Steve Francis Comparison

if your going to do a comparison, please don't compare apples to oranges. you need to do the comparison based on their rookie years. obviously turnovers usually decrease as experience increases.

------------------

 

Interesting numbers dont prove any ASS-umption. But if you want to prove your case more effectively, then why dont you compare rookie pgs who have to become THE star of their team because of injuries to 2 hall-of-famers while still trying to keep BENCH players for starters involved in the game?

Stats are fun to play with, but they dont always tell the whole story.

------------------
CriscoKidd ...

the official mascot for the S.F.B.W.C.

 

Problem with those Stats 4Chuckie, is that they have no means to measure the new-style PG that Nolen talks about:

For instance, Francis doesn't get an assist when he passes the ball to himself off the glass for a SLAAAAAAAAAM!

loooOvely!

 

I thought there was something wrong here, so I checked the stats myself, and lo and behold, they certainly don't favor Steve, even among rookie years of different PG's. I checked on Hardaway, Cassell, Payton, Kidd, Marbury, and several others. With a few exceptions, almost nobody had an assist/turnover ratio as bad as Francis's is now, at 6.5/3.9. Generally, even in rookie years, players tended to at least get around 2/1.

But hey, let's play with the stats some more. Did you know that Francis was making 7.5 assists to 3.5 turnovers back in Jan/Feb? That he averages 7.4/3.2 in Rockets victories? That he averages 8.3/3.3 on Thursdays? 4.6/5.3 on Fridays?(No, I'm not making this up.)

I remember how excited I was to see the very first preseason game here in Seattle. I remember how scared I got when I watched Francis play for the first time. He kept attacking the hoop like a fool with three defenders there, hanging in the air, and putting up a brick or bobbling a pass to a teammate. Complete Iverson/Kobe lameass stuff. Off the top of my head Steve averaged around 22 pts, 5 assists, and 5 TOs for the preseason. Now back then, we really could have some meaty debate about what his true position was. I'll be honest with you, I thought we were in for a loooong season. There were only two other players I had seen play so bone-headedly on offense, and I'd say it was a good 2-3 seasons before either Kobe or Iverson finally started learning how to play team ball. I was expecting the same long transition for our future superstar.
Within two weeks of regular season play he had improved significantly on his preseason stats. Suddenly, I was stunned and relieved. This kid listens to his mentors. He wants to learn. He learns; he adjusts. Within three months there was absolutely no question this kid was a superstar point guard, the best player on our team, and a guy who made us win. And there was certainly no speculation about his position. His points were up, assists up, and turnovers down, and if he continued to improve, hell, we'd be looking at 20 points 8 assists 3.1 turnovers by season's end. Instead, NBA temas took notice of our nationally televised victories over the Lakers and Blazers and Miami and decided it's time to shut this kid down before he blows us all up. You want to talk superstar attention? How about being doubled the moment you reach halfcourt? How about double teams before he even gets the ball? I can go find some quotes from Van Gundy (the Knicks always like to play everyone straight up, even Jordan) about how they decided to double Francis and he still picked them apart.

There are a few reasons why this debate has come up. 1)Francis's assists are down, his turnovers are up. 2) The experiment in Philly worked. 3) Some still harbor antiquated ideas about guard play.

I would bet very good money that if the whole Iverson/Snow thing hadn't occurred, over half of the 'Francis is a 2' faction wouldn't exist. Francis/Iverson comparisons were common back in the beginning of the year; they aren't anymore. Why? Because it has become so blatantly obvious what different players they are. Iverson doesn't even want to be a PG. There are several quotes concerning that. I could find just as many quotes from Francis about how he is a PG, wants to play that position. I couldn't find you any recent quotes from him, though, because no reporters bother questioning his true role. Do you remember the stats on how many times Philly lost when Iverson scored over 40? Steve makes this team win. When he plays well, everyone does.

The grandest illusion, however, is that somehow great scorers shouldn't be burdened with ball distribution. Or that running the team somehow will take away from scoring ability. I think this stems from inflexible stereotypes of the roles PG's and SG's play, especially rooted in decades past. Prototype 1's and 2's should be, say, Stockton and Jordan. Stockton is the floor savvy excellent passer who provides opportunities for the scoring machine Jordan.
The NBA game is always evolving. One thing that has changed, and is still evolving, is the role of guard play. If you took stock of starting point guards this season and had a look at the NBA back in '85, you'd see things have changed. I already went on at lenth on this subject elsewhere, so I won't repeat myself.

Francis is a big time scorer; and incredibly talented scorer. This does not mean he should be an SG. It would have in '85. You can run the team, be the primary ballhandler and passer, and still be a major scoring threat. Ask Payton, Marbury, Cassell. And if you're going to argue that those guys aren't PG's, well, that goes to show how stuck in the past you are, and how you can't break out of your position-orineted stereotypes.

As for his stats- do you think Feb is the last time we will ever see Steve Francis average 7.5 assists and 3.5 turnovers? He's peaked out? Can't do any better? Won't be able to adjust to the adverse traps and doubling he's encountered?

I apologize for this post being so long.

