I care more about the pass than the dunk and I still disagree with DaDakota in some ways. I think some of you critics get so caught up with Francis' athelticism that you don't or won't give him credit for the great point guard play/decision making he does display. He is neither perfect nor the best at his position, but he is one of the best. I've seen Francis make amazing, fundamental, bounce passes to cutters and to open players from the paint. Just because that player misses the layup or bricks the open J doesn't negate the great play Francis made in getting the guy open. I'm just tired folks talking as if Francis' game is all crossover and flash, because it isn't. His game is more about footwork, angles and rhythm than it is about the flash. It just seems people latch onto the flash and forget about his fundamentals. And I think the critics are the ones getting too preoccupied with his athletic ability.
If Francis is such a great, fundamentally sound playmaker, then how do you account for the staggering number of turnovers he commits each game? It isn't the fault of his teammates that he passes into traffic or dribbles the ball off his foot.
My argument is that this isn't an either/or situation in which Francis is either "point guard God" or "basketball simpleton." Francis makes dumb decisions and he makes great decisions too. Neither negates the other. These silly debates usually involve one group of people negating Francis' great play in order to paint a picture of him as some hyper-athletic bonehead and one group of people, sensitive to the criticism, defending Francis at all costs. I didn't say he was perfect, but turnovers don't negate his good play. Moreover, players who have to dominate the ball as much as Francis and have to be the first option like Francis, often turn the ball over a lot--as Kidd did in that game where he nearly set an NBA record for turnovers in a game. Hear are the NBA leaders in turnovers per game: 1 Allen Iverson, PHI 4.0 2 Steve Francis, HOU 3.9 3 J. Stackhouse, DET 3.5 4 Jason Kidd, NJN 3.5 5 S. Marbury, PHO 3.5 6 J. Tinsley, IND 3.4 7 J. Williams, MEM 3.3 8 Karl Malone, UTH 3.3 9 S. Abdur-Rahim, ATL 3.2 10 Tim Duncan, SAS 3.2 11 A. Walker, BOS 3.1 3. 12 Andre Miller, CLE 3.0 13 Baron Davis, CHA 3.0 Now think about the central role these players play in their respective offenses. These are ball dominating players, often called upon to make a play where none exists. The role they play in their teams contributes to higher turnovers. Take the ball away from these players and, sure, these guys will have fewer turnovers, but their teams are more likely to to lose as a result. The goal is to win games, not try an reach some statistical perfection. This does not mean that Francis doesn't make boneheaded decisions or that he doesn't need to improve. It simply shows that along with a heavier offensive burden comes more turnovers.
Are turnovers among the most overrated stats in the league or what? I mean, assume Steve averages 1 more turnover per game than most other NBA PG's (I haven't looked, just an assumption). Are you guys telling me that if he cut his turnover per game down by 1 per game he'd somehow have improved greatly? The Rockets will now be a championship team? Hell, that they'll even improve their record by 10 wins? If not, then it's pointless to harp on this pathetic little stat. The guy is the primary option on a team with about 2.5 options. He's going to handle the ball more. If he's not dishing the ball out, he's going to be receiving the pass to shoot it. Man, I wish they kept stats like how many touches these guys get per game or how long they hold the ball (yeah, I know Moochie's numbers would be inflated...)... Anywho... carry on... I'm enjoying the "turnover" and "fundamentals" battles...
In 00-01 he had 3.3 TO/G which is a lot more respectable from a PG. Nash got 2.9 last year and 2.9 this year, which is not that significant a difference. Steve's injuries this year obviously affected his play. Is it easy to handle a ball and not turn it over when your vision is blurry and you're disoriented? Steve's shooting also dropped. If he had the same FG%, 3pt%, and TO/g he had in 00-01 there would be no discussion in here about Nash. We'll all have to wait around for him to regain that form and couple it with his development as a player.
My final comment and I'm not coming back and my lips are sealed. Moochie (a.k.a. "The Little Dribbler") Norris is 49th of all NBA Guards for the category of Assists/TO ratio - 2.6/1. Steve Francis is #116 - 1.6/1. (Tierre Brown is #102). Moochie has the same poor shooting players to pass to that Steve does. Based upon minutes played, the "average" Rockets lineup was SF, Cat, Moochie, KT and Cato. SF and Moochie were the poorest shooters in this group. (In fact, in Francis' absence Moochie then had EG, TMo, & OT to get him his assists). So unless someone can convince me that Moochie gets all of his extra assists passing to Steve, I will will continue to believe that Steve's athletic adventures create alot of unnecessary turnovers by forcing the action... just exactly what I have stated prior. Hoping is not hating.
