The Official Wilson Chandler is Overrated Thread

Chandler doesn't really have any discernible talents. He's average to below average at every aspect of basketball. Bad shooter, average defender, average penetration, horrible passing and b-ball IQ. He's a bench player, nothing more.

I would give him up for Rudy Fernandez. Rudy would be a legit starting SG and give us more 3 pt shooting. Chandler doesn;t really bring anything to the table that we need.

If Wilson Chandler is an average defender what does that make Rudy Fernandez? Fernandez isn't as bad at defense as many say he is but he's still not better than Chandler who is an OK man to man defender and a pretty good help defender.

Chandler is an average two-way player. Fernandez is a better shooter but a worse defender.

On a team like the Knicks where we've been getting curbstomped due to our lack of defense, we need all the good defenders we can get.

Eh, I think it's a fair trade off. Wilson is slightly better defensively, Rudy is far better offensively. Considering we have a hole at SG, I think this trade is a no-brainer.

We added some defenders in Turiaf and Azabuike, and Wilson doesn't make a big enough impact on the team defensively to make a huge difference.

SSj4Wingzero said:

If Wilson Chandler is an average defender what does that make Rudy Fernandez? Fernandez isn't as bad at defense as many say he is but he's still not better than Chandler who is an OK man to man defender and a pretty good help defender.

Chandler is an average two-way player. Fernandez is a better shooter but a worse defender.

On a team like the Knicks where we've been getting curbstomped due to our lack of defense, we need all the good defenders we can get.

Click to expand...

This is a completely different roster than the last few years. We've added a lot of defensive players. Felton, Azubuike, Mason, Randolph, Turiaf, Mozgov.

We only have two players, at most, that can put up 20 pts on a nightly basis. Gallo and Amare. So I would say, based on our roster, defense is our strength and offense is our weakness.

Rudy could be a consistent scoring threat on this team. Chandler is redundant. His skills can be easily replaced.

I have a few points to make on this topic.

people say rudy is a better shooter.....why is that? is it because white dudes are known to be better shooters? steve kerr, paxon, etc.?? because looking at the numbers, chandler is a much better shooter. Chandler shoots 48% from the field, while rudy shoots 38%. Factoring in that rudy is a much better 3 point shooter at 36% compared to chandlers 27% shows that inside the 3 point line, chandler is a beast.

On defense, Chandler is heads and shoulders above rudy. He almost averages a block a game, Rudy averages 0.2 bpg. I know guards arent supposed to be shot blockers, but it is an indicator to effort and energy. They both only average 2 assist per game, and chandler only plays 6 more mins per game than rudy. i cannot credit rudy to be a good passer when he only averages 2 assists per game and he plays 23 mins per contest, and he plays on a better team.

im against trading wilson chandler, dont really give a **** about who thinks he's a bum. Plus, the kid is only 23. Can we keep a draft pick and develop them for once??? chandler is better now, than trevor ariza was for us then. One trade later, ariza got a ring and big contract.

Toons said:

I have a few points to make on this topic.

people say rudy is a better shooter.....why is that? is it because white dudes are known to be better shooters? steve kerr, paxon, etc.?? because looking at the numbers, chandler is a much better shooter. Chandler shoots 48% from the field, while rudy shoots 38%. Factoring in that rudy is a much better 3 point shooter at 36% compared to chandlers 27% shows that inside the 3 point line, chandler is a beast.

On defense, Chandler is heads and shoulders above rudy. He almost averages a block a game, Rudy averages 0.2 bpg. I know guards arent supposed to be shot blockers, but it is an indicator to effort and energy. They both only average 2 assist per game, and chandler only plays 6 more mins per game than rudy. i cannot credit rudy to be a good passer when he only averages 2 assists per game and he plays 23 mins per contest, and he plays on a better team.

im against trading wilson chandler, dont really give a **** about who thinks he's a bum. Plus, the kid is only 23. Can we keep a draft pick and develop them for once??? chandler is better now, than trevor ariza was for us then. One trade later, ariza got a ring and big contract.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Welcome back Toons!!!

