Reit and verse--yah, I think Hamilton for Cat strait up would be an upgrade--but in further thought maybe not to the degree of say Ray Allen. I think Cat and Hamilton have a lot of similarities, though Hamilton is younger, taller and a tad better shooter (20 ft and in), while Mobley is a little better off the dribble. I think both are dynamic, I don't buy that Hamilton is only effective off screens. He has averaged 20PPG both this year w/Detriot and last year with w/Wash--thus I think he can be productive on different systems and is more adaptable that people credit him with being. As for Redd versus Hamilton and Cat--all I can say is I was pretty dissappointed in Redd after Ray Allen was traded. I thought he could step in a do most of the things Allen did, but to me he really showed a limited, 1 dimensional, game when I saw him. Redd is deadly if left open--but not much more, he doesn't have a Mobley first step, Hamilton's midrange shooting ability, and neither's scoring or floor instincts. There are older players around--Barry, Piatowski, Peeler--that can do what Redd does and probably be had for 1.5 mil. Thus a) I just don't think Redd is a top half (CM) or top quarter (RH) overall starting caliber SG, a second reason I don't think it is relevant to talk about him much is he is a BYC player and is extremely difficult to trade for at least until next season anyway. Again though, I see him more as a bench shooting specialist than a guy versitile enough offensively and defensively to be a high quality staring 2--even if he was a BYC player I probably would not trade him for Mobley even though I would be gaining 4 years--Mobley overall is just the superior, more dynamic, player.
I agreed with you. Bobby Jackson is way better than Daniels. Although Daniels pretty good himself. I never saw a guard beside MJ does all those crazy circus shot and has it go in like Bobby Jackson usually does.
NIKEstrad, I don't have much time to write in response but I think my overall feeling is keep on believing whatever makes you happy. But, when i have the time, I’ll dissect your post as you did mine, but with a little more accuracy.
If you can hold down top competition for an entire 48 minutes, that's pretty darn good no matter how you slice it. And Mobes can do that. imo, the inconsistency is clearly about the ankles. He's had swollen ankles for two seasons, and that will show up on defense more than offense. He probably just can't bring it every night. Plus, the 41mpg didn't help. I'm banking on Mobes defensive gems going up in correlation to his minutes go down. I don't mind Mobes as a 6th man, but that's not the only way to look at it. Start your best defenders, then move SF to SG when the opposing starters are more tired. We could sit Mobes for a lot of minutes in the 2nd, and slide SF offer to SG with a vet PG coming in. We could do the same thing from like the 3:00min mark in the 3rd, to the 9:00min mark in the 4th. 1st Q 9mins 2nd Q 4mins (or whatever to rest Francis) 3rd Q 9min 4th q 9min that's 31 mpg, and gives a vet PG or SG 27mpg (if Francis rests for 10), and more if the guy is a big guard that allows us to go 3 guards for 4-8 minutes or so. 3 guards is a threat if that 3rd guard is a good vet who can run a fastbreak or shoot from the outside. bringing Mobes down to 30-33mpg also makes SF a SG when Yao is likely resting. When Yao is in, he and Steve are running Pick n Rolls and such. Man, I just wish SF could run the PnR better, that would solve so many things to start with, instead of having to trade a quality player in Mobes in an attempt to hide Francis's weaknesses. I just think trying to hide Francis's weaknesses is not worth trading Mobley. Just move Mobes down to 30-33mpg and let him concentrate on defense, resting Francis, fastbreaking, curling, spot ups and the occassional right-side elbow iso to pull us out of offensive funks. Mobes is a very solid player who can't just be tossed aside.
bullsh!t. they left Yao a lot of the time to trap the dribbler When they didn't trap the dribbler they poked the big man out there as somewhat a fake trap to delay progress to give the guard time to fight through the pick. The often resulting in both Cat and SF dribbling in wide circles around the pick, if not dribbling backwards. that's where SF really sucks. How did SF and CM get the reputation for not hitting a rolling Yao. What happened was the guards were often smothered, because the defense wanted to test their passing ability, rather than switch on them or, worse, try *not* to switch....which Francis burned repeatedly with his J, and Mobley would always drive on. The way the defenses played Yao on the PnR was to zone it from behind. If the guards could find Yao through a trap, and get it to him, the zone was already there.
