# ROFL @ Steve Francis



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/5251305.html

Article talks about him being disgruntled now that it seems like he will get little playing time if any come the regular season.

But how many of us here raised high the bs flag when francis said he chose houston for the fit, and for playing time, etc.? Didnt take norstradomus to figure this one out. Houston already had the components they needed for Adleman's offense, plus about 25 PG's and SG's on the roster. Even without a few of those guys one had to wonder how a player like francis would fit into the scheme over there. Sure enough, what we said has come true. 

I bet mobley is calling him up saying "i told you so." On our team, he would have been instant starter, and probably at LEAST 30 minutes a game. 

Well on the "sour grapes" side, at least signing knight instead of him means we can get closer to the number 1 pick next year. 

But dang am i laughing at francis now


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

This doesn't really surprise me. Francis should have thought about this more, the Rockets were loaded with G's it made sense that that he wouldn't get the playing time. When he signed with them I assumed he was just trying to cash in and take a free ride on a good team, I guess not. Unfortunate for him that he made a bad decision. At least is close to home which may keep him content.


----------



## qross1fan (Dec 28, 2004)

Oh well, good for him is what I have to say . Sure, I would have liked him, but I'm content with Knight and Dickau backing up Sammy


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

im content in that it will help us to be worse this year in order to get better next year.

But still, I would have loved to have signed francis to a few year deal. Next year we could have had once more chance at a playoff run with livingston and brand coming back, and hopefully a semi nice draft pick, we could have used the full MLE on someone of note...in addition to of course trading maggette at the trading deadline. 

Francis made a fortune off of his bought out contract. if i was him id be happy to sit on the bench...it might actually extend his career a bit.


----------



## alexander (May 6, 2005)

hey first of all, thank god Francis is not on our team, i don't want any of those natural born losers anywhere close to the Clippers, especially not as a starting PG. 
But on the other side, Sam Cassell is also a really bad idea for that spot, he is just taking away playing time that should be used on someone who can be our PG for the future(next 3-4 seasons), really, what's the point of Sam being our starter for this season? This is most definitely his last season as an NBA caliber, and we all know this season is pretty much over for us in terms of making some noise in the playoffs or even just the playoffs, so please get him out of here and get some guy who can be prepared for the next few years(Brands prime)....some championship contender could really use him, just find one before its too late


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

natural born loser? Hes done things in his career only a handful of players have ever done. Hes a baller, especially for the meager few million he would have cost us. Much rather would have prefered to have him and kept either diaz or jordan, then have paid the same amount for knight and dickau. But then again, look at the rest of your post, get the guy who just went for like 20 8 and 8 in his last semi regular season game, so that we can develop....who? 

Perhaps we could trade him at the deadline along with maggette for someone of note, or draft picks, but we cant trade him now for anyone of note.


----------



## hutcht02 (Sep 22, 2006)

I think we've finally figured Francis out. He goes to a place that obviously is way overloaded at PG and then complains. hmm. Mayb e he wants to haul away a fat pay-check and sit on the bench to earn it. WOuldn't you think that's a pretty sweet gig? Especially when, if you come to L.A. and play for the Clippers, you'd actually have to do something and have pressure on you.

Man, what a role-model. He made a decision and he hasn't even lived with it 6monthes before complaining about it.


----------



## alexander (May 6, 2005)

yes, he is a proven loser who is not going anywhere with his game even though he has it
Cassell is done, forget about the numbers, he is DONE, its the matter of time before he gets injured and retires, for this season we definitely need a guy(or 2)who can be a potential starter for years to come,..who?...well i don't know, we need to try someone, someone between age of 24-30 who is realistically available, maybe Calderon, why not Claxton, Blake, or heck even Jaric is a better solution at this moment, anyone available please, this is the perfect season for those kind of experiments, lets use it...we don't have much to lose


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

alexander said:


> hey first of all, thank god Francis is not on our team, i don't want any of those natural born losers anywhere close to the Clippers, especially not as a starting PG.
> But on the other side, Sam Cassell is also a really bad idea for that spot, he is just taking away playing time that should be used on someone who can be our PG for the future(next 3-4 seasons), really, what's the point of Sam being our starter for this season? This is most definitely his last season as an NBA caliber, *and we all know this season is pretty much over for us in terms of making some noise in the playoffs or even just the playoffs*, so please get him out of here and get some guy who can be prepared for the next few years(Brands prime)....some championship contender could really use him, just find one before its too late


ehh i dont know i think you guys will be decent enough to at least challenge for the 8 spot. I know the Brand injury screams 'Grizzlies!' but u guys have a lot more other talent on this team than Memphis had when Gasol went out. Plus I think Al Thornton can fill in pretty good and challenge somewhat for ROY so you got that going for you too. :biggrin:


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

This is exactly why I didnt want Francis. Once a cancer always a cancer.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Francis has been a cancer? I dispute that claim. Injury prone the last couple of years, most definitely. I just think he was dumb to sign with houston expecting playing time when they had traded for a PG, and had so many other pieces that fit into what adleman wants to do there. 

Dumb, yes, cancer no. Starting here on our team he certainly would not have been complaining. Fracnis is for sure not a loser. Hes been on bad teams before, but if that means being a loser, then i guess brand is a loser?


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Francis has been a cancer? I dispute that claim. Injury prone the last couple of years, most definitely. I just think he was dumb to sign with houston expecting playing time when they had traded for a PG, and had so many other pieces that fit into what adleman wants to do there.
> 
> Dumb, yes, cancer no. Starting here on our team he certainly would not have been complaining. Fracnis is for sure not a loser. Hes been on bad teams before, but if that means being a loser, then i guess brand is a loser?


What is it with your infatuation with Francis? What's their to dispute? He has been a virus since the day he was drafted by the Grizz and cried his way out of Vancouver claiming it was Gods will for him not to play in Vancouver as well as some other bull crap. He is a problem and always will be one. There is no need to to go through the chronicles of Stevie Franchise. It speaks for itself. Thank god we didnt sign another old vet. I want this team to get young again.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Infatuation? No, its no infatuation, its again based on facts. Hes not a cancer nor loser. Hes one of the better players to have played the game of late, its a shame his career isnt what it could have been due to injury. Wow. Amazing how a couple injury plagued years can make people forget this guy. For 6 years straight basically this guy averaged 20 points, 6 rebounds, and 6 assists. How many other current players can you name me that can boast that on their resume? 

So he pulled a danny ferry, big deal, how does that affect him signing with us? If he would have signed with us, obviously it would have been because he wanted to, so i dont think we would have had to worry about him holding out. 

The chronicles of steve francis do speak for themselves, when healthy hes an incredible player.

And what was the alternative? You say thank god we didnt sign another old vet. Well, i say we would have been MUCH better off signing him (29 years old) for the SAME price as signing Knight (32 years old), and Dickau (29 years old). No to mention, it WOULD have allowed us to keep a "young" player, be it Diaz or Jordan. Francis is easily better than knight and dickau combined in our offense. Would have allowed cassell to come off of the bench giving him even more of a chance to last the season. Would have meant we wouldnt have had a defensive liability, thus allowing us to start the best offensive players instead of having to worry about inserting patterson or ross to offset cassell all the time. 

