Would you rather have Mario Chalmers or JR Giddens?

[vjcsmoke]

Last year in the 2008 draft, I was highly in favor of drafting Chalmers.  I was really excited when he dropped to the Celtics draft choice and instead they took Giddens who has shown... nothing so far.

What has Chalmers done this year? 10 ppg, 4.7 apg, including a recent strong triple OT performance that helped the Heat defeat the Jazz.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/mario_chalmers/career_stats.html

Chalmers would have been the perfect backup PG for the Celtics and has contributed a lot more than JR Giddens ever has.  Anyone else regretted this missed draft opportunity?

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jr_giddens/index.html

[Roy Hobbs]

I don't know much about Giddens' game, but I do like Chalmers'.  He seems like a guy who is a perfect backup point guard.  He can score, pass, and shoot, and he makes things happen on defense (although he gambles a lot).

Now, if he was on the Celtics, I doubt he'd be seeing the time he's getting in Miami.  However, from what I've seen, I'd absolutely take Chalmers here.

[ManUp]

This question is kind of loaded.

Of course you have to go with the proven player (Chalmers).

However, I do believe that if we drafted Chalmers he'd be in the same ship as Giddens.

[vjcsmoke]

Well I would think that Chalmers would get more minutes as backup PG and saved the Celtics the trouble of having to play House at PG which is not his true position, and would maybe have made the Marbury acquisition unnecessary.  It's difficult to project for certain, but his skillset and defense (4th in steals in the NBA) would have been a great addition.  When Rondo rests, you still have another pesky defensive PG in Chalmers who can also space the court with the threat of the 3 point shot.

[ManUp]

Well I would think that Chalmers would get more minutes as backup PG and saved the Celtics the trouble of having to play House at PG which is not his true position, and would maybe have made the Marbury acquisition unnecessary.  It's difficult to project for certain, but his skillset and defense (4th in steals in the NBA) would have been a great addition.  When Rondo rests, you still have another pesky defensive PG in Chalmers who can also space the court with the threat of the 3 point shot.

I don't believe that Doc would play Chalmers, a rookie point guard, when he has other options.

Rondo, House, and Pruitt would all be a head of him at the point.

In my opinion, Chalmers would probably be in the D-league "working on his game" if he were on this team.

[crownsy]

Well I would think that Chalmers would get more minutes as backup PG and saved the Celtics the trouble of having to play House at PG which is not his true position, and would maybe have made the Marbury acquisition unnecessary.  It's difficult to project for certain, but his skillset and defense (4th in steals in the NBA) would have been a great addition.  When Rondo rests, you still have another pesky defensive PG in Chalmers who can also space the court with the threat of the 3 point shot.

I don't believe that Doc would play Chalmers, a rookie point guard, when he has other options.

Rondo, House, and Pruitt would all be a head of him at the point.

In my opinion, Chalmers would probably be in the D-league "working on his game" if he were on this team.

100% agree. if he was on this team, the best he could do would be to be in JR's current role.

[CoachBo]

Clearly, Chalmers - with both foresight and hindsight.

But I do agree that he would not have gotten the burn here that he's gotten in Miami.

[moiso]

I think Chalmers would have beaten out Pruitt for Pruitt's minutes.  

[crownsy]

I think Chalmers would have beaten out Pruitt for Pruitt's minutes.  

pruitt gets minutes? 

[moiso]

I think Chalmers would have beaten out Pruitt for Pruitt's minutes.  

pruitt gets minutes? 

ha, yeah thats about what he would have played.  But maybe he would have been good enough to keep those 10 minutes/game throughout the year.  Unlike Gabe who gets 10 minutes a game for a week then doesn't play for the next week.

[guava_wrench]

Chalmers. He has done enough this season to give him the benefit of the doubt. Yet, if Marbury contributes, it doesn't matter much.

[Fafnir]

This question is kind of loaded.

Of course you have to go with the proven player (Chalmers).

However, I do believe that if we drafted Chalmers he'd be in the same ship as Giddens.

I wouldn't call Chalmers proven. He's played very well for a rookie. But good for a rookie isn't very good overall. I'll be watching him next year to see if he makes the leap to being a productive point.

I definitely agree that Chalmers wouldn't have seen any time with us this year.

[amenhotep04]

Last year in the 2008 draft, I was highly in favor of drafting Chalmers.  I was really excited when he dropped to the Celtics draft choice and instead they took Giddens who has shown... nothing so far.

What has Chalmers done this year? 10 ppg, 4.7 apg, including a recent strong triple OT performance that helped the Heat defeat the Jazz.

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/mario_chalmers/career_stats.html

Chalmers would have been the perfect backup PG for the Celtics and has contributed a lot more than JR Giddens ever has.  Anyone else regretted this missed draft opportunity?

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jr_giddens/index.html

If Chalmers were here, as others have said, he would get zero burn, and people would be posting about missed draft pick opportunities.

I like Giddens, BUT it's hard to get playing time when you're fourth on the depth chart.  I'm guessing this summer there will be a trade or two which will either move him to another team, or that people will be moved ahead of him to allow him the chance to play here.

[celticinorlando]

chalmers

[elcotte]

Giddens.