Sam Cassell stated Which leads me to this question.....Do you feel Francis is a better player than Andre Miller? If you were starting a team would you rather have Francis or Miller? I guess you would have to break them down their abilities. It seems that Francis is more atheletic overall in terms of one on one type of basketball, whereas I think Miller might make less mistakes and not look for the shot as much as Francis. The reason I think Miller is a great PG is not just because of his numbers but his intensity overall coupled with his ability to try and usually make good decisions. I think if Miller wanted to he could score 20+ppg on several teams and still get others involved. But I think his style is more geared towards getting others involved first and doing the other little things such as rebounding and passing to the right people. Francis comes off more as an SG with great abilites and great overall athelticism but I wouldn't say he is any better than Andre Miller as an overall player. Francis I say is a better overall athlete, but Miller I think knows how to get to certain spots on the floor when he wants to, and is able to make his impact both scoring and getting others involved. Basically I think Miller can do a little more for a team than Francis. I agree with Cassell and others when he says Miller might have more assists because of the spot up shooters on the Cavs, but i think Miller is the type of PG who can still get a lot of assists and get his teamates involved (while scoring) as well as any PG in the league even if his assists #'s were reduced a little bit due to playing on a different style team. Overall Francis and Miller are very close, but when i look at a PG I dont neccesaily see the best passer or decision maker but someone who can get his teamates involved while being intense and being able to make the big shots or plays down the stretch. I think Miller has an ability to take over games with the drive and his post up game for PG, and also has the ability to get others involved without trying to score 40pts like maybe a Steve Francis would. Its very deceptive to tell who is better but I think in a PG you need someone who plays to their abilities, knows how to get others involved and is able to make the big play down the stretch (whether it be making the shot or the dish). You can be a PG and get 20ppg and 6apg as long as you get others involved, can make the big play ,and make the right decisions as a player relative to your teams style of play. Basically I think you need to be an overall player no matter the position, but I just see Miller as being a better overall player and not just because his assists are statiscally higher, and I dont think the fact that because Francis can drop 40 more times makes him a better player as some others may beleive. Heck its all relative, I may be rambling, but oh well what do you guys think makes a great PG, being a great overall player or playing the PG position how its "supposed" to be played.
A good pg - not Steve Francis. Whatever he does, it's either not enough, misplaced, or detrimental to the team.
first and foremost, i think miller is a smarter player. that, alone, cancels out any "athleticism" edge that francis might have. why is he smarter? his decision making. rarely will you see andre miller force up a shot. he almost always makes the right choice on the break. he runs a pnr almost flawlessly, as well. "smarter"...aka..."the intangibles"...aka..."what separates the great ones". second, i understand what SamCassell is saying. for example, i don't think it's important what we "label" griffin. it's just important to have him on the court. however, i don't think that applies to the point guard position. i think it DOES matter if you have a point guard. the only time it doesn't matter is during "the jordan exception" - where your dominant player is also your playmaker. francis, imo, does not have that ability to be both the dominant player and the playmaker. he has yet to consistently show the ability to be the dominant player, scoring wise. and he has never shown the ability to be a dominant playmaker. in order to not have a pure point guard, i believe you need a player that is both of those: dominant player, dominant playmaker. none of the rockets, for that matter, are dominant playmakers...which is why we so, so much isolation basketball. these guys are capable of creating shots for themselves, but have not learned (or do not have the innate ability) to know how to make their teammates better. it's the whole parts v sum argument. are five players, playing individually dominant ball better than five players, collectively playing dominant team ball? imo, it's easy, the collective beats the parts. yet, we are stuck with the parts, and in need of the glue that binds the parts. andre miller is that glue. a good point guard looks to a) set up his teammates; b) display himself as a threat, if ignored; and, c) dictate the tempo of the game. steve is very good (though not exceptional) at letter b. steve is below average at letter a. steve is very below average at letter c. in fact, let's look at steve's strengths: 1) great one-on-one player. 2) great jump shot. 3) difficult to cover 4) sometimes dangerous, careless ballhandling 5) strong in the air anything i'm missing? well, that sounds like a potential allstar SHOOTING GUARD. the problem is, we already have one of those in cuttino mobley. so we're left with 2 shooting guards and no point guard. two athletic players, and a jump shooting front court with no one to glue them together. sounds like a dangerous, yet inconsistent team, in need of glue. sounds like the houston rockets.
I figured someone would say that exact line....but I was hoping maybe you could add some of your insight on the topic? Also verse I agree with you about Miller. Just because Francis is more explosive at scoring atheltically does not mean hes a better overall player than Miller. I consider Miller to be a the best PG in the league behind Jason Kidd and in a few years maybe better than him.
