent at the 2.

scooterj5
07-03-2002, 11:09 PM
&quot;Tell him he's dreamin'!&quot;

for the aussies.

scooterj5
07-06-2002, 03:44 AM
Wally should not have been an all star. Other than score what does he do? 4.7 rebounds and 3 assists. His defence is at best average. He's not much more than Ron Mercer... just with a higher field goal percentage.

aexchange
07-06-2002, 08:16 AM
wally isnt worth 7 million a year.

as much as i hate bonzi wells, i'd rather have bonzi wells than wally world. wally isnt worth more than the MLE and thats being pretty damn generous. he can't play defense, he's selfish, and he has yet to provide anything other than a nice outside shot. he's a larger more selfish version of steve kerr.

Murphy3
07-06-2002, 08:58 PM
i don't really get the selfish bit... if a guy is shooting around 50% and not taking an over abundance of shots..i don't really guy the selfish bit.... maybe you should look at guys shooting 40-43% that actually take 18-20 shots a game... that might be more representative of a selfish player

Murphy3
07-06-2002, 09:02 PM
just my opinion but when you're shooting 50.7% from the field and 45.5% from the floor and taking around 14-15 shots a game.. well, i don't have ANY issues with the amount of attempts except that he probably could have gotten a couple MORE shots per game

scooterj5
07-07-2002, 03:49 AM
I checked out a couple of Wolves message boards, and the word 'selfish' came up a fair bit. It seems that he gets whingy when the plays don't go through him, and he had a little fight with KG a year or two ago. The consesus is that he is nowhere near worth the max.

And field goal percentage is overrated. For example, Iverson has a pretty horrible shooting percentage, but if you replaced him with someone like Wally (higher field goal %) then the Sixers would be one of the worst teams in the league.

PeterVecseyisdumb
07-07-2002, 02:53 PM
<< I checked out a couple of Wolves message boards, and the word 'selfish' came up a fair bit. It seems that he gets whingy when the plays don't go through him, and he had a little fight with KG a year or two ago. The consesus is that he is nowhere near worth the max.

And field goal percentage is overrated. For example, Iverson has a pretty horrible shooting percentage, but if you replaced him with someone like Wally (higher field goal %) then the Sixers would be one of the worst teams in the league. >>



I don't think fg percentage is overrated. Look at a player like Michael Jordan. Michael Jordan's career fg percentage in the nba, before last season, was about 51 percent. In other words, if Iverson's fg percentage was about 51 percent, then he would have probably averaged about 35 points per game, this season. I think Larry Bird had about a 49 percent fg percentage for his career, in the nba. Shaq has a high fg percentage. I think fg percentage is important.

I understand what you are saying about Wally. If you put Wally on Philadelphia, the Sixers would be worse. Iverson is a much better scorer than Wally. Wally probably couldn't score as many points as Iverson. Iverson is much better at creating his own shot than Wally, and Iverson can get to the free throw line much better than Wally. Iverson is a much better player than Wally, right now.

Murphy3
07-07-2002, 03:55 PM
actually, scooter, a.iverson is overrated.

FG% is not overrated. that makes very little sense whatsoever. no, i don't think wally would be a good guy to have shooting 27 times a game..but neither is iverson.

the funny thing is..is that wally probably has a point. he probably DOES need a bit more of the offense to go through him... him and KG should have very similar amounts of shot attempts

scooterj5
07-07-2002, 06:40 PM
New Jersey Nets made the finals with a team % of .446

Dallas Mavs were eliminated in the 2nd round with a team % of 0.462

The Lakers WON with a team % of .461 (they beat the Kings, who had a team % of .467)

FG% is just a number that has little meaning on its own. It needs to be compared with what you are allowing your defensive player to shoot at- a staistic which is difficult to find for individuals. Iverson's defence more than makes up for his relatively low field goal percent. And another thing- a high % cannot be used to make projections. Wally might only take the shots that he is 100% comfortable with taking, but the team might go with KG for the crunch shots. If Wally took all the tough shots, his % would most likely dive. And using Michael Jordan is any argument about statistics is useless, because his numbers are off the scale.