Toons said:

I have a few points to make on this topic.

people say rudy is a better shooter.....why is that? is it because white dudes are known to be better shooters? steve kerr, paxon, etc.?? because looking at the numbers, chandler is a much better shooter. Chandler shoots 48% from the field, while rudy shoots 38%.

Click to expand...

Eddy Curry has a career average 54.5% fg. Do you think he is a better shooter than Chandler?

metrocard said:

How do you call Chandler explosive when he gets to the free throw line at a lesser rate than Gallinari, who you claim isn't explosive? Gallo was playing 70% last season too and it was his first legit rookie season.

Gallo alot of times was our go to guy, while Chandler settled for being a 3rd option on offense.

Chandler is a very soft and not aggressive basketball player.

His talent is dunking a basketball, which 95% of the NBA can do. He's not special.

Talent is Gallo, 6"10 Point Forward with handles, passing, offensive awareness, toughness, aggresiveness, leadership, footwork, and 3pt range.

Click to expand...

Pay attention to the highlights in this post ....

Metro.....I was on the majority of KO game-threads last season, I did not see this Gallo u are mentioning with decent handle, offensive awareness, footwork, or his 32% 3-ball range. I seen a Gallo hanging out on the 3-ball line from Oct. to late February who had alot of open 2-point jumpers but never took them untill T-Mac & Eddie House arrived on the team.
The only agressiveness/toughness Gallo showed last season was in one game vs Carmelo.

I am starting to believe with the new aquistion of PG-Felton/SG-Azu/and PF-Amare,
alot of Gallo-fans (and headcoach Damntoni) will see Gallo minutes decrease
at the SF position with Wilson Chandler still on the Knick roster.

The best foward on this Knick team to resemble a "Marion & Amare" tamdem
to add a strong rebounding factor, scoring only off of broken plays, plus
taking the ball hard up the middle with athority of injuring any fool who
stands in the way to catch an offensive-foul is "Wilson Chandler & Amare" tandem.

For those who dont understand, the Knicks just signed Amare to a $100M contract.
Amare will be looking for a 30 minute running (bigman) partner in the
frontcourt during training camp/preseason games that will have his back
on offense/defense for a 82 game season.
It is no longer about Damntoni's coaching decisions in New York.
Marion & Amare never swallowed any of Damntoni bullshuuuut in Phoenix.
The two always looked at Dantoni as an interim coach.
Marion average 42 minutes per game throughout Damntoni tour in Phoenix
(highest minute player each season). So if Gallo dont step-up to the plate aggressively as a starter to please Amare, and the Knicks lose the first 3 games of the season ...... think owner Dolan.

So the best solution for all the Gallo-fans and coach Dantoni's future
in New York is to trade Wilson Chandler before the 2010-11 regular
season begins.
Wilson Chandler may not be an All-Star or star player, but he is an
all-around strong versatile "SF" who will go face to face aggressively
with any NBA oponent without backing down on offense/defense.

It should not be hard for Knick-fans to recall the (2008-9) 21-25 record from a 6-man rotation Knick team with the main 30+ minute lineup being:
PG-Duhon
SG-Nate
SF-Chandler
PF-Harrington
C-Lee
We Knick-fans never seen that lineup in the 2009-10 season b/c of a 34 mpg Gallo at the SF position.
PG-Duhon needed another guard in the backcourt with him lastseason, which he never received accept when the Knicks went on their longest winning streak of the season (the 4 game win streak on December 4th with SG-Larry Hughes averaging 35+ minutes throughout those 4 games vs Hawks/Nets/Blazers/and CP3 Hornets), with Nate getting all the attention for being DNP in all 4 games, no one bothered to mention SF-Gallo average only 21 mpg throughout the 4 game winning streak.
Those 4 straight winning games Wilson Chandler averaged 34 mpg at the Foward position.

LJ4ptplay said:

Eddy Curry has a career average 54.5% fg. Do you think he is a better shooter than Chandler?

