BTW: Rox vs Clippers Yao >>> Kandiman (especially considering he's injured) EG <<< Brand Rice << Odom Cat = Maggette SF >> Miller Rox bench whips Clips bench Looks like we have the better team to me.
Looks to me: Yao > Kandiman EG <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Brand Rice < Odom Cat < Maggette SF = Miller Therefore, Clipper is a better team than Rox.
Yeah, but one of the knocks on Steve is maturity, if Brand was so mature, he ought to be the leader to say, "hey guys, screw management, screw coaching, let's go out and play hard, and prove why people predicted us to make the playoffs".
Francis and Elton Brand are like he 2nd tier superstars. Steve plaued like an mvp begining of the season but has come back down. Brand is a great second option but not a first option every night
True, but Brand gives them rebounding, defense, and shotblocking every night. Steve has glaring weakness in defense, fast break, and playing smart. Brand probably has no major weaknesses.
If Brand was so great, his team would have a better record. Period. And don't tell me its the Clippers. The guy has Miller, Olawkadi, Maggete, and Lamar Odom (I know he just came back). You guys knock Steve around for not making the playoffs, and then you wanna claim Brand has no weakness, the guy's team has won exactly 20 games, he's the leader, something doesn't add up. Steve's glaring weaknesses won us 45 games two years ago.
I guess you don't know who is first or 2nd in the league in double-doubles since 99? Brand is a stud but has been on some poorly coached or thought of teams. If the Clippers said the rockets can have brand, I'm sure no one would be left out except Yao and maybe Francis. Could you imagine Yao and Brand with anyone else running the other positions? Scary thought.
LeBron will be the next in line among those 1st Round 1st Pick Duds I'm telling you, these anal-ysts working as scouts for teams are all mindless lemmings reading all the hype you and I read. And like most people, they too get suckered into all the press and hype. The Rocket investment in Yao came down to simple homework. Go to China, go check him out, in his comfortable environment, and talk to the guy AND his family. How often do you see scouts do this kind of investigative due diligence??? LeBron James has all the makings of a big-time disappointment, IMO. Just like Kwame Brown, the expectations placed upon a high schooler is often more than a young kid can bear. Moreover, I'll be curious to see James' maturity level in dealing with: 1) the expectations 2) the critics - like myself 3) the fame/glory As good as he may be at the high school ranks, I think it's always a rude awakening for young talents who think their "top sh*t" until they get into a league where everybody is TOUGH and TALENTED. That's why humility pays BIG TIME dividends in this league (and in most walks of life too). Everything I've read and seen about this young man is that he is too young to understand what is happenning around him. He is getting showered with praise and attention that may all good, but possibly inflating his ego. My take is that he, like his fans and the marketing maniacs are getting ahead of themselves... and increasing their probability for future disappointment. Good Job St. Vincent's. If only more high school administrators were as commercially savvy as you. theSAGE
C-Kompii They were won by big men, like Yao not Brand. No a comparison to Brand is a pf like Malone, Barkley.....great players who have yet to or ever will win a championship.
it would have been nice to see a rookie win a nba championship. if yao had come out a year earlier and got drafted by the wizards, he would have been playing in chinatown (where the wizards play) and gotten a chance to win the nba championship with jordan, stackhouse, and oakley. and oakley would have helped instill toughness in yao.
Pgabriel, your sledgehammer on big men is uncalled for! There's no denial that basketball is a big men's game. Not only b ig men won more rings than guards, they also were relied more heavily upon even when guards are winning rings. Pistons and Bulls had very quality big men in the championship runs. Bill Laimbeer, Rick Mahorn, Horace Grant, Dennis Rodman... just to name a few. Look at the guards on the 98 Spurs, guys like Avery Johnson and Mario Elie were not up to par to those front court players on the Pistons and Bulls. As for big man and guard combo champion teams, namely the 95 Rockets and the Lakers, we all know that Hakeem and Shaq were the main man. History says that big men can won rings with average guards but guards only won rings with above average big men. The sole exception being the 94 Rockets. This means that even a big man is slightly less able than a guard. Chances are to go with him. Just a thought.
if the old 8th seed denver nuggets can beat the then #1 seeded supersonics, then the rockets can beat dallas if their fortunate enough to make the play-offs. all it takes is faith, alot of prayers, and a big miracle. it COULD happen.