The only way i say "thank god we didnt sign" him is because if we would have signed him we would have done better this year, and probably taken us farther away from a top pick.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

LOL. I love your extremely impassioned arguements for Steve Francis yam, and I think I actually side more with you on this one. A cancer is somebody like Latrell Sprewell, Steve Francis was just a guy who didn't want to play for the freaking Grizzlies. I won't really defend him for that, but I don't think it's enough for him to be labeled a cancer. He had a tremendous stretch with the Rockets in which he was a perennial all-star caliber guard and remained productive after a trade to Orlando. It was only after arriving in New York and being thrust into a chaotic overcrowded backcourt that his numbers began to decline. He also sustained injuries which further limited his ability to produce and ultimately buried him on the bench. The reality is, he's now healthy and still only 30 years old. Granted, he made a TERRIBLE decision in returning to Houston. I think the idea of going back to play in the city that he loved and enjoyed his greatest success in would somehow turn back the clock and revive his "Stevie Franchise" days of glory. Obviously, this is not going to be the case. I was hopeful that he would choose to sign with Clippers and would still welcome him if a mid-season trade were to bring him here. He's not the greatest "team guy" in the world, but he's definitely not what I would call a cancer. That label I reserve for morons like Latrell and my all-time personal favorite Benoit Benjamin.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

agreed on all counts. Like i said, im not saying he is a genius. Hes an absolute idiot picking houston thinking he would fit into that system there. (unless its all a show, and he really just wanted to be close to home, have no presurre, and kick back for a couple of years...no way to prove either way).


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

I'm now dumber for having read this tripe attempting to defend Steve Francis

The only good thing that would have come out of Francis signing with the Clippers is reading the stories of Dunleavy trashing him in the media after Francis cost the Clipper yet another game with his selfish play and boneheaded decisions.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

If we ever lost a game it wouldnt be because of steve francis. Having him on our team would have WON us more games, and had us closer in games that we would have been farther away in.

Theres no refuting the fact that a healthy steve francis starting for us, and giving cassell less minutes is better than having cassell start, play a lot of minutes, and pay the same money for brevin knight and dan dickau. 

Is that a guarantee that it would have worked out? Of course not. He could get injured, could have a family emergency, who knows. But all things equal francis would have been better on this team than knight and dickau. And obviously the clippers thought the same way because they pursued him heavily before even thinking about knight or dickau.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> I'm now dumber for having read this tripe attempting to defend Steve Francis
> 
> The only good thing that would have come out of Francis signing with the Clippers is reading the stories of Dunleavy trashing him in the media after Francis cost the Clipper yet another game with his selfish play and boneheaded decisions.


I'm dumber for having supported the Clippers for 20+ years, but hey, what can you do?


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> If we ever lost a game it wouldnt be because of steve francis. Having him on our team would have WON us more games, and had us closer in games that we would have been farther away in.
> 
> Theres no refuting the fact that a healthy steve francis starting for us, and giving cassell less minutes is better than having cassell start, play a lot of minutes, and pay the same money for brevin knight and dan dickau.
> 
> Is that a guarantee that it would have worked out? Of course not. He could get injured, could have a family emergency, who knows. But all things equal francis would have been better on this team than knight and dickau. And obviously the clippers thought the same way because they pursued him heavily before even thinking about knight or dickau.


You obviously haven't watched Steve Francis actually play NBA basketball. Here is a big clue, stats are misleading things.

It is very easy to refute that Francis would help the Clippers more than Knight to anyone that doesn't go "OMG, Steve Francis is so talented, look at the stats he use to put up"


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Stats are not misleading when you do the things francis can do. Theres no such thing as stats being so misleading that a guy who averages 20, 6 and 6 for 6 years straight is somehow worse than a brevin knight. Especially when were talking an offense which needs the PG to be a shooter, get a couple of boards, and stretch the defense. Now, if we were talking steve francis vs. say Chris paul or chauncy billups, guys who have never even put up one season of what francis did for 6, yes we can say that in that case, its an argument of who is better, DESPITE the stats.

But were talking about freaking brevin knight and dan dickau. There is no arguing that for the price Francis and jordan or diaz is worlds better than knight and dickau. And like i said, the clippers feel the same way as well because he was priority number 1 this offseason. I dont know what you are trying to argue here.

Im not saying we should have released sam cassell to sign francis. Im not saying we should have done a sign and trade with portland and trade maggette or something for francis when he was there. All im saying is that for the money, one of the better players the last decade is better than a PG who has, over the last 2 years, hit the same amount of three pointers as yaroslav korolev for goodness sakes.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> Stats are not misleading when you do the things francis can do. Theres no such thing as stats being so misleading that a guy who averages 20, 6 and 6 for 6 years straight is somehow worse than a brevin knight. Especially when were talking an offense which needs the PG to be a shooter, get a couple of boards, and stretch the defense. Now, if we were talking steve francis vs. say Chris paul or chauncy billups, guys who have never even put up one season of what francis did for 6, yes we can say that in that case, its an argument of who is better, DESPITE the stats.
> 
> But were talking about freaking brevin knight and dan dickau. There is no arguing that for the price Francis and jordan or diaz is worlds better than knight and dickau. And like i said, the clippers feel the same way as well because he was priority number 1 this offseason. I dont know what you are trying to argue here.
> 
> Im not saying we should have released sam cassell to sign francis. Im not saying we should have done a sign and trade with portland and trade maggette or something for francis when he was there. All im saying is that for the money, one of the better players the last decade is better than a PG who has, over the last 2 years, hit the same amount of three pointers as yaroslav korolev for goodness sakes.


Hilarious, especially over a guy that finished in the top 5 in turnovers for 5 of those 6 seasons and only made the playoffs one time.

I suppose you believe Marbury was a good PG when he was averaging 20 and 8

Also, you need to stick to one side of an argument. You are now claiming that the wisdom of the Clippers Front Office should just be accepted at face value after strings of posts declaring how dumb they were for taking Al Thornton over Nick Young.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

How is it hilarious? I have no problem with someone giving me 20 and 6 and 6 a game, to have less than 1 Turnover per 10 minutes. Same as i have no problem with alen iverson averaging 25-30 7 and 4, who got over 1 TO per 10 minutes. 

Brand has barely made the playoffs in his career, so what? Garnett didnt the last couple of years, is he a cancer too? Marbury is MORE than a "good" PG. The guy in his entire CAREER has averaged 20 and 8. His minutes and output has gone down slightly the last couple of years, in the crazy situation that is NY. But contract aside, would i rather have him right now than a 38 year old sam cassell? Dang straight. 

I only argue one side of the argument, the truth, and the facts. Clippers have made a lot of boneheaded decisions such as thornton, rebraca, promising korolev, etc.. But does that mean that they must always be wrong? No, otherwise decisions like trading jaric for cassell, resigning brand, finding Q Ross, etc. must also be wrong. The truth and the facts are simple: Sometimes the clippers make the right decisions, sometimes they make questionable ones. Sometimes the "right" decisions at the time dont work out down the road, sometimes the "wrong" decisions at the time do work out. 

I just stated a fact, that not even the clippers brass thought that brevin knight was better than francis. No team in the league was reported to have brevin knight on their watch list before steve francis that i saw. 