Click to expand...

dont be an idiot. curry's shots are all dunks and layups.....

chandler and rudy can shoot and score from anywhere on the court, wilson just does a better job at it.

i watch games, i watch game highlights, i dont just watch stats.

lmao, cant believe u tryna comapre a centre and a guard lmao dummy

Toons said:

dont be an idiot. curry's shots are all dunks and layups.....

chandler and rudy can shoot and score from anywhere on the court, wilson just does a better job at it.

i watch games, i watch game highlights, i dont just watch stats.

lmao, cant believe u tryna comapre a centre and a guard lmao dummy

Click to expand...

It was to expose your idiocy. Using fg% is misleading and that was the point. The majority of Chandler's points come close to the basket. Mostly through layups, dunks and floaters.

Chandler had the lowest field goal percentage in the entire league with catch and shoot scenarios, regardless of location. He is an awful shooter. Plain and simple. And to even suggest that Chandler is a better shooter than Rudy is moronic. Just looking at their 3-point fg%'s is enough, dummy.

LJ4ptplay said:

It was to expose your idiocy. Using fg% is misleading and that was the point. The majority of Chandler's points come close to the basket. Mostly through layups, dunks and floaters.

Chandler had the lowest field goal percentage in the entire league with catch and shoot scenarios, regardless of location. He is an awful shooter. Plain and simple. And to even suggest that Chandler is a better shooter than Rudy is moronic. Just looking at their 3-point fg%'s is enough, dummy.

Click to expand...

What game are you watching??? the same wilson chandler that is ragged on because of a lack of aggerssion? lmaoooo
yes, we all know fg% can be misleading, but it is an indicator of accuracy. You tell me that my statistical reference is idiotic to reflect the accuracy of a shooter, but then you use another misleading statistic like 'catch and shoot' lmao by your standards, jordan crawford is a beast because he ranks very high in catch and shoot percentages with or without a hand in his face....if u wanna go by ur silly statistic. Chandler doesnt do the catch and shoot thing, he isnt a spot up shooter, he is a slasher....most of his shots he creates. Kobe bryant doesnt catch and shoot.....almost ALL of his shots he creates himself. True shooting percentage is a combination of free throws, three pointer and mid range shots. average them all off and chandler still is the better shooter by volume.

48% and 38% arent even close. Maybe you need to watch a trailblazer game and see the shots rudy chucks and misses. how the hell are you a shooting guard with a 38% fg%??? dude shoots 3's better than a jump shot lolol thats like bruce bowen, good 3 point shooter, poor free throw and midrange game

LJ4ptplay said:

It was to expose your idiocy. Using fg% is misleading and that was the point. The majority of Chandler's points come close to the basket. Mostly through layups, dunks and floaters.

Chandler had the lowest field goal percentage in the entire league with catch and shoot scenarios, regardless of location. He is an awful shooter. Plain and simple. And to even suggest that Chandler is a better shooter than Rudy is moronic. Just looking at their 3-point fg%'s is enough, dummy.

Click to expand...

soooooo ur saying that bruce bowen is a better shooter than richard hamilton then?? is rudy a better shooter than kobe? lebron? just because he has a high 3 pt percentage?? lmao hahahahhaha go shoot marbles niqqa

dummy.....

LJ4ptplay said:

It was to expose your idiocy. Using fg% is misleading and that was the point. The majority of Chandler's points come close to the basket. Mostly through layups, dunks and floaters.

Chandler had the lowest field goal percentage in the entire league with catch and shoot scenarios, regardless of location. He is an awful shooter. Plain and simple. And to even suggest that Chandler is a better shooter than Rudy is moronic. Just looking at their 3-point fg%'s is enough, dummy.

Click to expand...

We don't need any more 3 point shooters.

Felton, Gallo, Douglas, Walker, Azubuike, Rautins, all of these players can shoot the 3 ball at a 35% or better clip. Why do we need another 3 point shooter? Frankly I don't even think Rudy Fernandez is better than Kelenna Azubuike, so...why are we dumping Chandler for him?

Chandler gets too many points close to the basket? Since when is having a good tough athletic forward who drives to the basket a bad thing?

JayJ44 said:

Eh, I think it's a fair trade off. Wilson is slightly better defensively, Rudy is far better offensively. Considering we have a hole at SG, I think this trade is a no-brainer.