That was the beginning. Later on, Yao's man never left his side. Go watch the tapes. There were times Yao would create open lanes because his defender didnt want to look bad by leaving him wide open.
sorry, that's just bogus. Francis and Mobley both burned attempts to not switch. Are you kidding me? this is not the defining mark of what happened. not to say it never did. The Rockets true PnR gets trapped. They fully trap, do what I call a trapping, delayed release on Yao, or simply zone the PnR. RIET, you want to come over and watch tapes. Mobley did not get 1on1s on his guard off of a PnR with Yao at any clip worth making the point you are trying to make. If they tried to play the PnR straight up without trapping or switching, making their man fight through the pick, Mobley's first step nearly always takes that ball to the hole. I guess you are thinking of zone situations or sumpin. Because our guards get trapped. That's just so true. And btw, Mobes didn't really even run PnRs with Yao as much as he used the forwards, largely when Francis was just sucking or was resting....just like verse described.
the other thing you might be talking about is the fake PnR. And that wasn't later on in the season, as you say. I was definitely seeing that in the Orlando game in early January, and Rudy went on the radio describing it about 2 weeks later. I remember that, because I described it to several people here (incluing a convo with popeye about it), and also cause my buddy and I counted low post entries in the Orl game....it was ~32. That fake PnR play does 1on1 the guard, you could say. It was about Yao not holding his pick at all and releasing early to push his man straight down the lane. The purpose of that really had nothing to do with the guards or a PnR, it was to prevent fronting of Yao. It was simply a fancy way to get a low post entry...not a PnR, and not a guard 1on1 as an option.
NIKEstrad, First, I realize this is a late response but I really didn’t have much time to write. But now down to business. How did verse call me out on the political calls? I had essentially stated the PPS accounts for shots made and political bail out calls from refs meaning foul shots. Verse had thought that my original post of PPS didn’t include foul shots from political calls but he miss read my post. Your post amuses me because essentially, you make even less sense then Verse. <B>You believe that fouls shots and political bail out calls are two different things when in fact I have stated them as being the same.</B> He had no argument and yet you back him up 100%. <B>You might be able to read and type but that doesn’t equate to intelligence.</B> <B>Your Specific Scenario</B> As for your specific scenario’s well, I find that amusing as well. <B>You try to stretch your argument by calling me out on a particular play or player but against the bigger picture you have missed the point. Some people think big while others worry about minute details that don’t really have a bearing on the main argument. That is what differentiates between your ideas and mine.</B> The example you used, is just ridiculous Of course I would rather see a player shot the ball after being fouled to try and attempt the 3 point play. What NBA player would not attempt the shot? So this is my exact point, nearly almost any player would attempt to shot. Therefore, the distribution of a players PPS should not differ that much. <B>PPS Worth:</B> PPS is a better indicator of offensive efficiency then FT% because it takes into account for free throws accumulated from fouls. <B>So, my question is, if you think PPS is such a horrible statistic, cause you are arguing against PPS, then I offer you to suggest a better statistic measure for offensive efficacy?</B> Here is what PPS does tell you. It tells you how many shots a player needs in order to accumulate so many points. It doesn’t matter if a player gets his points from the shot or from the free throw line. What matter is that the player is going to take this many shots in a game and this is how many points he is going to collect. Here is what PPS does not tell you, it does not tell you how many possessions it will take a player to accumulate the shots. How quickly the player accumulates the points. Nor does it tell you some of the statistic values that are not directly measured such as making other teammates better, how you obtained the points, low post, etc… <B>Your Player Analysis based on PPS</B> Again, you have missed the point of the argument. At what point did I say that PPS tells everything about the player. I had stated that PPS is the best statistical measure for the offensive efficiency. This does not mean that PPS is the definitive vote on who is the better player but is simply a measuring stick. If I am wrong, then again, please prove a better measurement that has been provided. Cause I would love to first see you compute it then see how you derived it then I would like for you to compute at least 10 notable players including Mobley. PS – <U>I DID state that ESPN does have the PPS statistics on its site in previous post. But your lack of investigation has lead you to many assumptions. Many of those assumptions being wrong</U> When you read…make sure you read not once, not twice, but three times before making an argument. You might be a senior member but that doesn’t make you knowledgeable or smart.
