I'd perfer Ollie over Daniels on this team, what we need is defense and mistake-free play out of our back up point, and that;s exactly what Ollie brings. Daniels, is younger, bigger, more athletic, but fit more into the slasher role ala Moochie, Steve, Cat.
On Rudy's team, I'd think it be Daniels over Ollie pretty handily. Rudy valued versatility, and Daniels' size (6-4) allowed him to comfortably play both guard slots. We haven't seen enough of JVG to see where he stands on versatility vs. filling a role. However, the more or less "release" of Morris, who could play either forward slot makes me tend to think the multi-position thing isn't as big a deal to him.
Verse I hear you. I lived in San Antonio for awhile and played pickup ball against him 3 days after the Spurs won the lockout championship. He was checking me and I hit a few jumpers on him and he didn't like it so he starts throwing forearms into my back and the whole thing just escalated into a shoving match before some other players broke it up. I know for a fact the guy is a headcase and I'm not the only one that has had an altercation with him while playing pickup ball against him. He is more like 6'2 or 6'3, he doesn't have that great of an outside shot but its not as bad as some people on this board may think, he is as strong as a bull for a guard and he is a lockdown defender. He might be a descent pickup if he's matured any since his san antonio days.
jump shooter, yep. although i disagree about the 6'2, 6'3 height. i'm 6'4, and he and i were just about eye to eye (played with him over at the concord). he may have had a .5" on me. maybe it was those bulky ass ankle supports he had on. hey, did you notice that antonio is a serious "one arm bandit"? dude will not...i mean will NOT...go to his left. right hand the whole time. lol! he's effective at it, but damn, mix in a left hand dribble every now and then!
1) Smith replaced DA, not Daniels. 2) The rest of this post is just ridiculous. Mobley is a top 10 or 12 SG in the whole league, Daniels is probably a top 10 or 12 back-up tweener guard. Daniels isn't disciplined enough nor a good enough ball handler to a a good starting 1, and isn't a good enough shooter or scorer to be a legit starting 2. He can do a decent job at backing up both spots--he does bring defense and athleticism--but not much more. If you want to compare a Blazer guard to Mobley based on talent and performance use DA. Mobley is probably a notch better overall--but they are pretty close overall though each may be better at some things than the other one. I would entertain the position that DA might be a better fit than Mobley--not sure of it either way--but AD just isn't in their league. I 3rd the props to verse and jump shooter with that info. Personally, AD would make a better back-up for other teams. We have plenty of athleticsim in the back-court when you consider Francis, Mobley and Posey, and certainly defense in the latter two. If we add another back-up guard we want more a specialist--a guy really good at one or two things. For example, a pure shooter--Barry, Piatowski, Peeler, or a defensive-oriented disciplined floor leader--Ollie, Ward, etc. AD would make a fine back-up for many teams--but really doesn't bring what we most need.
