Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36

Thread: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

  1. #1

    Default Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    eak:


    I was just reading the post about Jeff Foster's defense getting dissed, and thought that Foster is kind of a poor man's Wallace - a defender/rebounder who is not prolific offensively.

    So anyway I took a look at their respective stats per 48 minutes (for 2003-2004) to see how far apart the really are.

    Offensively they are a wash. Both average 12.2 points per game (over 48 minutes). Foster shoots 54% while Wallace shoots 42%. Foster shoots 67% from the line and Wallace shoots 49%.

    Defensive prowess is harder to guage statistically. Foster averages 1.74 steals to Ben's 2.25, and blocks are Ben's big advantage 3.9 to 0.7.

    Rebounding suprised me a little. Wallace averages 15.8 per/48 and Foster averages 14.9. Not really a big difference. Furthermore, Jeff has the edge in offensive boards 6.1 - 5.1.

    Obviously the intangibles are important, you can't really overstate BW's intimidating status. He seems larger than life and can really alter entire game plans. Foster hustles well and sets a pretty nice pick, but doesn't have the same presence.

    Most Pacer fans would trade Foster for Wallace in a heartbeat (me included), but it doesn't seem like the difference between the two is as great as the media makes it out to be.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Frankfort, IN
    Posts
    9,095

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Ben Wallace can CONTROL a game with defense - totally change the way a team attacks offensively. Jeff Foster can't do that - not even close (though he can be disruptive).
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

  3. #3
    diego
    Guest

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I think the difference is Ben brings it every night. Not that Foster doesnt but like yoiu said he does not play the same amount of minutes either as Ben. Ben is a much better shot blocker and intimidator. He is also much stronger than Foster.

    I agree Foster is not as far off as some think, but there is definitely a difference between the 2. In fosters defense though, he amazes me how well he finsihes around the basket. His jumpshot is nto great, but if he gets it down low, he usually puts it in.

  4. #4
    Member Dukins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    911
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes is better probably 10 times better than Foster. Big Ben can do it all on defense. Block, alter shots, steal, and control gameplay.


    2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

  5. #5
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,340

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Jeff stays low, feet on the ground. Getting up in the air can get ya in trouble, whether you get beat or you foul... but getting up in the air provides opportunities for blocks. I think the main times I see Jeff leave his feet is when he leaps to get a hand in a shooter's face out on the perimeter. Otherwise he stays low and boxes out and sets screens (he's very good at that).

    Foster is a glue player. He glues the team together without seeking glory or standing out. But don't mistake "visibility" for "impact". The media sees the Game 1 win based on Reggie's 3, but they don't mention much about Foster's game-tying layup and hardly mention anything at all regarding his defense on the last plays and the awesome pick he set on Rip to set Reggie free. It's those plays *we* Pacer fans see.

    It really depends on how that player fits into their respective system. Ben didn't fit into quite a few systems before he landed in Detroit, where he has known success as a defender. The blocks statistic can be a bit misleading. I regard the blocks statistic like I do the "steals" statistic. Getting a bunch of steals doesn't necessary indicate that the player plays great defense. Allen Iverson gets a lot of steals and so does Jamal Tinsley, but they are hardly what I consider defensive stalwarts. Steals a lot of times means that a player gambles on defense and part of the time gambles in a losing way, allowing a player to get by and penetrate the lane or shoot a wide-open jumper.

    A block usually indicates help-defense... meaning the player didn't actually D up someone, they just wait in the lane and in the event a player beats his man on D and he cleans up with a block. I don't base defensive prowess strictly on blocks and steals. I think Ben is a very good defender, but there's just different types of defense. A block is flashy and glamorous, but if you play defense in a way that prevents a player from even getting the ball or prevents that player from shooting and forcing another pass, well that is unglamorous yet very effective defense.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  6. #6
    Member Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,620

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes. Ben is much better than Foster.
    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

    - Jimmy Buffett

  7. #7
    Offical Thread Killer TheSauceMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,889
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes he is much better , Big Ben is the kinda guy that could pull down 20+ rebounds a game , not to mention blocks and still put in 10 points in scoring , oh and steals..

  8. #8

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    We missed SEVERAL bunnies early Sat as guys were looking for Wallace when they were close in.
    Funny you mention that. Its in vogue for teams to say "We got the shots we were looking for, they just weren't falling"

    I've wondered how many times people are rushing shots, or have it in their mind that they are playing against a good defensive team, or that "the shot blocker" is lurking as they go up for a turn-around jumphot. Anyway, I never expected a player to comment on that until I read this from Jermaine O'Neal:

    I got them (great shots). I broke down my shot (on tape) and Im going home to look at it because I was short-arming a lot of them and they were really wide-open shots. I was surprised I had so many wide-open shots in the 8-to-10-foot range.