By my count, you got the player-in-question's name wrong 13 times in one post. Can anyone find more than 13? Sorry man, yeah we all make mistakes, but that really bugs my anal-retentive self.
One of the contenders for Daniels may be out of the running. The Orlando Sentinel reports that while the Magic are still looking at Daniels, their attention has shifted to Tyronn Lue at the point guard position.
yeah that is pretty retentive but it's not so bad when you admit it. But next time you post, can you actually add without subtracting?
Thanks for the little barbs attempting to belittle my intelligence. I'll skip over the whole verse thing, if he wants to deal with it later, he can. Thinking big is great and all, but the "little details" are what win games. You better get used to the "little details" because Van Gundy sure as hell cares about them. Maybe you should try your reading 3 times. Of course every player attempts to finish the play, the difference is making it or not. The fact is, PPS punishes a guy if he makes a spectacular layup after absorbing contact. Think of all those improbable shots that Francis made falling to the floor, and even Moochie. Everyone tries to make them, not everyone can. PPS punishes a guy for being successful in finishing the play (thus counting a FGA). You're completely missing the point. When did I ever say FT% is better indicator than PPS. "Offensive Efficiency" does not a player make. How does PPS fully measure offensive efficiency without accounting for assists? Further, Why are you so hung up on measuring a player's offensive efficiency? Obviously, it doesn't measure defense, and clearly it doesn't even measure the offensive side of the ball well. The whole point of this is, how is your use of PPS make any sort of argument that one player is better than another. PPS is just like per 48 minute stats- it shows a degree of effectiveness, but is severely limited based on attempts. Andrei Kirilenko is a PPS leader, but he will never be a scoring leader because he is limited in the ways he can score. Sam Cassell put up more points per 48 minutes than Jerry Stackhouse, Steve Francis and Stephon Marbury, but does that make him a better scorer than Stackhouse, Francis or Marbury? You decided to use "shot" as synonymous with "Field Goal Attempt". A "shot" in which a player is fouled and does not make the field goal is not counted as a field goal attempt. "Points per shot" is "Points per field goal". Thus, this stat is weighted towards guys who make their way to the free throw line. The ability to get to the line is certainly a good trait, but certainly is not the end all statistic. Points per shot is not synonymous with points per possession. Therefore, it does not measure the probability a player is going to score given the opportunity to score. What is your obsession with using one stat to measure a player? It's good we've established that offensive efficiency is not the end all be all, but why do you feel the need to use a stat? Do you not watch games? You seem like you do, why don't you use what you see? I suppose not taking 3 days to perform a study on your posts is inconsiderate, but here is your quote- Calculating PPS would mean having to find the players' numbers, and divide the points by the field goal attempts. Looking up the stat on a list of PPS conveniently categorized by shooting guard on ESPN is not overly difficult. Once again, nice little barb at the end. Yep, this has everything to do with me being a senior member. (and I even hate the rolleyes thing)
<B>Contradiction 1: </B> It wasn’t hard to belittle your intelligence. The mere fact is that your argument is so dam inconsistent. One minute you are saying, little details win you games. The next minute you are suggesting there is no need for statistics because we have eyes to watch the game? What is your argument? Certainly, you mean that we should use both our ability to analysis the game with our own two eyes and use statistics to help in bolstering our argument of what we witness in a game? But the way you put it, you are putting me down cause I think bigger picture, and you put me down cause I use statistics? What is your argument? <B>Why I talked about PPS:</B>As for being hung up on offensive efficiency, I wasn’t hung up on. I was just using PPS as a measure of offensive efficiency. I asked you to accumulate a better formula considering you don’t think it’s a good formula based on your arguments. Go ahead, my friend and do some calculations if you are going to belittle the PPS system. <B>Reason to talk about FG:</B> If you read back the argument went all the way back to FG%. I suggested the FG% does not tell the whole story. I suggesting using PPS is better qualifying statistic to measure offensive efficiency compared to FG%. I never said, PPS is the end to all arguments. Never once. But, I know it’s a better statistic then FG%. But for some reason, you interpretation of what I write has been tainted by your lenses. The only thing I will agree with is that PPS is not the ends to all means statistics. And I never claimed it is. I’m not sure if you are on drugs or not but man you need help cause surely you don’t mean to be so wishy washy about your arguments and in the end contradict yourself over and over again. Think what you like, but don’t do crack. By the way, I already understand the rule of continuation. But uhh...thanks for Basketball 101...
x_trepidation_x, Instead of bringing up stats. Tell me what you like about AD game, and what you like about BJ game. I disagree with the idea (verse?) that BJ needed a great team to perform. I remember back in Minnesota was the first time that I recognized BJ game (The Golden Gofer). This was back when he was "finding" his game. He has smooth moves to the basket. He wasn't really a "shooter" per say. Nor a "scorer." But he did have a nice all around "controlled" game. He's able to control the ball with those BIG mitts of his. And he's a short player with long arms and is able to hug the ground when going around corners/picks. He reminded me of the old school players of Harlem. Smooth! High-socks, and cool demeanor. I loved his game. Over all I think he's a better floor leader, but really not a PG. More of a G. A hybrid. BJ is better at the half court game than Daniels. I feel that he's a better one-on-one player too. Daniels is a highflying, dunking, slashing, floor running wing-man. The funny thing is, he's listed as a 6'4" PG. But he's really never been a ball distributor. He's more of a utility guy. He can play the point, not to make scoring pass off the dribble, but more as a setup man. His is at his best when there's action, or cutting, or running the court. Not necessarily during the half-court game. Daniel's strength is on the fast break. Get out of his way! He'll out jump you, plus he can palm the ball "Statue of Liberty" style for a dunk! Daniel's reminds me of a Vernon Maxwell type player; cutter, slasher, runner with an extra emphasis on dunking! I'll tell you what. I'd take BJ over Moochie. I don't really like short PG (lack of defense). But BJ would be an exception because at times he can be hard to stop on the pick and roll. He could give us some scoring help off the bench. Much more than Mooch. Daniel's would be great as an off-the-bench guy that could give us that spark on defense and the fast break. Maybe hit a 3 pointer or two. I love both their games. Hard to pick. I'd say for the Rockets, we should go with Daniel's. Only because he'd fit our team right now. But I'd pick BJ, if we had no PG/SG and were in need of some help on that side. BJ could be a very good starter as long as you had two more "stars" to back him up. Same with AD. But, I take him off the bench, rather than start him.
DavidS, Well put. I think you summed up Danials positives quiet well. No need to reiterate your points.
x_trepidation_x: "yeah that [calling me out on misspelling 'Daniels' 13 times in one post when I'm so hot on the guy I can't sit down] is pretty [anal] retentive but it's not so bad when you admit it. But next time you post, can you actually add without subtracting?" Would the Rockets please, please sign Antonio Daniels? It seems to be the only way of shutting x_trepidation_x up. But then he's a senior member, so I guess I shouldn't criticize him. Senior members are all knowledgeable and smart, right? Because of the number of times they've "added" to a thread?
