Which player from the 04 championship team would help this squad the most

[breezypeezy]

Q- Which player from 04 would help this squad most?

Answer- YES!!

[blog_pistons]

Rasheed Wallace

[TPA]

Next Post: Which Bad Boys Piston would help this team the most?

[tmorgan]

Next Post: Which Bad Boys Piston would help this team the most?

I think I’d take Joe D, or maybe Rodman for funsies.

[Snakebites]

Sheed would be an absolute monster nowadays.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using RealGM mobile app

Sheed is always a 3rd/4th option. Great defender, skilled enough to go toe to toe with the All-Time greats..., but even on a roster with no true #1 he was mid on the pecking order. It's true he was ahead of his time and would undoubtedly up his 3pt fga, but he's still 3rd/4th most nights. He wasn't out to dominate unless you pissed him off.

Hell, I think you can argue that Tobias, when he's being assertive & giving you that efficient 20 is as good if not better offensively. Defensively Sheed was elite in the post and top notch defensive qb. But kinda same role, 3rd/4th.

Chauncey commands the floor every night and would absolutely murder people playing off Cade. It'd be like if Beasley, THj and Ivey had a love child, pumped him full of hgh and taught him to command an army.

Yeah, I did really like Rasheed as a player quite a bit but his impact isn't quite on the level of Chauncey. He had a nice shooting stroke but he was never consistent enough with it at high enough volume at 3 point range to be a floor spacer like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner. To be clear so nobody jumps down my throat, I do think that overall he was more talented and better than those two players (both of whom have more limited offensive games outside of their shooting), but he wasn't a floor spacer like those guys are.

Chauncey on the other hand provides a point of attack defender, a terrific shooter, and a second ball handler. He's literally everything you need alongside Cade. You know how we have to choose between spacing, ball handling, and defense in terms of our Cade backcourt mate under the status quo? With Chauncey we'd get all of them.

[ComboGuardCity]

Sheed in today’s NBA is special. Even if he follows trajectory of never wanting to be the guy, a switchable 4/5 who is unguardable by both is insane.

I see the Chauncey argument but Cade is more effective with the ball in his hands.

Can’t go wrong with either and a fun hypothetical

[Snakebites]

I don't quite get the "Cade needs the ball in his hands" argument TBH. Even Luka Doncic and prime James Harden found their greatest team success alongside another great ball handler (Chris Paul in Harden's case and Kyrie in Luka's case).

[Invictus88]

Sheed would be an absolute monster nowadays.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using RealGM mobile app

Sheed is always a 3rd/4th option. Great defender, skilled enough to go toe to toe with the All-Time greats..., but even on a roster with no true #1 he was mid on the pecking order. It's true he was ahead of his time and would undoubtedly up his 3pt fga, but he's still 3rd/4th most nights. He wasn't out to dominate unless you pissed him off.

Hell, I think you can argue that Tobias, when he's being assertive & giving you that efficient 20 is as good if not better offensively. Defensively Sheed was elite in the post and top notch defensive qb. But kinda same role, 3rd/4th.

Chauncey commands the floor every night and would absolutely murder people playing off Cade. It'd be like if Beasley, THj and Ivey had a love child, pumped him full of hgh and taught him to command an army.

Yeah, I did really like Rasheed as a player quite a bit but his impact isn't quite on the level of Chauncey. He had a nice shooting stroke but he was never consistent enough with it at high enough volume at 3 point range to be a floor spacer like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner. To be clear so nobody jumps down my throat, I do think that overall he was more talented and better than those two players (both of whom have more limited offensive games outside of their shooting), but he wasn't a floor spacer like those guys are.

Chauncey on the other hand provides a point of attack defender, a terrific shooter, and a second ball handler. He's literally everything you need alongside Cade. You know how we have to choose between spacing, ball handling, and defense in terms of our Cade backcourt mate under the status quo? With Chauncey we'd get all of them.

Sheed actually shot the 3 ball better in all of the seasons in which he shot them with higher volume; the exceptions being his final 2 seasons that he was 35 and 38 respectively.