Desert Scar, I'm not sure where you are getting your crapola but it stinks. You suggest Mobley a top 10 or 12 shooting guard in the whole league? Huh? What? Once again, I will go back to my original argument from past posts. <B>If Mobley is such a great talent then why didn't we get more wins when he was first option during Francis' injured stricken season?</B> Exactly, he stinks. His ability to become a team player and make others better is exemplified by his 2.5 assists during the 01-02 when he was first option. Yet, you have the crapola to call him a top 10 to 12 shooting guard. Please... The whole idea of Mobley being a top 10-12 guard is just ridiculous. <B>There are lot of guards who could put up Mobley's numbers with more efficiency but they don't because these players play within the team concept and are willing to adjust their game, meaning they don't hog the ball, don’t take ill-advised shots and play defense, for the better of the team.</B> Your theory of Mobley being a top notch player in the NBA is just a put down to other great players in the NBA. Before writing about how great Mobley is and claming he is top 10-12 guard, trying analyzing a bit about why you think he is such a great player. As far as I can see, Mobley is a cancer because he thinks he is great but in the bigger picture he is more of a role player who was given the opportunity to become a focal point of an offense when he never should have been. This could only occur on the Rockets or a bottom dwelling team which is exemplified by the Rockets record when Mobley was first option. Mobley’s developed mentality as a major offensive weapon has hurt the team chemistry and the development of this team and will continue unless he takes a back seat to Yao and Steve as well as start developing and focusing on other parts of his game. If you have ever watched Danials play, he is explosive and just as athletic as Mobley. They are the same player except Danials isn’t' such a hog ball and can play within a team oriented offense. As for Derek Anderson, yeah he is okay, but his simile is better then his game. Put Danials in for 30 plus minutes a game and then see what his production is. Also, his points per shot out put is decent at 1.34. A heck of a lot better then Mobley's points per shot out put of 1.19. Danials is the better fit for this team because he is more efficient on offense, provides more defense, and doesn't need the ball in his hands to be productive. Also, i'm sure he wouldn't mind feeding Yao down in the post. <B>As for Verse statement</B>, I question if he ever watches Sac play and in particular Bobby Jackson. Bobby Jackson, is talented. He could be a starting point guard on most teams, and he was when he was playing in Minn. If you ever watched this guy play he is a hardcore defensive machine, hits clutch outside shots during critical times in the game, and he is awesome at penetrating the defense. This guy can easily acquire 25-30 some points in a game if given the opportunity. Do you even watch this guy play? When Bibby was out, Bobby Jackson took over and was actually even doing better then Bibby. But they put Bibby back on the starting line up because Bibby is more of a pass first oriented point guard. Plus it's hard to justify the 80 million they spent on Bibby, if he didn't start the games.
Erick Strickland. Kenny Anderson. Kevin Ollie. Antonio Daniels. Darrell Armstrong. Eric Piatkowski. Tyronn Lue. Rafer Alston. Voshon Lenard.
x_trepidation_x, why didn't francis get more victories when mobley was hurt? yet, he is accepted as a top 5 point guard. hmm....
Why don't you stop meandering past the point of my post and actually answer the question. Actually, many people on this board will tell you that Steve Francis is a great individual talent but doesn't have great point guard skills meaning he isn't a good passer, a good decision maker, nor a good overall floor general. So, I'm not sure if you read other people's posts or the countless threads that suggest this. Or perhaps you didn't see the SportsCenter clips on ESPN which made fun of Francis' and Mobley’s inability to make the smart decision and pass the ball to the open man. Don't side step the question. You state such a thing as Mobley being a great talent. To go as far as to say he is a top 10-12 guard in the league. Now prove it. Show me how he helps this team. Show me how he helps the Rockets get the "W". Show how he is able to play within a team concept. Show me something to believe that you have a case.
Well, I will try my best to explain this. <B>1. No inside presence</B> T-mac for the time he has been there has never had a decent inside player at either the 5 or 4 position. They have either had over the hill players such as (Kemp, Horace) or a bunch of no name centers such as (DeClercq, Andrew, John Amaechi, etc). When you see Pat Garrity playing the 5 position at times in a game, you know Orlando has front court problems. <B>2. Point Guard Position Rotation Weak</B> Armstrong has been a serviceable point guard but the magic have wanted him to be the guy coming off the bench as a six man which is his best position having won 6th man of the year award. However, Armstrong has had to start because there isn't anyone good enough to warrant a starters position. <B>3. Grant Hill factor</B> Grant Hill, has been injured all this time. Therefore, teams triple/double team T-mac. The second option has been Mike for a long time but Mike was young and failed to provide the consistent second offensive weapon that the Magic needed. But all of this is about to change. Now that they have Gooden who can post up, especially against the Eastern front court. They also have Gordan Giricek who has made up for the loss of Mike. Also, if they get PJ Brown this is going to be a good team with or without Grant Hill. Please don't compare T-Mac's game and Mobley's. That is an insult to everyone's intelligence, an insult to basketball players, fans, and the NBA community in general.
