Verse, The 76ers are definitely a worse team with Mutombo. I said that trade was a mistake from the beginning. But not because of Mutombo's defense, for crying out loud. They're a worse team because they ruined they're chemistry. They had such a nice groove going leading into that trade, then they traded one defensive-minded player for another larger, slower, defensive-minded player. That was the difference. I don't think they're defense is any better now than it was. It was a stupid trade, I said it from the beginning. Now they are paying for it. ------------------ Gascon [This message has been edited by Gascon (edited May 16, 2001).]
But we are short 2 intimidators, at least. You can't build a defense on starters alone. You can't last a season in fights for home court advantage on starters alone. You going to fill two holes in the frontline (starting C and backup C/PF) from free agency, and Webber? If we get Webber, we lose Mo'. So we are still down 2 workhorses once Dream leaves, and Cato is given his pink slip. You should probably build around the idea of needing TWO centers and a backup for Webber. You know such guys like Davis are pretty expensive and valued, and rightfully so. Besides, I hear Marc Jackson plays matador defense....although I've only seen him once, so I know little about him. Will makes a point about signing Webber robs us of our ability to sign others and lose others. aelliott makes a point of saying Walt comes off the books next year for $5m. Is that $5m going to land you a proven intimidator. Maybe, but is it worth betting on vs investing in rookies or trading your picks for the proven intimidator? Also, why would CD and Rudy target SFs in this draft noted for its rare depth of big men when they are notorious for ignoring athletic SFs and the last two years have pretty much exposed our biggest weakness, not enough big men. You say you can just go out and land an intimidator through free agency; I say athletic SFs are a dime a dozen in every draft. And with all their hype, they pan out at a low percentage as any position. orrcottle has me convinced. Getting Webber will make it hard to rebuild our center position and get the intimidators that Webber asks for. The Walt $5m cap windfall won't cut it, unless we consider trading a guard and/or packaging draft picks. We are short 2 frontline intimidators for the long haul. All we need is one dime a dozen sharpshooter for SF or a junkyard dog fighter from the CBA like Elie. Defensive/3pt shooters like Rick Fox fall to low 1st round and into the 2nd round all the time. Frontline intimidators don't nearly as much. my opinion is, use the draft to invest in the expensive NBA positions (either by trading up or trading away your picks), and expect free agency, the CBA, and minor trades to get you the inexpensive positions. We don't need a playmaker at the SF position (especially if we land Webber), so why invest in one. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 16, 2001).]
thanks, Gascon btw, i don't think they are worse because of mutombo's defense. i think they are worse for the same reason you said, because they ruined chemistry, especially on offense. defensively, they ARE a better team now. however, to show the import of "o", they ruined what fragile offensive continuity they did have when they added "black mantis". my point was that increasing your defense does not necessarily make you a better team - and it was moreso directed at mango. still, i appreciate the response.
Three thoughts on the much-maligned Ratliff-Mutombo trade: 1) In the short-term (i.e., this season and the playoffs) it was clearly a good trade, for the simple reason that Ratliff hasn't played a minute since the trade as a result of injuries. Until next season the operative question isn't "Would the Sixers be better with Ratliff?" It's "Would the Sixers be better with no starting center at all?"--to which the answer is an obvious no. 2)I don't think anyone in Sixerland saw the trade as necessary to help the Sixers compete against other Eastern teams--though undersized, Ratliff could more than hold his own against the other converted 4s (and assorted mediocrities) who play center in the conference. The concern then was that even if Ratliff recovered from his injury, he would not have the size to slow down the western behemoths (shaq, duncan, robinson, sabonis, etc.) should the sixers reach the finals. Here again, I tend to think it was a good gamble, at least for the immediate short-term. Mutombo may not be able to do much to slow down Shaq or Duncan/Robinson in the finals (if the Sixers make it there), but it's an excellent bet he will do more than Ratliff could have. 3) Finally, how exactly does this factor into the defense vs. offense argument anyway? After all, both guys are defensive specialists. The Sixers simply traded the soon-to-be best defensive center in the East (barring a full Alonzo recovery), for the current, but aging, best defensive center in the east. ------------------ [This message has been edited by orrcottle (edited May 16, 2001).]