PeterVecseyisdumb
07-07-2002, 07:17 PM
<< New Jersey Nets made the finals with a team % of .446

Dallas Mavs were eliminated in the 2nd round with a team % of 0.462

The Lakers WON with a team % of .461 (they beat the Kings, who had a team % of .467)

FG% is just a number that has little meaning on its own. It needs to be compared with what you are allowing your defensive player to shoot at- a staistic which is difficult to find for individuals. Iverson's defence more than makes up for his relatively low field goal percent. And another thing- a high % cannot be used to make projections. Wally might only take the shots that he is 100% comfortable with taking, but the team might go with KG for the crunch shots. If Wally took all the tough shots, his % would most likely dive. And using Michael Jordan is any argument about statistics is useless, because his numbers are off the scale. >>



The nets play in the eastern conference. The eastern conference was a terrible conference, this season. Also, those team fg percentage stats, don't show that the mavs took a lot of threes. The mavs main problem wasn't their fg percentage, it was their defense. The lakers are a solid defensive team.

Iverson isn't a good defender. I don't see how you can say iverson's defense makes up for his terrible fg percentage. Iverson might get steals, but those stats don't show the times he tries to get a steal, and misses, and the player he is covering scores on him. Iverson is short. Iverson can't block shots and can get posted up by the player he is covering, easily. Iverson is a bad rebounder.

Why do you think the michael jordan argument is useless? If michael jordan had a terrible fg percentage, then michael jordan would have scored less points. Look at the fg percentage of players like shaq, kobe, dirk, duncan, etc. Look at the fg percentage of players like wilt, kareem, larry bird, mchale, etc. All of these players have high fg percentages.

Rhylan
07-07-2002, 07:58 PM
<< FG% is just a number that has little meaning on its own. >>



Ouch!! Man THAT HURT!

I was biting my tongue so hard that I bit right through the damn thing.

FG% is one of the most important offensive statistics in basketball, and you can't say that it should be compared against the opposing player's FG%, because teams play team defense. You don't guard one guy the whole game, and one guy doesn't guard you the whole game. Moreover, defenses will give you/deny you certain shots based on how well you shoot those shots, which is directly related to your FG%.

Kat
07-08-2002, 11:45 PM
Wally puts up good FG%, and I agree, hello that number is important. But....I don't know why, I just have never liked him. But have to say I don't think he is worth the Max right now. I don't really think he has proven to be a Max guy yet. I agree if he gets the ball more maybe then he would prove me wrong. Not sure. A Max guy leads the team, is part of the foundation, not the problem.

scooterj5
07-17-2002, 03:18 AM
<< FG% is one of the most important offensive statistics in basketball, and you can't say that it should be compared against the opposing player's FG%, because teams play team defense. You don't guard one guy the whole game, and one guy doesn't guard you the whole game. >>



Yes, that's what i said. Your own field goal percentage is abritrary on it's own. It only means something if you compare it against what you are giving up, and there is no one statistic that shows this. (since basketball is a team sport as you mentioned) If you play awful defence, shooting 50% yourself is almost wasted.

There's a *massive* difference between a 50% shooter and a 43% shooter isn't there? If you shoot 14 shots a game, a 50% shooter will get 7. The 43% shooter should get 6. Would you take good defence or *one* extra shot, over an entire game?????

[/i] >>

Moreover, defenses will give you/deny you certain shots based on how well you shoot those shots, which is directly related to your FG%. [/i] >>



That's an oversimplification, and if it were true, Iverson would not be doubled and tripled team. His field goal % is low, why are coaches sending triple teams on him? I wonder... shouldn't they be concentrating on Eric Snow and Matt Harpring because they have a higher percentage?