*chuckle* of course i've watched sac play, and in particular bobby jackson. no doubt, bobby jackson is talented...as is antonio daniels. starting point guard on most teams? hmm, as is yes, because of his recent play with the kings. but have you considered the factors that go into him performing as well as he has? first of all, bobby jackson is never, ever going to be the concentration of any opponents' defensive scheme. not when you have peja and webber on the team. i have no desire to argue with you about b-jax natural ability. it is there. what i'm telling you is that you could replace b-jax with antonio daniels and get very similar results. what? you don't believe me? ok, do you really think mike bibby is as good as he looks on sac? or is it a simple matter of a talented player being surrounded by studs like webber/peja that make him look better via the attention they demand? why, x_trepidation_x, did b-jax look like crap with the twolves & nuggets? 1997-1998 (denver) FG: 39% 3pt: 26% 1998-1999 (minnesota) FG: 41% 3pt: 37% 1999-2000 (minnesota) FG: 41% 3pt: 28% 2000-2001 (sac) FG: 44% 3pt: 38% 2001-2002 (sac) FG: 44% 3pt: 36% 2002-2003 (sac) FG: 46% 3pt: 38% hmm, notice the dramatic increase upon joining the kings. amazing how becoming the 3rd or 4th option can take pressure off of a player. amazing how many more open shots he gets off of double teams can increase his FG & 3pt %s. same goes for mike "overrated" bibby. star players make fringe starters like b-jax look like star bench players. see...mario elie. see...bruce bwen see...jaren jackson of 1999 now let's look at antonio daniels under the same parameters 1997-1998 (van) FG: 42% 3pt: 21% 1998-1999 (spurs) FG: 45% 3pt: 29% 1999-2000 (spurs) FG: 47% 3pt: 33% 2000-2001 (spurs) FG: 47% 3pt: 40% 2001-2002 (spurs) FG: 42% 3pt: 31% 2002-2003 (blazers) FG: 45% 3pt: 31% well, i'll be a monkey's uncle!! look at those career numbers when playing next to a stud. 01/02 was the year the spurs acquired tony parker. if you live in san antonio, you know that this acquisition directly affected antonio daniels' game. for three years, he was promised to be the spurs' point guard of the future. then, in comes the french wonderboy, and you're chopped liver. daniels was NEVER happy that season, never was given a true defined role, and i think his play suffered because of it. 02/03 his FG% went right back up. his 3pt % went down because portland lacks a true down low threat. now, let's look at the best seasons for both over the past 3 years: AD: 2000-2001 (spurs) FG: 47% 3pt: 40% BJ: 2002-2003 (sac) FG: 46% 3pt: 38% hot diggity damn! amazingly similar, aren't they? hmm... considering the fact that neither are "true point guards", neither is a "pure shooter", and neither are good enough to be starting 2 guards, and that their stats are amazingly similar, i'd say i've proven my case pretty well...
The blade cuts both ways. You want to apply your criteria for a good shooting guard (team win %) to Mobley but not T-Mac. Also, I believe the original poster claimed that Mobley was a top 12 shooting guard, yet you seem to have taken his statement as top 12 guard.
Next time you decided to include statistics please calculate the <B>Points Per Shot which is a true indicator of the offensive efficiency as well as the bail out political calls from the refs which send the player to the free throw line. </B> Don't give me your crapola statistics of shooting percentage as the definitive evidence of comparing players. If you are comparing and suggesting Bobby Jackson and Antonio Danials as being the same then you don't know how to evaluate talent. I'm sorry but you have no argument because you have: 1) Used statistics that don't really indicate how efficient a player is offensively 2) Your eyes are failing you because Bobby Jackson is a better at penetration, defending, is faster, and can hit the clutch. Jackson is in another league compared to Danials. Any GM would take Jackson over Danials any day.