    So there you go. That's the kind of problem you get with a great shoblocker that you don't get when playing a good position defender.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I think the short answer to the question asked in the title of this thread is "YES"

    but...

    The extent to which Ben Wallace is better than Jeff Foster is less than the extent to which Artest is better than Prince and about equal to the extent that Jermaine is better than Rasheed.

    mathmatically,

    Ron/Tayshaun > Ben/Jeff = Jermaine/Rasheed
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!)

  10. #10

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes he is much better , Big Ben is the kinda guy that could pull down 20+ rebounds a game , not to mention blocks and still put in 10 points in scoring , oh and steals..
    I guess my point is this: Statistically(per/48), Wallace does not really rebound better, does not score more points (and certainly not as efficiently), and only has slight edge in steals (0.5 more per/48).

    I will concede that:

    1) Wallace is better defensively
    2) Wallace has a great presence and intimidates/alters games
    3) Wallace is a much better shot blocker

    So, in the offseason Jeff needs to grow a 'fro, look intimidating, and start blocking shots.

  11. #11
    Offical Thread Killer TheSauceMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,889
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I would say Jeff is Just fine he plays his roll well and that's what earned him a starting position. I don't want to see Jeff get too agressive because when he does that he get's silly fouls and gets in foul trouble and that was my biggest complaint prior to this year about Jeff.

  12. #12
    Graywolf_59
    Guest

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Wallace is a Great Defender and Deteriant to inside shot's.But I would take a Jeff Foster over him in the long run...Period!Foster bring's so Many more thing's to the court.....Hustle/Heart/Desire/-(Earn my $$$$)!If you have( 2) of these type of player's on your team @ 1 time.//Your going to Win.......and Win alot!I'm sure Wallace want's to earn his $$$$ (?).But he has a name in the NBA to Make lot's of $$$........Jeff Foster (Has) to earn his $$$$$$!If your a GM of a NBA team and the Name's come up-----Wallace or Foster.......Your going to go on Auto and say Wallace.......-----Who's this Foster!
    So I guess with all of the above said-------I'd take Jeff Foster......No Matter what!

  13. #13
    Member efx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,657

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    No contest. Of course he is.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    339

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes - no question.

  15. #15
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yeah, he is.

  16. #16
    year of the black rainbow obnoxiousmodesty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Age
    33
    Posts
    4,299

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Jeff and Ben have found their niche on their teams by using their skills to their best advantage. Ben is a fantastic help defender, patrolling the lane, blocking shots, and rebounding. Jeff plays solid man-to-man defense and can rebound better than most. I think they have fine-tuned their natural abilities to best suit their teams. I'm not 100% certain either could do quite as well with another team, since they could be asked to do things they're not familiar with.
    Take me out to the black, tell 'em I ain't coming back. Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me.

  17. #17
    Member Snickers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    True
    Age
    27
    Posts
    1,614

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Yes he is.

    Wait.... what were talking about again?
    Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

  18. #18
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,685

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Wonder what some of our Pistons fans would respond to this question.

    Jeff is a good one-on-one defender, very good, but he is not the help defender that Ben is, not even in the same league.

    Overall Ben is a much better player. Jeff will never make the allstar team.

  19. #19
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,340

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I really think Jeff could make the All-Star team. If Brad Miller (undrafted out of Purdue and not extremely athletic) can make the All-Star team with a lot of hard work, so can Jeff Foster. Especially in the East. Imagine if Foster was given a green light by Carlisle to improve his offensive game and was groomed to improve his help-side defense? Why wouldn't he be All-Star material then? It's not uncommon for a player to expand their game 5-6 years into their career and elevate to a whole new level. Hell, Ben Wallace and B. Miller are prime examples.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    339

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    Here's a question - would you rather have Jeff Foster or Mehmet Okur? I assume most of you guys will say Foster, and most Pistons fans would say Okur. I think those guys are on a lot closer levels than Foster and Wallace.

  21. #21
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,340

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I actually compare Okur to Austin Croshere.
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  22. #22
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I actually compare Okur to Austin Croshere.
    You're not the only one:

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=962

    Actually that's a very good article.

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    339

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    I agree that Okur and Foster's styles of play aren't that similar. I'm just saying that in terms of overall talent, potential, and value they're a much closer match than Foster and Wallace.

  24. #24
    Member Doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,620

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    While we're comparing players...

    Darko == Bender

    ???
    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

    - Jimmy Buffett

  25. #25
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    27,527

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Is Ben Wallace really that much better than Jeff Foster?

    While we're comparing players...

    Darko == Bender

    ???
    Get back to me on that in a few years....

    They have different talents, but I think the value of what they brong to the table is the same.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •