I agree with HP that "getting it" means different things for different position. The bottomline is, does the player understand the game enough to maximize his resources (including his skills, his physical abilities, and the cooperation of his teammates) to be the most effective at his position. That said, I don't agree with people who insist that a 7 footer has to play a dominating inside game to be counted as "got it." To me, Garnett and Webber got it. True, Webber is weak minded. But that has nothing to do with him understanding how to play the game. They are not the typical low post big men. But why do your height has to dictate your style? Look at Magic Johnson. His body looked more like a power forward. Has anyone questioned Magic for not playing a power game inside? I am not saying that physical attributes don't affect your playing style. But as long as the player effectively uses what he has and effectively "cover up" what he doesn't have, that, to me, is getting it.
Easy, how can you say that webber and/or garnett "get it"? part of getting it is knowing your role on the team...knowing that if you are the "go to man" that there is a time and place to take over a game. neither garnett or webber have even shown the DESIRE to take over crucial games, much less the execution. steve francis, to me, "gets it" as a shooting guard. it's his NATURAL POSITION. that said, he is playing a position that, by definition, requires that you set your teammates up for easy shots first, then look to score after all options have been exhausted. that said, a point guard can still be "the man" and take over games when necessary. take isiah thomas for example. he was the pound-for-pound ultimate "lead guard" of our generation, imo. he would look to set his teammates up over and over again, almost never exhausting 18 seconds off of the clock before doing so. then, with his incredible athletic ability he'd do one of two things: a) create for himself with the clock running down (if the ball came back to him); or b) take over the game in the 4th quarter, when the defense absolutely HAD to respect the teammates that helped get the pistons in the lead. witness the game wheer isiah had 18 POINTS IN THE FINAL 90 SECONDS. that's incredible and rare, no doubt, but the point is knowing when to take over. steve francis, i think, tries to execute the coach's gameplan from quarter #1, but sees his teammates building houses then decides to take over. the problem is that those teammate usually don't get "good shots" from francis' efforts. anytime, as a player, that you stand around for 18-23 seconds watching someone dribble, then get the ball, it's damn hard to score. even for nba players. i can't fault steve completely. imo, point guards are born, not made. it's a mentality of not just setting your man up, but setting your man up for the shot he wants, where he wants it, and when he wants it. steve, frankly, does not know how to do that. it's not innate to him. and i don't think it's possible to "learn" such a thing. if anyone doesn't believe me, name one great point guard EVER that was converted to be a point guard...... the answer, imo, is to remove ballhandling responsibilities from steve francis and place them in the hands of someone that is a natural. that can be either a pure point guard or a center (yao ming) or forward (maybe lamar odom) that has a mastery of court placement.
Yep, maybe it's from watching Hakeem's footworking so long it's hard to miss bad footwork. I'm surprised that more commentators don't mention it. Garnett shoots mostly turnarounds in the post. He probably also needs stronger legs in addition to better footwork. He looks like he's stuck and lacks some of his regular explosiveness when he is banging. Elton Brand is a different story. I think would take Brand over Garnett.
Steve is a dynamic scorer but either he has limited court vision or he has this uncontrollable urge to try the impossible because it looks good when he makes the hard shot. I think it's the latter. I don't want Steve to simply be a dynamic scorer, I want him to be a dynamic player. As far as that pass to Yao in OT, it was phenominal. The point is that he doesn't do that nearly enough. Where were you late in the 4th quarter of that game where Francis and Mobley almost lost the game by recklessly playing offense thus turning the ball over and taking impossible shots? Hence why I did not like the Thomas/Posey deal. An off night? It was horrendous but at least our dynamic scorer got his stats. I expect them to play smart basketball. I expect them not to play streetball. Is that too much to ask? Rice wasn't hitting his shots. The team definately needs a shooter but Rice has not shown that he still has that ability. Ideally, I'd prefer a pure shooter at the 2 spot than a pentrating ballhog. As Franics said, "What we need is consistency. What I don't know is how we get it." Well Steve, if you pass the ball and use the offensive sets Rudy gives, you'll be MUCH more conisistent. Get it?
verse, I don't see how you can say that Francis doesn't "get it" in one position, but he does at another. imo, guards/swingmen who "get it" can effectively run the show from point and the trational SG role. No, there are no great converted PGs who I know, but there are many great SGs who were playmakers....versus the Reggie Miller's who played hide and seek with the defense. Would you really change SF's role much by making him a SG? I don't really see how AI's role has changed that much. Don't Kobe, MJ, Pierce, Grant Hill (pre-injury), Rose, McGrady, Stackhouse...all dominate the ball. Some get it and some don't. I believe it comes down to consistently making the right decision against an assortment of NBA defenses/teams. I don't think Francis would be consistent at doing that by being the PG or SG, and he's not the right SG to play off ball to a PG who dominates the play...anymore than MJ gave up the ball to his PGs. And please don't suggest he should be a Rip Hamilton or Reggie Miller off ball catch and shoot player who rarely penetrates off the dribble. <blockquote><hr> As Franics said, "What we need is consistency. What I don't know is how we get it." Well Steve, if you pass the ball and use the offensive sets Rudy gives, you'll be MUCH more conisistent. Get it?<hr></blockquote> I like what Greg M says here. That's a pretty funny play on quotes. I would tend to say, "Well, Steve, if you learn to beat multiple defenses with the multiple options Rudy is trying to teach the team, you'll be MUCH more consistent."
