I disagree with your somewhat glowing assessment of Mobley's capacity for improvement. He's been in the league for quite a while now and from my perspective, you are seeing all there is to see. Even if all that you said is true about chemistry and coaching and such, I just don't see him making more than marginal improvement as by now, he's far too set in his ways to make that dramatic a change. Mobley is AT BEST, your 6th man off the bench. He is not in the same class of the better 2 guards in the league (and yes, AI no matter how much he offfends your sensibilities belongs in that group). No, Mobley is a notch or 2 below that level. I do not see him having the capacity to make that leap because of his inconsistent shooting. Were he to develop a midrange jumpshot that would act as a zonebuster, then maybe my opinion would change but he has seemed completely disinclined to do so. He either merrily bombs away from beyond the 3-point arc with mixed results or attempts to drive directly into the teeth of the zone one-on-one and thereby getting bopped. In many repects, he and SF3 are bookend images of each other in terms of style of play and that's the biggest problem I have with Mobley.
So, you're telling me, that Cat changing/improving, drastically I might add, the exact year he gets a coach that really suits him. Shows signs of him settling to an already concrete stubborn style of play that will never blossom into anything more? And, come now, Cat compared to Steve in those ugly, lets hope it falls in while I toss it up recklessly after driving right into a mosh pit, drives of Steve's? That's not a fair comparison at all. If anything, Cat's driving abilities not only are superior to Steve's, but more consistent, and so is his perimeter game. I mean, please, I'm not trying to make Cat seem like some offensive machine. But, please, Cat=Steve? Not one bit, for the fact that one's dumber and hopelessly unable to change his game in any way shape or form. Now with Steve, I'll agree, the guy is set in his ways, it's fairly obvious seeing how trying to adapt his game into something he's not used to kills his abilities horribly. Like I said, not trying to make Cat into some hallowed 2 gaurd, that just shames Hamilton and Iverson or any other two. You miss my point, which does not point towards any "potential", but points towards actual improvements that would happen with Cat in another year with that same coach. Not drastic unrealistic changes either, my god, all he needs to be more consistent is to cut down even further on those sudden bursts of "bombs" as you phrased it. And play even MORE within the flow of the game and team. All of which, he improved on this season, can't tell me he jacked up as much shots as he has down before JVG. Let's give credit where credit is due, it's not common occurence for one coach to change one player who has been "settled" into an all offense, erratic one at tha,t style of play all his career, into a player with a well balanced game of o and d, in one year while not hindering but actually elevating said players game. And also vastly cutting down on those erratic shots of the past. I just don't see how all this, points to a player that is doomed to not improve on such realistic goals which he has already begun to improve on. I truely see Cat being pretty consistent 15ppg 42% fg and 39-41% 3pt shooter with consistent defense for his career with one more year of JVG ball. And I also do believe, since this season although not many people mention it, he did improve on his passing it down to the big guy, to improve on further in a team with a better chemistry and with Steve out. Not that he'll be a big assist guy, but his passing will get good enough to not complain about anymore.
Sorry I looked at something wrong before, but pietrus doesn't have good stats and he is a backup for the warriors. Now he could just be lacking minutes. I don't know how he plays because i've never seen him play. You don't see too many warrior games in georgia. I just didn't feel as though some of the less proven talent should have been mentioned along with mobley who has proven that he is a quality player.
After the Rox get McGrady and Grant Hill, they should then talk to Indy about a Mobley for Harrington. The numbers work, Indy needs a 2 since Miller is done and Harrington wants to start. If the Rox get McGrady, getting rid of Mobley is next. Indy doesn/t want to be on the oppsite end like they were with the O'Neal trade.