But anyway, you try to keep beating around the main issue, which there is no arguing. Steve Francis (healthy) for our offense is > Brevin Knight (healthy) in many ways.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> How is it hilarious? I have no problem with someone giving me 20 and 6 and 6 a game, to have less than 1 Turnover per 10 minutes. Same as i have no problem with alen iverson averaging 25-30 7 and 4, who got over 1 TO per 10 minutes.
> 
> Brand has barely made the playoffs in his career, so what? Garnett didnt the last couple of years, is he a cancer too? Marbury is MORE than a "good" PG. The guy in his entire CAREER has averaged 20 and 8. His minutes and output has gone down slightly the last couple of years, in the crazy situation that is NY. But contract aside, would i rather have him right now than a 38 year old sam cassell? Dang straight.
> 
> ...


I could go through this and respond point by point, but I feel sorry for you, so I won't.

I have not beaten around this issue. I have stated quite clearly that you are full of crap and proven that you the value you place on basketball players is hilarious. 

The fact you believe Francis and Marbury were good PG's (or should I say more than good) tells anyone with a brain how clueless you are. Both players are selfish, me first ball hogs. That is the last thing the Clippers need. The Clippers got extremely lucky that Francis decided to take his *** to Houston, as the lockerroom would have been as toxic as the Mo "I'm worth a max contract" Taylor days.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Infatuation? No, its no infatuation, its again based on facts. Hes not a cancer nor loser. Hes one of the better players to have played the game of late, its a shame his career isnt what it could have been due to injury. Wow. Amazing how a couple injury plagued years can make people forget this guy. For 6 years straight basically this guy averaged 20 points, 6 rebounds, and 6 assists. How many other current players can you name me that can boast that on their resume?
> 
> So he pulled a danny ferry, big deal, how does that affect him signing with us? If he would have signed with us, obviously it would have been because he wanted to, so i dont think we would have had to worry about him holding out.
> 
> ...


Yes I said infatuation...Your posts/ESSAYS prove it. He is NOT good anymore. Get over it. I was NEVER defending the signing of Knight/Dickau so for you to bring that up makes abosolutely no sense. Its no secret what I wanted the CLips to do in the draft. Critt, Critt, Critt!!!! I am happy with AL though. He has proved me wrong with his perimeter shot.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

cpawfan said:


> I could go through this and respond point by point, but I feel sorry for you, so I won't.
> 
> I have not beaten around this issue. I have stated quite clearly that you are full of crap and proven that you the value you place on basketball players is hilarious.
> 
> The fact you believe Francis and Marbury were good PG's (or should I say more than good) tells anyone with a brain how clueless you are.


haha.. your not the only one! 

I think his ideal starting backcourt would be Stevie Franchise at SG with Yuta Tabuse at PG! :lol: :worthy:


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> I could go through this and respond point by point, but I feel sorry for you, so I won't.


Translation: "i cant argue with you anymore because how can i argue the facts"



> I have not beaten around this issue. I have stated quite clearly that you are full of crap and proven that you the value you place on basketball players is hilarious.


Now, THAT is hilarious. Havent beaten around the issue? The issue is whether a healthy steve francis is better than a healthy brevin knight. You havent touched that once, because you know the answer to that. How have you proven that the value i place on ball players is hilarious? You are the one saying that its nothing to get 20 6 and 6 for six years....that its "just misleading stats." You are the one who says that a 20 and 8 for 11 years PG should not even be considered "good." keep it up, soon your posts will become so comical that I wont even have to respond. 

But, just in case for once you DO want to get into the issue, please do explain how a healthy brevin knight is better than a healthy steve francis for this offense. 



> The fact you believe Francis and Marbury were good PG's (or should I say more than good) tells anyone with a brain how clueless you are. Both players are selfish, me first ball hogs. That is the last thing the Clippers need. The Clippers got extremely lucky that Francis decided to take his *** to Houston, as the lockerroom would have been as toxic as the Mo "I'm worth a max contract" Taylor days.


More hilarity. Who are the best PG's of clippers recent history? Well who are the PG's who have directed playoff runs? Cassell of 05/06 is the only one in the dunleavy era. I could go with others, but unlike you i like to stick to the topic of this current team/system. Cassell, our best PG in over a decade, if not more in 05/06 averaged 17 FG attempts per 40 minutes, and had 7 assists in that same time frame. Sounds like a familiar statline. Oh yeah, Marbury in his entire career has averaged 17 shots a game, but 8 assists per game. If youre wondering cassell averaged about 4 rebounds per 40, while marbury has just been around 3 for his career. What about francis?  Well this "selfish, ball hog" has only averaged 15 shots per 40 in his career, 6 and a half assists per 40, and 6 rebounds per 40. 

So your theory is bogus. Marbury and francis are not ball hogs the way you say they are. If they were, they would not have the assist numbers they have. Francis, even has less FG attempts per 40 minutes than the best PG the dunleavvy offense has ever had, yet the same assists, and twice as many rebounds about. And were comparing francis with cassell, do we even have to compare him to knight? The dunleavvy offense needs a PG who can hit the occasional three, and who can give decent offense. 

And francis would have made the locker room toxic? Why? He would be getting tons of minutes, so what is there to complain about? He would be with his best buddy in the world, mobley. There is nothing in francis history that would make one say that in the clipper situation he would be a toxic prescece in the locker room.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> Yes I said infatuation...Your posts/ESSAYS prove it. He is NOT good anymore. Get over it. I was NEVER defending the signing of Knight/Dickau so for you to bring that up makes abosolutely no sense. Its no secret what I wanted the CLips to do in the draft. Critt, Critt, Critt!!!!


Yup, im infatuated with facts...so kill me. Im not infatuated with the person. Francis is not good anymore? Why do you say that? He might not be the same as 5 years ago, but his per 40 numbers the last 2 years are still only down only 3 points and 1 rebound/assist from his career totals. To put that into perspective, elton brand went down from 05 to 06 by 4 points per 40. 

And how can it make no sense me bringing up dickau/knight? That is all we are talking about here since the beginning. He chose to sign somewhere else, and he was my first FA choice, the clippers first FA choice. Instead of us getting him we got brevin knight...so i have said that im not saying francis is a superstar anymore, all im saying is that he was an incredible player before, and he is much better than brevin knight and dan dickau. Im assuming you agree with me? If so, then wonderful. I dont know about crittenton..im not 100% sure i would have even taken him over thronton. Possibly just on need alone. But if not thornton, i would have picked about 4 or 5 other guys before crittenton. 



> I think his ideal starting backcourt would be Stevie Franchise at SG with Yuta Tabuse at PG!


haha, keep it up. For any new members, this is what usually happens when people try to argue with me, they end up resorting to stupid comments like this since they cant hendle the facts. Love it.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

yamaneko said:


> haha, keep it up. For any new members, this is what usually happens when people try to argue with me, they end up resorting to stupid comments like this since they cant hendle the facts. Love it.


For any new members?? I've been around longer than you and even use to moderate this forum. Been around long enough to remember your infatuation with Yuta Tabuse (there is that word again used to describe your viewpoint). What facts are you pointing out?? Your arguing PER statistics which is rediculous. And then you don't even want to look at all the statistics and nobody has even tried to argue their side using PER stats. Maybe we could field a starting lineup that averaged 15-20 turnovers per game (and that would be just the starters). 
Isn't it kind of odd that nobody agrees with your opinions/evaluations??


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> For any new members?? I've been around longer than you and even use to moderate this forum.


