neither Tmac or Kobe proved A too. they also dont satisfy Sagehare's definition of franchise players.
No, but he could become one. He just needs to steadlily progress for five more years and then he'll be there. I just say Yao is what he is, namely a solid and talented player. But anybody who sees now the Yao we were told we were getting before he was drafted is crazy.
Depends who you were listening too. It seemed about half the "pundits" were saying: Rik Smits > Yao = Larue Martin The other half was saying: Yao = Shaq, Dream, etc. I think most people claimed that they would be satisfied with an 18/8 - 20/10 player which is what he is right now. What we got is a somewhere in the middle. I have no idea how much the zones matter but it does seem that Yao typically starts games "hot". The other team then starts fronting him with weakside help - and then he doesn't get the ball much in the second half. Very hard to get the ball to him in that situation.
Sometimes I wonder if Yao is like the missing link between mammoths and elephants. When the league thinks of him like the last of a dying breed. It seems the league is evolving. And I bet 10-15 years ago, there'd be no doubt about Yao's ability to dominate. But with all the league rules that have been changed and adapted to American basketball, the league forgot that every so often, something special comes along. Something like a 7+ footer who has nice, soft touch. The league just doesn't know what to do with a guy like him. They thought it might end with a guy like Shaq who'll just pumel you and bruise you and drag you along on his way to the basket. And then we can all go to small, quick basketball. With an uptempo game. So scores would be in the 150s. Like Phoenix. The league doesn't know how to handle that rare gem like Yao Ming. A guy who truly represents what the pivot could become. And until they figure out his greatness, and actually let him play, we'll keep having these questions.
There are only around 6 to 8 players max that any and all GMs in this league would not trade for Yao and probably actually less than that. He's a Franchise Player.
Sage, your poll asks if Yao is a franchise center, not a franchise player. Considering the pathetic crop of centers in the league these days, Yao is clearly a franchise center. Does that make him a "franchise player?" I don't think anyone would argue that Tracy is, but does Yao deserve the label yet? Good question. He plays like one, on occasion. Should he ever manage to do it consistently, we wouldn't need to discuss it. My take, from a basketball context? Yes, as a franchise center, but no as a franchise player... so far. I hope he gets there. If he plays at a high level consistently, he will.
Good catch Deckard! You know that was totally an inadvertant typo on my part. But you're point is very well taken. There is certainly a difference between being a franchise center vs. a franchise player. Great observation! theSAGE
If Yao played in the old era with the old rules, he'd own. Wow, I actually used the "owned" slang.....sort of.
EVOLUTION First Came the Wooly Mammoth! Then Rose Yao Ming! And Years Later, the Elephant! And Sadly, the League trying to hide Yao errr rather the Elephant! Toast, i couldn't resist. theSAGE
Is he or is he not? Definitely an interesting question to talk about. But does it have an accepted answer, when the basic concepts invovled (franchise player, "true catalyst", etc, etc.) are impossible to define? So I will just throw in another rather simple measure. If half (or 1/3, or 2/3, you define it) of the other NBA teams are HAPPY to trade their current best player for another guy, and doing so not for franchise monetary evaluation but for getting more wins , then that "another guy" IS a "franchise" player. Yao qualifies, it seems to me.
Let me throw in another measure. If he is a central or core player around whom a championship contending team can be built (and is therefore very unlikely to be traded) he is a franchise player. I think Yao qualifies.
This is a no brainer. There is not a slightest doubt in my mind that Yao Ming is the franchise player in the Houston Rockets, not merely from business, popularity or marketing value point of view. Jeff Van Gundy joined in 2nd season; The previous Franchise (Steve Francis) was traded for Tracy McGrady in 3rd season. And a major reason of them joining the Rockets is Yao Ming. And all the trades of players ever since Yao Ming joined are meant to put together the missing jigsaw pieces for a championship team. If the above facts did not prove that Yao Ming is the centre piece and franchise player of the Rockets, I don't know what other proofs one needs to admit, no matter how unwilling one is, that Yao Ming is the Franchise player of the Rockets.
I believe we have CO-FRANCHISE players here. yao and tracy are the franchise player's. player's is the Opreative word here. If jumaine O'neal is a franchise player, then yao is certianly a franchise player to. yao dosent lack anything on O'neal.
Isn't there like 20 other "Is Yao a Franchise Player" threads? Will, you're a mod, cmon man you know what I'm talking about. DO I have the right to hit SageHare with a large trout?
I dont think so, but I think he is a great player and I dont want to trade him. but, he is not a franchise player, here are my reasons: - He needs players to help him (more than one) - He is not the team leader - He doesnt make other players better But a repeat, he is a great player.
I'm torn between "yes he is" and "I'm not sure yet" depending on exactly how is a franchise player defined. if we use your quick checklist, here's what I would answer: Check Check if League Leader means top 3 or top 5. Arguably check if you mean strictly the best player in that position (but then in that case we are limiting outselves to 5 franchise players in the whole NBA) maybe some of us here would disagree, but I'm pretty happy with Yao's consistency so far. He will have some bad games every now and then, but he normally has much much more "on par" or "good" games in between. I'll give him a pass on this although he could certainly improve upon it. a. According to this criteria, Kobe is definitely not a franchise player b. Seeing how our 3 pt % dropped after yao is out, I would say his fellow teammates is playing worse when he is not in the game. This could be due to a lot of reasons, most notably the double team he generates when he is playing. But does his leadership presence on the court play a part in the difference of our perimeter play? I'm not quite sure yet and it probably is a question open to debate. I'll ranked a questionable on this and wait for more evidence before answer this criteria Check With these criterias, I would say Yao is a true franchise player, although there are certainly things that he could improve on
The problem with this franchise player argument is that every team has to have a franchise player by default, now if there was only 12-14 teams in the NBA this wouldn't be a problem, but there's 30 so 60% of the teams are left without a true franchise player. I think, SIZE still reigns supreme in the NBA, PGs are hardly ever true franchise players, the only ones who ever get close almost have to be great rebounders and defenders. Duncan, Shaq, KG, Dirk, Yao, Jermaine, Wallace, Amare, and Pau are all franchise players in my opinion, those dudes will RARELY miss the playoffs if the team around them is decent. AI, T-Mac and Lebron are the only other non-big man franchise players, Kobe should be there too but he really is losing his sanity, Wade is actually closer right now.
