[Chron] Guard glut? What guard glut? More the merrier, according to Mike James.

Actually, I do not mind to keep alston if we cannot trade for equal values at 4. both james and francis can get some PT at 2, wells and tmac can get some pt at 3, this means no time for head/syder/brooks/novak.

 

Wow I did not know that James and Francis have been retired for four years. That's odd because I remember James being in Houston in 2005, and having a decent season in 2006. I also don't remember either James or Francis retiring from basketbal recently. But other than that, good comparison.

The stats are the stats - but the stats you are showing us are not of much use as you have made no attempt to control for efficiency or a variety of other factors. So, yeah, raw stats protrayed out of context, are in fact, the raw stats portrayted out of context.

Anyway, I know you claim to be the poster formerly known as dconover. Are you sure you aren't really THIS GUY?

 

But isn't that's what other teams do? They try to force you into doing the things you aren't good at doing while exploiting the exposed weakness. With Francis & James handling the ball, I can forsee opposing teams pressing the ball handler in order to force a turnover or bad decision. That was the big problem with SF3 the first go round here. And Mike James is not immune either. My point here is that all 3 have definite flaws that opposing teams can and will exploit and it's just a bit unfair to focus on Rafer's without looking at those of the other guards on the roster.

 

Funny...

The only context in which I am comparing James or Francis to guys who have been out of the league for several years that is stats decrease for a reason (Hollinger has a good article on this topic...

HTML:

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2968602&name=hollinger_john

).
The decline in numbers for James and Francis have as much to do with current ability than they do teams/systems.

I like their addition as players. But I don't think either should take over at point. James was traded away for a reason from the Rockets. Francis had been traded three times and released in the last three years for a reason.

 

Well said hillbilly.

 

Considering that Rafer was 1. here last year while the others weren't (I don't recall teams exploiting James weakness in 2005, do you?) and 2. his glaringly obvious weakness was apparent all season long, from the very first game of the season vs. Utah (open, obvious volume bricking,) to the very LAST game vs. Utah (more open, obvious volume bricking).

If other teams are going to force the ball into the PG"s hands and force him to make a play and score regardlesss- if you think the Rockets are best served with that player being Rafer you are out of your mind at this point.

There's really nothing else to say here. Turnovers are going to happen and pressure ball handlers regardless whether it be Rafer or anyone. But if teams are going to leave James and Francis as open in the halfcourt as they left Rafer, even the older versions of James and Francis, IMO are going to make them pay in a way that Brick House Rafer (who can't even make layups, LAYUPS for god sake) is incapable of doing.

It's like a time warp, this is not last offseason. This is 2007.

 

It's an insiders' only blog. Can you post it?

 

No matter how your stats are, how good Rafer you make he is,

It is obvious that the Rockets organization and TMAC did not buy the "Rafer is all we needed at PG" crap. They talked publicly and took actions to get rid of Rafer. And they are the boss and basketball professionals.

Go figure that.

 

Leave open? Francis is a porous 3pt shooter who will be left open every time at the top of the key. And his ability to drive will be diminished as his defender will be sagging back on Yao making the lane more clogged and giving less of a passing lane to give Yao the ball.

James is a better outside shooter than Francis and Rafer (although slightly) but not nearly as steady with the ball and not the guy you want running your offense (hence his being traded away for Rafer in the first place).

It all comes down to "what do you want in your starting point guard"?

I think what we need and want is best brought to the table by Rafer. James and Francis need and must have important roles on the team. But I think we are better off with Rafer on the team and in the starting five.

 

Here you go...

Reality check for retirees
posted: Friday, August 10, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry
filed under: Reggie Miller, Allan Houston, Penny Hardaway, Charles Oakley

Let me start by saying I hope I'm wrong.

I hope all these guys come back, average 20 points a game, and prove that the old dogs have enough tricks to thwart all the young whippersnappers out there.

But it's time for a reality check, now that faded stars of the '90s suddenly are launching comeback attempts on a daily basis -- to varying degrees, Reggie Miller, Charles Oakley, Felton Spencer, Allan Houston and Penny Hardaway all threw their hats back in the NBA ring this week. (Well, all of them except Spencer. I actually have no idea what he did this week. But I got your attention, eh?)

The reality check is this: if somebody wasn't any good when they last played in the NBA, they probably aren't going to be any good when they return either. That's especially true for a player in his 40s after a multiyear layoff. And in every case but one, these guys left the league for darn good reason. Let's review:

• The most preposterous case is that of Oakley, who is talking about a comeback at age 43. That oughta be a hoot. For a refresher, let me remind you how Oakley's final three seasons in the NBA turned out.

In 2001-02 -- six years ago, mind you -- he played 57 games for the Bulls and was quite possibly the single worst offensive player in the league. He shot 36.9 percent and put up a PER of 6.63.

That performance couldn't get him out of the league, though, because his ol' buddy Michael Jordan came through and signed him to a deal with the Wizards the following season. Oakley's PER that year was 8.35, and despite the most favorable management environment he could possibly ask for (the GM/star was one of his best friends, the coach was the GM/star's lapdog and was also one of the most veteran-loving coaches in recent NBA history, and the team had nobody particularly good at his position), he fell out of the rotation by midseason.

Even then, he got another reprieve a season later when his old coach Jeff Van Gundy came through for him and inked him with the Rockets. That experiment came to a merciful end after seven games. He was 41 at the time; by this December he'll be 44. I suspect he didn't improve in the intervening three years.

• Penny Hardaway's case isn't much better. In his last full-ish season, 2004-05 with the Knicks, he played in 37 games and was pretty darn awful.

