You can all remember the trade that land us Steve Francis.And i have a question:We gave up F Antoine Carr,G Brent Pice,F Othella Harrington,G Michael Dickerson and a draft-pick and become G Steve Francis and F Tony Massenburg.Now my question:Should we had to keep Michael Dickerson instead of Cat.Since there often topics against Cuttino Mobley,i asked me that question.Now I want to hear your opinion!!!
If I remember correctly, Vancouver specifically wanted Dickerson, not Mobley, to get the deal done. I think we did fine by keeping Mobley.
I think that their skills are a bit different, but they are both good players. Mobley has a quicker first step, but Dickerson might be a better athlete all-around - not sure about that. Also, I believe we did not really have a choice at the time. Dickerson was a No. 14 (or 16?) pick whereas Mobley was a No. 41. At the time, everybody (at least those outside the Rockets) thought Dickerson was by far the better player. While the chemistry between Francis and Mobley turned out to be great, Francis/Dickerson might have been an even better combination on the court. Very hard to say. But it's a hypothetical question and I think we will never know...
I prefer Mobley over Dickerson because Dickerson is TERRIBLE in the clutch. He disappears the last 5 minutes of every game - he's scared to shoot the clutch shots. Obviously Mobley is not scared to shoot the clutch shot - his problem is he shoots too much. But Mobley will learn over time when and when not to shoot. Mobley has confidence and I like that!
We lucked out with Vancouver taking Dickerson instead of Mobley. Dickerson was good; I liked him and I'd like him starting at the 2 for us if Cat weren't here, but with the exception of questionable decision-making, what's not to like about Cat? He's an effective go-to player, clutch and is much better at defense and 3-pt. shooting this year. In my opinion, we would not have been as close to the playoffs last year with Dickerson instead of Mobley.
At the time. I was upset we lost Dickerson and not Mobley but after the last two season we definately kept the better player. Mobley is a far better defender and a much more dangerous 2nd option. Dickerson is a better shot but Mobley finishes around the basket better. If we had a Kidd, Miller type point guard Mobley would average 25pts a game easy.
Have you even watched a game he has played in Vancouver? Dude has had at least three buzzer beaters that I can remember.
I think Dickerson's stock is depressed because he played for a poorly performing Vancouver team. I don't think they've been tapping as much of his talent as a better-run team would be able to. I think if we had kept Dickerson, he'd have been the up-and-coming young shooting guard and Mobley would have played decently in obscurity.
Career Numbers Cat vs Dick 16.2 PTS 15.7 2.6 AST 2.6 1.1 STL 1 2.1 TO 1.9 3.9 REB 2.9 42.9% FG% 43.2 36.7% 3PT% 40.2 Looks like they produce around the same numbers to me.
Last year's #s: Mobley v. Dickerson 19.4 PTS 16.3 43.4% FG% 41.7% 35.7% 3PT% 37.4% 83.1% FT% 76.3% 2.5 Ast 3.3 5.0 Reb 3.3 1.1 Stls 0.9 2.1 TO 2.3 38.0 Min 37.4 Mobley looks a little better, but no, Dickerson's no scrub. If it weren't for the chemistry issue, I'd be open to a hypothetical Mobley, Cato for Dickerson, good center trade.
I thought it was a good trade other than the fact they shouldn't have drafted Francis in the first place. With Lamar Odom there he and Shareef would have been a great combo. Bibby,SAR,and Odom would have been a good nucleus now all you would have needed was a coach, but thats why they're the grizzlies.
