Official John Wall Appreciation Thread 2.0

[JonathanJoseph]

I dislike watching Wall play. I dislike watching him fall to the ground because he's out of control. I dislike seeing a poor shooting PG looking for his 32% long-2 jumper early in the shot clock. I dislike seeing an athlete of that caliber abused off the dribble on a frequent basis.

I think CCJ and I were the only one's really questioning Wall early last season. SVG was ripped here for similar sentiments as recently as two weeks ago. Seems like the tide is turning quickly.

IMO Wall is an average NBA player and that sucks. The curse of les Boulez.

[Upper Decker]

Last off-season three PG's were extended beyond their rookie deal (Lawson, Curry, Holliday). All three are unquestionably better than Wall. Here are the terms:

Lawson 4/48
Curry 4//44
Holliday 4/46

IMO the Wizards are screwed because as a #1 pick, Wall's agent will basically say he's worth the max. Draft status will play more into his extension than his actual production. I don't think he's worth the contracts above, but he'd never resign for anything lower.

Former #1 picks either become bona-fide star's and get mega-bucks, or move on. I can't recall an instance where a #1 pick didn't meet expectations but both sides concluded it's best to remain together at a reduced rate to work things out.

The trouble is if they trade him they'll only get fifty cents on the dollar because another team won't want to be saddled with this situation. Can't trade him for equal value, can't pay him his actual worth. This conundrum is really starting to push Wall into semi-bust territory.

[JonathanJoseph]

Last off-season three PG's were extended beyond their rookie deal (Lawson, Curry, Holliday). All three are unquestionably better than Wall. Here are the terms:

Lawson 4/48
Curry 4//44
Holliday 4/46

IMO the Wizards are screwed because as a #1 pick, Wall's agent will basically say he's worth the max. Draft status will play more into his extension than his actual production. I don't think he's worth the contracts above, but he'd never resign for anything lower.

Former #1 picks either become bona-fide star's and get mega-bucks, or move on. I can't recall an instance where a #1 pick didn't meet expectations but both sides concluded it's best to remain together at a reduced rate to work things out.

The trouble is if they trade him they'll only get fifty cents on the dollar because another team won't want to be saddled with this situation. Can't trade him for equal value, can't pay him his actual worth. This conundrum is really starting to push Wall into semi-bust territory.

Inevitable. Wall has litte trade value as no one is willing to commit serious money to him. I was laughed at for saying I would have traded him for a lottery pick in this recent draft but it's looking more and more like getting so much as a lottery pick will be difficult.

[Jay81]

ive heard people say that if we get better players..that will make a Wall a superstar. thats not what a superstar is. A superstar is great no matter what crap he has around him. Like Kyie Irving. Wall needs to improve his skill set to be a superstar...not by bringing in better players.

[Nivek]

ive heard people say that if we get better players..that will make a Wall a superstar. thats not what a superstar is. A superstar is great no matter what crap he has around him. Like Kyie Irving. Wall needs to improve his skill set to be a superstar...not by bringing in better players.

Yep.

[tontoz]

I am struggling to think of many starting guards on good teams with jumpers as bad as Wall's. The only one that springs to mind is Stacy Augman on the 90s Hawks teams.

[Nivek]

I am struggling to think of many starting guards on good teams with jumpers as bad as Wall's. The only one that springs to mind is Stacy Augman on the 90s Hawks teams.

At basketball-reference they have shot-distance/type stats for Augmon's last few years. He shot better than Wall on jumpers in several of those seasons. The first season they have numbers for, he shot .395 on jumpers, according to b-r. Wall would need to improve a TON to shoot that well.

[jivelikenice]

ive heard people say that if we get better players..that will make a Wall a superstar. thats not what a superstar is. A superstar is great no matter what crap he has around him. Like Kyie Irving. Wall needs to improve his skill set to be a superstar...not by bringing in better players.

Players that fit his skillset, not better players. I don't think he's a superstar but I think he can be a consistent all-star with Beal and Webster on the wings with a stretch 4 and a coach who knew what he was doing.

[Nivek]

So, we've gone from "Wall makes his teammates better" to "Wall needs the right teammates and a better coach so that he can be an All-Star"?

[Wizardspride]

IMO Wall is an average NBA player and that sucks. The curse of les Boulez.

Makes you appreciate our last PG even more.....

[jivelikenice]

That's the issue. People are in love with Arenas who was a scorer. Scoring looks better so they mistake that for being a great pg or a great player. I loved Gil, but we won one playoff series with him. its over...time to move on.

[jivelikenice]

So, we've gone from "Wall makes his teammates better" to "Wall needs the right teammates and a better coach so that he can be an All-Star"?