Yes, for any new members who are just wondering what kind of strange comment you just made, I was just letting them know that whenever someone cannot argue the facts, they will make some off the wall attack that has no basis.



> Your arguing PER statistics which is rediculous. And then you don't even want to look at all the statistics and nobody has even tried to argue their side using PER stats.


Im not arguing "PER" statistics which is a complex system that John Hollinger uses. I am aruging regular statistics, combined with "per every 40 minutes played" statistics. What do you mean I dont even want to look at all the statistics? Who is quoting the most statistics here? Others are the ones saying, 'well statistics can be misleading,' and other cop-out statements.



> Isn't it kind of odd that nobody agrees with your opinions/evaluations??


Check again. People cant argue the facts. How many people are arguing in this thread supposedly "against" me? 2? Everyone else most likely is just watching, laughing along. But again, people are not even really "disagreing" with me. STill no one has said nor explained how Brevin knight is better steve francis for this team. On some of the minor arguments in the thread, no one has provided a statistical nor logical analysis of Francis not being a good player despite his numbers in the past. And the last point, only one person in this thread so far has been silly enough to say that marbury is not even a "good" PG. 



> Been around long enough to remember your infatuation with Yuta Tabuse (there is that word again used to describe your viewpoint).


Here it is again newbies. Just for the newbies again, what he is mistakinly referring to is how angry I was that we dropped Tabuse for the 3rd/4th string PG position in favor of the twice as expensive, twice as bad Doug Overton. And, as usual, I was absolutely right, both at the time, and in retrospect, as doug overton stunk himself out of a roster spot not that long after.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> Translation: "i cant argue with you anymore because how can i argue the facts"


No, it is exactly what it says. I feel sorry for you.



> Now, THAT is hilarious. Havent beaten around the issue? The issue is whether a healthy steve francis is better than a healthy brevin knight. You havent touched that once, because you know the answer to that.


Of course I know the answer to that and it is that a healthy Brevin Knight is better for any team than a healthy Steve Francis with one exception. That exception is if a team has no talent and that certainly isn't the case for the Clippers.



> How have you proven that the value i place on ball players is hilarious? You are the one saying that its nothing to get 20 6 and 6 for six years....that its "just misleading stats." You are the one who says that a 20 and 8 for 11 years PG should not even be considered "good." keep it up, soon your posts will become so comical that I wont even have to respond.


Yes it is hilarious to anyone that actually watches the game. It isn't a coincidence that every team has gotten better after Marbury has been traded. It is the people like you that only look at the pretty stats that bring down the general discourse on the NBA. OMG!!!!!Zach Randolph is such a stud, look at his numbers!!!!OMG!!!!!!!! 



> But, just in case for once you DO want to get into the issue, please do explain how a healthy brevin knight is better than a healthy steve francis for this offense.


The Clippers have plenty of players that can score from the perimeter and the last thing they need is a me first, pound the ball, past his prime headcase. Brevin Knight knows his limitations and knows how to facilitate for others and that is what the Clippers need to distribute the scoring load with Brand out.



> More hilarity. Who are the best PG's of clippers recent history? Well who are the PG's who have directed playoff runs? Cassell of 05/06 is the only one in the dunleavy era. I could go with others, but unlike you i like to stick to the topic of this current team/system. Cassell, our best PG in over a decade, if not more in 05/06 averaged 17 FG attempts per 40 minutes, and had 7 assists in that same time frame. Sounds like a familiar statline. Oh yeah, Marbury in his entire career has averaged 17 shots a game, but 8 assists per game. If youre wondering cassell averaged about 4 rebounds per 40, while marbury has just been around 3 for his career. What about francis? Well this "selfish, ball hog" has only averaged 15 shots per 40 in his career, 6 and a half assists per 40, and 6 rebounds per 40.


Your disjointed mixing of per game, per season, per career and per 40 demonstrate how little you understand of this issue. Cassell accomplished those numbers in 2005-2006 by being the tertiary scorer both in per game and per 40. Additionally, he spent time on the court playing with Livinsgton. Neither Marbury nor Francis is able to do that and win games. Marbury attempted it last season, and we all see what happened.

You need to watch the players actually play and understand the context of how the stats are achieved. 



> So your theory is bogus.


Actually, it is a fact and it is accurate



> Marbury and francis are not ball hogs the way you say they are. If they were, they would not have the assist numbers they have.


When Francis was at his best, he was only putting up 1 APG more than Kobe and 1.5 APG more than AI. Players that dominate the ball are still able to get plenty of assists in game as they do find wide open teammates. Marbury is notorious for passing the ball to his teammates late in the shot clock after pounding the ball. They are ball hogs that put up numbers, just like Zach Randolph.



> Francis, even has less FG attempts per 40 minutes than the best PG the dunleavvy offense has ever had, yet the same assists, and twice as many rebounds about. And were comparing francis with cassell, do we even have to compare him to knight?


Again, using stats without understanding their context. Francis played one way, as the primary scoring option, until he had to play under JVG and then he complained like the emotional baby that he is. Cassell achieves his stats as the tertiary option. Getting 9 APG on a horrible team in 30 MPG is the mark of someone that knows how to facilitate for his teammates.



> The dunleavvy offense needs a PG who can hit the occasional three, and who can give decent offense.


The Clippers offense needs PG play that allows the other players to score the ball. Maggette, Mobly, Thomas, Kaman, Thornton and Patterson all need their touches and Brevin delivers the ball in the right place for players. Without Brand, the Clippers need a facilitator for their offense, not a disruptor. 



> And francis would have made the locker room toxic? Why? He would be getting tons of minutes, so what is there to complain about? He would be with his best buddy in the world, mobley. There is nothing in francis history that would make one say that in the clipper situation he would be a toxic prescece in the locker room.


The Clipper locker room would be toxic because the last thing they need is a player looking to be the man. Additionally, Francis isn't happy under demanding coaches. There is nothing in Dunleavy's personality that meshes with Francis' personality. 

It is hard enough to lose games in the NBA, but when the players aren't happy and cohesive, it becomes toxic in the locker room.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> Of course I know the answer to that and it is that a healthy Brevin Knight is better for any team than a healthy Steve Francis with one exception. That exception is if a team has no talent and that certainly isn't the case for the Clippers.


Ah, the truth finally comes out. Until now you have refrained from asserting this assinine statement but you couldnt help yourself. In no planet is a healthy brevin knight better than a healthy Steve Francis. I doubt i even have to explain it to anyone else here. Actually MAYBE one team where he would fit in better (but they didnt puruse him at all), is boston, inasmuch as they wouldnt want to get too much into luxury tax with a higher deal to francis, plus that is a unique situation where they actually NEED the PG NOT to score, but rather just distribute and play defense. But in our offense, we need the PG to score and shoot. But thanks for the comic relief. LOL. I can barely type here im laughing so hard. Someone actually said that a healthy brevin knight is better than a healthy steve francis. thats like material to put on a signature.



> Yes it is hilarious to anyone that actually watches the game. It isn't a coincidence that every team has gotten better after Marbury has been traded. It is the people like you that only look at the pretty stats that bring down the general discourse on the NBA. OMG!!!!!Zach Randolph is such a stud, look at his numbers!!!!OMG!!!!!!!!


