That's a fair point. Nash and the other PG's are not the potential go-to guys that Steve is. They can never be the #1 option on a good team. But, then again, a team with Steve as the #1 option has never been very good.
i thought about including "d" and "e" in my original post, but did not because van exel was inconsistent this year and most team don't believe that finley can beat them singlehandedly. as for francis and his tempo...i cannot understand why rudy has these guards initiating the offense so late. why he doesn't scream at them to get up the court is just a mystery to me. all season long i paid attention to when our half court offense actually got started. without fail, it was consistently in the 14-10sec range. that means francis or moochie or whoever spent 10-14 seconds dribbling the air out of the ball. for god's sake, you only have 8 seconds to get it across halfcourt!! the remaining 2-6 seconds were spent just dribbling! aaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhh!!!!
The Nash-Dirk PnR is deadly, even more so than Stockton-Malone because Dirk is a much better shooter than Malone. Did you see how the defense sometimes doubled Nash and leave Dirk wide open? That's because they respect Nash's shot. The problem was, Nash would always pass to Dirk in those situations and Dirk would bury the open shot. Try imagine Steve running that same play with Dirk. Defense would also double on Steve. But Steve would never look to the open Dirk. He would try to dribble past the two defenders or jack up a shot with two hands in his face. With a shooting big man in Yao, the Rockets could have run the same thing effectively. But can Steve do it?
Come on, Yao is not as good as Nowitski yet, not even close, but he is already a better passer and defensive presence.
How many times can Steve drive and Dish . . . only to almost be hit by a brick? If he had shooters. . . CONSISTANT shooters . . how many more assists a game would steve have? Does Nash have better shooters than Steve? THANK YOU FOR PLAYING [when u can rely on ya shooters. . . u don't hesitate to pass half as much as when u dish to bricklayers] Rocket River
How many times can Steve lead a break . . . only to jack up the shot himself or turn it over? If he knew how to set up his teamates. . . CONSISTANTLY set up his teammates . . how many more assists a game would steve have? Does Steve have better court sense than Nash? THANK YOU FOR PLAYING
How many times have we seen Francis wait too late to pass the ball to a open teammate? How many times have we seen him lead a break and either keep the ball and shoot a circus shot or wait till the man is in the paint and deliver the ball too late? How many times have we seen Francis go back to the rebounder instead of creating a lane up the court for a fast break? He's just not a smart player.
That's why I said potentially franchise player. Do you think this team would be in the playoffs if Nash was the point guard and it was his 4th year in the league?
not yet having good teammates helps alot of things NASH - 17.7 - pts 7.3 Asst 2.06 TOs 1.04 stls 2.5rebs Francis - 20.1 pts 6.4 asst 3.7 TOs 1.6 stls 6.30 Rebs Francis Scores more, Rebounds more, Steals slightly more, and turns the ball over more Nash - Assts slightly more What are your expectations of Steve Francis? I'm curious .. I think that is the Base to start at DO YOU EXPECT: 20+ Pts, 10+ assts, 6 REbs, 1TO, 3 Stls? What about: 17.6 pts, 13.1 asst, 7.3 rebs, 4.56 TOs, 2.23 stls Rocket River the last set at Magic Johnson's 4th yr stats
DavidS has almost reached the mythical Dadakota level of trumpeting bball iq over athleticism while telling us how much steve sucks. keep trying just a little harder and you can get there, maybe a steve for andre thread would do it. you do have him beat on the whole old school is better than new school, players used to know how to play, and today's players just don't get it thing though. so bravo. ahh good, your continual reference to everything you don't like about the nba as "espn highlights" or "and 1" or streetball. everyone who plays today that isn't unathletic has been brainwashed by these things and doesn't know how to play. francis maybe dunks what, once a game? maybe. and that's usually on fastbreaks when it's a no-brainer. he usually just does his 17 foot pull up jumper (very espn-ish i admit) or tries to drive by his man and go to the line. the most espn-ish thing we probably do is the alley-oops to cato and cat going baseline when steve drives. and i would say those have been very good to us over the years. and now to verse: oops you accidentally said almost entirely instead of sometimes. common mistake. dallas's running game is predicated on those things, and even then, van exel or finley can do those things (although not at nash's level) if nash is out or unavailable for the outlet. of course, the end game of the whole fastbreak is getting the ball to a 7 footer who can drain 3's or any of 3 other players who can all drain 3's and spread the floor even on a break. put nash out there without those guys and he's just a chicken running around with his head cutoff b/c there is no one to complement his getting the ball up fast, being frantic, then hitting an open teammate caused by his pressure and the obvious disorganization of the defense always caused by running. everyone else is just as valuable to making sure the points get on the board as nash doing things quickly, they need each other. as for nash only having to run an offense, that's crap. if opponents don't respect nash's ability to score, the entire mavs offense breaks down. of course he has to get his shot...do you think that 17ppg is purely accidental??? the entire mavs offense breaks down? they don't still have dirk posting everybody smaller than him or shooting over everyone bigger and slower. they don't still have finley creating shots and being a playmaker? all the shooters disappear? i mean nash is definitely important to making the mavs the most offensively explosive team in the league, but they don't go to crap w/o him. they're still gonna score. oh yeah, and they have van exel right there to take his place if he falters. i'm sure nick the quick could do an oh so adequate job if asked to pg. it's not as if he's adverse to moving the ball quickly and jacking it up as fast as possible. he's also got a better ast/to ratio. he's also the reason the mavs are still playing. his points generally come from times where the defense a) does not collapse completely i.e. damn there's so many shooters we can't clog the lane on this guy. c) concentrates so much on dirk that the ball gets swung around to nash. option "c" happens the least frequently. people don't concentrate on dirk very often? but nash is undoubtedly the better point guard. so, is he undoubtedly better at PG skills or are you saying he's the better playe with a PG next to his name. in terms of traditional pg skills, i'd give it to nash, though i'd love to see him try to run our "offense" while steve has 19 3 point shooters waiting for his kickouts. in terms of better player, steve wins hands down. dallas can live w/o nash, the rockets can't live w/o steve (except against memphis apparently).