Gater, If assists/TO are the end-all-be-all of the game then why is it that we were 2-25 with Mooch starting (far superior ratio) then the 26-29 record when Steve started? Its simple, because that stat doesn't take into account that Steve is not only a passer but also our leading scorer. As a young gaurd TO's are generally higher than you want. As a matter of fact, what was the reigning MVP's (Ivy) assist/TO ratio? I'll be it was worse than the Franchise's the last 2 years.
I agree DD. Watching last night and tonight with Kidd really makes me realize how far behind as far as running a team Francis is. I saw the Kings make a basket,Nash get the ball and go coast to coast because no one picked him up. Is this something francis could do? Yes. Why doesn't he? If the other team makes or misses and francis constantly pushes the ball in the middle of the court, eventuall his teammates would run with him. I would say right now Nash is more of the leader at the point, but hopefully Francis will learn to do this.
I agree that Francis isn't great at the break, but is that entirely his fault? Most fastbreaks start because you have guys down low who can rebound so you can free your gaurds to push the court. Our leading rebounder is Steve so he's rarely in position to push the ball up the court. Even if we were great at the run and gun its a form of offense that has NEVER won a championship. Do championship teams take advantage of fast breaks when the opportunity presents itself? Yes, but a championship team has never lead the league in fast break points nor have they relied heavily on it as a form of offense.
How could I have ever been so stupid. I'm so embarrassed I may never post again. Thank you for enlightening poor ignorant me. Steve has a worse A/TO ratio than Moochie and Iverson has a worse ratio than either. Since the Sixers made the playoffs and the Rockets are in the Lottery the answer is as plain as my hands typing this response. Screw TO's, just put up as many shots as you can, don't pass the ball to your teammates 'cause they can't be trusted to make shots. Assists have no relevance to anything. We can't win unless I have the ball in my hands. I don't want anybody confusing me with that clown Jerry Stackhouse...giving up over 600 shots for a lousy 7 more assists...I believe I can fly..... Sorry it took me so long to respond...I got carried away watching those two boring losers Jason Kidd & Baron Davis...what a jerk Kidd is giving the ball up to Todd MacCulloch and Aaron Williams... the Nets won't get anywhere with those scrubs shooting the ball.
Well, its not that plain, seeing as how the sixers would also be playing the lottery this season if they were in the same conference as the Rockets. Yep, Steve definitely needs to improve his turnovers, but I think some of it can be attributed to the fact that team chemistry on the court was not allowed to be formed this season, and the fact that he was often...ya know...playing with his heading feeling like it was going to split. He made a great improvement in the amount of turnovers last season, only to fall back this season. I think that improvement would have continued this season under normal circumstances. But you are right on one thing, his teammates really couldn't be trusted to make shots this season. Steve tried to give them some open looks, but they just couldn't convert. As for Steve's 17 shot attempts per game, you maybe need to rethink your comment about shooting as many shots as you can. That's not very many shots at all for a team's #1 option. You might also want to consider that our teams #3 and #4 scoring options were injured pretty much the entire season, so Steve had to shoot a lot more than he wanted to. The year before when we had a more healthy team, Steve only shot 15 times per games, which is a far cry from being selfish. It would have also been around 15 shots per game this year with Taylor and Rice playing. Stackhouse and Steve both took about 17.5 shots per game this season. The only difference is that Steve was a more efficient shooter despite his health problems. You're right, Steve won't be confused with Jerry Stackhouse. Steve's not quite as selfish. He doesn't quite jack up shots like Jerry can, as evidenced in Jerry's abysmal field goal percentage and 3-point percentage. Anything else Francis-haters?
