A role player cannot thrive without good players around him, hence the term "role player". It's just as likely that Starks numbers would have decreased had he been on an inferior team, since teams would be able to focus on him more defensively.
Ok, I know that I started this post, but its even beginning to bore me. Let me suggest that if you have the Clutch City video, you go back and watch it. I watched it last night. Yes, you are not getting the entire picture from the videotape, but you can see how important Starks was to that New York team. And his game six was awesome. Are John Starks and Mobely the same player. No, I never said they were. Starks passed the ball a lot more than Mobely. But they have a lot of the same characteristics. And anyone who doesn't think that Mobely shoots too much or tries to shoot his way out of a slump isn't watching the games. I think that John Starks was a very good player for a couple of years. But he was damn frustrating to watch in the same way that Mobely is hard to watch on occassion.
I still have to disagree. You say that you never said they were the same player, yet the title of this thread is Mobley = Starks. The offense never went through Starks. He was another scoring option, but it went solely through Ewing. Starks passed better then Mobley, Mobley scored better, and drove to the basket better then Starks. Saying that Mobley is just like Starks because he is a shooter that tries to shoot his way out of a slump is crazy. Then you would have to say that Mobley = Starks = Dan Marjerle = Vernon Maxwell = Iverson = Francis = a young Michael Jordan = Kobe Bryant, the bottomline is that a shooter will try to shoot his way out of a slump. And other then that, I don't see ANY characteristics between Mobley and Starks. ------------------ Dream a deadly Dream. . . [This message has been edited by RocksMillenium (edited February 23, 2001).]
Tod: you're backing off your original statement there. Do Cat and Starks exhibit a couple of similarities? Yep. Is it too early to tell if MObley will be better or not? Yep. Are their games very similar? Nope. Starks was a gritty defender and a big-time shooter. He didn't drive, didn't do ISO's, and was never the focus of an offense. Comparing their games is like likening an apple to an orange. I just don't see how the comparison is useful. ------------------ Why is it that everytime BC defeats a major conference opponent, that opponent promptly goes on a losing streak? PS. Notre Dame sucks
Any player who is any good feels they can pull themselves out of a slump in a second. The difference was that Starks would do this by launching long threes and other low percentage shots. Mobley at least attempts to get a higher percentage shot, and he is often able to get a better shot because he's quicker than Starks. Secondly, I'd like to come out of the closet : Mobley doesn't shoot enough. There, I said it, and I'm not taking it back. ------------------ The Rockets will be the NBA champions. Believe. [This message has been edited by Puedlfor (edited February 23, 2001).]
Hey, I am not that old. But you are correct, the block was in game 6. But nonetheless.....to say that Starks carried his team (by the way, that was Ewing's team) to anything is ludicrous. If he had played half as good in game 7 as he did in game 6, Houston may have not been champion that year. But again, we can play coulda, woulda, shoulda all day. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