We expect him to distribute the ball consistently, run the offense smartly, and make players around him better, none of which he does. You can find plenty of players who put up great stats but are now floundering with little impact- Stackhouse, Sprewell, Damon Stoudamire. Do you think any of them are "franchise" players? Those statistics show great talent, but they don't necessarily translate to winning.
I don't think the Rockets would be a better team with Nash instead of Francis--at least not until Yao's offensive skills are in the league of Shaq, TD, Webber or Nowitski. But I am not sure Francis would make the Mavs (or Kings, or Spurs or Lakers) better than Nash would either. Francis when healthy has shown he can make a crappy team mediocre--because when he is "on" it is enough to give you a chance to win against anyone. But that is different from being a consistent performer or a player who consistently helps his teammates be the best they can be. Off topic--but it isn't just who Francis plays with that will determine his stats or efficiency. Look at Marbury, who really is the better comparison to Francis anyway in that they have closer physical attributes (peerless combination of quickness, strength, individual basketball ability, similar age) than Nash does to them. Think about this--every freakin year Francis has been in the league he has more turnovers and fewer assists than Stephon Marbury. Further, Marbury has played with both worse and better teams than Francis has over that same period--yet with the exception of a couple of points less scoring for the good teams his numbers are very consistent. The moral of this story. Don't expect Steve's efficiency or performance to change drastically just being around a couple of better shooters. Further, Steve should not try to be that 25PPG scorer unless someone else is setting up the offense. Instead, aim for 1.5 more assists and 1 less TO even if you give up a couple of points doing it. That would make the Rockets a much better team. Can he (does he have the mental make-up), and will he (does he have the dedication), put the team above himself like Marbury has is anyone's guess.
do any of u think the rockets would be better with steve nash? i dont cause steve can creat for himself and is one of the rare few players who can score anytime he wants.
Most people think he actually needs to shoot more. Particularly when he drives lane after getting a look at an open jumber. Most of his ugly turnovers come from putting the ball on the floor and charging the hoop. Better shooters would help the assists, him taking the open shot instead of driving would lower the TOs. That would make us a better team. Look at Parker in last nights game. He kept setting up about 15 feet out on the sides and sinking jumpers. When the lakers adjusted he was able to drive the lane and put up that soft tear drop, which is a shot I wish SF would use. It would help if we had better spacing on the floor to clear out the lane too. "Being far apart isn't the same thing as good spacing you knuckleheads," said the fictional coach who actually knew how to run an athletic, quick offense.
"create for himself": emphasis on HIMSELF "who can score anytime he wants": replace "can" with "tries to"
francis 4 prez: it's not just their running game. it's ability to get into their offense early, as well. and, you're right, van exel/finley cannot do those things at nash's level. what's your point? basketball is a team game. 5 people working together. not 1 man dribbling by himself...were you trying to make a point, or just reminding us all how good basketball is played...cause i think we already know how.... read it again. if opponents don't respect nash's ability to score, he has no need to pass to dirk, post dirk, etc. dude's shooting layups and open 10 footers all day long. read my post and read the post i was responding to. then respond. it's not a hard concept. honestly, from the many, many, many times i've seen dallas play this year, the number of times dirk would post up (via iso or whatever means) and swing that ball around to nash was far less than the number of times nash would penetrate and score on his own or pull up for 3 or a short jumper on his own. you know, somehow i thought i made it clear when i said: maybe you missed that. not reading again, i see. common mistake. run our "offense"? what offense?! we don't have an offense!! as for steve playing with dallas...honestly, i think steve would get his numbers...maybe even higher #s than he does now, since he'd have better teammates. but i don't think they would be as cohesive offensively as they are now. steve, imo, does not have a good enough grasp on how to set his teammates up for the shot that they want. steve passes, imo, as a bailout...not necessarily with premeditated intent.
