how good would he be ? He is a much better athlete then i thought, but i think his relative lack of height is what will seperate him from guys like mcgrady and hughes. But, i guess my completely hypothetical question is : if Cat was 6'7" would you take him over tracy mcgrady ? ------------------ "Don't they get cable in Canada ?" Keith olbermann, after watching hakeem block terry catledge's shot 5 times.
No. Of course Cuttino Mobley is athletic compared to the average human being, but for a basketball player he is not blessed with anything remarkable except a lightning quick first-step. He still has no where near the explosiveness Tracy McGrady has near the rim. You watched the dunk contest, and while Carter was the show, his little cousin didn't do too bad. McGrady is second to no-one in the league (after Vince) when it comes to sheer athleticism. Even though Cuttino is a guard, I think Tracy's ballhandling skills are a bit better. Of course I know that someone will reply and say that Tracy McGrady doesn't have any heart like Mobley...blah,blah,blah....
thecabbage overrates sheer athleticism. McGrady and Hughes are just highlight reels right now. They have shown no reason to double team them. For SG and SF, that is indicative of limited dribbling ability and/or lack of an outside shot. I don't have to mention heart. The effectiveness of ballhandling ability in the NBA is measured by your ability to get spacing from your defender or completely lose them. Mobley routinely loses his defender more than McGrady. And don't talk to me about TOs. McGrady is more TO prone. All you have to look at is whether McGrady or Hughes get double-teamed. Then look at Mobley. next! [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited February 14, 2000).]
What? No comment about ISO's? Geez... oh wait.. they don't do that much any more. By the way, why would you want to double team McGrady when you have Vince Carter to deal with? Or do you just want to concede him the basket? ------------------ trade them all and fire the coach.
"By the way, why would you want to double team McGrady when you have Vince Carter to deal with? Or do you just want to concede him the basket?" Well, teams have Francis to deal with, and they still double Mobley. Francis may not be as good as Carter yet, but I guess we'll see if the same happens next year.
Ah...the double-team argument again. DoD: You must double-team every plays that beats single coverage. That is the whole premise of rotational defenses. Conversely, if you double-team people that don't deserve it, you're leaving a man open for no reason. Mobley gets double-teamed because he commands it by his dribbling ability. Cabbage saying McGrady is a better dribbler is an overstatement. Either you want monster dunks, or you want a streak shooter with a first-step. Both can be stopped with double-teams for sure. The former looks better on ESPN. But, that doesn't make them better, until they can get that monster dunk through their own ability. Look at Horry. Never amounted to someone who could get the dunk without a seam already exposed. I'm not defending Mobley here. I'm challenging the stardom some are prematurely attributing to McGrady. Another way to look at it is the old shooter vs scorer theory. A scorer creates off the dribble or with low post moves. A shooter can get their shot off regardless of tight coverage or their inability to drive (Miller and Rice come to mind). These are the fundamental attributes that beat single coverage on a regular basis. McGrady and Hughes haven't shown me this, yet. Mobley is further along in this regard.
Well, McGrady is 6'8", but I'd still take Mobley over McGrady if Mobes was 6'7". For me to agree that McGrady is more athletic than Mobley I'd need more proof. Reasons I'd prefer Mobley: 1.) Answer me this: Who has more put-back dunks on the Rockets? A.) Cato B.) Francis C.) Mobley. Well, as far as I've seen it's Mobley. The guy has got some hops and seems to be able to elevate quickly. I dont' think I've ever seen a guard have more put-back dunks. The reason I bring up 'put-back' dunks is that they happen in the flow of the game, and usually when the other team is trying to get a defensive rebound. Mobley just has an instinct that allows him to time his jumps and get in there with the trees to dunk those misses home. 2.) The other thing is that Mobley was our starting PG during his rookie year, and he had a very low TO rate. Also, as others have stated if Tracy has better ball-handling skills then why does that Mobley ISO play work so well, and get called so often? I believe that he is well ahead of McGrady in this category. 3.) I don't know about 'heart', but by watching Mobley on the court, I am convinced he has more drive and desire than McGrady will ever have. BobFinn*, Why would you want to trade away a 6'7" Mobley for a PF? Isn't our biggest hole in the lineup SF right now? We have C. Rogers, K. Thomas, and K. Cato to play the PF spot, so why do we need another one? (An expensive one at that, or at least he will be. ------------------ I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.
DREAMer, You are right, SF is our weakness, Thomas takes too many three point shots for a PF, I think he wants to be a SF. He is a great rebounder though and Cato is our future center. [This message has been edited by BobFinn* (edited February 14, 2000).]
Of course Mobley was going to have a low turnover rate his rookie year. For one, Pippen brought the ball up court more than Mobes. And two, all you have to do was throw the ball in the post and shoot the 3. Tracey McGrady has played quite a few minutes a point this year. That's pretty good for a guy who's 5 YEARS younger than Mobley. And I'm not too sure where someone got that Mobley has more put back dunks than Cato and Francis. I'm not sure what game they are seeing. As I've said over and over, the fact that they double team Mobley every now and then is more indicative of how bad our team is than how good Mobley is. Every team that plays us wants to stop our perimeter game in order to beat us. We have no legitimate low post scoring until Hakeem gets back his stamina. The Rockets used to double every low post player down low no matter who it was. That was just the defensive strategy. Don't tell me when we used to double down on Oliver Miller and Tom Hammonds, it showed how great of a player those guys were. Just look at McGrady! He's 6'8", can play the 1, 2, 3, and probably some 4 later in his career. He is still in my estimate the 2nd best run and jump athlete in the league. HIS 1.9 BLOCKS in 27 minutes a game at the 3 spot is a perfect testament to that athleticism. Like I said in 27 MPG, he averages 14.1 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1 spg, 2.8 apg, 1.91 bpg, and shooting 47 % from the field at the nice old age of 20. TWENTY! The best stat is that 2.8 apg by McGrady compared to Mobley's 2.7 apg with 3 more minutes a game. For a guy named Mobley, who supposedly gets double teamed all the time and breaks down the defense better than anyone, you'd figure he'd get more assists than a 6'8" small forward. McGrady almost averages more steals than Mobes. He scores .3 less than Mobes in 3 less minutes. You can't deny the talent. And you can't deny that Mobley will be turning 26 years old this year compared to McGrady turning 21 in May.
