Harping on the Rockets winning record against poor teams and losing record against the good teams is avoiding the key point in this thread. Francis has a tendency to underestimate the opponents, which creates inconsistency that cuts winning streak short last year and losing mental edge to all teams, good or bad. The Mavs have had our numbers in the last few years, we lost 7 out of 8 games we met in the last two years, but Francis refused to give the Mavs credits, instead he likes to think that the Mavs didn't beat us and we just didn't play well. That's underestimating your opponents, even when it was an elite team. Underestimating opponents also make winning harder because the team often dug a hole for themselves then try to come out later. We beat the Hawks in triple overtime on our homefloor and lost to the Clippers, well, somtimes it's hard to get out of a hole we dugged ourselves. Our performances also fluctuate from quarter to quarter and game to game. Each time the 3rd quarter approaches it is worry time. Each time we have won two or three games in a row it's probably the end of winning streak. Rarely a smooth offense was carrying out for a whole game. The Rockets don't play consistent basketball and underestimating the opponents is one of the reasons.
Yeah he's not the only one responsible for it but he's the one that's not wise enough to hide the attitude problem. Poor Stevie you need a better advisor to tell you what to say or not.
I can sort of agree with that. hes not guilty of being the only player to take bad teams less seriously, hes just guilty of being the only one who admits it. BTW ..wouldn't really call that an attitude problem, as much as I would call it human nature
Sorry, I was saying Francis' attitude problem was one of the reasons for the Rockets inconsistency, I didn't say there's more teammates who shared the same attitude problem. I think everyone is guilty if they underestimate their opponents. Barkley was, McGrady was, Francis is, but the difference is, it's human nature for complacency in a commanding position like being 3-1 in playoffs but sheer stupidity in a losing position against a team that owned you. I'd also venture to say that the winners take every NBA team in a single game seriously. I don't think the Spurs go into a regular season game against a team below their record with a walkover mindset. That's what seperate winners from losers IMHO.
Panda, I think its naive to assume that just because a team is elite, that it doesn't fall into complacency and not take lesser teams as seriously as they should. If they didn't, they simply wouldn't lose as many games as they do to lesser teams. Francis is no more guilty of this attitude you talk of (and again, I don't call it an attitude problem) than Garnett, Kobe, Duncan, etc. are. IN addition, regardless, his "attitude" against lesser teams, based on our various records, was not a factor in how this team fared last season. Our record against quality opponents, was. Francis (and his teamates) are simply guilty of not being good enough to lead his team to victory over better teams.
That's your oppinion and I respect that. I still think in the regular season a top team like the Spurs won't go into a ball game against any team with a walkover mindset. It's not about nature IMO, it's about grasping the reality in the NBA that there's no walkover team in a single game. The Spurs losing to lesser teams isn't the proof of their being complacent since there's no walkover teams in the NBA, but if Tim Duncan openly admits that he considers some teams as a walkover team I regard that as the proof of being complacent. Well, it looks like we both have hardened stance on this one and need to agree to disagree.
Again, Im calling this naive. To assume that just because Steve is the only one who admits it, doesn't mean hes the only one who thinks that way, regardless of whether the other player is TD. Don't tell me that TD and the Spur's mindset is the same when they are playing G.S. as it is when they are playing the Kings or Lakers. If it was, then they wouldn't have lost, not once, but twice to G.S.
The fact is that statement was made about the Pistons (during the finals - not the entire season) and that is why they are the champions. However, you are correct, a lot of teams do take possesions (or entire quarters/games) off. I'd say the teams that are the most guilty are the bottom rung. Teams least guilty are upper eschelon. I am not singling Francis out (though I think he is a major contributor) to the problem. One of the things that drove me crazy was our inability to turn a 10 point lead into a closed out game. Everybody knows that the Rockets will let you back into the game. I specifically remember Snapper Jones saying that as well as some other announcers also. I live in Austin and get the NBA package which has a lot of other team broadcasts. As a rule, we got a lead, we coasted, good teams made a push. Weaker teams we could fight off the push, stronger teams we could not. Look at the playoffs against the Lakers. There were two other games we had a good chance to win, but could not close out. Of course all of this goes against the concept of losing to poor teams. Pre JVG I think that was a major problem. After JVG, I think we did a much better job of beating the weaker teams. Two years ago, we lost to every single last place team. Some more than once. Missed the playoffs by a single game.
