# Do we have too much talent?



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

*Do we have too much potential talent?*

i was thinking about possible grizzlies lineups today, and it hit me that we may have too much potential talent on our team. I dont think that with the team we have now, that the ball will get enough touches to those who deserve them and should get them. the lineup right now is:

C - Wright/Archibald 
----> the only really weak position we have, the grizz should be trying to land a solid center in case wright goes down.

PF - Gasol/Swift/Massenburg 
---->I think swift is expendable, but hes playing well. why do you have to make it so difficult stro?!? If you ask me, Massenburg is a perfect match for gasol. He can come in for 10-15 minutes at the most and put in some hustle and rebounding while pau gets some rest. gasol/massenburg is a good combo

SF - Battier/Gooden 
----> Ok gooden has been playing alot of power forward in the preseason, so that is quite interesting. that puts battier and giricek or something at small forward, which really clears up this position. however, if gooden plays at Small forward, the problem is quite evident. Two very good players at one position.

SG - Dickerson/Giricek/Person
----> If Dickerson comes back in full force we have a slasher that can step back and shoot a high % three point and is explosive to boot. We're talking 18 ppg easily if he gets enough shots. Person is coming off a 16 ppg season, and hes a great 3pt shooters, one of the best in the league. Giricek is doing incredibly well in the preseason, as hes more of a veteran than a rookie. has a lot of potential and should do well in this league. How do we divvy up the minutes? well if dickerson goes down (god forbid), it will make it alot easier, but for now this is a question mark.

PG - Williams/Knight/Watson
----> Williams will start, Knight and watson will have to fight for backup minutes. West seems to be high on watson, and knight is a great backup point guard... kinda the alter ego of Travis Best. Again, more talent than we need.

I think the biggest problem is the unexpected arrivals of Giricek, Watson, and Person. Giricek came from nowhere, Person was gotten for nothing, and Watson was stolen from the sonics. Remember who was starting at SG last year? Rodney Buford. yes, Rodney buford. Now we have 2 guys who have proven that they can put up 15 a night easy and one that looks like he can as well. At Power forward, its just crazyness. Gasol, Swift, and Gooden all call the PF spot their home which makes everything a lot harder. unless one of them is moved, expect gasol to try his hand at Center, and Gooden possibly sharing time at PF and SF.

So what can we do about this? The grizzlies have two major weaknesses: the Center spot, and possibly (not sure about this) their defensive scheme. We have too many SG and PF, and even an extra PG. I know i've mentioned this before, but i think West should target Cleveland with a possible deal. a point guard like Knight would fit in so incredibly well with their offense that i dont see how cleveland could turn him down. adding in a power forward like swift would make thier young core that much better, as they are starting who, Tyrone hill right now? However, what we could get back is another thing. Possibly Mihm/Hill/and a protected first rounder, protected for 3-4 years for Swift/Knight? it works on RealGM, and Cleveland might actually do it considering Hill will be retiring very soon and the Grizz can get a young center that has some potential. I think this trade might be a little much in the Cavs favor, but the grizz despartely need a center in case Wright goes down. Forget Eddie Jones (although if West can get him,   ) We need to focus on our needs.


----------



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

Too much talent?????:stupid: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

too much talent,the grizz?you may mean too many players at the same postions but dont confuse quantity with quality.


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

ok i think we have a few things mixed up here, and its my fault. i meant "potential" not "talent". Other than the clips and soon the cavs and the nuggs, there isnt a team with more "up-and-comers" than the grizzlies. the focus of my post is that in order for these players to have a chance at reaching their potential, the current structure of the team would never allow them to do that.

Also notice that i have never said that the grizz are even gonna have a winning season, and i doubt that they will in the next 2-3 years, but when it comes to potentially good players, i think the grizz are only second to the LA Clippers (who have a lot of already very talented players already)

but to quote rainman 


> you may mean too many players at the same postions but dont confuse quantity with quality.