Heypartner: Are you telling me that Cuttino Mobley has a higher ceiling of potential than Tracy McGrady simply because he gets double-teamed at the 3-point line?(!?!?) For one, Cuttino Mobley is our second most effective weapon on offense, and of course he's going to get a double-team...who else are they going to focus on? I don't see teams rushing out to double-team Kobe Bryant when he has the ball (because they damn near know well that Glen Rice is waiting in the wings), does that make Cuttino Mobley a better player than him? The defense has to concentrate on the primary area of attack, and Mobley is one of our strongest links. And as Da Man so emphatically pointed out, McGrady is 5 years younger than Mobley, is playing terribly out of position (in the backcourt) and has as much potential as anyone in the league (outside of Carter).
I'm still not sold on Carter. He's a superstar, granted... but more potential than anyone else in the league? I don't think so... I'd favor Duncan, Bryant, Garnett, or Kidd for that one. He's a great player, but let's wait to coronate him for a while.
How is it relevant that McGrady is 5 years younger when he's had a full year more of NBA experience than Mobley? All it means is that he'll retire sooner than Cuttino. Not too long ago, there was a thread about Shawn Kemp, where someone mentioned he looked like he was a very 'old' 30. Why do you think that is? It's because he started playing when he was 20! McGrady too will be an 'old' 30, while Mobley will still be improving at that age. Isiah Thomas retired very young, because he started young. Michael Jordan took 2 years off, and when he returned, he was able to play like he was 33, even though he was 35. It's not how young you are, it's how many miles you have on your body.
thefreak, age is relavent because it indicates how close you are to your peak. cuttino, at 25 is prolly close to his peak (im guessing he peaks around 28). McGrady is nowhere near his potential, and his first year in the nba was basically a wash-out. cuttino has alot more organized b-ball experience then tracy. Face it, i think mcgrady will be a better player then scottie pippen ever was, and pip was great in his heyday. I do think cuttino will be an above average player in the nba though. ------------------ "Don't they get cable in Canada ?" Keith olbermann, after watching hakeem block terry catledge's shot 5 times.
I thought we were discussing a 6'7" Cuttino not a 6'3". At 6'7", I'd take Mobley over McGrady. Maybe McGrady can jump higher than Mobes. Okay fine, let him to try out for the Olympic high jump event. I want desire and basketball know-how. Also, someone mentioned that Mobley was our second most effective weapon on offense.... Well, don't you think McGrady will be our second most effective weapon on offense?? McGrady's stats: (Career -- 2000) PTS: 9.7 -- 14.1 - B FG%: .453 -- .469 - B FT%: .701 -- .676 - W REB: 4.9 -- 5.1 - W AST: 2.1 -- 2.8 - B STL: .92 -- 1.0 - W BLK: 1.34 -- 1.91 - B TOs: 1.5 -- 2.2 - W MIN: 22.1 -- 27.0 W = worse, B = better for per minute production. Now, if we're talking about our very own 6'3" Cuttino Mobley versus the 6'8" Tracy McGrady, I'd swap them in a second. The reason being that we have a need at the Small Forward position. We have Anderson as our starting SG. We have Francis as our starting PG. We have Cato as either our starting C or PF. Plus, we have Kenny Thomas and Carlos Rogers who are two quality PFs, so our biggest need is SF. ------------------ I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem. [This message has been edited by DREAMer (edited February 15, 2000).]
McGrady can't have worse per minute rebounding production than Mobes. Shawn Kemp looks like an old 30 because he's 50 lbs over his normal playing weight. Even at 50 lbs over his normal playing weight, he still gets the same production as he did when he was in his prime. Skipping college didn't really shorten Moses Malone's career. Ken Griffey looks like a young 30 right now even though he's been in major league baseball since he was 19. It's not like basketball players are pitchers that usually burnout early if they skip college. They don't. But just in case you want to make a case that basketball players who have the most miles will burn out first. Who plays more basketball games than Cuttino Mobley? He's an obsessive gym rat that plays more pick up games than one can imagine. Because he isn't the most talented player in the world, Mobes had to play all out to get where he is. He's had to practice harder and put his heart on the line every time he's on the court. McGrady has been able to put half the effort and achieves more than most people dream of. So if we want to talk about players that will burnout faster, Mobes is obviously the most likely candidate. But then again, I'm not a big believer in players burning out. Oh yeah, the reason Isiah's career wasn't as long as a Jordan or a Kareem is because he's short! The shorter you are, the more likely your career will end faster. That's why 7 footers have long careers and small pg tend to have short careers. They have to rely on more of their athleticism just to make it to the NBA. As they age, their athleticism is the first to go and they can't fall back on their size. Jordan is still considered by today's standards as a big 2 guard. So when his athleticism declines, his size makes his loss in athleticism less glaring.
DaMan, Tell that to John Stockton, or Calvin Murphy, or Mugsy Bogues, or well..you get my drift...it is all based on individual talent, not generalizations. DaDakota