Lets' conclude what's been said throughout this thread. The negative side: Webber may turn his back on the team in 3 years or so. He may not have the will, MAYBE not the toughness. Well, if in 3 years, Webber turns his back, that would most likely mean that we have not won a championship, and if that's the case, we say SO LONG to a 31-year old Webber. If by the time he's 31, we haven't won, he hasn't done hs job, so BYE! If Webber didn't have the will before, he'll have it now, cause HE'll be choosing his own situation/destiny, so he'll work towards his goal. If there's anyone here that thinks that if Webber signs with us next year, he doesn't give his biggest effort EVER, then you need to re-analyze. Webber knows that he's not getting any younger, and he's gonna start ripping into opposing players starting next year, when he's where he wants to be at. About toughness, it's not about toughness. Horace Grant did an incredible job. His sole purpose in that whole series, his only objective, was holding on to Webber so he wouldn't take off. Considering the situation, I think Webber did a great job against one of the better defensive PFs in the league. Now, here's why we SHOULD sign him: We had, what, 45 wins last season? Look at these factors into account: C - Hakeem will be playing at a high clip all season rather than only after the All Star game. Plus, he has TWO backups, so he WILL get his rest. PF - We upgraded from Mo Taylor to Chris Webber. Webber can do anything Mocan do and more. We see HUGE improvement here. SF - If it's Shandon, we'll have improved, because he'll be a MUCH better player with the new rules next year, PLUS, Webber's game suits his game better than Mo's. SG - Cuttino is a youngplayer, and at his age, he can only get better. PG - While teams such as the Sixers, Bucks, Lakers and Spurs are just getting that steely glint in their eyes as the playoff marathon hits full stride, the Rockets' season has been over for more than three weeks. "Won't happen next year," Francis said. "Nope, it won't." Why? "Because I won't let it." "You'll see a different Steve Francis next year. I'm going to get it done." Nuff said. We basically improve in every category. We can also add at least one first round pick to the mix. We also have Langhi coming off the bench. We have Cato off the bench. I don't see how we don't win 10 more games. Most of our losses were against the West. Actually, something like 90% of them were against the West, right? So now, we have an All-Star PF to battle the big teams. Best case scenario: Webber signs, Hakeem sees the opportunity and signs, and we draft a top notch SF. Either: We'll be huge contenders for years to come. OR, we'll have been contenders in the playoffs for 3 years, Webber will wanna leave, and we'll let our own young players take over. Webber's great, but if you wanna go looking at him through a microscope, he has his flaws. As does every other player in the league. We're getting the 2nd or 3rd best PF in the league, what else do you want? ------------------
Interesting fact for the Webber fans. How many game winning shots has Chris Webber had since he has been in the NBA? Were talking crunch time, a few seconds left and the game is tied or his team is down by one. Give up? The answer is, 1. One buzzer beating tip in since... well as Chris put it this way after that game: "That's the first time I've had one of those since high school." Some clutch performer this guy is. The bottom line is this, Webber is an All Star, he just isn't a super star. ------------------
So you're saying we should not sign him because he is "merely an All-star"? Geez, we're getting picky ain't we? Great thread guys. ------------------ I always thought "With my talent, it's only a matter of time before I'm discovered". Now I think "With my talent, it's only a matter of time before I'm found out".
orrcottle: a) it seems to me (although I could be mistaken) that many people (Mango, et al) believe that defense is the primarily driving force in a winning team. b) the 6rs upgraded defensively at the center position when they traded ratliff for mutombo. So… why is it they were a worse team after the trade, if increasing defense should make you a better team? imo, the reason is because there offense suffered dramatically. theo ratiff was a power forward playing center – admirably. more importantly was that theo was comfortable out to 15 feet away from the basket. this allowed for not only more lanes for AI, but for complementary players like g-lynch, buford, snow, mckie, to get to the basket for easy shots. NONE of those guys can hit the ocean from the beach, if you ask me, but they were able to thrive because of AI and theo. acquiring mutombo hurt the 6rs offense so much that they have to rely on AI even more – which I thought was inconceivable, but have been proven wrong. thus, they have become even more so one-dimensional and a worse team for it. So… did improving their defense make them a better team, or did hurting their offense make them a worse team??? they are BOTH important, but which is more important, ultimately?
verse, sorry for getting into this late. I'm not sure if you've already answered this: Why do you proclaim the 76'rs a worse team? Didn't they purposely slow down once they got home court adv so that Iverson could rest and heal. I remember 3 losses in a row without Iverson playing. Are you saying they shouldn't be having trouble in the playoffs?