Minnesota, while they had marbury averaged 43 wins. The year the traded him, they went 25-25. The 2 years after they traded him, they averaged about 4 more wins. Using your logic, its due to the subtraction of marbury. The next two years, he was on one of the most pitiful disgraces of a team ive seen, the nets, and they averaged 28 wins a year where he was joined on the starting lineup by guys like our own aaron williams, and johnny newman. Then all of a sudden, they got someone by the name of jason kidd, one of the best PG's in history, plus Richard jeffrson. You add those two to any team, they will be improved. Who wouldnt trade marbury for jason kidd ? Marbury then went to phoenix where in his first year, they had (coached by frank johnson), 44 wins despite having guys start most of the games they were in like Tsakalidis and scott williams. The next year, 29 wins in a year where the coach got fired midseason, and guys like Voskuhl was starting tons of games. Next you let marbury go, fully integrate the new offense, and have amare/nash/marion/Johnson/Qrich start almost all 82 games. 

So your point is arguable at best. His first old team, minnesota was only margainally better after trading him for terell brandon who put up some great stats himself for a couple of years. And then the nets and suns got better after adding 2 of the best PG's of NBA history, and better surrounding talent. So your point is moot. You replace any PG with kidd or nash, plus add better talent, youre going to do better. 

Elton brand averaged 17 wins a year in chicago. The next two years they averaged almost 10 more wins. So brand is a scrub? Steve nash averaged 54 wins his last three years in dallas, the 3 years after him, dallas averaged 63 wins...so was steve nash holding down dallas? Your logic is not sound.


----------



## AllEyezonTX (Nov 16, 2006)

Thumbs up to all the haters!:lol:


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

And yes, Randolph puts up good numbers. Hes no superstar, but still better than the majority of the PF's in the league. Not sure what point youre trying to prove there. 



> The Clippers have plenty of players that can score from the perimeter and the last thing they need is a me first, pound the ball, past his prime headcase. Brevin Knight knows his limitations and knows how to facilitate for others and that is what the Clippers need to distribute the scoring load with Brand out.


Francis is no headcase. Clippers do not need just a distributor. As shown, the clippers do best with a PG who can stretch the defense, whild still distributing, and take over games, such as cassell. Its why conroy couldnt even make it as a 3rd string PG here, he didnt have an outside offensive game. Its exactly why they gave up on jordan, quote, "he just didnt have enough of an NBA shot." Its why livingston never lived up to expectations, without an outside shot, its hard for a PG to suceed in this offense. With brand out, it becomes even more important for the guards to pick up the scoring slack, not less important. 



> Your disjointed mixing of per game, per season, per career and per 40 demonstrate how little you understand of this issue. Cassell accomplished those numbers in 2005-2006 by being the tertiary scorer both in per game and per 40. Additionally, he spent time on the court playing with Livinsgton. Neither Marbury nor Francis is able to do that and win games. Marbury attempted it last season, and we all see what happened.


Not disjointing anything. Just stating facts. You accuse francis and marbury as being ball hogs, and people who only look for their own shot, and as something this team does not need. I counter by showing the most successful season in clippers recent history had a guy put up the stats that these guys do their entire careers. So if you say they are shoot first guys, then so is cassell. And if thats what he is, fine, its what we needed and still need. 



> When Francis was at his best, he was only putting up 1 APG more than Kobe and 1.5 APG more than AI. Players that dominate the ball are still able to get plenty of assists in game as they do find wide open teammates. Marbury is notorious for passing the ball to his teammates late in the shot clock after pounding the ball. They are ball hogs that put up numbers, just like Zach Randolph.


What are you saying? Its easy to do what francis does? Then again, name me another player in recent memory to have put up 20 6 and 6 over a period of six years. And marbury a ball hog? You cannot be a ball hog and still average 8 assists a game. If you can score AND get those kind of numbers like iverson, if thats being a ball hog, then every team needs a ball hog. Forget the 20 points, how about name anyone who started out their career with 6 straignt 15 and 6 and 6 seasons? If you do a search you wont find anyone not named Magic, Oscar, or Grant. Not saying hes as good as magic or oscar, but it shows that it is rare talent to even be able to do that. 



> Again, using stats without understanding their context. Francis played one way, as the primary scoring option, until he had to play under JVG and then he complained like the emotional baby that he is. Cassell achieves his stats as the tertiary option. Getting 9 APG on a horrible team in 30 MPG is the mark of someone that knows how to facilitate for his teammates.


And on our team, he would be the primary option almost even with Maggette, even though he wasnt looking to do that necessarily. (he even signed with houston, where he knew that at best he would probably be the 4th or 5th option, if he started at all). Francis has gotten the bum rap, and id be complaining if i were he to. Look at the debacle that has been theknicks rotation the last couple of years. Everyone complains in NY. 

When has cassell averaged 9 assists on a bad team in 30 minutes of action? The most cassell has ever averaged was 9 assists in 36 minutes of action, on a playoff team that had Glen robinson, ray allen, and tim thomas. marbury is the guy who has been getting tons of assists on piss poor teams. By the way, francis was not always the number 1 option. One year it was yao ming, perhaps 1 or two years, francis, the rest of the years, it was cat mobley. 



> The Clippers offense needs PG play that allows the other players to score the ball. Maggette, Mobly, Thomas, Kaman, Thornton and Patterson all need their touches and Brevin delivers the ball in the right place for players. Without Brand, the Clippers need a facilitator for their offense, not a disruptor.


If that was the case, then brevin knight would be the hands down starter, not someone who would even be concievable as the 3rd string. Because cassell is going to be looking for his own shot. If we just needed distributors, we would have kept conroy or jordan instead of paying twice as much for dan dickau. If we needed a sole distributor, brevin knight wouldnt have been our last choice, francis would have been. Look at the guys we have given up, and then gone after. We gave up jason hart, not THAT great of a shooter, in order to make a run at steve francis. That didnt work out, so plan c was brevin knight. we let go of conroy and jordan, due to lack of outside game, in order to get dan dickau, a noted shooter. 

And again, if brevin knight is exactly what the clippers wanted and needed, he would have been their number 1 choice. Not to mention would be starting for cassell since cassel is not a pure distributor. As it is right now, no one thinks he will start over a healthy cassell, and even cassell himself isnt sure that he will be the main backup to him, although he does hope so. 

Francis was always happy when he played wit hhis best buddy mobley. then he gets traded under strange cirumstances, and he pouted for a while. Then gets traded again into a crazy situation on a team with guys like qrich, marbury, crawford, nate robinson, etc. all in the same positions as he. Francis would be happier on the clippers than almost any other team, since his best friend is on there, and since he would get playing time like he wants. As far as his kids schooling though, i cant comment on that, it seems like he wants his kids in houston...


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> Ah, the truth finally comes out. Until now you have refrained from asserting this assinine statement but you couldnt help yourself. In no planet is a healthy brevin knight better than a healthy Steve Francis. I doubt i even have to explain it to anyone else here. Actually MAYBE one team where he would fit in better (but they didnt puruse him at all), is boston, inasmuch as they wouldnt want to get too much into luxury tax with a higher deal to francis, plus that is a unique situation where they actually NEED the PG NOT to score, but rather just distribute and play defense. But in our offense, we need the PG to score and shoot. But thanks for the comic relief. LOL. I can barely type here im laughing so hard. Someone actually said that a healthy brevin knight is better than a healthy steve francis. thats like material to put on a signature.


