RealGM

In their prime, who would be the best starting option for the team at center, Ratliff or Dalembert? I think it's safe to assume Dalembert still has room to improve, but he's never going to be a scoring option and he'll never lead the league in rebounding unless he starts drinking Muscle Milk like it's water. Ratliff's best days are long gone, but before that dreaded wrist injury, he was a rising star as a young defensive C in the east.

The Breakdown

Dalembert - 07-08 was clearly Sammy's best season as he averaged a double-double, was in the top 10 for rebounding, and in the top 5 for blocks and offensive rebounds. Statistically he was a top 10 center last year. Still, one has to wonder if the rest of the teams and their fans view him as such. His passing and short jumper are improving, but he'll most likely never be more than a 13 & 11 kind of guy. His rebounds will probably go down just a bit this year because of Brand, but his scoring could go up because he'll have more open looks in the post. Still, where do you think a lot of those Miller lob passes are headed this year?

Ratliff - Theo is a little harder to quantify. His best season statistically was 2000-01 his last in Philly. However, he only played 50 games before going down and eventually getting shipped for Deke. He was voted in as the Eastern Conference starter at the 5 for the 2001 All-Star game, which unfortunately he never got to play in due to the wrist injury. He still led the league in blocks with 3.74 per. In his only season that he was not plagued by injury, 02-03, he averaged a modest 8.7 & 7.5 over 81 games. Obviously he was even less gifted offensively then Sam and didn't rebound as well, but I wonder if his game changing shot-blocking talent and the self described "intimidation" factor make him the more formidable starting center.

Things to consider are that Ratliff and Sam both had their best seasons (so far) in their sixth full year in the NBA. I'm not a Sammy D hater and I love what he brings to the team, but I also remember the electric feeling of the 2000-01 season and the looks on guys faces when Theo sent their shot flying into the third row. Considering our current lineup, who would you rather have starting at C, Dalembert or a healthy Ratliff circa 2001?

The key word here is a "HEALTHY" Theo Ratliff in his prime against Sam. Before going down with the injury in '01, Ratliff was playing amazing basketball and anchoring one of, if not the, best defensive teams in the league. While I credit Sammy for his strong play last season, my vote would go to Theo. I think Theo is more polished offensively and brings just as solid of defense. The two things that I give the edge to Sam are rebounding and running the floor which is a nice fit with this team.

It's close.... but I'd take a HEALTHY Theo. If there are no guarantees of his health (and there really shouldn't be), than I would take Sam.

Yeah, a healthy Theo is tops but I gotta go with Sam.

Was Theo's last ridiculous contract signed while he was in Atlanta? The man has lived in many apartments since then. I do wonder what this team would have been like had we not traded Kukoc and Ratliff for Mutumbo. Deke was huge for us in our Finals run but that was about it. The following season he became a liability in the playoffs against the Celtics and then he was moved. Then again, Ratliff has never really been healthy.

I believe Theo's first big money contract was awarded in ATL the summer after we traded him, but Portland GM John Nash (who works for us now) was the genious who gave him that horrible 5 year extension in 2004-05, a season in which his skills were clearly diminishing. Theo's a great guy but paying $12M a year for essentially Marcus Camby sans the rebounding was just plain silly.

Sixersfan87 wrote:I believe Theo's first big money contract was awarded in ATL the summer after we traded him, but Portland GM John Nash (who works for us now) was the genious who gave him that horrible 5 year extension in 2004-05, a season in which his skills were clearly diminishing. Theo's a great guy but paying $12M a year for essentially Marcus Camby sans the rebounding was just plain silly.

I was not the ist time John Nash screwed up. He was our GM who drafted Kenny Payne, Vincent Askew and Chris Welp. He brought in Jay Vincent and Bob Thorton. Nash took our city for a bunch of fools. I will never understand how this shrewd talking salesman has lasted so long in the NBA. It must be his nice head of hair.

is1531 wrote:
Nash took our city for a bunch of fools.

He's taken every city he's GM-ed in for fools.

And I take pre-injury 2000-01 Theo over any year Sam.

depends on what you need. dalembert is a better rebounder while ratliff was always one of the greatest shot blockers in the league. but again i want to point at the rebounds... rebounding ability is why i pick sammy. sammy can block some shots too but can also grab 20 boards if his ass wants to.

Theo hands down.

You never heard anyone question Theo's "basketball IQ" and was (maybe still is, in short bursts) much quicker around the basket defensively. His D was light years ahead of Sam.

Theo was an Allstar in his prime (also due too a weak c-position in the east back than, but he deserved his selection by far). Dalembert is a rollplayer in his prime.

^^^Even though I've got to give the nod to Theo, Dalembert is more than a role player. He provides much needed production at the C spot as far as intimidation/weak side d/rebounding goes. He's a top 7 C in the league. Despite his inadequacies he's a valuable commodity in this league. Relegating him to a role player at best is definitely selling him short.

However, like I said, Ratliff was a much more efficient player, who made fewer mistakes, had a much higher BB IQ, and played effective man to man D to go with his elite shot blocking...

Sam's a better all around center, but Theo probably was more of an impact player on defense. Very good on the man defender and shot blocker.

Let me say that Theo was not only a better defender as Sam (man to man certainly) but also a better offensive player. He had a good jump shot and effective turnaround jumper. He was also stronger in the paint than Sam will ever be.

I really hardly can't see anything what makes Sam a better player, except health and maybe speed/running. But that's really it.