Sage you make some valid points. How great James could be in the NBA is speculation. - Is he the next Jordan? ... Maybe. - Will he be the next Kwame Brown? ...Not a chance. I believe James is going to be great. He is so physically gifted just like Kobe and McGrady. However, what seperates James' game from Kobe/McGrady is that he knows how to get other players involved. He knows how to dish the ball and control the tempo of the game. It's amazing to see. That is why his team is able to beat other teams that have so much more talent. You are right he is playing against highschool players. However, some of the highschool teams James is playing against could beat major division 1 college basketball schools. NBA will be a great challenge but lets face it...James is no chump
Actually, the concept that a team must be build around a quality big man to win the championship is a little obsolete in today's context. Firstly, let me say that no one is disputing the VALUE of a good big man in the playoffs BUT the concept that a good big man (Brand for eg) is more valuable than a good guard (Francis for eg) to a scout when both are unproven is way past it's used by date. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, historical context. Up until the late 70's, conventional wisdom and historical trending dictated that a team must have a good big man to win. There were precious few precedents up to that point. The Russells, Chamberlains, Reeds and Kareems of the world won you championships. Thus, between an unproven big man and an perhaps slightly more impressive but unproven guard, the benefit of the doubt was usually given to the big man. However, Magic, Bird, Isiah and Jordan came around. Bird and Magic both had good arguably great centers (Magic had a very old formerly great center) but there was no doubt who was the critical component within their teams. The role of the center was diminishing in a way the NBA was unfamiliar with. Then came the Pistons and the Bulls, where the center simply played the role of an intimidator, almost an offensive afterthought. At this point, the conventional wisdom was that a versatile and skilled all rounder was the way to go. This mindset yielded us players like Garnett, Dirk and CWebb - players who do not play anything like prototypical big men. Secondly, rule changes have made it increasingly a guard friendly game. From widening of the lane, to 3 second violations to the handcheck rules. Arguably, the three point line also shifted the importance of big men somewhat. This is true only up to the end of the 70's. After that, spectacular big men such as Ewing (Houston, Spree, Starks etc), Robinson (he finally won when it wasn't his team anymore, but failed to win with the marvellously talented Spurs teams of the early 90's), Hakeem (in the late eighties) and Shaq (even with a spectacular Penny and a strong supporting casts of past scorers from other teams) have not won rings with considerable supporting talent while guard and forward oriented teams have won in the years 80,81,82,84 (83 was Philly, but Moses Malone had an incredible supporting cast which included Dr J, Andrew Toney etc), 85, 86, 87, 88 (Lakers in 87-88 had Kareem who was seriously showing signs of aging, chk out his scoring avgs),89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98. Of course, then came Shaq. So, with Zonal defense, the tide might be changing again. But, my point is that it can no longer be taken for granted that a big man is automatically more valuable than a good small man. Recent history has made this abundantly clear.
Despite changes in NBA basketball that works in favor of the guards as you mentioned, the league and fans still value big men with comparative talent over guards. Reasons being that big men get higher percentage shots and quality big men are hard to come by. Good guards are abundant and nice big men don't grow on trees. Houston snatched Francis and Mobley in just two years, and if it was not landing Yao Ming by sheer luck, God knows how many years would go bybefore Houston getting a stud big man. Hypothetically, who would you pick between a 6'9" Francis and 6'3" Francis if their game were on the same level? It's a no brainer. Always go with the taller player with equal talent. Even if Brand is just a tad below Francis gamewise, which is arguable, it's still a fair trade if it goes down IMO. The league values big men over guards is a perpetual fact. I'm surprised to find that some fans try to deny it.
Name your top 5 player alltime, period. Now name your top 5 guards: Jordan, Magic, Big O, JWest, Kobe? Now top 5 big men: Wilt, Kareem, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan? How many guards made the top 5 period?
Except Jordon's Bulls, every championship team had a Hall of Fame big man but not every championship team had a Hall of Fame guard. Isn't this obvious? The game nowadays might *appear* to be more perimeter-oriented but don't you think that it's more because of a lack of big men and influx of guards (Jordon effect) than the rule changes? Anyway, look closer to all the credible contenders of this year, all are built around a big man, not a guard.
Again, I am NOT disputing the fact that height is important in basketball. And no one would argue that with exactly the same set of abilities, the taller player will be chosen. But truly, this is the real world. There are tradeoffs. The question should be whether I would take a 6'3" Francis as he is or a 6'9" Francis who is a tad slower and has less of a range. C'mon, should all things be equal, is it even a choice? It would be a rhetorical question! What I AM saying however, is that height is no longer the be all and end all that it once was. Now there are precedents of guard and forward oriented teams which can and do win the championships.