I didn't argue that he's the only one who thinks that way. I was saying that since Francis openly admits treating another NBA team as a walkover team he's proven to have complacency. Two wrongs don't make a right, no excuse for wrongs. The naive way is to make excuse for Francis by calling his inability to grasp the basic reality that there's no walkover team in the NBA as human nature. There is no walkover team in the NBA, any team can beat another team on any given night, and occasionally there is bad shooting nights,tired legs, injuries and mismatchups. So what the Spurs lost twice to the G.S. It's amusing to call that as evidence of them being complacent. It's like saying the only way a good team can lose to a bad team is through complacency, how about grasping the reality THAT THERE IS NO WALKOVER TEAM IN THE NBA. There is no evidence to suggest the Spurs are being complacent. They will have more respect towards the Lakers and less for the Warriors, that by itself is not being complacent as long as they don't underestimate the Warriors and give inadequate efforts. The losses by themselves are no sign of complacency as mentioned above. Giving proper assessment to the opponents and prepare accordingly is not complaceny IMO, underestimating opponents because of stupidity to grasp basic facts is being complacent. If you want to peg complacency onto the Spurs losing to the Warriors there's a need for further evidence. The key is to have enough respect and Francis doesn't have enough respect for his oppoents because he admitted it. If there's no conclusive evidence to suggest a man is guilty then I consider him innocent, whereas you are like trying to say that since another man might be guilty or some other men should be guilty then Francis isn't guilty even when he himself presents the evidence. Isn't calling another NBA team a walkover team underestimating the opponents? Yes. Isn't underestimating the opponents a form of complacency that breeds inconsistency? Yes. Didn't Francis admit that he considers another NBA team as a walkover team? Yes, he did. Therefore Francis was a source of the Rockets inconsistency.
Francis has been lit up by some inferior players to himself. I wish to hell I could remember the exact names in a thread on this board, when people were pretty irate about Francis saying he thought he had the night off, or something to that effect, playing some no-name, and was surprised. Of course he thought he could have worked less hard against some opponents, but hell he got lit up on a regular basis. I jumped for joy last year when he finally got the better of Marbury, right after Marbury went to N.Y. I hope someone remembers that thread about him taking time off, because that is not showing the killer instinct we need for championships. Fortunately, that is not our problem anymore.
You basically did. You said that a team like SA won't go into a game with a walkover mindset. Its funny though. Great teams actually do have this mindset, albeit, stated differently. Great teams and great players know when they are better than their opponent, and they damn well know what teams they should always beat. The difference is, sometimes are better at executing and following through than others. This is what separates good teams (the Rockets) from great teams (SA). I am saying that regardless of whether he admits it or not, its pretty common knowledge this is a bad habit throughoutt the NBA and througout sports in general for the matter. Steve is being singled out because he admitted it. Im not making excuses for Steve. I am merely saying that this mindset he has is relatively common. Exactly. These reasons, along with not taking a lesser opponent as serious as you should, are why we lost to lesser teams on occasion. You can't sit here and create different rules and reasons for Steve and the Rockets just because Steve admitted, what other teams and players are guilty of also. To be fair to Steve, I think he played just as hard against teams like Seattle as he did against teams like S.A. Its a blind assumption on your part to say that Steve gave less effort against Seattle than he did against S.A. I certainly didn't see that. Another blind assumption. You assume that just because Steve feels his team should beat a lesser opponent, that he doesn't try as hard to beat them. Quit making more out of his lil quote than is actually there. So what?? That doesn't mean that Steve, who has admitted it, gives less of an effort than those who haven't admitted it. The evidence is also on the court. If I see two different people committ two different murders, I don't have to have only confess to know that both are guilty. I go back to the same argument I presented earlier: Just because Steve admitted it, doesn't mean every other team and player in the NBA aren't guilty of it. Therefore, I refuse to convict him on something that is common mindset amongst NBA players and teams, regardless of whether he admits it or not. The bottom line is, his mindset did not grossly affect this team's performance, as a whole during the season, any more than any other NBA player's mindset against lesser team's did. Our inability to beat good teams is why we finished where we did. Not because we lost 3 more games to bad teams than SA did.
what's with all the Francis hate, everyone knows the Rockets inconsistency, lack of play-off appearances and general crappy record was soley the fault of Cuttino... and now he is gone, so all is good!!
I thought what Steve said was hilarious..."I thought they were just gonna be another walkover team." Anyways...yeah that might show why we were inconsistent...but whatever. TMAC & YAO DYNASTY
I love how Panda is now a telepath....he knows who was underestimated prior to the game and who wasn't. Nobody can read the mind of Steve Francis like a panda..they have magical powers. You think they just sit around eating bambooo all day? Wrong, my friend. He knows who was underestimated and who wasn't. (BTW, I would love to see this logic applied to other Rocket players....I wonder who this logic wouldn't be applicable too, or against whom it would be twisted around again in an inconsistent direction, oh I wonder...) I like how the argument by the disgruntled francis bashers has done a complete 180 in the span of 12 hours (BTW, why are there still disgruntled francis bashers? He's gone, get over it. ). First, the claim that began this whole dead corpse re-lynching was that the Rockets played badly against bad teams and well against good teams -- a claim that has no basis in reality. It's ironic really, because the thesis wasn't actually the point of the thread, the point of thread was really the explanation for the thesis -- that it was somehow traceable to Francis. Of course, as stated, the thesis was DOA, it got torpedoed by codell and others about as soon as it is posited. It's not true, and has never been true, that the Rockets exhibit this type of win/loss pattern -- therefore the hypothetical cause is rendered meaningless. Now, Panda assumes the head-bashing mantle, using his remarkable telepathic powers, and the logic behind the thesis has done a complete about face: instead of it being Francis' fault that the Rockets lose to bad teams inordinately, it is now his fault that the Rockets lost to good teams, because he underestimates them and won't acknowledge how much better they are than he is, post hoc. In other words, the conclusion is being twisted around to fit with the facts when they come out an opposite way; just discard one logical basis, assume a completely inconsistent one, with the help of psychic powers, and pronounce yourself correct: A > B, therefore X B > A, therefore X It doesn't what manner of equations come in there, you guys are going to come up with X no matter how intellectually dishonest you have to be to do it. We have a name for that kind of argument in my profession: bullsh-t. Sling all of the bullsh-t you want guys, just don't get to dirty while you do it. I have no clue why you guys are still at it considering that he's been gone for a month now, but I guess there are some people I just won't understand.