Here are Steve's career stats: 99-00 (77 games) 36.1(mpg) .445(fg%) .3453(pt%) .786(ft%) 2.00(off) 3.30(def) 5.30(rpg) 6.6(apg) 1.53(spg) .38(bpg) 3.97(to) 3.00(pf) 18.0(ppg) 00-01 (80 games) 39.9 .451 .396 .817 2.40 4.50 6.90 6.5 1.76 .39 3.31 3.40 19.9 01-02 (37 games) 40.8 .429 .333 .776 1.80 5.50 7.30 6.6 1.22 .24 4.14 2.90 21.5 Now if you analyze those numbers, Steve was improving until he experienced injury and the migraine bug this year. Turnovers actually went down his soph year. Now we look at Andre Miller: 99-00 (82 games) 25.5 .449 .204 .774 1.00 2.40 3.40 5.8 1.02 .21 2.02 2.40 11.1 00-01 (82 games) 34.7 .452 .266 .833 1.10 3.20 4.40 8.0 1.45 .34 3.23 2.80 15.8 01-02 (58 games) 36.6 .452 .246 .809 1.40 3.50 4.90 10.7 1.40 .38 3.17 2.80 16.8 First we note that Miller plays up to 4 minutes less per game than Steve this season. Comparing turnovers, Steve really only averages one more turnover per game. (4.14 compared to 3.17 for Miller) So statistically, Steve is also the better player.
you may be right about miller eventually surpassing kidd as the best point guard in the nba. the main thing that kidd has over miller, currently, is his amazing ability to dictate the flow of a game. never, i mean never, have i seen a point guard that always makes you play HIS game.
nice of you to conveniently fail to mention the ASSIST numbers between the two. steve: 6.6, 6.5, 6.6 (can you say pattern?) andre: 5.8, 8.0, 10.7 (can you say improvement?) that many more assists and still less turnovers than steve. don't say it's because of steve's scoring...because andre's only 2 buckets behind steve in that department, and has outshot steve % wise the past two seasons... face it, andre is a better point guard.
As of now what I like about Miller is that I think he has a little bit better of a knack for scoring than Jason Kidd, while still putting up the assists and getting others involved. Miller does not dictate the flow quite like Kidd yet, but Miller is a similar type of PG and I think with his scoring ability, intensity, and similiar abilities at PG that Kidd has, Miller has potential to be a GREAT PG.
Are you guys ever going to mention the fact that Odom will turn Francis into a much much better player. With Odom sharing the ballhandling skills, Francis can focus some more on defense. Then, he can be dominant. We really don't need Odom to score. Just handle the ball, play D, and rebound some.
what does odom have to do with the thread title? and to answer your response, odom would not make francis a better defender. please explain that theory. but, would i take odom? absolutely. check out the other thread re: marion, odom or lewis. that's where we talk about lamar odom helping steve francis. but even then, it would be OFFENSIVELY, not defensively...
Leave it up to an Aggie to rely on statistics to make a point... Stats are very irrelevent if you factor in the fact they play on different teams. Bottom line question is, who does Francis make better? Which guy on our team really suffers without Francis? Maybe Kelvin Cato. Instead of 8 ppg with Francis, he might only get 4 points. Other than that, Francis doesn't make his teammates better. We obviously win more with Francis because he is our best player, but the elite players are the ones who elevate the play of others ala Jason Kidd. I will not bother considering Francis to be an elite player until he is able to raise the play of his teammates. Francis also doesn't show any leadership qualities. There are plenty of times where the Rockets come out flat, and is in need of a kick in the ass. Rudy tries to fire up the team, but no one listens. Shouldn't our "elite" PG be the one to light a fire into the team? I know that Francis isn't a vocal leader, which is exactly why he shouldn't be a PG. This team will go nowhere until it brings in a leader the players respect. I don't think there is a guy the players respect, even Rudy T. If Francis is unwilling to move to SG, for the betterment of the team, then why should we keep him at all? Francis isn't a selfish player on the court, but when it comes to having things his way, he is very selfish. Especially if Barkley's comments about him are true. Apparently Francis has the ability to tell the Rockets what position he wants to play, as well as being able to draft ex-college teammates. I'm all for giving him some power, if he's willing to take the responsibility of being a team leader.
Steve Francis would make a better shooting guard. His ability to penetrate would give him many open looks at the basket. Steve Francis is playing out of position and we're paying the price. His defense sucks which is why we get jobbed by the better point guards. Your point guard is the QB and Steve is a QB who never passes. He wants to do it all himself and if he passes, it's only as an an after-thought. Look at the way Magic Johnson ran the floor with "showtime". He would fake his guy out, throw a no-look pass which would lead to 2 more passes and an easy basket. Without Magic leading the charge, there would be no "showtime". Steve does not understand this aspect of his position. All he wants to do is slow the game down, get in half-court offense, run an ISO and take a bad shot while his teammates are standing around the 3-point line like spectators. I would take a point guard who can't score a lick but plays defense and disrupts the other teams' offense over Franchise any day. He is totally over-rated as a point guard. As a shooting guard, he MIGHT be okay.
He's a point guard who doesn't pass, doesn't play defense, and worst of all DOES NOT PROTECT THE BALL. It's not worth the 20 points he scores to give that up. At THE VERY LEAST a point must PROTECT THE BALL. He can't use the "I'm just a rookie" excuse anymore. He has been the turnover king ever since he came to this league. I would trade the guy while he still has some value. I'm sure someone would give up a good small forward for the guy.