Since I first brought up the comparison of Mobley to AI and Hamilton, I'd like to clarify what I meant. When I judge a player's trade value, I have to see how the player would fit on other teams. So I look at the Pistons with Mobley instead of Hamilton, or the Sixers with Mobley instead of AI, and both just screams downgrade. If you ask Detroit and Philly fans if they'd trade Rip/AI for Mobley, they'd ask you what you're smoking. It really doesn't matter how bad a fit AI might be for this team, or how little you think of Hamilton on defense(even if he is on the best defensive team in the NBA). What matters is that the GM of those teams would be fired if they ever trade those players for Mobley straight up. Look at these three players. One is the best scorer on a team in the Finals. One is capable of leading the league in scoring every year. One is the 3rd option on a team that barely makes the playoffs. Comparing Mobley to Rip or AI is just blatant homerism.
Well, apparently all this has gotten this thread nowhere. So, let's have some fun. Which of these coupled three players would you rather build a team around on? With the purpose in mind, of course, of building good chemistry, good fit, good balance and a good contender for championships to come? Which would be your favorable "core" as it were, to build a team around on? Steve-PG AI-SG Yao AI-SG-PG Cat-SG Yao Steve-Pg R. Hamilton-SG Yao R.Hamilton-SG Cat-SG Yao Cat-SG T-mac-SF-SG Yao Well? What will it be gentlemen? Just for fun. I'm curious.
5 Steve-PG AI-SG Yao 4 Steve-Pg R. Hamilton-SG Yao 3 R.Hamilton-SG Cat-SG Yao 2 AI-SG-PG Cat-SG Yao 1 Cat-SG T-mac-SF-SG Yao
Everyone notice how Cat appears in the top 3 of Stupidmoniker's prefered core to build a team around on? Anyone see my point? That Cat isn't a scorer like Hamilton, or AI, isn't gonna get picked to play in a lot of all-star games like AI, isn't gonna get you 30 plus just like AI or give you a jumpshot like Hamilton's. Doesn't offer more offense than they do, or equal to them. But, he offers more balance, diversity overall.
I was listening to my local radio station in Souther California and Cuttino Mobley said he would not mind becoming a Laker especially if Kobe Bryant leaves as a free agent, after Cuttion's contract is up with the Rockets, the Lakers should go after him. This is what all the radio guys are saying. Cuttino says he loves the Lakers and has good friends on that team. I just wanted to let you guys know what I heard.
What is the whole point of that list anyway? Cat appears 3 times on the list, as opposed to only twice by AI and twice by Hamilton. Cat is the only player to appear next to by far the best player in the group, which is T-Mac. Geez, no bias there. In addition, it's pretty much a consensus here that AI and Yao don't exactly mesh. Since when did meshing well with Yao become a factor in evaluating a player in general? Steve Kerr meshed incredibly well with Jordan, Pippen, Duncan, and Robinson. No one in his right mind would think Kerr was anything more than an average player. Seriously, if you think so highly of Cat, go post a trade proposal of Cat for AI on a Philly board, and see how many posters start ridiculing you.
Well apparently, me saying im that I'm not arguing Cat is better than AI and Hamilton in what they do best, isn't getting through. Is it so difficult to get the point, of me arguing that Cat is more diverse overall? Is that so hard to admit to without going the "go post in a philly site and see how they ridicule you for asking for a Cat and AI trade"? My god, I don't want AI, or Hamilton, I NEVER argued you could get either of them with Cat straight up. So, stop going into irrelevent discussions. The discussion here was that Cat offers more balance, diversity than those two. THAT IS ALL. Can you comprehend that? Understand that? Can you simulate that in your mind without, "but you can't get AI for Cat"? Because, that isn't the argument I'm making. And, Kerr has nothing to do with all this, the argument was between Cat, Hamilton and AI and who offered more in their overall game. My point is, who would you rather have? Cat as a third option, or Hamilton and AI as main first option? Who would succeed more in teams that didn't aid their game? Who could be placed in any team and fit almost every time in each of their own respective positions? Please understand, what the argument is, I repeat, WHO offers more balance and diversity?