Wrong. It's a blind assumption on your part to say I argued only Francis thinks that way, because I didn't say so. Great teams do not underestimate their opponents. That's one of the things that separates winners from losers. First you admitted Francis has this problem of viewing lesser teams as a piece of cake, then you try to make it sound like the dominant attitude of a great team. I sense a change in tune. Sorry, the confidence of "we can beat them" is not the same of "they are just a piece of cake." Oh yeah like it is common knowledge for the NBA players to think that there is walkover teams in the NBA. And that's another excuse - ok no biggie because everybody else does it is exactly an excuse. Those reasons are why we lost to lesser teams, there's also another reason Francis admitted, that he underestimates the opponents. You've had no proof that it's common for the NBA players to think that there is walkover teams in the NBA, so don't proceed to say that it's a common mindset and make them guilty. And even if it is, a big if, it doesn't excuse the fact that complacency is an attitude, and complacency is a problem, therefore Francis has an attitude problem called complacency. Well, I didn't specifically talk about Seattle, and I'm not saying that Francis underestimates every team. Furthermore, you might be biased when you are making excuses. You are going in circles. You acknowledge that Francis has the problem of not paying enough respect to opponents, then now you call it an assumption that admitting so is indicative of lacking effort. Quit making excuse for Francis by saying it's human nature to believe there's walkover teams in NBA. Oh so now we should make excuse for Francis because other unidentified complacent players might give less effort than he does? And you assume the two different murders are out of the same motives too. You keep saying it a common mindset so that Francis should not be convicted. Sorry, two wrongs don't make one right. It's a common mindset for the NBA players and teams to give different level of respect to different teams, but I need you to prove that their less respect for a worse team is definitely complacency. Less respect isn't necessarily complacency except when it reached a level of no respect, which Francis showed towards the Heat. You are confusing less respect with no respect IMHO. The two are totally different things in this situation. Blind assumption. I don't know to what extent does that attitude problem affect the Rockets, but a problem is a problem. I'm glad that problem is gone. You are ignoring Francis' underestimating good teams like the Mavs, which I mentioned above. Let me summarize my stance for you, Francis underestimating the opponents is a problem, regardless of the prevalence of such mindset in the NBA, it's an erosive attitude towards a winning atmosphere for it creates inadequate focus and inconsistency. Therefore Francis is a source of Rocket's underachievement. ............................ Samfisher, a man is innocent until he's proven guilty. A team isn't complacent untile it's proven so. It's no telepathy. It's common sense.
Nice syllogism, too bad your conclusion is bullsh-t and has been utterly discredited 8 ways from Sunday. But nice syllogism nonetheless, it just makes clear that you are totally devoid of any objectivity here and that you are out to pervert any array of facts and conjecture to fit your agenda. BTW, since we're talking about inconsistency, what does that mean for a certain Center who can dominate the game's best Center at times then get owned by stiffs like Rasho Nesterovic or Eduardo Najera....or who disappears every spring?
Let me break it down for you one more time Francis underestimating the opponents is a problem You have presented virtually no empirical evidence 1. that this occurs ex ante, or 2., that if it occurs, it had a significant impact on the team. I doubt that it is even possible to find it for you. It's an erosive attitude towards a winning atmosphere for it creates inadequate focus and inconsistency You have no evidence to support this statement, just intuitive logic. I could cite billions of examples of you of Shaq, Michael Jordan, Lance Armstrong, Wayne Gretzky etc underestimating and/or trash talking there opponents. Did it create inadequate focus and inconsistency for them? Elementary logiciians beware, I can sense a tautological/circular response. Therefore Francis is a source of Rocket's underachievement. Therefore, I hate steve francis still because....why? Complete dogsh-t. You can construct this syllogism for every negative trait (and in a more concrete, empirical fashion in most cases) for every team in the NBA, probably even including the Pistons....that's what you can do with flimsy, tautological arguments like this. X is bad, Y is bad, therefore Y contributes to x because X and Y are bad. The point of this thread was not to say that Francis was a source, but THE source, a point that you seemed to be claiming but now are backing off from in favor of a more convenient approach, because the other approach is simply not tenable and can be shot full of holes. What floats your hate boat.