Again, you are talking about individual players and I'm talking about team play. Yes, Francis is the better And-1 player, but in terms of contributing to winning basketball, Knight wins every time.

The Clippers need a PG that looks to distribute first and can score when necessary.



> Minnesota, while they had marbury averaged 43 wins. The year the traded him, they went 25-25. The 2 years after they traded him, they averaged about 4 more wins.


In 1999-2000, the first full season w/o Marbury, the TWolves won 50 games. 



> Using your logic, its due to the subtraction of marbury.


No, it is the replacement of Marbury with a better team player in Terrell Brandon



> The next two years, he was on one of the most pitiful disgraces of a team ive seen, the nets,


You do realize the 1999-2000 Nets won 16 more games than the Clippers



> and they averaged 28 wins a year where he was joined on the starting lineup by guys like our own aaron williams, and johnny newman. Then all of a sudden, they got someone by the name of jason kidd, one of the best PG's in history, plus Richard jeffrson.


Your attempt to retell Nets (especially to a Nets fan) history is hilarious and wrong. For starters, you are overlooking Keith VanHorn and how much he regressed playing with Marbury. You are also overlooking the tremendous amount of injuries the Nets suffered in 2000-2001, when the managed to finish only 5 games behind the Clippers and with 5 teams having worse records than them. 

You also are missing how Marbury created the toxic dump that was the locker room in 2000-2001. Writing things like "All Alone" on his games shoes was the sign of a true PG and leader. He was a grade A, classless jerk.



> You add those two to any team, they will be improved. Who wouldnt trade marbury for jason kidd ? Marbury then went to phoenix where in his first year, they had (coached by frank johnson), 44 wins despite having guys start most of the games they were in like Tsakalidis and scott williams.


The Suns won 51 games the season before with Kidd as the PG and they had less talent than the 2001-2002 Suns. The 2001-2002 scored more points and grabbed more points than the 2000-2001 Suns, but because of Marbury, their defense sucked. The third leading scorer for the 2000-2001 Suns was Cliff Robinson.



> The next year, 29 wins in a year where the coach got fired midseason, and guys like Voskuhl was starting tons of games. Next you let marbury go, fully integrate the new offense, and have amare/nash/marion/Johnson/Qrich start almost all 82 games.


After Marbury and Penny were shipped to the Knicks, the Suns won 35.4% of their games that season as compared to 35.2% with Marbury.



> So your point is arguable at best. His first old team, minnesota was only margainally better after trading him for terell brandon who put up some great stats himself for a couple of years.


No, they were significantly better. The jump from 45 wins to 50 wins is a big jump in the NBA. Additionally, the team was better off not having to deal with Marbury's drama. Your attempt to average seasons before and after the trade fails to provide an adequate picture because it doesn't take into account the growth in KG's game on the front end and the death of Malik Sealy on the back end.

Terrell Brandon was a former All-Star that knew how to play the game. Again, the stats aren't the issue, it is how the PG meshes with his team. 



> And then the nets and suns got better after adding 2 of the best PG's of NBA history, and better surrounding talent. So your point is moot. You replace any PG with kidd or nash, plus add better talent, youre going to do better.


The Nets got better because they played basketball the right way. Changing a culture of losing takes a tremendous amount of effort, and it isn't something that happens because of talent. It happens because of leadership.

The Suns were better as soon as they traded Marbury.

The season before the Nets traded for Marbury they were 43-39. The season before the Suns traded for Marbuty they were 51-31. The Knicks is the only team that has improved at all when Marbury arrived, and then the next season they were worse than before Marbury arrived.



> Elton brand averaged 17 wins a year in chicago. The next two years they averaged almost 10 more wins. So brand is a scrub?


The Bulls upgraded the overall talent on the roster after Brand was traded and they fired that hack Tim Floyd, so it isn't possible to pin that on Brand. Additionally, the Clippers improved because of Brand, something Marbury can't say.



> Steve nash averaged 54 wins his last three years in dallas, the 3 years after him, dallas averaged 63 wins...so was steve nash holding down dallas? Your logic is not sound.


The logic that isn't sound is your attempt to average seasons. Nash's last season in Dallas they won 52 games because of the stupidity of the front office, the trades for Jamison and shimmyboy killed the good play and shimmyboy poisoned the locker room. The 2002-2003 Mavs won 60 games and it took until 2005-2006 for the Mavs to reach 60 wins again. The Mavs didn't improve by getting rid of Nash.

Keep trying though, I need the laughs


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> Again, you are talking about individual players and I'm talking about team play. Yes, Francis is the better And-1 player, but in terms of contributing to winning basketball, Knight wins every time.
> The Clippers need a PG that looks to distribute first and can score when necessary.


That logic is so faulty, its laughable. In that sense, then why isnt brevin knight being offered huge contracts every year? This is like his 8th different team in the last 9-10 years. Knight can pass better, so what. Were talking about everything to make the team win games. And if you have a guy who averages 8 points and 7 assists and 3 rebounds for his career in the exact same spot as someone who has averged 18 points, 6 assists and 6 rebounds, the latter player will help you to win more games. Its as easy as that. Knight has always been, even when he was on top of his game a decent, PG with exceelent assist numbers, but the rest of his career, journeyman bench player. Francis has been a 3 time all star. To compare the two is downright silly. 

Clippers play best with an offensive minded PG who can stretch the defense. Heck, even rick brunson shot the occasional 3, and looked for his shot at times, and if a scrub can do that and be sucessfull, then that what we need. Even livingston had the coaches on him all the time because he looked to pass too much as opposed to looking for his shot, and he never could hit a three. The only offensive minded PG we have had, cassell, has been our best PG of the last decade. 



> In 1999-2000, the first full season w/o Marbury, the TWolves won 50 games.


I took the average of marbury's two years, with the average of the next 2 years without marbury. about a 4 game difference. 



> No, it is the replacement of Marbury with a better team player in Terrell Brandon


Nope. How about the fact that with marbury, there was sam mitchel, gugliotta, parks, carr, stanley roberts, all with over 40 starts. After marbury, better guys like malik sealy, and Wally Szczerbiak. heck, any team that has gugliotta as your leading scorer, i dont know how they won 45 games that year. 



> You do realize the 1999-2000 Nets won 16 more games than the Clippers


Mainly, thanks to marbury. Look at the starting lineup those years he was on that team. Marbury, kendall gill, keith van horn, kerry kittles, Jim McIlvaine. Put brevin knight in that lineup and i assume they would have done much better using your logic, right?



> Your attempt to retell Nets (especially to a Nets fan) history is hilarious and wrong. For starters, you are overlooking Keith VanHorn and how much he regressed playing with Marbury. You are also overlooking the tremendous amount of injuries the Nets suffered in 2000-2001, when the managed to finish only 5 games behind the Clippers and with 5 teams having worse records than them.


Yes, keith van horns demise is marburys fault. please. With marbury, he averaged 18 points a game. Then with kidd he averaged 15. He was on a terrible team. Is that an excuse for being upset? maybe, maybe not, but still doesnt take away that hes one of the better Pg's of the last 10 years. 2 time all star, 2 time all nba 3rd team. 1st or second in the league in assists 3 times, but no, lets believe you and say hes not even a "good" player.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

I have killed almost every one of your non points, even as it gets farther and farther away from the main point which is and has always been:

Clippers would have won more games this year with steve francis on the team. 
Steve francis is a much better player than brevin knight. 
Brevin knight had no one beating down his door until the clippers were out of options after their first choice, francis was gone. 
Its laughable to say that marbury is not even a "good" PG. What is he? Average? Below average?