I'm sorry but how are wesley person, drew gooden, and stromile swift not quality players? person averaged 16 ppg last year, drew has huge potential, and swift has all the tools to become a star. i dont know about you, but i would call that quality.

so sorry, my bad folks, i'll edit my post name.... (by the way, the post was stated in a question form... instead of calling me stupid, just reply "no".... thank you.)


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>hogey11</b>!
> 
> 
> so sorry, my bad folks, i'll edit my post name.... (by the way, the post was stated in a question form... instead of calling me stupid, just reply "no".... thank you.)


I didn't mean to call you stupid, just the idea that the griz had too much talent. thats all, I think they have great potential and are better than alot of teams.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

If you want to talk too much talent, look at the Pacers. o_0 I think the Pacers will be a very dangerous team this year.

While the Grizzlies have quality players, they need a better starting PG to pull the team together. No playoffs for these guys until they trade Jason Williams.


----------



## hogey11 (Aug 30, 2002)

i think jason williams goes into the potential pile as well. If he can play the way that West wants him to play, he'll be plenty good enough to get the grizz in the playoffs within a few years. Jason has always had the tools to become a great point guard. if he can settle down and do what hes supposed to do, he can really be a contributing part of this team.

take note that i fully realize that JWill will almost certainly be the same-old 30ft-3pt jacking, pot smoking dolt. but hey, we can all dream.....  

and what do you people think we should do to free up the logjam at SG, PF, and PG??? does anyone have any ideas?


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

Personally, my idea would be to see how everything pans out through the season. With all the players in the same positions and the coaching staff.(either winnning or not winning) By midseason though, if the Griz arent winning and there are alot of problems, leave it up the man Jerry West to solve them. He is one of the best GM's in the league, so he can solve problems. Until then though, the best of luck to the Griz. 


word out


----------



## bdachakeya (Jun 10, 2002)

c_dog I'm starting to wonder if JWill stole your girlfriend from you or something. Have you and this guy had some kind of disastrous run-in with each other? I mean, no matter what the topic is, you're going to make it your duty to find a way to bring his name in the topic to be dissed. If the Grizzlies were to beat their opponents by 40pts, you'll say if they didn't have JWill on the squad they could have outscored their opponents by 41. If the Grizzlies had a total of 50 assists for the ballgame, you'll say that they could've gotten 53 if JWill wasn't on the team. If Jason were to be injured and sitting out of the game, and the Grizzlies guards ended the night with 25 turnovers, you'd still find a way to say if Jason wasn't on the team they'd only had 10 for the night. Man, you've got to be the greatest fit for the word "Player Hater" in its truest form.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

I don't hate JWill, I just think he's a really bad player. How a person of his caliber even gets to play starter I'll never know. Just look at his FG%. I think even the players in my high school team shoot better than him.

I just don't like how people think JWill is a great player, simply because he's flashy. Yes, he does have some very cool moves, but I, for one, would rather see the Grizz win, than to see him showing off. If he could just cut down his flash and 3 point attempts, I would respect him a lot more.

I still think he's over-paid, and that the Grizzlies are better off trading him for somebody with more substance.


----------



## Babby (Jul 26, 2002)

I fully agree. The flashiness doesn't account for great point guard skills. His errors by far outweigh his talent. The Kings are laughin. They stole Bibby from us. J-Will is too proud to play anyway but his. What a shame.


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

hey C_dog the NBA does not compare at all to high school , so don't even talk. Jason Willams is probably one of the top 15 starters in the league. They won in Sacramento with him, and now are winning with bibby as well. Bibby didn't win in memphis with all his talent around him, so what's to say that J-Will is making all the mistakes here. 





word out


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C-MO 22 LD</b>!
> NBA does not compare at all to high school , so don't even talk. Jason Willams is probably one of the top 15 starters in the league. They won in Sacramento with him, and now are winning with bibby as well. Bibby didn't win in memphis with all his talent around him, so what's to say that J-Will is making all the mistakes here.


