I think what Shane is best at is he's a great floor general on defense. He not only plays excellent defense one on one, but he manages to tell his teammates where to position themselves while doing it.
That is one of the intangibles that make Shane important to this team. This team at present does not have any other player who can guide the team on court and off court.
I can dig that. I'm just saying that either just through confidence or arrogance, most great offensive players will never agree that a guy gives them trouble. Those guys are on a entirely different scope and they can take and make tough shots all game long. What happens is when they also have to take highly contested skilled shots and play defense on another player is when they struggle. If you go look back at even the kings when christie was playing vs kobe, kobe actually had a poor fg % and even in those finals he ddnt play well, but when shaq is destroying people, its easier to overlook how crappy a guy plays.
I'm not sure if this evidence is great for a Battier argument. It basically shows that playing solid perimeter D and making Kobe expend energy with good offense (like Orlando did) is atleast just as effective of a defense as Shane's great defense. Throughout the playoffs when posters (Kwame? leebigez?) mentioned Pietrus as a good example of what we should be getting out of Shane they were laughed at. I love the many things that Battier brings, many of which do not show up on a stat sheet but it's odd how defensive people get about him. I'm certain much of it is because people feel he's a great guy and love his attitude. People act as if he's the first and only intangibles guy in the nba. I'm happy that Morey makes it a point to find players like Kyle Lowry and Trevor Ariza who bring intangibles even though they don't have as much of a cult following.