In these 6 seasons he shot it >= 3.9 attempts per game and hit it between .351 and .360. He had a 7th season at 3.8 attempts where he shot it at .341.

I think it's safe to say that for his time he was a completely adequate/good floor spacer. I think if you add him to today's game where there is emphasis on analytics / maximizing efficiency that those numbers are all higher and the spacing works even better because defenders know how much more important it is to close out.

So I think the lack of consistency and spacing argument is a bunch of bunk.

I think the choice is between adding leadership and defense to the 2 guard position or to the 4/5. I think we are good leadership-wise with Cade and are much more terrifying / versatile with Sheed.

[Snakebites]

Sheed is always a 3rd/4th option. Great defender, skilled enough to go toe to toe with the All-Time greats..., but even on a roster with no true #1 he was mid on the pecking order. It's true he was ahead of his time and would undoubtedly up his 3pt fga, but he's still 3rd/4th most nights. He wasn't out to dominate unless you pissed him off.

Hell, I think you can argue that Tobias, when he's being assertive & giving you that efficient 20 is as good if not better offensively. Defensively Sheed was elite in the post and top notch defensive qb. But kinda same role, 3rd/4th.

Chauncey commands the floor every night and would absolutely murder people playing off Cade. It'd be like if Beasley, THj and Ivey had a love child, pumped him full of hgh and taught him to command an army.

Yeah, I did really like Rasheed as a player quite a bit but his impact isn't quite on the level of Chauncey. He had a nice shooting stroke but he was never consistent enough with it at high enough volume at 3 point range to be a floor spacer like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner. To be clear so nobody jumps down my throat, I do think that overall he was more talented and better than those two players (both of whom have more limited offensive games outside of their shooting), but he wasn't a floor spacer like those guys are.

Chauncey on the other hand provides a point of attack defender, a terrific shooter, and a second ball handler. He's literally everything you need alongside Cade. You know how we have to choose between spacing, ball handling, and defense in terms of our Cade backcourt mate under the status quo? With Chauncey we'd get all of them.

Sheed actually shot the 3 ball better in all of the seasons in which he shot them with higher volume; the exceptions being his final 2 seasons that he was 35 and 38 respectively.

In these 6 seasons he shot it >= 3.9 attempts per game and hit it between .351 and .360. He had a 7th season at 3.8 attempts where he shot it at .341.

I think it's safe to say that for his time he was a completely adequate/good floor spacer. I think if you add him to today's game where there is emphasis on analytics / maximizing efficiency that those numbers are all higher and the spacing works even better because defenders know how much more important it is to close out.

So I think the lack of consistency and spacing argument is a bunch of bunk.

I think the choice is between adding leadership and defense to the 2 guard position or to the 4/5. I think we are good leadership-wise with Cade and are much more terrifying / versatile with Sheed.

He was actually between 34 and 36 percent in all of his volume shooting years. He never in his career had a volume year where he shot better than 36. That slots him as an average to slightly below average shooter relative to our current NBA, and it matches with my recollection of him as an inconsistent outside threat.

I’d still consider him a positive floor spacer given his position but I think it’s being oversold how impactful he’d be in that regard.

[Invictus88]

Yeah, I did really like Rasheed as a player quite a bit but his impact isn't quite on the level of Chauncey. He had a nice shooting stroke but he was never consistent enough with it at high enough volume at 3 point range to be a floor spacer like Brook Lopez or Myles Turner. To be clear so nobody jumps down my throat, I do think that overall he was more talented and better than those two players (both of whom have more limited offensive games outside of their shooting), but he wasn't a floor spacer like those guys are.

Chauncey on the other hand provides a point of attack defender, a terrific shooter, and a second ball handler. He's literally everything you need alongside Cade. You know how we have to choose between spacing, ball handling, and defense in terms of our Cade backcourt mate under the status quo? With Chauncey we'd get all of them.

Sheed actually shot the 3 ball better in all of the seasons in which he shot them with higher volume; the exceptions being his final 2 seasons that he was 35 and 38 respectively.

