That is a weak argument because one bad shot selections don't automaticly lead to points for the other team. A miss is a miss. They both clang off the rim the same way. Turnovers is what leads to points and fast breaks opportunities and Cat only averages a half a turnover more than JJ and actually turns the ball over less than everyone favorite player, Yao Ming. But Cat also averages more steals than JJ also. Secondly Cat is a much better defender than Jim Jackson. Cat is the one that covers AI, VC, Jones and McGrady not Jim Jackson. Jim Jackson gets to cover Dunleavy, Melo, and Shane Battier. This shouldn't even be a discussion. There is not a thread that is titled Jim Jackson for defensive player of the year. Cat is by far the best perimeter defender on our team. Lastly, the reason JJ doesn't cost games at the end is because sometime he is not in at the end of games and there are no plays called for him at the end of games. I know everyone has pointed out how JVG criticized Mobley for his bone headed play at the end of the GS game. However, no one has mentioned that Cat still leads the team in minutes even though JVG could give those minutes to JJ and Francis. People must realize that JVG calls those iso's for Cat. Cat doesn't just get the ball and yell at his teammates to get out of the way. I know bashing Cat is trendy here and I am guilty of it sometimes, but people have to realize the value he has on this team. Cat is a high energy player who can take almost anybody in the league off the dribble. He is also our best defensive player by a long shot and he has sacrificed his game for the team. Cat is the one taking less shots so Yao can get his, not Francis or JJ. Like I said before, Cat doesn't make the best decisions on the court but his positives outweigh his negatives. JVG seems to agree which is why he gives him 40 minutes a game and calls plays for Cat.
Reading at the above, I can safely conclude that this SamFisher guy (or dog, cat, rat, whatever) has the IQ of below zero.
If you read my post clearly I said giving UP TO 12 points, not WILL GIVE UP 12 points. I also used the same argument for JJ. I understand that whoever we play might not score but think about this way. Up to 12 points subtracted from our score, up to 12 points added to whatever other team's score (for those that can't do simple arithmetics, that's up to a 24 point differential). You'd be insane if you tell me that doesn't make a diff. For every good thing Cat does, he does 2 bad things. As I said, Cat lovers think he can do no wrong. OK so he hit that 3 pointer, does anybody remember what he did the possession before that? Or the one after? And the one after that? So he gave us 3 points, cost us up to 6. Sounds like pretty simple math to me.
I find strange that people still argue that they would put an opponent on the FT line and give away free point(s), even with a 50% FT shooter! (They don't even do that with Shaq, attempts to do so in past year largely backfired) Never mind that Dampier is a career 63%FT shooter. The choices are not between him shooting FTs and allowing any Warrior to put up an open shot. Even if they could get a good shot off from the field, that is only even money. (Dunleavy missed a wide open shot at the end). Within the 2 minutes mark up to that point, the Warriors' shots consist of: a made by Cheaney a miss by Cheaney a miss by Robinson 2 misses by Claxton You always want to play defense and contest a shot from the field rather than giving away FTs. (The only time when you would do it is if Dampier had a wide open layup. In this case, he was 94 ft away grabbing a rebound) Yes, it was the worst mistake you can make. Ask any coach.
The problem everyone has with your "logic" is that you somehow think a missed shot by Cat is magically worse than a missed shot by someone else. If anyone on the team shoots and misses, that translates to a 2 point loss for us and a potential 2 point gain for the other team (ignoring three pointers as you have done). That means that everyone's misses should count the same. Then you made up something called "bonehead shots". For some reason, you say that only "bonehead shots" result in this 2 point potential gain for the other team. On a regular missed shot, I guess either we are guaranteed an offensive rebound or the opposing team turns it over. Otherwise, using your example from above: Mobley shoots 20 shots, makes 10 and has a +/- of zero (20 - 20) Jackson shoots 20 shots, makes 7.4 and has a +/- of -10.4 (14.8-25.2) Obviously, using this regular earth logic, it can plainly be seen that we want Cat shooting, not Jackson.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yea, his crazy shots defend against the Rockets being able to comfortably beat teams without sheer terror....
You are right when you commented that Cat has made significant contributions to this team's overall defense. He should be given credit for that. However, the minutes played statistic is a canard. Van Gundy has no other options right now. When Pike gets back, Van Gundy will come down harder on Mobley for his mistakes. Secondly, JGV does call isos for Cat. But that's not what is at issue. The problem with Cat's play is when the play is not called for him, specifically, his refusal to execute plays called for Yao. I firmly believe that JVG should and, when Pike gets back, will modify Cat's role to maximize his strengths and minimize his mistakes. Cat should be on the floor when he is a primary offensive weapon. Calling isos for Cat is just fine, when the matchup is right. Cat demonstrated improvement and willingness to be a playmaker off those sets, finding Jackson, Francis and others for wide open perimeter shots. Cat should also be on the floor when we need defensive stops late in the game. However, Cat should not be forced to play the role of post feeder, a role with which he is clearly not comfortable, familiar or particularly willing to play. The mark of a great coach is to be able to take the roster he has, and maximize the performance of the team. I think Van Gundy will do that.
Some of the replies on this thread make me sick. It seems as if all the bashers wait for Mobley to have one bad game, and make a couple of bad decisions and then they're all over him. Let me sum up why this thread should not be here at all: Mobley's been the one carrying the team at the start of this season, plus he's coachable. His defense so far has been spectacular and his shooting is still very good. And... his salary. Props to SamFisher, StupidMoniker, rockbox, Pole, RocketManJosh and others for trying to stem the tide of hating. (Oh and what the hell was that stuff MFW?? It didn't make any sense at all.. hell you've obviously tried to skew the math fit your bias.)
Ray Allen Kobe Bryant Ricky Davis Michael Finley Richard Hamilton Allan Houston Allen Iverson Eddie Jones Tracy McGrady Paul Pierce Latrell Sprewell Jerry Stackhouse Bonzi Wells How can Mobley be an excellent SG when he's not the best half of the SG. He is the cheapest but not an excellent SG. Yes he's a very good 1on1 player but basketball is a team game. He's not willing to take a back seat and be accepted as a role player. He still thinks he's the 2nd option in this team. That's the problem. I have no doubt he one of our best defender, but that's not an excuse by not following the game plan and to be a hero.
Mobley is averaging over 40 minutes per game for JVG, as he often did for Rudy T. He must be doing something right.
Finally a reasonable comment ... This is acceptable and I have no problem with the Rocks diminishing his minutes a little once Pike gets back, and not setting him up as the post feeder too often. The problem is with the people that see a couple of mistakes and bash Cat constantly to no end. And saying he should be "Fired" or benched for good is ludacris and I think it should be insulting to all Rockets fans. If people think Mobley is not a good player for the money we pay him, then these people definitely do not have the BBIQ they love to talk about.