------------------

 

Does anyone else get the impression Nolen is sneaking up on Keeley as bbs Stat Guru?

 

great post Nolen.

I especially agree on your point about the Francis-Iverson comparisons. If it wasn't for Iverson, and the fact that Francis played some 2 in college, I doubt anyone would be seriously considering moving Francis to the 2.

I couldnt have put it bettter myself.

No, REALLY!!!

And make your posts longer! I didnt want that one to end! Ever!

I think Im falling in love with exciting puncuatuion!!! Hey Pard- ...! HElp!!!!



------------------
CriscoKidd ...

the official mascot for the S.F.B.W.C.

 

Crisco- thanks. Really. REALLY!!!!

Heypard- hehe. Don't really want to be a stat guru, although I love the stuff. There is no way I would have the patience to do the stats per minute action 4chuckie had put up at the beginning of this thread. I just use good sources.

nba.com has the best sortable team comparison stats I've found, you guys should all check it out. Also, ESPN finally opened up it's sortable player stats to non-members (finally) and added a fantastic 'splits' section to the player profiles. Now that is awesome. On any player, you can see his relative stats in wins/losses, home/away, month by month, days of the week... cool stuff.

By the way, that stat for Steve on Fridays scares me. He's only played 8 games on Fridays, but the only other time I will get to see the Rocks live is tomorrow here in Seattle... on Friday.
Hmmmm. In two games vs. Seattle, Steve has averaged 6 assists, 5.5 TOs, and 27.0 points. Wonder if he can still light Glove up.

------------------

 

Sign Jalen Rose and let him handle the ball more as the "lead-guard" but let him defend the 2's while Stevie still guards the PGs.

This allows Stevie to roam without the ball and go for more alley-oop jams and such.

Shandon can guard either the 3 or 2, whoever is the better player since Shandon is a better defender than Jalen.

 

4chuckie- excellent, excellent point, well made. Of course, triangle offense in LA is a whole different beast with ball distribution, but that's only one of the eight teams you mentioned.

Question to me is- do we attribute the winning ability of these teams (in part) to their guard play? Do we attribute the losing ability of teams with 'scoring' point guards to the play of the point? Let's take Marbury, Cassesll, and Payton. The Bucks- now there's a disappointment. Who could possibly dream that any team with Cassell, Allen, and Robinson wouldn't make the playoffs (in the East for God's sake) but Orlando would? Can we blame any of that on the style of guard play? How about the Nets? I can't find myself capable of criticizing Payton, I'm afraid- he's Mr. Everything. If the Sonics are losing, it isn't because of him.

You've made a very strong case for the traditional PG on winning teams. Also, there is evience of great winning teams with scoring PGs. Isaiah and the Pistons. Magic in LA. That incredible Payton/Kemp combo back in '95.
I don't have any stats to back up what I'm going to say here; a lot of this is gut feeling. I do not see the Rockets imroving with a traditional PG and Steve at the 2. Period. Isaiah, Magic, Payton, these were/are incredibly special people who were astounding scorers who also lifted their entire team to a new level when the ball was in their hands. I truly beleive that Steve Francis, turnovers and all, will be another one of those guys. I don't want to say that he will be an all-time great Hall of Famer, a lot could go wrong in the next couple of years; what I mean is that his talent fits this mold. Rudy already did experiments with Drew at 1 and Steve at 2, also with Moochie at 1 and Steve at 2. We still see that now for, say, four minutes a game. But the experiment is pretty much over. I feel that the magic happens when the ball is in Steve's hands and he is allowed to create/initiate.

Furthermore, maybe even most importantly: Steve Francis wants to be the point guard of the Rockets. He wants it. He wants to be the creater, the quarterback, the general. He wants that, and at the same time he wants to be the lethal weopon, the big-man-posterizing guard that all defenders fear. It's a tall order, but he can do it. He will.

------------------

 

After reading these posts, something has been lost in all this stat talk. Francis wants to only play point guard, Iverson wants to only play shooting guard. What the hell kind of crap is that???? YOU WILL PLAY WHERE THE COACH THINKS YOU WILL HELP THE TEAM WIN GAMES!!!!!! These modern players are so damn spoiled. They have lost all recognition of what the object of this game is.

------------------
"The bigger they are, the worse they smell."

 

4Chuckie and Nolen...

I'm going to place my neck on the chopping block again, at the risk of losing the last two posters who still talk to me. Where's my tomato?

Provocative Comment #1: 4Chuckie, contrary to your last post, several NBA finalists in this decade have either featured a high-scoring PG or one that doesn't get paid to be a primary distributor.

Provocative Comment #2: There is nothing special about the Triangle that doesn't allow for a distributing PG. Nolen, to make sense out of #1, I have to challenge your Triangle offense claim about being a "different animal".

The Triangle is nothing special versus any other customized motion offense. There is nothing magical over what Knight/Coach K/D. Smith invent. It is a variation of a Flex Offense, just like everything else is. They all share the same qualities:

Penetration (passing or dribbling);
Spacing
Movement of the ball and the players, with a purpose;
It's a five-man concept with options to pass to any of the other four players;
The offense counters what the defense does;
It utilizes the individual talent of the players.