In these 6 seasons he shot it >= 3.9 attempts per game and hit it between .351 and .360. He had a 7th season at 3.8 attempts where he shot it at .341.

I think it's safe to say that for his time he was a completely adequate/good floor spacer. I think if you add him to today's game where there is emphasis on analytics / maximizing efficiency that those numbers are all higher and the spacing works even better because defenders know how much more important it is to close out.

So I think the lack of consistency and spacing argument is a bunch of bunk.

I think the choice is between adding leadership and defense to the 2 guard position or to the 4/5. I think we are good leadership-wise with Cade and are much more terrifying / versatile with Sheed.

He was actually between 34 and 36 percent in all of his volume shooting years. He never in his career had a volume year where he shot better than 36. That slots him as an average to slightly below average shooter relative to our current NBA, and it matches with my recollection of him as an inconsistent outside threat.

I’d still consider him a positive floor spacer given his position but I think it’s being oversold how impactful he’d be in that regard.

I never stated differently w.r.t. the numbers. However, he did that during a time when efficiency wasn't specifically a focal point of optimization. Given that he was still serviceable back then even by today's standards I would tend to believe he would likely fare better today and alleviate the spacing concerns. But I feel I already stated these points. Your opinion may differ.

[Uncle Mxy]

Darko

[DetroitSho]

Sheed actually shot the 3 ball better in all of the seasons in which he shot them with higher volume; the exceptions being his final 2 seasons that he was 35 and 38 respectively.

In these 6 seasons he shot it >= 3.9 attempts per game and hit it between .351 and .360. He had a 7th season at 3.8 attempts where he shot it at .341.

I think it's safe to say that for his time he was a completely adequate/good floor spacer. I think if you add him to today's game where there is emphasis on analytics / maximizing efficiency that those numbers are all higher and the spacing works even better because defenders know how much more important it is to close out.

So I think the lack of consistency and spacing argument is a bunch of bunk.

I think the choice is between adding leadership and defense to the 2 guard position or to the 4/5. I think we are good leadership-wise with Cade and are much more terrifying / versatile with Sheed.

He was actually between 34 and 36 percent in all of his volume shooting years. He never in his career had a volume year where he shot better than 36. That slots him as an average to slightly below average shooter relative to our current NBA, and it matches with my recollection of him as an inconsistent outside threat.

I’d still consider him a positive floor spacer given his position but I think it’s being oversold how impactful he’d be in that regard.

I never stated differently w.r.t. the numbers. However, he did that during a time when efficiency wasn't specifically a focal point of optimization. Given that he was still serviceable back then even by today's standards I would tend to believe he would likely fare better today and alleviate the spacing concerns. But I feel I already stated these points. Your opinion may differ.

Just curious, do you think the same shots he took and missed would magically be makes at a higher rate just because of the era?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[Fennis Dembo]

It's Rasheed and it's not even close.

[Kalamazoo317]

Next Post: Which Bad Boys Piston would help this team the most?

I think I’d take Joe D, or maybe Rodman for funsies.

Prime Joe D would be sick next to Cade. He's great on or off ball on offense and would shut down the best guard on the other team.

[Invictus88]

He was actually between 34 and 36 percent in all of his volume shooting years. He never in his career had a volume year where he shot better than 36. That slots him as an average to slightly below average shooter relative to our current NBA, and it matches with my recollection of him as an inconsistent outside threat.

I’d still consider him a positive floor spacer given his position but I think it’s being oversold how impactful he’d be in that regard.

I never stated differently w.r.t. the numbers. However, he did that during a time when efficiency wasn't specifically a focal point of optimization. Given that he was still serviceable back then even by today's standards I would tend to believe he would likely fare better today and alleviate the spacing concerns. But I feel I already stated these points. Your opinion may differ.

Just curious, do you think the same shots he took and missed would magically be makes at a higher rate just because of the era?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

No. I think that it's more of a focus to get corner 3s (which are easier) now than it used to be. Plus, the drive and kick out for open 3s is much more prevalent now which means those 3s will be less contested.