verse: I see your point re: the Mutombo trade; thanks for the clarification. I agree with everything you said about Mutombo hurting the Sixer offense. At the same time, I'm not terribly convinced that he's helped the defense, either--at least not to this point. Personally, I'd just as soon have a healthy Ratliff defending the shorter-but-quicker centers in the East (Jermaine O'Neal, Camby, etc.). Where I still imagine Mutombo could be valuable is going up against the big Western centers in the finals--if the Sixers make it that far. ------------------
heypee: in philly's last 27 regular season games (post black mantis trade), they were: 15-12 of those 27 games, AI missed 8 of them, in which they were 3-5 so, post-b.m. trade, they were 12-7, a 63% winning %. *************** pre bm trade, they were 41-14 for a winning % of 75%. defensively, after the trade, they gave up 89.85 ppg. for the season, they gave up 90.4, not much of an upgrade defensively... offensively, 89.92 after the trade 94.7 before the trade ****************************************************** "improving" their defense actually hurt their offense, and it shows in the playoffs. if AI doesn't score 40+, they don't win. so should they be struggling? yes, they should, seeing as how they wanted to "shore up their d" and ended up "neglecting their o". this is what i do not want to see the rockets become. i don't care for all the all-defense awards, cause as i look on the list mango provided, i see 1) cliff robinson - HA! 2) scottie pippen - HA! 3) jason kidd - HA! 4) charles oakley - HA! 5) john stockton - HA! guys who are either bonafide thugs, hackers, illegal defense specialists, or flat out overrated on d (kidd). none, i repeat, none of those guys are good 1 on 1 defenders. what they are/were is decent/slightly above avg team defenders - something we could use more of. but don't go and tell me we need these defensive specialists who can lock down their man and we'll be a better team for it, cause we won't. name one guard who can't score over 12ppg who locks down there man and is a SERIOUS asset on the floor. that goes for anyone on this bbs. i bet no one can.
verse, I realize there isn't a NBA All-Gunners team, so you won't be able to come up with the same type of data to support your position. I know that there has to be some offense to win a game, defense alone won't do it. The point that I am harping on, is that Cat, Francis and Moochie seem destined to carry the bulk of the minutes at the 1 & 2 spots. If you pencil in Webber at the 4, then the 3 and 5 will really need to play superior defense to make up for the average or below "D" at the 1, 2 & 3. Currently, the Rockets have question marks at the 3 and particularly at the 5. If Langhi (average defense?) logs some minutes at SF, then the 5 had better be a stud to make up for the others. Cato as I stated earlier seems to be a lost cause. Dream, if he stays can't be expected to makeup for the weaknesses of others. Collier is probably a journeyman and won't solve the problem. The Rockets would have 3 offensive studs in Francis, Cat and Webber, yet be missing a defensive anchor. The Kings looked great during the regular season, but sputtered when things switched to a series format and the opposing team prepared better on defense. The regular season makes it difficult to implement a thorough defensive plan because of the rotation of opponents during the regular season and the lack of prep time. Suppose the Rockets land K Johnson and Battier in the upcoming draft and sign Webber this summer. Replace Cato with a journeyman 4/5 and Dream is resigned. Dream (questionable health) Collier (young & inexperienced) K Johnson (Rookie) Webber (currently at his peak & probably for 2-3 years beyond that) KT Journeyman 4/5 (Cato replacement) Battier (Rookie) Langhi (young & inexperienced) Walt? Cat Journeyman 2/3 (SA replacement) Journeyman 2/3 (CBA? Rookie?) Francis Moochie Is that roster supposed to intimidate Duncan or Shaq? By the time Johnson and Battier get a handle on the NBA and their responsibilities of carrying a huge load on Defense to offset the others, Webber will be starting to see the downside of his career. He will still be good, just not at his current level. Duncan is younger, so Webber should be on the decline first. Dream fussed about not being involved enough on offense when Taylor, Francis and Cat were on the team. Webber would play more minutes and take more shots than Taylor, so how would Dream feel about getting the ball even less? Without at least one Superior Defender on the team, the Rockets will be hard-pressed to be a true playoff contender. Mango ------------------ Get it right or just don't do it! Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated. Start more Webber threads! [This message has been edited by Mango (edited May 16, 2001).]
I'll take you up on this, using just guys who played in the second round of the playoffs: McKie (regular season 12 ppg), Snow (10 ppg), Christie (12 ppg). Of course, it all depends on what you mean by serious asset - but all those guys play pretty big roles on their respective clubs. ------------------ We used to laugh at Grandpa when he'd head off and go fishing. But we wouldn't be laughing that evening when he'd come back with some w**** he picked up in town.
verse, I'm disapppointed in stats being your answer. Besides, you should only show the stats for the 12-7 games. Iverson missing 8 games is a great anomaly. No wonder the team's stats changed dramatically on offense/defense. And don't you think maybe the entire team let up. I mean, they clinched homecourt rather quickly, No? Seems you should only be talking about the playoff performance of this team. Tell me why, without stats. Cause I could show you that Iverson has 6 ast/gm without impacting his TOs for the playoffs....seems like team accomplishments to me, versus his points going up 2 point showing more one-dimensionality. I don't really know. I haven't been paying much attention, post Ratliff. Give me quotes/commentary not stats. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 16, 2001).]