We haven't gone from that at all. Wall will make players who fit his style of play better. He'll make Beal and Webster better. On the other hand, he can't make a Jordan Crawford better because Jordan needs the ball in his hands to play at his best. That's why Jordan is a better fit as a 3rd guard on this team....

So by your logic, Wall should make any teammates better, regardless of how they play, right? So surrounding him with shooters versus non shooters shouldn't make an impact? That seems to be your logic. By that logic, the Skins and RG3 would have had the same success had they just put him under center and ran a strictly traditional offense. And Garcon's return didn't help because RG3 should have made Hankerson and Morgan better.....Wait, Pierre did help and somehow by your logic that means RG3 is not a star.

[tontoz]

I am struggling to think of many starting guards on good teams with jumpers as bad as Wall's. The only one that springs to mind is Stacy Augman on the 90s Hawks teams.

At basketball-reference they have shot-distance/type stats for Augmon's last few years. He shot better than Wall on jumpers in several of those seasons. The first season they have numbers for, he shot .395 on jumpers, according to b-r. Wall would need to improve a TON to shoot that well.

That looks like a pipe dream for Wall.

Augmon's last year with the Hawks was '96. His form was so bad it was a joke. Maybe he got better as he got older but i didnt follow him after he left.

I would be glad if Wall just gets to Josh Smith's shooting level. At least Smith shoots confidently even though he sucks. What really pisses me off is when Wall passes up an open shot then takes a couple of dribbles to take a contested jumper.

[payitforward]

So, we've gone from "Wall makes his teammates better" to "Wall needs the right teammates and a better coach so that he can be an All-Star"?

...Wall will make players who fit his style of play better. He'll make Beal and Webster better.

...So by your logic, Wall should make any teammates better, regardless of how they play, right? So surrounding him with shooters versus non shooters shouldn't make an impact? That seems to be your logic. By that logic, the Skins and RG3 would have had the same success had they just put him under center and ran a strictly traditional offense. And Garcon's return didn't help because RG3 should have made Hankerson and Morgan better.....Wait, Pierre did help and somehow by your logic that means RG3 is not a star.

This is the classic BS. A player can't make another player better. Period. Certainly a point guard can try to get a player the ball where he shoots best, but if you remember the other team plays defense, so that's just not going to happen often.

Wall hasn't made Webster better, and he hasn't made Beal better. Wall needs to worry about making himself better not anyone else. And what he's really bad at -- jump shooting and turnovers -- won't become better because we one another kind of other player on our roster.

So far, into his 3d season, he hasn't been all that. Was there someone else to draft #1 in 2010? Sure, but only in retrospect. No one questions the pick itself; it's the player.

[montestewart]

That's the issue. People are in love with Arenas who was a scorer. Scoring looks better so they mistake that for being a great pg or a great player. I loved Gil, but we won one playoff series with him. its over...time to move on.

But, it might be time to move on, again. I don't think most people here are analyzing Wall in comparison to Arenas only, or to Arenas at all. Even if Wall had a jump shot, they would be quite different PGs. Arenas was shoot first, but his ability to shoot got his teammates open looks, and he was a pretty good passer on the run and in a half court set. Maybe Arenas wasn't great, but at his peak, he was very good. If Wall would/could develop a jump shot, he could maybe have some of that.

[jivelikenice]

If we put him in position to succeed, I'd buy that, but we haven't. He has some responsibility here, but up until the 3rd quarter versus Sacramento he had been playing very well in his limited time this year. One and a half bad games, and he sucks again.

Call its bs if you want but i think its totally irrational that people don't think what you surround him with should have an impact. Yup, getting a prized investment, surround him with parts that don't fit (pre-Beal), heavy roster turnover, and a coach with a bad track record with an offensive system that nobody would use with a player like this, and then act surprised when the result is inconsistency. -Wiz message board logic.

[tontoz]

An open jumper is an open jumper regardless of who the other players on the team are.

[montestewart]

I'm not disputing that Wall might look a lot better if he had a range of efficient shooters that were good at getting open, so there were always at least two on the floor with him, and preferably three, w/ a stretch PF, and additional good shooting options off the bench, allowing the coach to feed in rested legs and hot hands. That would make any PG look better.

But a better jump shot would make Wall better no matter who was on the floor. He looked good coming back because he was rested and he's still very fast and a good passer on the break. But he still needs a shot.

[JonathanJoseph]

A good PG will make any random 4 other players at the local YMCA better players.

[payitforward]

But but but... his production of assists is *not* what's holding John Wall back.

He has no 3, doesn't shoot jumpers well, and turns it over at a high rate. It was the same at Kentucky. A different cast of characters around him won't help those problems.