Would you rather have Mario Chalmers or JR Giddens?

[Bankshot]

I don't know how anyone could make the determination one way or the other considering Giddens hasn't gotten any significant playing time to prove anything.  It's unfair at this point.

[ben]

chalmers

isn't it ironic how chalmers is trusted as a starter for the heat, and giddens is barely trusted to play 1 min. a game.

[Jaycelt]

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.

 I disagree.  One thing Chalmers has that JR has never shown is a great basketball IQ.  It always helps when your Dad is a coach and you've grown up with that kind of tutalige.
I think Mario would have gotten floor time because he would have earned it in practice.  Certainly not the kind of time he's seeing in Miami of course, but I think Doc would have more trust in him than most of you believe.

[ManUp]

chalmers

isn't it ironic how chalmers is trusted as a starter for the heat, and giddens is barely trusted to play 1 min. a game.

What's so ironic about a guy with no competition at his position starting on what for the most part is a crap team?

[xmuscularghandix]

Giddens, he's our type of player, he rebounds, forces TO's, strong, atheletic...... to bad he still looks confused out there.

[crownsy]

chalmers

isn't it ironic how chalmers is trusted as a starter for the heat, and giddens is barely trusted to play 1 min. a game.

can you go ahead and name me the heat PG's he had to beat out to get that spot?

I mean, as much of a superstar as chris quinn is, seems like the depth chart is a tad easier to break into over there than JR's is over here. 

lets look at the depth chrats coming into both camps.

Heat- Quinn, fresh off his 10 day contract last year- and uh...i guess wade could have played the point?

celtics- Ray allen, Eddie house, Three year vetran of the system in pruitt, who never plays because ray and eddie get all the minutes.


Your right,  same situation. JR stinks.

[RebusRankin]

Chalmers

[crownsy]

Chalmers

well obviously right now you would. I just laugh at people who act like if we had drafted chalmers he would be this good right now.

If we had drafted chamlers, we would be saying he needs to be cut because he's been in the D-league all year and can't crack the rotation.

[Chief]

I'll have to see Giddens play some meaningful minutes before I comment.

[RebusRankin]

well obviously right now you would. I just laugh at people who act like if we had drafted chalmers he would be this good right now.

If we had drafted chamlers, we would be saying he needs to be cut because he's been in the D-league all year and can't crack the rotation.


True but the question just asked who you'd want right now. It didn't get into the level of detail you just expressed.

[xmuscularghandix]

If we were a bad team then Giddens would be force fed minutes. The last thing we need is more guards, i have confidence that he'll be a contributor next year.

[cordobes]

I agree with Jaycelt; it doesn't make sense to assume Chalmers wouldn't get PT here. I'm pretty sure he would; at least he'd get Pruitt's minutes, although I believe he'd earn some more (not considering that had we drafted him, we'd have gone differently in the FA market).

Chalmers reminds me of Gerald Henderson: he won't create or fix plays, but he'll initiate the offence, hit some shots and play good defence. I think he's going to be a very good backup guard for good teams through out his career, but he surely can handle the starting spot, especially if paired with a playmaking wing. More importantly, Chalmers is pretty much a finished product; he'll improve his shot-selection but not a lot more. He's already a very solid rotational player, I don't understand how people assume he wouldn't play in some NBA teams.

Chalmers was one of my favourite players for the C's in the draft, so I guess I'd still rather have him; but it's hard to say having seen so little of Giddens.

[the_Bird]

The Giddens pick was odd just in the context of also drafting Bill Walker.  Now, Danny may well have not thought he'd be able to get Walker in the middle of the 2nd, but still - you've got two guys basically battling for one spot in the rotation.  Chalmers, at least, potentially could grow into the backup PG role.

Perhaps they envisioned Pruitt making a bigger leap this year?  I haven't given up on the kid, but he wasn't been able to crack the rotation with any consistency even when we were pretty desperate for a backup PG.  

If Danny has *known* that he'd be able to grab Walker, and that Pruitt wouldn't really have progressed much, I wonder whether he might have looked more closely at Chalmers.

[crownsy]

well obviously right now you would. I just laugh at people who act like if we had drafted chalmers he would be this good right now.

If we had drafted chamlers, we would be saying he needs to be cut because he's been in the D-league all year and can't crack the rotation.


True but the question just asked who you'd want right now. It didn't get into the level of detail you just expressed.

my point is the question is pointless.

Where would mario have played? and how does anyone know that JR has, since we never get to see him play?

From a "seen hsi work standpoint" i'd of course take Mario, but he wouldnt even get minutes here, as good as he has looked.

[illestmcsgt]

From my understanding Danny Ainge must have felt he saw something in JR Giddens. If he did see Mario Chalmers in a celtics jersey then no doubt he would have drafted him. Chalmers does seem like a good back up point guard. Still, we already had one in Pruitt and House takes up a lot of minutes in that role. Unless we cut Pruitt I don't think he would wanted to draft him IMHO. I still would like to see what JR can accomplish with some given minutes.