I'm not really following verse on the whole defense is overrated thing, but I definitely agree with him that the Christies (as great as they are on defense....excellent!!) they just have little impact on playoff games versus the teams with SGs who can score! like they are supposed to.
i'm pressed 4 time, but i will respond.... as 4 batt/k-johnson, i'm all for those picks, particularly battier. i have not seen enough on ken johnson to give a real good assessment. the reason i'm for the battier pick is that yes, he is a good defender, but more importantly is that he is a good defender who can hit the ocean from the bench. as for the superior defender part, imo, there is no such thing as a superior guard defender. i'll have to go into that one later. however, there is such an animal as a superior front court defender, and that i would like to see on the rockets. if ken johnson is that man, so be it. i can accept a nonscoring center that plays gr8 defense and rebounds a lot quicker than the same in a guard. that guard is a useless guard, IMO. p.s. while i criticize mutombo on the 76rs, i would not mind seeing him on the bucks or even (gulp!) on the rockets. while he can't stick the open j, i think he would not hamper our offense too much. be back w/ more later oh, and thanks for the debate, i love an intelligent convo.
heypartner, Is that because of overpowering play from Kobe, or because Christie lacks strong support defense from Vlade, Webber & Pollard, so he has to play more conservatively? Mango ------------------ Get it right or just don't do it! Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated. Start more Webber threads!
damn you. i should have been more specific. please include this last qualifier: "who can't shoot!" that eliminate snow from the equation automatically. but i'll give you mckie and christie. those are two player i'd GLADLY have on the rockets, because i think they are more than capable of hitting the j and scoring when called upon.
heypee: true about the stats, but Mango did ask for some. guess i should have stuck to my anti-stat guns!!! commentary has always been my strong suit anyway.... re: 6rs yea, the end of the season may not be a fair barometer, considering one team or the other might not be playing all their best players or trying their hardest, etc., etc. however, i think you can look at the playoffs and see how much the 6rs are struggling. against toronto, they are finding it extremely difficult to get anyone involved other than AI or without going through AI. mckie stepped it up in game 4 (i think) and that's been it, basically. imo, the reason is because they have no room for cutters on that team. deke sits his big ass right in the middle of the paint or somewhere nearby and makes it very difficult for mckie, snow, buford, ollie, etc. to get to the rack. if you noticed, most of AI's points (incredibly) are coming on jumpers. he isn't getting nearly as many easy shots. i'll try to explain more later....like i said, i'm pressed like a white shirt right now.... as for the d/o thing, if you notice, no one player stops a true scorer. and even if you fielded a team of oh, let's say: PG: gary payton SG: shandn andersn SF: george lynch PF: charles oakley C: sean bradley i'd tell you that they wouldn't make it past the second round of the playoffs. they are all "gr8 defensive players" according to the stats and votes. but, outside of payton, they are all pretty much terrible on offense. there has to be an equal balance individually and on a team level. individually, i don't want all-d players. i want players who can play a rotating, swarming early 90's seattle supersonic style defense, but... can still come down and score in a variety of ways. a threat from every position (except maybe center) to drive or shoot. true triple threats. that All-D mentality will keep games close, but (ask pat riley) when it comes time to score and put the game away, they will turn to each other and look for someone else to take the shot. unfortunately, in the nba, you don't have that choice. the ball, sometimes ends up in "shandn's" hands - unless he's on the bench (which is where rudy has to stick him in fear that he would get the ball). you/we/i need players - 5 of em - who can yes, play good team d, but more importantly get their man in foul trouble by playing good, strong, aggressive "O". want to know how to beat allen iverson? make him play D. same went for jordan. look at baron davis v sam cassell. the winner of that matchup every game goes home with a team victory as well. neither one of these guys is playing good defense. what they are playing is good enough "o" to get the other guy either a) in foul trouble or b) flustered on "o" so much that they're commiting UNFORCED turnovers. i guess you could say that i hate specialists of any type. don't be "all D". don't be "all 3 pointers". and if you do have one on your team, unless he's the best @ it in the business, don't act like he's a "cornerstone" of the franchise who deserves as much $ and respect as the 1st or 2nd best player on the team. there's a reason mario elie has been on more teams than you can shake a grumpy stick at. gotta go.... be back l8r 2nite. oh ya, thanks for putting me on the spot . you know how i hate STATS !!!!!!!!