Im not saying francis is a model citizen, or smart guy. Matter of fact i started this thread to say how stupid he was to go to houston. But bottom line is, for 6 years he did things that few in the history of the game have done, has been an all star, and still puts up very nice per 40 minute numbers, in sporratic playing time. 

Other irrefutable facts is, even when our leading scorer was with the team, we STILL needed a PG who could score, and hit an outside shot. Now you expect us to believe with 20+ points a game gone, not to mention livingston, that we need a pass only PG who cannot hit a three pointer, over a PG who does everything dunleavvy wants, scores, hits 3's, rebounds, assists, and way better defense than cassell.


----------



## leidout (Jul 13, 2005)

Holy cow, even with my new giant size monitor, these posts still don't fit in the screen.


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

leidout said:


> Holy cow, even with my new giant size monitor, these posts still don't fit in the screen.


haahahaha

all i have to say as long as the Clippers dont have a Sam Cassell type (confident scorer, get the ball to their man when necessary and a leader) the Clippers wont make much noise for a while again


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

Yup. Agreed. With dunleavvy as coach we need the sam cassell guy. Francis, possibly could have been that guy. NO ONE expects that from knight and dickau obviously, and i doubt many really think that livingston, even without that injury, now even more so, could have ever been that guy. 

That being said, barring some unforseen trade, our only shot at such a player might be to get one of the top 2 picks in the draft. Its not often that a player of Francis calliber is just bought out, and even MORE not often that said player would even consider going to the clippers.


----------



## Showtime87 (Jun 27, 2005)

leidout said:


> Holy cow, even with my new giant size monitor, these posts still don't fit in the screen.


:lol: :lol: :lol: 

These two definitely have some sore fingers right about now...


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

Who erased my post? At least have the guts to man up. There was nothing offensive nor obscene. Lame


----------



## ElMarroAfamado (Nov 1, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> Yup. Agreed. With dunleavvy as coach we need the sam cassell guy. Francis, possibly could have been that guy. NO ONE expects that from knight and dickau obviously, and i doubt many really think that livingston, even without that injury, now even more so, could have ever been that guy.
> 
> That being said, barring some unforseen trade, our only shot at such a player might be to get one of the top 2 picks in the draft. Its not often that a player of Francis calliber is just bought out, and even MORE not often that said player would even consider going to the clippers.


well....Steve Francis is not playing tonight so apparently he is waaaaaaaaaaay out of shape 
:lol:


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> I have killed almost every one of your non points, even as it gets farther and farther away from the main point which is and has always been:
> 
> 
> > Only in your mind. In reality all you have done is waste a lot of time and further prove how dumb you are.
> ...


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> That logic is so faulty, its laughable. In that sense, then why isnt brevin knight being offered huge contracts every year? This is like his 8th different team in the last 9-10 years. Knight can pass better, so what. Were talking about everything to make the team win games. And if you have a guy who averages 8 points and 7 assists and 3 rebounds for his career in the exact same spot as someone who has averged 18 points, 6 assists and 6 rebounds, the latter player will help you to win more games. Its as easy as that. Knight has always been, even when he was on top of his game a decent, PG with exceelent assist numbers, but the rest of his career, journeyman bench player. Francis has been a 3 time all star. To compare the two is downright silly.


Because we are talking about what the players can contribute right now to helping the Clippers win games. Steve Francis, even at his best, wasn't a guy that played winning basketball. You can point to the pretty stats all you want, but that still doesn't change the fact that winning basketball is not something Francis understands. The GM's that understand how to build winning teams are few and far between. It has been proven time and time again that GM's will pay huge sums of money to guys that put up pretty stats



> Clippers play best with an offensive minded PG who can stretch the defense. Heck, even rick brunson shot the occasional 3, and looked for his shot at times, and if a scrub can do that and be sucessfull, then that what we need. Even livingston had the coaches on him all the time because he looked to pass too much as opposed to looking for his shot, and he never could hit a three. The only offensive minded PG we have had, cassell, has been our best PG of the last decade.


This isn't about being an offensive minded PG. Cassell simply has "it" He showed that in Minnesota when he was the driving force behind that team finally making a deep playoff run. The fallacy that I have been pointing out is that you can't just look at Cassell's stats and say, duplicate that. Sam is a winner and Francis isn't.



> I took the average of marbury's two years, with the average of the next 2 years without marbury. about a 4 game difference.


Which is just dumb as there are too many variables in that comparison.



> Nope. How about the fact that with marbury, there was sam mitchel, gugliotta, parks, carr, stanley roberts, all with over 40 starts. After marbury, better guys like malik sealy, and Wally Szczerbiak. heck, any team that has gugliotta as your leading scorer, i dont know how they won 45 games that year.


Again, the lunacy of your attempt to average multiple seasons. Additionally, you once again demonstrate how little of NBA history you understand. Googs was a damn good player and far better than any other forward KG played with afterwards. I isolated the variables and you are attempting to muddy the waters.



> Mainly, thanks to marbury. Look at the starting lineup those years he was on that team. Marbury, kendall gill, keith van horn, kerry kittles, Jim McIlvaine. Put brevin knight in that lineup and i assume they would have done much better using your logic, right?


You really should stop looking at old stats and pretending you know something about things you know nothing about. Marbury replaced Cassell and the Nets were worse.



> Yes, keith van horns demise is marburys fault. please. With marbury, he averaged 18 points a game. Then with kidd he averaged 15. He was on a terrible team. Is that an excuse for being upset? maybe, maybe not, but still doesnt take away that hes one of the better Pg's of the last 10 years. 2 time all star, 2 time all nba 3rd team. 1st or second in the league in assists 3 times, but no, lets believe you and say hes not even a "good" player.


KVH averaged more pre-Marbury than he did with Marbury. When Kidd joined the Nets, KVH was given a far different role than he had with Marbury as the PG. Again, another demonstration of a lack of knowledge on your part.

Marbury is a talented individual player that doesn't play winning basketball. That is who he is. His best value is as a fantasy draft pick because he makes sure that he gets his. Marbury lived off a reputation that he had since HS that he was a special player. Indeed he is special, but he still isn't a winning PG.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

> No, it is beyond laughable to consider Marbury a good PG. He is a talented individual that doesn't have the first clue about how to play winning basketball. He puts up lots of pretty stats for teams that go nowhere. He doesn't defend and he doesn't play smart basketball. This is where watching the game instead of looking at the stats is important.


Keep it up, you just make anything you potentially say that much worthless if you think marbury is not even a good PG. Stats is important when you talk about such a wide different. Newsflash: Stats wins games. Whoever has the most points at the end of the game wins the game, simple as that. Now, there are grey lines when youre talking about similar level players. For example, Baron davis might have better stats than chauncy billups, but first of all, not by THAT much, and second, both of them are stars. But one might say theyd want chauncy on the pistons rather than baron despite the slight stat difference. I can handle that. BUt when you say someone like marbury isnt even a "good" PG, its just so off, its laughable. There is nothing about his game on the court that would even put him as average, let alone "not good". he is a distributor and scorer. Perhaps he doesnt rebound like a kidd or francis, but so what. A "good PG" might be a guy like livingston? Maybe a little better? What does the average PG do? Good is someone who has never sniffed an all star game. Good is perhaps 11 points, 5 assists per game. Youre saying hes not even good. A "not good" PG, were talking 2nd string at best? 7 points, 3 assists? It doesnt matter the players attitude, doesnt matter anything else, if you put a "not good" point guard on a team, and put a 20 point 8 assist player on the same team, the latter is better.

