Here's another good article on Battier. A good change from all the talk about pretty much everyone else lately. link: Rob Peterson's article The article appears to be based on this one: The No-Stats All-Star So what are the chances that Battier holds LeBron to under 20 points this coming Thursday??!
Probably pretty low, battier usually has more trouble guarding the more powerful swingmen, like lebron and paul pierce.
As Artest is starting, he seems to be better suited for matching up against James. I think he and Battier will share the duties, depending on their foul situation.
MVP candidates often sport Battier-like qualities? That's interesting, but I'm pretty sure most mvp candidates can dribble a basketball effectively, are athletic, and can do more on offense besides the corner 3.
our team wouldn't be that good as it is, or our team would be much worse if we didn't have a contributer like battier. battier is not as skillful as those superstars that waste double-digit shots and make 20pts per night, but battier can make them suck when he meets them face to face. battier's opponents are always the scoring machine of our opponent team, but they still always score less points than battier does except Lebron and Kobe. But Battier will never allow Lebron to score 55pts in a game.
id have to agree with alot of the article. im glad someone took the time to highlight a lesser known player who does contribute more than he is given credit for. shane i think gets bashed a little much
MVP candidates do sport Battier-like qualities: They're over 5 feet tall. They shower after games. They drink water. They enjoy, at times, listening to music. They play the game in jerseys.
People that complain about Battier have their points about his lack of athleticism, or scoring etc.... But at the end of the day, they are all just 100% wrong. DD
Battier is the kind of player you need to win championships . . . The average analyst or fan thinks you need a bunch of all-stars to be contender or championship team. If you look at teams, like the Knicks of early 90s, the Jazz of the late 90s, or even the Bulls. Most of the players on the team are very much workhorses stocked with intangibles and BB IQ. People will always say you need an athletic team (or a team stacked with talent) to compete, but the Jazz pretty much proved that to be a fallacy. If you can pass the ball really well, play physical, rebound, and not make alot of turnovers...you can beat most teams even the ones who are better than you talent wise. Why do I point the Jazz? Because, they didn't have the same kind of talent and athletes that the Supersonics, Lakers, Rockets, or Suns had...but they were a tough, stable team who did all intangibles well. Which lead them to beating those teams?