Hardaway had a PER of 8.99 that season, one of the worst marks among wing players. His trademark scoring skills had declined to the point that he only averaged 12.0 points per 40 minutes, and did it with one of the worst true shooting percentages at his position. He also had a pathetic rebound rate (5.8) and made too many turnovers. Basically, he was finished. He played four games for the Knicks the next season and then they traded him to Orlando, which set him free.

That last full season came in 2004-05 -- two years ago. And he'd been steadily declining up until that point, even while insisting that he was in great shape and had never felt better. Again, it strains logic to think he's improved during this layoff.

Basically, I'm somewhere between puzzled and flabbergasted as to why the Heat made this move, even though it only cost them the minimum. I can only surmise that Rony Seikaly and Jon Sundvold weren't returning their calls.

• Then there is the case of Allan Houston. Houston didn't fare quite as badly in his last two NBA seasons, but his body gave up on him. Houston retired in 2005 because his arthritic knee couldn't take the pounding of the Knicks' training camp. If I recall correctly, he lasted until Day 4, and that was only by skipping the afternoon session in Days 1-3.

Now, I'm not a doctor, but pardon me while I play one on the Internet: I'm not aware of arthritic conditions that just go away. You never see headlines like, "Johnson returns to lineup after brief bout with arthritis."

It's chronic, and usually it gets worse unless you do something -- like stay off it for two years -- that stops the damage. Houston says he feels great right now and I have no doubt that he does, because he's not subjecting his knee to the rigors of the NBA. But as soon as the two-a-days start, he'll remember why he retired.

• And now, it's time for the one possible exception to the rule: Reggie Miller. In the above three cases, it wasn't a case of the player leaving the league -- it was the league that left the player behind, when he was unable to cut the mustard any longer.

Miller, however, was still a starter when he retired. A pretty good starter, actually. He hasn't played in two years, and that's a long time for a guy to sit things out. But the difference is, he was still good when he hung it up. So even if he lost something while he was in the TNT booth, he still might be productive.

Reggie had a 16.62 PER in his last season (2004-05) even though his 3-point shot uncharacteristically started failing him (he hit 32.2 percent). If Boston signs him, one presumes he'd be able to improve on that percentage, which might make up for the rot in other parts of his game.

Who knows, he might be terrible. But Miller is the one member of this week's comeback gang who has a chance of contributing if he returns. Like I said, I hope they all do gangbusters. Realistically, though, Messrs. Oakley, Hardaway and Houston are going to find out pretty quickly why they've been out of the league.

 

Talked publicly and took actions to get rid of Rafer. Isn't he still on the team. I haven't heard any active rumors (other than unsubstantiated stuff on this board) about Rafer. And could you provide these public quotes?

And I am not saying he is all we need. Did you read my original post/analysis? I said that James and Francis are going to make Rafer better than he was last year (when he already posted better numbers than those two) by reducing his minutes and allowing him to be more productive.

 

Hey, David, invest in subprime mortgage stocks. I hear 2007 is going to be a BIG year for them.

 

It is a whole new system a different head coach and Goals to not just be a good regular season team but a team that advances deep into the playoffs. Rafer was good for what jeff van gundy wanted and he fit into van gundy's system. Rick's system isn't tailor made for alston,Adleman's system calls for the point guards to be scorers,If rafer is going to blend into this sytem he is going to have to become more of a scorer and be more effeicent offensively.The point guards in this system are not depended upon to run the team. 5 players are called upon in this sytem to organize the offense and run the team.Anyone can intiate the offense in this system,no one is going to be looking for rafer specificly to bring the ball up the court and get the team into things,the uptempo thing works because anyone can make plays in this offense and everybody can run the fast break and be a playmaker. Rafer will need to learn to play off of the ball because no one is going to be standing around watching and the constant movement calls for the guards to set screens and look for back door plays, In sacramento mike bibby was a slasher and he was always under the basket getting fouled for and 1 one's. Rafer must learn to play without the ball and become a better mid range player in order to get the playing time that he got last season. This is a different system and a new philopsophy that isn't the same as last season.

 

And what do you expect teams to do with Francis out there? Sure, he has ability to finish at the rim better, but how well will that go when the opposing player is backing off not allowing him to drive?

What about James as well? It's not like he was blazing from the 3 pt. line either last year. He was only .01% better from the arch than Rafer.

And what about efficiency? I'm sorry but playing 40+ minutes in game 7 and only having ONE turnover (only coming off a slip on a wet spot on the court) doesn't spell inefficient to me.

Sure, Rafer is a streaky shooter but 36% is not horrible. Are there better options for a starting PG? Yes. But, Rafer is not the dog trash everyone makes him out to be around here.

 

Rafer's job was to shoot the open 3 last year. That was predicated by JVG's offense. Same is true for Battier and Head. "Take the open 3".

And according to the stats, he did that pretty darn well. Better than James or Francis.

 

Thanks for the financial advice.

I am pretty set already with my 1000 share investment (at $5 a share) in ADot a couple of years ago. Oh wait... it is only worth $.001 a share right now. Damn.

 

Here is a list of what I want from a PG, the engine of a top NBA team,

Leadership.
Clutchness.
Court vision.
must have a reliable way to put the ball into the basket.
always in attacking mode.
do all these things effieciently.


Rafer has exactly NONE of above.


what can Rafer offer to the table again?

 

How about you explain to me how exactly James and Francis offer more than Rafer...

 

Your analysis does not show a players ability to produce, but how much they produce if given X amount of playing time. Francis didn't much last year because of injury, so you cannot use direct stats to evaluate his game.

Last year we didn't have any players that could take away Rafer's minutes therefore he played almost all the point guard minutes, and had far more playing time then Francis and James. This is no indication of "durability", the same way steals do not make up for the fact that most opposing point guards score willingly against Rafer.

Also, Morey actively said he is shopping Rafer.