It would be one thing if you had a PG who scored like 20 points a game, but averaged maybe 3 assists. THAT would be high scoring, but the team is not getting the ball from their PG. But marbury gets assists, sometimes more assists than any player, any position in the nba in years. Is he the best PG? No, but if you do that, theres no question that you are WAY PASSED, "good." 

Perhaps you harbor some ill will against him because you are a nets fan and you somehow think he is responsible for the demise of keith van horn or whatever else problem you have. But only someone using emotion would then call a guy with such a distinguished career not good. Heck, all of us clipper fans hate andre miller. But hes more than just a "good" PG. Why did he suck so much with us? Surprise, his STATS went down by incredible figures with us. Didnt meet up to our expectations. Didnt want to be here. Still dont know why we got him when he always said he didnt want to come here. But just because we hate the guy doesnt mean, oh now hes a below average PG. 

Talk about putting up stats, and not know about winning basketball? How about elton brand? out of any PF with his kind of stats he probably has one of the worst career winning percentages. He also in his tenure here in los angeles, has never hit ONE buzzer beating game winning shot, although every year he has been here he is the suppoesd star of the team. Thats why i say i dont want to give him another max deal. But im not going to sit here and say hes not a "good" PF because he doesnt carry the team to victory. Hes a dang good PF. Theres guys like mehmet okur who hit game winning shots all the time.....but the clippers are still way better off with brand than okur, again due to the stats. Now, you compare brand and pau gasol or others, now you have an argument. 

Ive proven the points too many times already, youre starting to waste my time. Argue something else if youd like, but im not going to sit here and waste my time trying to argue something that NO ONE in their right mind with argue, namely:

1. Brevin knight is better than steve francis

2. Marbury is not even a "good" PG. 


Back on topic now.

Still ROFL at Steve Francis decision. Wish i could have seen the look on his face as he got a DNP - coaches decision tonight against the lakers. I knew he didnt fit into addlemans plans, but still, to watch alston get 26 minutes ahead of him while shooting 1-6, and then to see even luther head get 7 minutes of 0-2 shooting aahead of him, priceless.

I hope mobley is calling him right now and rubbing it in his face.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

yamaneko said:


> Newsflash: Stats wins games.


Thank you for giving us the single dumbest statement ever typed on this site


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

How can it be dumb when its true? When its all said and done, whoever has more points at the end of the game, GUARANTEED, is the winner. You talk as if you dont know that fact. You put 5 guys out there who are the best citizens, best team players, yada yada yada, but they only can put up 80 points, yet the opposing team has cry babies, ball hogs, yada yada, and they get 90 points, guess who won the game?

Dont talk as if statistics are meaningless especially when comparing 2 players where one averages twice as many points as the other. You can use the meaningless stats argument when were saying things like, hey Q ross averages almost nothing offensively, but his defense is what doesnt show up in the stat book. 

Or if we say, kwame brown averages more points than Robert horry, hes a much better player. Yeah, then we can use the statistics is misleading argument. 

Or perhaps when there is a player who is a one hit wonder on a terrible team like mike james going for 20 and 6 for toronto. No way is he better than cassell who that year averaged less than that. 

But you are using the statistics are meaningless argument on things that are not even close.


----------



## shaunliv (Sep 12, 2005)

DaFranchise said:


> Who erased my post? At least have the guts to man up. There was nothing offensive nor obscene. Lame


i feel you man, i've had at least THREE posts deleted within the last two weeks with NO explanation. the gestapo is in full effect!


----------



## shaunliv (Sep 12, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> Because we are talking about what the players can contribute right now to helping the Clippers win games. Steve Francis, even at his best, wasn't a guy that played winning basketball. You can point to the pretty stats all you want, but that still doesn't change the fact that winning basketball is not something Francis understands. The GM's that understand how to build winning teams are few and far between. It has been proven time and time again that GM's will pay huge sums of money to guys that put up pretty stats
> 
> 
> 
> ...


as tough as it is to admit, i AGREE with YAMS, on these particular issues. although Knight consistently has one of the best assist to turnover rates and plays solid D, there's no way he could outplay a _healthy_ Francis. offensively, Francis would have provided a legitimate scoring threat from anywhere on the court(he would definitely had to be accounted for). he averages 6.1 assists and 5.6 rebounds a game for his ENTIRE career! IMHO, the clippers WOULD win more games with FRANCIS rather than Knight!


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

shaunliv said:


> as tough as it is to admit, i AGREE with YAMS, on these particular issues. although Knight consistently has one of the best assist to turnover rates and plays solid D, there's no way he could outplay a _healthy_ Francis. offensively, Francis would have provided a legitimate scoring threat from anywhere on the court(he would definitely had to be accounted for). he averages 6.1 assists and 5.6 rebounds a game for his ENTIRE career! IMHO, the clippers WOULD win more games with FRANCIS rather than Knight!


You might as well be talking about bigfoot playing PG for the Clippers because the Francis you are talking about doesn't exist anymore.


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

dafranchise, any posts which are just personal attacks on a singular person, when not even having any basis on a topic at hand are deleted. Its one thing to have a good argument going back and forth, on topic, but if you just come out of nowhere with negativity directed toward one person that is completely uncalled for, its the same as a personal attack and is deleted, not to mention when people do things like that it really brings down the board. 



> You might as well be talking about bigfoot playing PG for the Clippers because the Francis you are talking about doesn't exist anymore.


Look at her per 40 minute numbers though in his "down years" while he was injured. The 20 6 and 6 francis is certainly not there anymore. Look at him in the last month of the season when he finally was getting playing time. The last 5 games, that he had over 30 minutes in, went for 23 points, 5 assists, 4 rebounds. The next to last month of the season, in games he had 30 minutes or more, averaged 16 points, 5 rebounds, 5 assists. When he gets minutes, he still can put up decent numbers. 

He is not an all star, but when given minutes, even in his "off years" puts up better numbers than most that we have put at PG/SG the last couple of years.


----------



## DaFranchise (Jun 29, 2005)

yamaneko said:


> dafranchise, any posts which are just personal attacks on a singular person, when not even having any basis on a topic at hand are deleted. Its one thing to have a good argument going back and forth, on topic, but if you just come out of nowhere with negativity directed toward one person that is completely uncalled for, its the same as a personal attack and is deleted, not to mention when people do things like that it really brings down the board.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Did you erase it and how was it offensive? Explain in detail


----------



## yamaneko (Jan 1, 2003)

If you really do not know why it was erased, feel free to PM, do not continue to go further off topic on the thread. 

Its very simple, try to stay on topic if you can. If you bring up something totally out in left field that has no basis to be in the thread, it could be either A. ignored, B. moved to an appropriate thread, or C. deleted if the post was just meant to attack someone for no reason. 

Now, for the last time, enough with the comments that have nothing to do with this thread and are made solely to try to aggravate or attack another person. Matter of fact, thread is closed.


----------