We added some defenders in Turiaf and Azabuike, and Wilson doesn't make a big enough impact on the team defensively to make a huge difference.

Click to expand...

Rudy is not far better offensively. If anything he might be SLIGHTLY better offensively because he has a better 3 point shot but he doesn't have the size that Chandler has.

Just go to a Blazers forum and see all of them hoping this trade gets pulled off wondering if the Knicks are really stupid enough to swap these two

Toons said:

What game are you watching??? the same wilson chandler that is ragged on because of a lack of aggerssion? lmaoooo
yes, we all know fg% can be misleading, but it is an indicator of accuracy. You tell me that my statistical reference is idiotic to reflect the accuracy of a shooter, but then you use another misleading statistic like 'catch and shoot' lmao by your standards, jordan crawford is a beast because he ranks very high in catch and shoot percentages with or without a hand in his face....if u wanna go by ur silly statistic. Chandler doesnt do the catch and shoot thing, he isnt a spot up shooter, he is a slasher....most of his shots he creates. Kobe bryant doesnt catch and shoot.....almost ALL of his shots he creates himself. True shooting percentage is a combination of free throws, three pointer and mid range shots. average them all off and chandler still is the better shooter by volume.

Click to expand...

If you want to say Chandler gets his points at a more efficient rate, then fine. But to say he is a better shooter is just moronic. And to use fg% as your evidence that Chandler is a better shooter is being deceiving.

Put Chandler and Rudy in a shooting contest and see who wins.

Move on. Find some other reason to say Chandler is better than Rudy. It is clearly not shooting. And if you think so, you are a dumbass.

SSj4Wingzero said:

We don't need any more 3 point shooters.

Felton, Gallo, Douglas, Walker, Azubuike, Rautins, all of these players can shoot the 3 ball at a 35% or better clip. Why do we need another 3 point shooter? Frankly I don't even think Rudy Fernandez is better than Kelenna Azubuike, so...why are we dumping Chandler for him?

Chandler gets too many points close to the basket? Since when is having a good tough athletic forward who drives to the basket a bad thing?

Click to expand...

If Azubuike is 100% healthy and back to the same form he was at before the injury, then I'm fine with him starting at SG. Having an athletic FORWARD that drives to the basket is fine. Chandler is a SF and having him start at SG is a bad idea. We will regret not having a starting SG.

SSj4Wingzero said:

Just go to a Blazers forum and see all of them hoping this trade gets pulled off wondering if the Knicks are really stupid enough to swap these two

Click to expand...

I have looked at a Blazer's forum. It's a mix. Most of them would rather a pick than Chandler. Many of them don't think Chandler is good enough for Rudy and some are for it. I didn't see any posts that think they would be stealing Chandler from us and many think we should give Randolph for him.

Only Knick fans overhype Chandler. Noone knows who he is. He would come off the bench and get minimal minutes in Portland.

http://www.iamatrailblazersfan.com/...d/158/aff/488/aft/1807/afv/topic/Default.aspx

LJ4ptplay said:

This is a completely different roster than the last few years. We've added a lot of defensive players. Felton, Azubuike, Mason, Randolph, Turiaf, Mozgov.

We only have two players, at most, that can put up 20 pts on a nightly basis. Gallo and Amare. So I would say, based on our roster, defense is our strength and offense is our weakness.

Rudy could be a consistent scoring threat on this team. Chandler is redundant. His skills can be easily replaced.

Click to expand...

We are clueless on how any of the new Knick players will perform alongside
of a new "PG-Felton" and a new "PF-Amare" under a short rotation coach
who doesnt use or feelance his bench players.

The Knicks will need inside scoring, plus good inside/outside defenders to
win in the East.
We have two "versatile" players with inside offense/outside defense we
seen perform with consistency throughout a 82 game season in PG-Douglas
and SF-Chandler.

Why would u (and others) want to get rid of these two players before u
seen what the other new Knick players have to offer?
Players do get injured from training-camp to the first 10 games of the
season. We only have a 13 man roster ..... our roster could use another
C/F and a SG to complete our 15 man roster.
Or are we hoping to find a hungry player in our training-camp tryouts?