1. And we had inside presence with the often injured Cato was our Starting Center with Willis. MoT was gone and we had 19 year rookie that like to jack up 3's for our starting PF. 2. Moochie Norris and Tierre Brown were our point guards when SF was injured or couldn't see or thing straight. 3. So who did the other teams have to defend when Cat was the primary scorer. Moochie? Oscar Torres? Collier? Rice?(no he was injured also) Griffin? Cato? Tmo the rookie?
I didn't say he was a great talent--like a top 5 SG capable of carrying a team, merely a very good player (top 12 at is position). That team had nothing on it--you put other guys in Mobley class like DA, Wells, Jason Terry, etc--those teams suck too. Mobley is a proven starter in this league, DA is a proven starter in this league (when healthy), AD was a failed starter for SA and was barried on the bench last year. If you can't see a major difference in these players I can't help you. BTW here is my classification of SGs--and it is a liberal one (Calling Carter, Pierce, Houston, Rose, Davis) SGs even if they don't play there often): Elites (1-4) Kobe McGrady Pierce AI Next (5-10) Carter Allen Hamilton Stackhouse Davis Finley Next (11-18) Wells Rose Sprewell Houston Terry Mobley Christie Next (18+) JR Miller Barry DA Redd Mason Wesley Kittles Cheney Peeler Thus by the most extreme, including guys who normally dont play SG but can, Mobley is somewhere in the 11-18. If you consider players who are primarily 2s (exclude Carter, Houston or Spree, Davis, Rose) --I'd say the 10-12 range is very close to accurate for Mobley. Mobley is certainly better than more than half the starting 2 guards in the league--go by each starting 2 if you don't believe me. But I am sure you are going to say stuff like Kittles, Wesley, Cheney and Redd are better--which they are not close if you take any kind of comprehensive view that considers total production, defense, and fouls caused.
BTW CM is 12th of SGs in PPS with a very respectable 1.2--that is better than the likes of Carter, Iverson, Wells, Wesley, Rose, Finley, Davis, Spree, etc. etc.,--you defeated your own argument. Of course I think PPS is important--but I wouldn;t solely wieght it. I am not about to say Mobley is better than AI, Carter and Finley simply because of PPS. Regardless, for an SG Mobley has a fine PPS, and good FG, FT and adequate 3 numbers--both last year and career. They are quite similar to Francis's actually.
Uhhh..Shooting guard is the most stacked position in the NBA. So, I would still like to see that argument. Feel freely to offer your opinion on, Mobley as a top 10 shoot guard, since you have clearly stated your intrest in the subject. Winning Percentage. When Mobley was first option the team record was 28 Wins and 54 Losses. As for Tracy McGrady's winning percentage. Orlando has hovered around 50 percent which is far better then 28 wins that Mobley was able to rack up for the Rockets. As I see it, T-mac has made it into the playoffs 3 years in a row, as the number 1 option. The players surrounding Tmac is skeleton at best. If Tmac had any front court player such as (Cato, Taylor (even though I think Taylor sucks), etc..) he would have done better. There front line was just pathetic and I don't care how good of a backcourt player you are cause you need front court help. Everyone knows this...please don't be the exception because it seems that you don't understand this concept. Having said all of this, it makes me wonder if you guys understand basketball or just look at statistics and come to some conclusion without watching the games.
Using the Player Efficiency Ratings from Alleyoop.com, which are minute-independent, you get the following... Mobley: for 02-03, he ranked as the #24 SG. The year before, #20, and the year before that, #11. It's been a decline. Jackson vs Daniels: Daniels is listed as a SG after 98-99, Jackson a PG the entire time. 02-03: Jackson #10 PG, Daniels #33 SG (18.36 vs 13.32). 01-02: Jackson #13 PG, Daniels #35 SG (17.3 vs 13.32). 00-01: Jackson #33 PG, Daniels #17 SG (13.18 vs 15.95). Prior to that, the players range from nearly equal to Daniels with a several point advantage. So, using this measure of players, you can make a claim for verse's theory. And, I disagree with the utilization of points per shot...that takes away the role of other significant contributions such as rebounds, turnovers, assists, etc.