This is exactly what the Rockets do at their best. Except for Two Shakes...that is not part of any Flex system.

The only thing that makes the Triangle different is the shape of it that places 3 people on one side together in a triangle form. In every play, this triangle can re-form on the other side (a flex). Every play starts with an entry (pass or dribble) to one of 3 spots: the Post, Up-Top, Corner. Cuts and picks are constant,,,but with a purpose.

Within these fundamentals, Tex Winters just add one play after another. Much like what Rudy is doing know. Not until 5 players can learn to the fundamental of moving together, can you really start running any motion system.

But note, one big key is to always exploit your most talented players. In our case, that is Francis. I guarantee you, if SF is in a Triangle offense, he would be doing plenty of dribbling. As much as Jordan did. This has little to do with using a traditional PG. Call him what you want, you would start many plays with Francis. How many times do you remember seeing Jordan dribbling facing a single man in a clear-out. Often. That is still the triangle offense.

So, where am I going with this? Oh, I remember.
In any motion offense (Triangle or not), Francis will be exploited just like Jordan. Tex Winters simply hasn't had a good PG yet, so the plays don't key on them...but they could.

Now back to 4Chuckie:
The Bulls are not a special case that you can choose to ignore when you say the good teams need distributing PGs. I contend: they are actually the case-in-point to the contrary. Teams that can run motion and still exploit their stars don't need distributing PGs, since the whole team participates in distributing. It just makes things a lot easier when you have the penetrating dribblers (hence the reason you bet on the guard teams in NCAA pools).

So, there you have 6 championships that didn't need to distribute everything through one man because of solid fundamental motion (just like Bobby Knight teaches). Then you have 2 Rockets titles that didn't distribute the ball through Smith, but rather Hakeem.

Now, some of the finalists. Portland had Porter with only 5.8 assists and second leading scorer. Drexler had more assists I believe.

Johnson was a huge scorer and often in ISO in the 4th quarter. Sure he had a lot of assists, but he was crucial to scoring.

Starks...nuf said there.

Seattle had Payton to do much of the scoring, as others noted.

So, I don't consider your claim that PGs must be primary distributors with no top scoring role. History doesn't follow.

But my main point is not to challenge your thinking, but to emphasize that our motion offense must and will exploit Francis like we are seeing, as PG or not it wouldn't matter. Not much would change, cause team movement should be fluid yet get the star scoring opportunities, since that is a fundamental premise of all motion offenses, including the Triangle.

Give Rudy time to teach more motion fundamentals and you will see less clear-outs for Francis than Jordan had, because Francis is a superior passer to Jordan, and will utilize that more. Here's where I'm back to agreeing fully with Nolen: Our offense turnovers as a team will go down as we play together longer.

cheers guys

[This message has been edited by heypartner (edited April 06, 2000).]

 

After reading these posts, something has been lost in all this stat talk. Francis wants to only play point guard, Iverson wants to only play shooting guard. What the hell kind of crap is that???? YOU WILL PLAY WHERE THE COACH THINKS YOU WILL HELP THE TEAM WIN GAMES!!!!!! These modern players are so damn spoiled. They have lost all recognition of what the object of this game is.

Don't even try comparing Francis' personality to that of Iverson. I'm positive that if Rudy wants Francis to play SG, he will play it without complaints.

Francis came to Maryland with superior talent, yet didn't complain when he was coming off the bench in the first exhibition game. He didn't complain when he was made to play SG for the first time in this career. He tried his best to fit right in and that he did.

Despite having a guy who rarely turned the ball over at PG (Terell Stokes), a lot of Maryland fans still regret that Gary Williams didn't play Francis at the point guard position last year.

Fracis may come off as the typical spoilt NBA brat, but his actions do not justify such an impression. His career will prove what an unselfish/team player person he is.

------------------

 

MarylandFan,

Love your take. Hate your timing. Where were you when we needed you after the Grizzly vindication fest, and all the SG stuff started after Bibby's game-winner.

(oooohhh-i hate grizzlies) shake you head while you say that. it works!

 

HeyPartner,

Did you go to Europe really for Spring Break or on a scouting mission?

------------------

 

heypartner- I don't have any fundamental knowledge of the triangle, or of flexing full motion offense either. I just have a fuzzy memory that the Bulls had different leaders in assists all the time, depending on who was hot and what weaknesses were being exploited.

I would really like to read more and educate myself on motion offenses. You know of any good sources on the web I can read?

BobFinn*- good point about spoiled players. There's a lot of selfishness out there. Still, there is something to be said about doing what you love to do. When your heart is truly there, the way your actions flow are just... different. You know what I mean.

------------------

 

Boys!

Don't forget Francis is an athlete. He runs, jumps, makes crossovers and pivots... He's play has a lot of risks in. Stocton made some pick and roll and over.

Francis is much better but maybe he doesn't equivalent to Iverson or...

------------------
Peter Komlosi, alias KP.
Student of Computer Technology
University of Veszprem, Hungary
komlosip@almos.vein.hu