shoelyesses
Banned
- Sep 10, 2012
- 5,770
- 1,292
It was an example...an over exaggeration kinda like saying wiz=buck as far as talent....bucks had an allstar and two other players who where in the ballot and almost made the allstar game.NT loves going to the extreme. Derek Fisher? Really? Come on man, your better than that. Derek fisher isn't comparable to the two. (To any starting PG for that matter) And Wall's Wizards teams were just as talented as Jennings Bucks squads. The Bucks were not leaps and bounds better than the Wizards. And even so, Jennings isn't the one getting maxed out, Wall is. If you can't get your team in the playoffs in the EAST, should you really be getting maxed out?
If we put Jennings on those Wiz teams...they may make the playoffs. Do I think so? No, but I'm not a fortune teller. And for all of Wall's improvements,and Jennings regression, Wall has nothing but 12 and 13 seeds in the conference to show for it while Jennings has been in the playoffs.
Name any player other than wall who was even remotely close to being an allstar? And kyrie hasn't lead the cavs to anything either...and clearly he is better then Jennings and it isn't even close.
And the numbers show Jennings has regressed...and Wall has improved plus he is the face of a franchise. So I don't get why would you ask why does a franchise player that almost made the all star game (coaches knocked him because of being hurt) who has improved each year deserve a substantial amount more money then a non allstar player who has actually gotten worse throughout the years.