But, Garnett is a phreak. There is no one his size that is even close to him laterally, plus quick leaping and long arms. He has that slithery ability to get inside, even without true post moves, and I think he's right next to Duncan as the premiere PFs in the game. IMO, I think most of it has been said. I don't think Steve has that innate PG ability, which IMO, means that either some of the responsibilities for making the offense "go" must be taken by: a.) Yao Ming polishing the potential he has to be the type of center that the entire offense can be centered around, b.) moving Steve to SG, acquiring a natural PG c.) acquiring a point forward (Odom type, younger Anthony Mason maybe)
Garnett is probably the 2nd best power forward in the NBA behind Tim Duncan. He doesn't really have any moves. He just uses his quickness and size. He uses it well. Like Amare...but Kevin is better. Tim Duncan really has good fundamentals. He is very good. The next best power forward could possibly be Chris Webber or Dirk Nowitzki. After them, Jermaine O'Neal is probably the best. He is just a little smaller.
NIKE, I'm basically asking the same question of Thano and verse, so I may as well direct it to you, too. What would Francis all of a sudden do differently as a SG? I don't see him as a stud shooter (he can't shoot moving Js at Allen/Wally/Reggie/Rip's level, imo), be great decision maker (Dumars/Jordan), or know how to recognize motion responsibilities (Hornachek/Christie/Barry) How many All-Star SGs are there who aren't either dominating the ball or are moving-J shooters? What do you see when you look at the 22+ppg SGs? Is it Finley? What do you want him to be, because he isn't Jordan or Dumars without first getting it, and he isn't a pure shooter with a quick release hitting Js on the move. Do you think he understands the game like Finley, and can immediately play a 3-man game with a great PG? I don't. If you do, that 3-man game requires a great PG (to include scoring) to work. Assuming you switch him and he's still status quo BBall IQ, then doesn't he continue wanting to dominate the ball like AI, Kobe, McGrady, Pierce, Stackhouse, Rose, Sprewell, Jordan and all his peers/hereos. bottomline: Francis likely doesn't change much if moved to SG without first getting it.
Steve Francis played Shooting Guard in college, but I don't think he should in the NBA. He should be a point guard. He is actually pretty smart. He is the only point guard we watch. There are many that are much worse. ANYWAYS, Francis usually shoots off the dribble. He can't catch and shoot. Well he can...but he usually doesn't. And he is also too short. Mobley is short as well but he has long arms. He shouldn't be SG.
Heypee, You're absolutely right. I think the only way Francis gets it, is after multiple playoff humiliations. Shaq never got it. But then, Phil Jackson forced him to get it. Maybe our coach can't force our players to do anything. Maybe we have a great coach, but the wrong TYPE of coach?
Steve is improving his game, The Rockets are improving their game. Neither are at championship quality yet, or as consistent as most of us would like, but they are improving. Others have said the same thing, and I'm really just adding my support to what they've said. As far as Steve's off the court game(talking after the Dallas game etc.) He has got to be one of the league's best. Steve complimented Dallas on their game this time, and mentioned improving on Houston's 26 turnovers. It was much ado about nothing. On the positive side, how many other team's stars around the league would go out of their to drive the new rookie around and help him adjust. Rather than let ego take over Francis has gone out of his way to help Yao, who's definitely taken a large portion of the spotlight away, adjust to the NBA, and the Rockets. Francis has put all of that behind him, and handled it like real leader. Steve has changed his diet, done everything the medical staff asked of him during the off season so that he could be ready for this year, and sought out help from older players(Jordan) coaches and others to take his game to the next level. He's doing all the right things more than most other 'stars' in the league are.
heypartner- I guess the closest thing to compare it to would be the Iverson situation. They slid a real PG next to him, and it was enough to get them to the finals 1 year. The goal of coarse isn't to turn Francis into a Reggie Miller type SG-though, I do think you underestimate Francis' shooting ability (he's been money this year). I think things would not be accomplished by simply moving Francis to SG and inserting a Moochie type at PG- the improvement would come through inserting your Eric Snow (or the flavor of the year, Andre Miller) type smart basketball player next to him. I think it comes down to this trio of guards (Francis, Mobley, Moochie) not being very intelligent basketball players. Do you think they are? With Moochie's minutes already so limited, replacing him doesn't seem to be the answer. With that in mind, (and assuming you're going to make a move) it's either move Francis, or move Mobley in attempts to create a more intelligent backcourt, and I think in that scenario, you keep Francis. Some people are suggesting putting a Brent Barry type next to Francis, which would be to accomplish the same type of thing. I think you hear "move Francis to SG" more is because really heady 2 guards like Barry are not easy to find, whereas your pure distributor point mans, like Tinsley and Dre Miller and the aftorementioned Snow are out there, and can be had. Combine that with Francis' plentiful experience as a 2 guard, and... So, it's not so much what Francis would do differently, it's what his backcourt mate would do differently.
