Rockets fans, and Steve Francis fans, why did USA today rank Steve Francis like the 15th best point guard in the NBA????
Go look at USA today dot com, and I'm very shocked, I mean come on...... http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2002-10-23-player-rankings.htm Is something wrong, or Steve Francis doesn't get noticed?
My bad, they actually ranked him 12th, but look who is in front of him? Does anyone agree?????? 1. Gary Payton, Sonics 10 20 16 4 16 3 3 9 5 1 87 2. Baron Davis, Hornets 11 23 1 20 29 5 4 2 1 5 101 3. Jason Kidd, Nets 5 28 10 26 13 1 2 1 9 9 104 4. John Stockton, Jazz 11 19 22 1 8 15 5 5 8 13 107 5. Sam Cassell, Bucks 17 18 13 6 7 6 11 14 12 4 108 6. Darrell Armstrong, Magic 11 15 7 17 2 7 18 3 20 15 115 7. Andre Miller, Cavaliers 24 24 24 7 12 4 1 10 4 7 117 8. Steve Nash, Mavericks 4 22 5 2 4 17 9 29 26 6 124 9. Chauncey Billups, T'wolves 6 7 9 15 5 20 18 26 10 14 130 10. Mike Bibby, Kings 1 7 20 8 15 20 22 17 11 11 132 Others: 11, Damon Stoudamire, Blazers, 137. 12, Steve Francis, Rockets, 140. 13, Eric Snow, Sixers, 148. 14, Stephon Marbury, Suns, 149. 15, Derek Fisher, Lakers, 150. 16, Alvin Williams, Raptors, 152. 17, Kenny Anderson, Celtics, 153. 18, Chucky Atkins, Pistons, 157. 19, Jason Williams, Grizzlies, 163. 20, Jamaal Tinsley, Pacers, 164. 21, Jeff McInnis, Clippers, 175. 22 (tie), Marc Jackson, Knicks, and Larry Hughes, Warriors, 179. 24, Rod Strickland, Heat, 179. 25, Chris Whitney, Wizards, 180. 26, Travis Best, Bulls, 184. 27, Tony Parker, Spurs, 188. 28, Jacque Vaughn, Hawks, 197. 29, Tim Hardaway, Nuggets, 206.
OH MY GOD! (sorry for the reference, but if this doesn't deserve that, what does?) That ranking....is....too funny. I didn't know they changed their magazine into a comic. Very nice change. I may start reading it. Hmm...Armstrong a top 10 PG...haha...Billups as well..hahahahahaha!
did you guys even look at what they used to rank the PG's? those were last years stats so of course steve is ranked low idiots. look 1st before you whine about why steve is ranked so low. but the ranking system is still bad because it includes team winning % and blocked shots and some other questionable categories. though its still interesting to look at to see where other PG's compared to each other in those categories. its dumb like how yahoo ranks players for fantasy stuff.
I saw the numbers, but didn't know what they were. Still, anyone who says Armstrong or Billups are top 10 PGs are, imo, idiots.
Oh NO! USA TODAY ranked Stevie low.... Now all people who are waiting to board a flight and don't watch basketball will think steve sucks. What ever will we do?
I don't pay much attention to rankings but Man this one is really bad. The ranking of Steve is bad but what were they smoking! When they ranked Shooting guards they ranked Brent Barry above Kobe, Allen Iverson, Mcgrady, etc.!! Brent Barry!! That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. I don't care what kind of system they were using to rank players. Any system that has Brent Barry #1 makes the BCS look like the greatest thing ever!! Hahaha!
Actually if they were talking about Steve being a SG it would make me mad, but as a true point guard i would have to agree with them. Steve is not a great point guard as many think. A great SG yes but point guard no way. Until he puts the team 1st and passes more he will not be considered by me as a great point guard. Sorry guys but that is the way i feel.
If you want to get a feel for this USA Today "ratings" system, just note: 1. David Robinson was rated over Shaq at center. 2. Alan Iverson was rated 10th at shooting guard. 3. They're using rank ratings of stats to evaluate players. Does it really matter for a center what his 3 pt shooting percentage was, relative to another center? Is being 15th in 3 point shooting percentage as important as knowing his 3 pt shooting percentage is 31%? If a player doesn't take 3 point shots, how much impact does this 3 point shooting percentage have in his overall play in the game? I'll answer this rhetorical question: not much. 4. Winning percentage was one of the factors in choosing these players. So, according to this ranking system, Oscar Robertson must suck, because he played largely on mediocre Cinncinnati teams. Problem with factoring overall winning percentage is that its a team stat affected by good or bad coaching. Mediocre players get boosted by good coaches and pay a penalty for playing for bad coaches on bad teams. There was a guy once, the basketball equivalent of a sabremetrician, who said that you can get a rough gauge of playing ability by counting non-shooting stats as a point: a block is a point, a rebound is a point, an assist is a point, a turnover is a negative point, a missed shot is a negative point. Sum up the positives and negatives and you get a score that rates what a player does on the court. I haven't seen this kind of stat work in a while, but it makes more sense to me than a rating system which tries to factor winning percentage into a player's skill ranking, or uses relative rankings of 3 pt shooting percentages to measure the skill of a center.
Well they are obviosly wrong and the reason the probably did it was for the publicity. They knew we'd jump on them
I penned some numbers just so I could see what was going on with point guards last year (the 2001-2002 season). Gary Payton Pts 1815 Reb 396 A 737 Stl 131 Blk 26 --------- 3105 positive points missed shots 841 missed ft 68 TO 209 PF 179 ---------------- 1297 negative points (3105 - 1297) / 82 games = 22.04 points per game. Jason Kidd Pts 1208 Reb 595 A 808 Stl 125 Blk 20 --------- 2756 positive points missed shots 683 missed ft 46 TO 286 PF 136 ---------------- 1151 negative points (2756 - 1151) / 82 = 19.57 points per game Sam Cassell Pts 1461 Reb 312 A 493 Stl 90 Blk 12 --------- 2368 positive points missed shots 643 missed ft 46 TO 177 PF 208 ---------------- 1074 negative points (2368 - 1074) / 74 = 17.49 points per game Steve Francis Pts 1234 Reb 401 A 362 Stl 71 Blk 25 --------- 2022 positive points missed shots 587 missed ft 96 TO 221 PF 172 ---------------- 1076 negative points (2022 - 1076) / 57 = 16.60 points per game To put this into perspective, if Francis had a shooting percentage closer to 46% last year, he'd have beaten Sam in the numbers. To get Steve into Jason Kidd's numbers, he'd have needed to shoot about 50% overall. Dave
Tell us what they had listed as their criteria. It may be easy to explain if they are rating PG based on the traditional responsibilities of a PG.
Let's put it this way folks. Last year the Western Conference starting PG was 14th in the league in assists. The assist to t/o ratio stop at 50 players. #50 is Bob Sura with a 2.09 AST to t/o ratio. Our beloved Franchise PG had a 1.64 AST to t/o ratio. That with his overall lack of assists, and ball handling skills I think makes him not one of the top 12 PG's in the league. He is a better player than he is a PG and many of the people in this forum lose sight of that. Is he an all-star calliber player? Even with his lack of D the answer is "yes". He should not play the PG position. He was not a PG prior to his NBA days, and he has done nothing to prove he is worthy of playing PG.