Of course NBA does not comapre to high school. o_0 It's the NBA. It better be a hell lot better. I wasn't comparing NBA to high school, I was comparing *Jwill's shooting* to high school. It's different. Jwill is a BAD shooter. Just look at his stats:
FG% .382
3P%.295 
FT%.792 

The free throws ain't bad, but the the field goal and 3 point percentages are HORRIBLE. And to think he attempts an average of 6.1 three pointers per game last season!

And NO WAY is Jwill the top 15 starters in the league. He's not even the top 3 starter in the Grizzlies, which is one of the worst teams in the NBA.

And yes, they won in Sac with JWill, but notice how much better the Kings are now that they have Bibby? They've improved to 61 wins. And can JWill make the clutch shots like Bibby was doing throughout the playoffs conference finals? No.

Bibby certainly played a lot better than JWill back in the Vancouver days, I'll tell you that. The Grizzlies could get at least over 30 wins, and most of their losses were close games. His supporting cast:

C-Ike Austin
PF - Shareef Abdul-Raheem
SF-Harrington
SG-Dickerson

Aside from Shareef, this supporting cast isn't at all better than JWill's current cast.


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

Bibby was the one making clutch shots in the Lakers-Kings series. I will give you that, but who else on the kings was willing to take shots. I did not see Peja or Webber taking shots at the clutch moments, it was all Bibby. Bibby is certainly a better clutch player than Williams but overall talent is probably equal. How bout you name your list of top Pg's in the league. I would just like to see what your opinion is. 




word out


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

There are way too many better PG's than jWill out there.

Andre Miller, Marbury, Bibby, Payton, Nash, Van Exel, Steve Francis, Chancey Billups, Tony Parker, Speedy Claxton, Stockton, Terry, T.Brandon, Sam Cassell, Baron Davis, Jason Kidd, Grant Hill are all loads better than JWill.

Even the mediocre PG's like Fisher, Studmire, Alvin Williams, Delk, Shammond Will, Travis Best, Eric Snow are all arguably better than him. o_0

As you can see, he's ain't even the top 15 PG in the league.


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

Not exactly there c_dog. Some of those pg's are not better. I think you just have an emotional problem with Williams that you cannot handle. It's ok , theres counselors for that 







word out


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

Er, who on my list isn't better than JWill? o_0 Plz, point them out. I'm dying to prove you wrong...


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

Well here we go , Van Excel, Parker, Billups, T. Brandon, Claxton, Grant Hill, (ha dag dude Hill isn't even a point, but hill is a very good small forward. All Star caliber player, not a point guard though.) and sorry to say but Stockton too. I'm sayin at this point in there careers, Williams is better than Stockton. Johnny's is getting a bit to old. Well Back to the Pg's , Fisher, Delk, Shammond, and Travis Best. Shammond Williams hasn't even played that much in the past two years. He hasn't gotten the chance. Alright so that's my opinion, but of course your going to shoot back at me, so let a rip



word out


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C-MO 22 LD</b>!
> Well here we go , Van Exel, Parker, Billups, T. Brandon, Claxton, Grant Hill, (ha dag dude Hill isn't even a point, but hill is a very good small forward. All Star caliber player, not a point guard though.) and sorry to say but Stockton too. I'm sayin at this point in there careers, Williams is better than Stockton. Johnny's is getting a bit to old. Well Back to the Pg's , Fisher, Delk, Shammond, and Travis Best. Shammond Williams hasn't even played that much in the past two years. He hasn't gotten the chance. Alright so that's my opinion, but of course your going to shoot back at me, so let a rip
> 
> word out


Okay, Van Excel is WAY better than JWill. o_0 Ask anybody. Just look at their stats, man. Van Excel is even on the all time list in 3 points and assists. We would be lucky if we can trade JWill for this guy! That would be the biggest steal the Grizz ever had!