I think its the players who are the blame. I blame Rudy for not doing anything about it. The offense for this team is not working. The Rockets cant rely on there defense every game. Trying to keep teams to 80 points a game wont happen every night. I dont know what Eddie is doing. (And dont bring out that excuse that he is 20 years old.) Kobe 19 averaged 18 a game. It can be done. They just need to get off there lazy ass and start working AS A TEAM and commit less turnovers. This is all I want to see. Working hard every night like the Nets.
Yes blame our guards for not "getting it". But blame Rudy for not "getting it" as well. We all know that the ISO offense is bad, why does Rudy still employ and call it every game? Why doesn't Rudy control the guards for doing it?
verse, you are quiet on my SF dichotomy. Maybe you can read up on my post and tell me how SF remains a dominating SG,, without first "getting it", and please don't use NIKEs reason that some PG like Snow or Tinsley will solve all our problems whether SF gets it or not.
"That last play was just a fluke," Francis said. "Give (Fizer) credit, as he was able to get it out of there and up. I had my hand on the ball, too. It just goes to show that you can play the right way for 48 minutes and still lose on a fluke. Today we just beat ourselves." ummm....huh?
from chron.com: "We did a good job getting hands in there smacking the ball," Francis said of the decisive basket. "The guy was able to pick the ball up and put it in the bucket. "I thought I had the ball. It goes to show you if you don't play the right way for 48 minutes, fluke stuff like that can happen. We stripped the ball from their best player. We didn't get it." I hope the quote from my previous post, from nba.com, was a misprint.
I have a really hard time believing that Francis would not whine over this simply because his whole mentality is to dominate the ball, beginning with the dribbling. IMO, his ego will prevent him from being an effective finisher off of another point guard's set-up's. He wants to be The Man from start to finish. He's gonna be MVP, or didn't you hear??
heypee, pippendagimp, etc.: sorry for the delayed response. i've been gone for a few days. anyway, after thinking about it, i realized that i'm wrong. i don't think francis "gets it" from the 1 or 2 spot. i just don't think he has the court intelligence to "get it". as for what i was saying earlier about getting it at the 1 vs the 2, i really believe that the point guard spot (and the center spot) is absolutely definable. 2s, 3s and 4s can be versatile in how they play. it's a mentality, i tell ya. take jordan for example. true enough, he was chicago's first option, however, MANY other factors have to be considered: one is the triangle offense. that offense truly does eliminate the need for a true point guard because the offense itself generates proper scoring opportunities for everyone on the court - as long as they are competent players. two is the fact that jordan, imo, switched many times from 1 to 2 during the course of the game. i'm not talking about bringing the ball up here. i'm talking about his MENTALITY on the court. it was a common occurrence to see an entire 1st half or 3rd quarter go by with jordan only taking 3-5 shots. jordan had self-awareness. he knew that (a) the other teams were completely focused on stopping him; (b) that he could, in fact, score at will, despite the other teams' efforts; and (c) that he COULD NOT WIN unless he got his teammates the shots that they felt comfortable taking. so he passed, to get his teammates properly involved and, at the same time, kept himself involved by taking over in critical stretches. this, imo, is what made michael jordan so damn phenomenal. to handle that load successfully from the 2 spot for such a duration of dominance is simply mindboggling. it's why he's considered the greatest of all time. he was able, in his mind and through physical execution, to split the duties of shooting guard and point guard. as much as i got sick of the jordan hype machine, i could never deny him this much... NONE of those other guys you mentioned (including kobe) "get it" in that sense. when i talk about "getting it" i mean being able to sustain carry a team on your back and getting to the big dance. iverson did it once, but, frankly (1) the east was absolutely horrid that year; and (2) the refs absolutely robbed the milwaukee bucks when they played the 76ers. iverson fouled out TWICE in that final game against sam cassell, but the refs refused to blow the damn whistle against the hip-hop icon of the nba... if you want to carry a team from the backcourt and be THE MAN over a sustained period of time, you have to either be a 2 guard with the mental abilities of a michael jordan or a true point guard. do you understand how difficult that is? this is why it always has been and always will be A BIG MAN'S GAME. this is why COUNTLESS opposing team's announcers repeatedly talk about how the rockets do not involve yao ming enough. i know you have season tickets, so you don't hear it as many times as us NBA league passers hear it. but it's EVERY DAMN ANNOUNCER. they realize it. why anyone else on the rocket's roster or coaching staff cannot is beyond me....
