Plus/minus numbers are a terrible measure in basketball. The fact that you use that as your argument is, well, sad. Where exactly is your evidence that James makes a team better? Rafer and James swapped this year, Toronto's young players got a year more of experience, and their record got worse. Milwaukee's record with James was worse than their record in both the year before acquiring him and the year after getting rid of him. James hasn't made teams better anywhere he's been throughout the last several years, regardless of what kinds of numbers he's put up. There are multiple examples of this in the NBA (SAR, for example). When you figure out that winning in basketball is not just a sum of the player's numbers, you might understand why James isn't a better fit for this team. Until then, keep turning to things like +/- numbers. Two months into the Rockets' season, I believe Ryan Bowen had one of the best +/- statistics on the team.
Read the post. I didn't use plus minus alone, I used a number of different measures - the first and foremost being points/100 possessions (I believe I mislabled as pts/48 - sorry) which is more or less the best measure of offensive efficiency around. James had a clear advantage over Sura in that category - and Alston, let's not even talk about it. Your recollection of the Rockets offense "stagnating" last year with James in the game was flat wrong. You want to play this game? Fine fine, let's play. Number of NBA championships won by Detroit after letting James go: 0. I'm not sure what Toronto's record was after they benched/suspended Alston after his fight with Sam Mitchell last year. But let's turn back the clock and see how their offense fared with him on the court Points scored/100 pos Alston ON 107.9 OFF 108.6 Points allowed Alston ON 109.6 OFF 110.2 Not exactly a huge impact when he went out - a slight improvement on offense and a slight decline on defense. Things haven't changed this year either. Moochie Norris this year had a greater impact on offense than Alston did - playing with all the handicaps of the 2005-06 ROckets. Ah, another cliche. Considering that there's documented proof that the Rockets were more efficient both offensively and defensively with him on the court last year - AND documented proof (look it up on 82 games yourself if you doubt it) of him doing the same for the Raptors this year - your little cliche is going to have to fight an uphill battle. When you figure out that scoring points and keeping the other team from scoring points wins more games than cliches like "pass first PG" and "fit", also if you figure out that shooting and defense are as important as "passfirstness", maybe you'd understand that "fit" goes both ways. First, again. I didn't use +/- alone...quite dishonest of you to suggest that that's all I used. EDIT I should also add - that +/- doesn't make that much sense when comparing players across teams, since it doesn't account for the value of their replacements - but when you're comparing two players who play ththe same position on the same team - and effectively ARE the replacement - this deficiency becomes a strength and the comparisons are that much more valid Second, no Bowen has consistently been at the very bottom of all adjusted rankings most of the season. Proof: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=107526&highlight=Bowen If you read my post and stop fabricating or distorting things a la some other folks around here- you'd realize that you don't have an empirical leg to stand on.
JVG has been quoted trillions of times on how he values defense and intensity. We have no reason to doubt him on that. They might not have done enough homework on Alston. If his defense and intensity is as bad as you think, JVG should have known. You see, shooting can be easily evaluated by simply looking at his stats. Defense and intensity, you have to actually watch him play. Maybe JVG relied too much on his brother's recommendation. I don't know. What I know is: (1) Anyone could tell that Alston wasn't a good shooter by his numbers. (2) JVG's diagnoses of the team's problems seldom include poor shooting. Sam, you still haven't answered my question. If JVG saw James as an adequate replacement for Sura's role, why would they trade him away for a PG? It was quite clear that last year when James was at the point, the team looked very different from when Sura ran the offense. So you can't say that James was playing the same role as Sura when it comes to running the team on the floor. It is no use pointing out how good James is playing for the Raptors. He either was not able to do what he is doing now, or he was not allowed (or given a chance) to do it on our team. That was a coach's not a GM's decision.
Speculation, but they thought (foolishly) that they could replace his shooting and defense with Barry and Wesley and Anderson - a dubious proposition then given their unreliability , and that's the way it worked out. I've mentioned this before several times. Yeah, one guy was black and one was white. He played the exact same role. I suppose he played it in a different way, since he's a different player. But anyway - you can't argue with the result: they were better on both sides of the ball with him in the game last season. ......nothign is of any use with regard to this debate ultimately. But does it matter? Pro-rate James numbers and he still comes out much better than pathetic. But I still marvel at people like you who push the myth that James is incapable of being a role player. He has an NBA championship ring that suggests otherwise. I also like how you think I'm ripping on Alston too hard. I don't think I've ripped on Alston enough. His performance this year has been so vastly inferior to what James did either this or last year it's not even funny - if you want to talk about guys who were ridden out of town for a reason, putting Alston up next to James doesn't exactly help your case. Finallly - nobody ever addresses Alston's millstone of a contract even though we keep bringing it up. If James was only a 'short term fix" for an injury plagued season - I don't know what that makes Alston, who is not a short term fix and IS a long term liability.
That doesn't answer the question. It's not whether his shooting could be replaced. It's why they would give away one PG for another PG. If they thought the PG they already had could do the job, why would they give him away in exchange for another? Yes, they played it in a different way. That's exactly the point. James's way was not what the coach wanted for his starting PG. If James's way was better than Sura's way in the coach's eyes, then James should have been the starter. And they would have had no reason to look for someone else to replace Sura. Anyway you slice it, it's the coach's decision. What exactly do you think "my case" is? You guys keep comparing James with Alston, praising how James is playing NOW and blasting how Alston sucks. My case is that if it was a bad move, it started before Alston even came into the picture. It started when the coach did not think James as an adequate starting PG. You haven't made a lot of comments on your view about JVG's performance. GATER is a known JVG defender. I love how he focuses on Alston's problem without putting the blame on the coach.