Hey Gater read my post and try to see where I said that assists mean nothing. All I said was A/TO ratio is far from the most important stat for measuring a PG's worth. Especially a PG that is required to shoot as much as Steve does. Duncan gets 3.2 TO/G but I don't see anyone complaining about him. He doesn't even have to pass the ball, so why is it acceptable for him to turnover the ball at a rate as high as Steve was in 00-01? All he has to do is catch it in the paint and decide whether to pass or do a post up move and that's 96% of the time he touches the ball. He doesn't bring it up the court, set up plays, or even dish the ball off as frequently as Steve does. Hakeem frequently averaged over 3 TO's a game as well. In fact, most guys that score or pass a lot have a lot of TO's, especially when they're young and developing. By the way, Steve probably shouldn't distribute the ball to the sad clowns he has to call teammates. Kenny T, Rice, T-Mo, Cato, and the Wizard missed wide open shots at such an alarming rate that I'm suprised Steve didn't turn into Iverson and totally give up on passing altogether. Its amazing he even attempted to pass to these guys after the half way point.
Kid, Who said they hated Francis? ANYONE? BUEHLER? I think people just expect him to lead, and he has not stepped up to that level yet. He certainly has the talent, now he just needs to acquire some savvy to go with it. Don't mistake criticism of someone's game for being a hater. DaDakota
I think that there are actually 4 or 5 questions being discussed here, not just one of even 2... 1) Which of the 2 is a better talent? I would say that Steve is clearly a better athlete, and has more upside, hence he is a better talent. 2) Which is a better player? Again, I would say Steve is more overtly dominant in many areas, and has higher highs than Nash. I would say that Nash has fewer lows, and the fact that Steve is THE MAN when he's on the floor, whereas Nash is one of many help Steve's ability to look great and lousy...Based on the idea of which one would I take in a trade, even money, I'd still say Steve. Pretty close, though... 3) Which is the better point guard? Here, I'd have to give a real edge to Nash...For those of you who claim that he's merely a product of the system/talent around him, you ought to listen to the Mavs' players and coaches when asked the reason for their success/mvp...virtually to a man they say Nash....Nowitzki himself said that Nash is THE MAN in Dallas, the leader, the guy the others look to, etc...yeah, he's being classy...but you can't discount all of it...And for those who don't think Nash could carry a team, as Steve does, you really ought to take a look at Olympic b-ball for the last few years...When Nash played, even against the U.S.A., he was always amongst the best players on the floor...and he carried a very untalented NCAA team a lot farther in the tournament than most thought possible... 4) Who would fit better on each team? I'd say it's best as is...Yeah, easy answer, but Nash fits Dallas like a glove, and Steve would be redundant in most of his strong areas whereas his weaknesses would still be evident, and his floor generalship/ability to involve teammates is nowhere near Nash right now, hence he would waste a lot of the talent Dallas is known for...Conversely, while I still think Nash would do well here, he doesn't have the individual talent that Rudy seems intent on showcasing whatever the cost, and as such wouldn't be as effective in iso's as Steve.
All of you Nash lovers failed to answer the question I posed.....if you were an expansion team in an expansion draft , and Francis and Nash were the 2 best guards left unprotected, who would you take (regardless of who else was available)... Let me help you with the tough ones....you'd take francis hands down because he is the BETTER PLAYER
NJRocket, The answer to your question is.....DEPENDS !!! Do you have spot up shooters on your team? Do you have players who can create their own shot? It depends who else is on your team as to who you want. If I had good players that would benefit from a good distributor of the basketball, I would take Nash. If I needed someone who could get his own shot I would take Steve. Not so clear is it? DaDakota
(making my, i'm sure, long awaited debut in the rocket's forum...) dadakota, you're right; but what you, and, quite frankly, ever other person in this thread has failed to mention is that nash, who played four years in college, is in his SIXTH nba season; francis just completed what should've been his rookie year. even without the supposition (though, it's entirely relevent), francis is three nba years and two college years behind nash. huge, tremendous difference that cannot be discounted when evaluating them right now. btw, in nash's third nba season (his first in dallas), he was awful (7.9 ppg, 36% fg%, 5.5 apg, 2.1 to); dallas fans would have rather seen lee harvey oswald play point guard. it wasn't until his third year in dallas that he began to really validate the trade that brought him to town, and that was after dirk arrived, underlining the importance of a supporting cast. so, that's five years (and one incredible german) into his nba career, and, again, the guy plyaed four years of college. i would hope he's better than steve francis. in light of that, let's agree to meet back here in two years (or four, if you're going to allow francis to make up his college time, too) and then let's discuss nash of '01-02.