Same goes for Parker, Billups, Terrell Brandon, and Claxton. Man, if we can trade JWill for anybody of their caliber, we wouldn't even hesitate. Parker and Claxton are super fast, and super exciting to watch. Their speed and their drives to the basket create a lot of room for Duncan to do his thing. They are also way better shooters than JWill. Note that they are both really young players. Parker is only a sophmore. This guy is going to be great. Billups and Brandon are quality PG's. They may not be superstars, but they are skilled, and so good at what they do. JWill isn't nearly as consistent as these guys in shooting, defending, or passing. It's silly to even compare JWill to these two. =_=

Grant Hill isn't a PG, but he can play PG. I believe Magic signed him originally to play point? *shrugs* I'll take him off the list anyway.

And Stockton may be way past his prime, but he's still better than JWill can ever be. You don't see PG's who get 12 assists per game very often, not to mention someone who's as old as him. His FG% is still lightyears ahead of JWill.

The rest(Travis Best, Fisher, Shammond) are more around JWill level, I guess. Delk is underrated, though. Note he did get 50 points once last season. o_0 This guy can really light up, just give him more play time. You'll see just how good he is this year. You also can't over-look his defense. He's one of the best defenders.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

jwill actually has a real team to play with this season so hopefully he will prove the haters wrong by playing some good ball. hopefully west and lowe will have him playing under control and distributing. it's hard for a point guard to look good on a weak team, especially when they have to take a lot of shots. hopefully williams will start shooting good shots because he is actually a capable shooter. he should do a decent job at the point this season, definitely top 15 out of the pg's. whether he can lead this team to many victories is another question. either way they will be pretty damn fun to watch.


----------



## bdachakeya (Jun 10, 2002)

c_dog at first I was wondering if it there was something personal between you and JWill, but now I know there is. Man, to mention some of the PGs on that list you gave proves there's beef with you and Jason, or you really don't know B-ball like you're portraying to know. Man come on, you can't let your personal issues become apart of your true assessments of one's game.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

Erm, no, no personal issues with me and Jason. o_0 I've never met the guy or anything. I just seriously don't think he's that good. I think he's over hyped and over paid. Maybe I exaggerated a little(okay, maybe a lot), but he's still overrated.

I still don't think he's a top 15 PG. There are too many good PG's out there nowadays. However, I'll say that he's *decent*. :grinning: 

The JWill last year definitely wasn't the JWill back in Sac, I'll say that. If he can become a new JWill, with a smaller ego, then I'd respect the guy a bit more.  God, I hate that Bibby-JWill trade!


----------



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

I would agree with C_dog that all those point gaurds plus numerous others (I'd take Jeff Mcinnis over williams) are all better. My reasoning is that J-Will has to have the worst understanding of how to manage the tempo of the game. He picks the worst time to run down the court with 4 guys back and just jack up a 3 ball. Then when he does pass he tries to do too much and turns it over. I think he has the potential to be alot better than he plays now, but it doesn't look like he wants to change.


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

hey c_dog and all those Williams haters, check out the article on nba.com on the league's most efficient point guards. You will see Mr. Williams in the top fifteen. Even though he does play bad sometimes, that cannot be the case all the time, because he had to be doing something right to get up at the top of that list. 



yo word


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

Bah! Mike Bibby at 18? Whoever made the list is retarded. And come on! 12. Darrell Armstrong? 14. Eric snow? o_0 Booo! *thumbs down* Bibby should be above those guys. I'd have Bibby at least in the top 10. Those damn retards... 

This just proves my point that stats don't mean jack. They lie.

For ppl who want to see the list -_-:

