- Jan 15, 2004
Very well said.I don't see it that way at all. To me, NBA teams focus mostly on potential for guys in this age range and JB's potential---athletically in particular---has always been far above Halliburton's. Which is especially important because sitting here today his play is as well. Brown is a vastly better scorer, and has tools to be a much more versatile defender and has shown that in flashes (though, as we've all noted, not consistently). I agree Halliburton is a better distributor. That said, and agreeing there's a couple years of age difference, I think there's no way any team is valuing Halliburton above Brown even figuring in contract (a big benefit for Halliburton right now). One is an all-star now with the potential to possibly be a first team all-NBA talent (though I don't know Brown will quite get there) and one is a very good player who looks like he might make an all-star game in a good-case scenario. But you never trade the first for the second. Even if one thinks Halliburton is a better player today (which is a tough case to make, even with Halliburton's efficiency) I don't think teams will project them similarly going forward.
And to repeat---going back to the draft---I'm a big Halliburton fan. But I think people are focusing a bit too much on Brown's gaps and too little on Halliburton's. So, yes, I agree Celtics wouldn't do that as I think they recognize the difference between potential superstars and very good players. HRB often makes the point about athletic ability and sometimes I think people focus a little too much on efficiency stats and not enough on how players can project forward....