Better analytics might make it easier to identify exact court positions where he is most efficient.

I also think in a more 3-centric game that it's plausible that Sheed would make them more of a priority in his preparation and maybe bump his percentages up a little.

He was already a serviceable 3-point shooter by today's standards in an era where none of those were really emphasized.

It's all conjecture on my part but I don't think it's too far-fetched?

[440BB]

Sheed's volume of technical fouls and the impact that would have both on games and the youngsters' attitudes put him behind Chauncey for me. Chauncey and Cade would rule the half court.

[DetroitSho]

I never stated differently w.r.t. the numbers. However, he did that during a time when efficiency wasn't specifically a focal point of optimization. Given that he was still serviceable back then even by today's standards I would tend to believe he would likely fare better today and alleviate the spacing concerns. But I feel I already stated these points. Your opinion may differ.

Just curious, do you think the same shots he took and missed would magically be makes at a higher rate just because of the era?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

No. I think that it's more of a focus to get corner 3s (which are easier) now than it used to be. Plus, the drive and kick out for open 3s is much more prevalent now which means those 3s will be less contested.

Better analytics might make it easier to identify exact court positions where he is most efficient.

I also think in a more 3-centric game that it's plausible that Sheed would make them more of a priority in his preparation and maybe bump his percentages up a little.

He was already a serviceable 3-point shooter by today's standards in an era where none of those were really emphasized.

It's all conjecture on my part but I don't think it's too far-fetched?

Sheed, as it is, took more 3s than he really should have at the time. I don't think increasing his volume would neither make him better at it or make the team better for it. Focusing strictly on corner 3s wouldn't make him a better overall 3 point shooter, it would've just slightly increased his percentages while making him more one dimensional in that aspect.

When Sheed was really on, he was dangerous due to the fact that he would trail on the fast break and hit em from the top of the key. Plus, he had the ability to hit 27-28 footers, and you had to semi respect it so that stretched the defense. Parking him in the corner, Bruce Bowen style, wouldn't be beneficial for the team.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[jaredtyshaf]

Sheed with today’s shooting coaches and more time spent honing his 3pt shot would have a better 3pt % than he did in the 2000s

[DetroitSho]

Sheed with today’s shooting coaches and more time spent honing his 3pt shot would have a better 3pt % than he did in the 2000s

No, he wouldn't.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

[Invictus88]

Just curious, do you think the same shots he took and missed would magically be makes at a higher rate just because of the era?

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

No. I think that it's more of a focus to get corner 3s (which are easier) now than it used to be. Plus, the drive and kick out for open 3s is much more prevalent now which means those 3s will be less contested.

Better analytics might make it easier to identify exact court positions where he is most efficient.

I also think in a more 3-centric game that it's plausible that Sheed would make them more of a priority in his preparation and maybe bump his percentages up a little.

He was already a serviceable 3-point shooter by today's standards in an era where none of those were really emphasized.

It's all conjecture on my part but I don't think it's too far-fetched?

Sheed, as it is, took more 3s than he really should have at the time. I don't think increasing his volume would neither make him better at it or make the team better for it. Focusing strictly on corner 3s wouldn't make him a better overall 3 point shooter, it would've just slightly increased his percentages while making him more one dimensional in that aspect.

When Sheed was really on, he was dangerous due to the fact that he would trail on the fast break and hit em from the top of the key. Plus, he had the ability to hit 27-28 footers, and you had to semi respect it so that stretched the defense. Parking him in the corner, Bruce Bowen style, wouldn't be beneficial for the team.

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

I'm just going by the statistics which don't show any sort of trend indicating he was taking too many. He shot higher percentages on more volume so if anything I'd conclude the opposite. And I made that point in response to a claim he wouldn't be a good floor spacer.

Nobody said anything about marooning him in the corner for eternity. But making slight differences in playcalling / positioning based on analytics to put him in positions to be more successful shooting is something that happens more now than it did back then.

You're free to read the data differently I guess. I think I've probably harped in this thread enough already.