1. Gary Payton 24.2 
2. Andre Miller 22.9 
3. Jason Kidd 21.7 
4. Steve Francis 20.9 
5. Sam Cassell 20.3 
6. John Stockton 19.4 
T-7. Baron Davis 19.3 
T-7. Steve Nash 19.3 
9. Stephon Marbury 18.6 
10. Terrell Brandon 17.4 
11. Nick Van Exel 16.4 
12. Darrell Armstrong 15.6 
13. Damon Stoudamire 15.4 
14. Eric Snow 15.2 
15. Jason Williams 14.6 
16. Mark Jackson 14.3 
17. Chauncey Billups 14.0 
18. Mike Bibby 13.9 
19. Jeff McInnis 13.9 
20. Alvin Williams 13.7 
21. Jamaal Tinsley 13.5 
22. Kenny Anderson 13.2 
23. Chucky Atkins 11.1 
24. Chris Whitney 10.8 
25. Derek Fisher 10.2 
26. Brevin Knight 10.2 
27. Travis Best 10.1 
28. Moochie Norris 10.0 
29. Tony Parker 9.8 
30. Troy Hudson 9.4 
31. Antonio Daniels 9.2 
32. Jacque Vaughn 9.2 
33. Tony Delk 8.8 
34. Avery Johnson 8.8 
35. Jamal Crawford 8.4 
36. Speedy Claxton 8.2 
37. Tyronn Lue 7.9 
38. Kevin Ollie 7.9 
39. Chris Childs 7.5 
40. Charlie Ward 7.3 
41. Anthony Carter 7.0 
42. Emanual Davis 6.3 
43. Eddie House 6.1 
44. Kenny Satterfield 5.3 
45. Lindsey Hunter 5.2 
46. Earl Watson 5.1 
47. Rafer Alston 5.0 
48. Shammond Williams 4.7 
49. Bryce Drew 4.5 
T-50. Bimbo Coles 4.3 
T-50. Howard Eisley 4.3


----------



## tenkev (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>c_dog</b>!
> This just proves my point that stats don't mean jack. They lie.


This doesn't prove anything except that the NBA brass are not great statisticians. The should have assigned a value to each statistic, not just adding them up blindly. If they brought in some of the people from baseball sabremetrics, they could easily make a more accurate formula. (Obviously it wouldn't mean who is the best player, just whose scheme and teammates helped him to excel the most.) It would be much more accurate than this NBA.com thing.


----------



## Dakota (Aug 18, 2002)

hey c_dog obvisiously the man or women that made this list is not retarded or they would not be aloud to write that list in the first place. SOOO if these stats are lying to us then c_dog what are they really saying. Are they saying that anyone on the list that you don't approve of is not rightfully justified. I guess that nba.com is just to dumb for you. 


yo word


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

Plz, any retard would know that Bibby deserves to be in top 10. The guy almost defeated the lakers by himself.

This isn't even a real list. It's just based on last year's stats. tenkev is right. They should assign value to the stats, and not just add them up blindly.

I still think stats aren't always accurate. A ball hog can have really good stats, but that still doesn't make him a good player.


----------



## Potatoe (Jun 17, 2002)

Hey C-Dog,

These are objective statistical comparisons, they are not subjective ratings of each player.

They are also based on last years regular season statistics and therefore Bibbys awesome playoff does not enter into the equation.

All this list does is take a point guards statistics and adjust them with regard to turn overs and field goal percentage.

No matter how you slice it, Jason is statistically a top 15 point guard, and the people who wrote the article are a long way from "retarded".

The list is however, based on statistics only and as we all know stats can often be deceptive.

I think that the truth about Jason lies somewhere in between your two opinions. He's no star, but I think you are grossly exaggerating his deficiencies. 

Jason is a talented guard and one of the leagues best play makers. He was forced to be the second scoring option on this team last year and that simply isn't a good role for him. Lets see how he plays when he is able to focus on distribution with out any pressure to score.

J-Will is not my first pick to run this team, but he is a good player who takes way more flack than he should.

I would still WAY rather have Mike Bibby, but that doesn't mean J-Will Sucks.


----------



## JoeF (Jul 16, 2002)

The reason Bibby is so low on the list is simple. The formula is objective only in that it uses numbers only. I am not sure you can find a unbiased rating period. In terms of true objectivity (i.e lack of bias) the formula really sucks. The formula is biased. It underrates the PG on teams like Sacramento. Sacramento is so balanced that Bibby stats suffer. Any of the PG above him would take a tumble down the rankings if they were Sacramento's PG. To make a fair comparison of Bibby and JWill you would have to use their stats for the last couple of years.


----------



## c_dog (Sep 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Potatoe</b>!
> I would still WAY rather have Mike Bibby, but that doesn't mean J-Will Sucks.


Agreed.


----------