If he was so bad, then why not trade him till Sura was injured? Why trade for him in the first place? Why did they allegedly try to trade for him multiple times before finally getting him? Does it matter what the Rockets management 'thought' or why? Clearly they thought wrong in this case - that has been my point. James did have a good case that he shoudl start over Wesley or Sura. Who cares if its the coaches decision? CLearly it was the wrong decision. That's the way I felt then and the way I feel now, and the results seem to validate ti. I don't know what your case is, I don't know what your position is at all, other than that I bash Alston too much. Half of the above posts have been about how James played THEN. Oh, and Alston sucked THEN and NOW too. I defend JVG too. But this move was a f-king disaster, just like his other bad moves (bringing in Charles Oakley, Charlie Ward, etc.) The difference is that this one will probably hurt the franchise more given that it's a bigger financial and time commitment, and what we gave up to get him. None of this goes to James v. Alston, which is a landslide for James and only looks worse every day.
It does matter what they think and why. You keep saying how much James is a better player than Alston. To me, it is about what type of player they each is. My point is that the fundamental problem is not player evaluation. Every coach and every GM makes mistakes on this. The fundamental problem is what KIND of players JVG values. The biggest difference between signing Oakley, Ward, etc. and this trade is not that it hurts more. The other moves were FA signing. We did not actually give up someone to get them other than giving up the opportunities for acquiring other players. This move clearly presents what kind of players is preferred. That's what bothers me more than anything else. BTW, for the record, I have a lot of respect for posters like GATER. He usually has very good analysis and I feel that I can always rely on his "facts."
the odd thing is james seems to be a player jvg would value. he plays defense and is efficient and he has fire about him. it really makes me wonder if players did have a lot of influence on shipping james out. if they did it will probably be the last time they do.
There were 2 quotes I did not understand from Mike James: "...miss 10-15, I'll take 20 shots. They say you miss 100% of the shots you take." -who says you miss 100% the shots you take? That hurts his argument for being the one who is willing to take the shot "I had a bad shooting night only shot about 45 or 46 percent." - isnt 45% a good shooting clip for a guard?
I was watching the raptors game last night in orlando, the orlando announcers were talking about his comments that have been in the press in toronto. I like mike james, but he does need a good dose of stfu. he's giving himself a bad rep distracting from the good season he's having.
If Raptors hate Mike James so much, we'll gladly give them back Rafer Alston. You don't even have to give us James - just a second round pick, and we can even make it a protected second rounder. Or a player you don't want. Anything. Take Alston, please.
Last I checked Mike James was the only person who has been on the Rockets recently who has a championship ring, if you care about championships. Larry Brown even thanked him for his valuable bench contribution and Detroit probably would be going for a 3 peat had they kept him. He is a great bench player or servicable starter, I don't understand the degree of negativity here. He also shot 10% better than 3 point land than Rafer did, and Rafer had Yau or Tmac getting him better looks. Rafer has to be much more consistent and effective next year before we can say we came out even in this trade. But on the bright side we are closer to a mid lotto pick because we made this trade. In the end that might prove more important than either James or Alston.
First time in his life did he have opportunities to showcase his talent and run the show, so to speak. Obviously he is over-excited and lose control a little bit. He will calm down once he get his contract next season.
Look at what Colangelo has to say: http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_a...angelo_careful_about_comment_regarding_james/ The Globe and Mail - The Mike James free agency is getting increasingly interesting as a source close to the club has expressed concerns about the guard, but Bryan Colangelo is being careful about his own comments. "He scares the stuffing out of me right now," a source with close ties to the Raptors said of James. "Everything that comes out of his mouth lately, it's all about him. All he seems to be concerned about is his stats. You can say all you want. But on a team that's won 20-something games, one of the worst records in the league, it's a bit much to keep trying to pass yourself off as a saviour." Colangelo has adopted a careful strategy when discussing James. "We've talked a lot about Mike," Colangelo said. "I'm not going to talk any more about the circumstances, only to say Mike has been a very valuable piece this year. He's done great things for the organization and we'll see if we can work it out where we can keep him." [READ]
What's a better measure in basketball? By ANY measure you can find, Mike James is a better player than Rafer Alston. Any measure. Just pick one. He had 39 points, 3-5 threes, and 18-18 from the line today in a win against Detroit. He's averaging 33.4ppg and 6.8apg for April, on 48% shooting. If you don't think that kind of player would help a team more than Rafer Freakin' Alston, I'm just flabbergasted. Numbers don't say everything, sure, but they do say a hell of a lot. As for who's a better fit between James and Alston, the notion that it's obviously Alston doesn't make sense to me. James is a better perimeter defender (which has been a weakness this season) and he's a better scorer (our other weakness). But this whole "who's a better fit" question is really overrated when comparing these two anyways. Sometimes when a player is just so overwhelmingly better than another, he's going to help a team more even if his role doesn't fit in exactly with the team's needs.
He's a lock for comeback player of the year, truly amazing and prolly the sadest trade the Rox have done since letting Cassel and Horry go, we'll regret this for years to come.
Wow! Mike James single-handedly took over the game against the Pistons to make a furious comeback against the Pistons and win the game for the Raptors, he went off for 39 points MIKE JAMES WHO BIAAAATCH?? What a horrible, horrible, lop-sided trade
