# OT: Is Tracy McGrady washed up?



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Is he a has been or a never was?

Sure, he's still a competent scorer and a talent most teams would want to have on their roster if possible, but hey.... he's falling from the ranks. Free falling, really.

It started last year when, despite a 60 pt game here or there, he embarrassed himself by being unable to get the Magic even THIRTY wins.

This guy is not a winner. He blew TWO chances to get a team out of the first round of the playoffs in the 2002 and 2003 seasons, but choked. He never REALLY improved Orlando as they were a mediocre team the year BEFORE he got there. 

Now he has Yao Ming on his side, but the early returns are not good. He doesn't have the "stuff" to either make his teammates better or lead his team to victories. And his numbers are falling. In the past years, he was usually one of the Top 5-10 players in Efficiency at NBA.com. But NOW, he's ranked 36th below such players as Keith Van Horn, Bobby Simmons, and, ironically, DREW GOODEN (one of the players McGrady played with last year when everyone said he didn't have "help.")

We could blame Van Gundy, I suppose. But there's more to it than that. McGrady now has a legit center down low and yet he's failing to make 72% of his three point shots. His block and steal averages are nearly the lowest of his career and his turnover average is the highest of his career.

He's simply not a winner. He's not a force that imposes any kind of will on this league. He's a ZERO IMPACT player. Let's face it-- could the Magic have been any WORSE without him last year? No. In other words.... let's look at the algebra here:

If CRAPPY TEAM + MCGRADY = CRAPPY TEA, then MCGRADY= 0.

The top perimeter players in this league are LeBron James, Dwayne Wade, and Kobe Bryant.

McGrady's time, if it ever actually existed, has passed.

Go Blazers


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

Orlando fans have gone over this kind of stuff forever. Pretty much everything you said I don't agree with, but I won't waste my time on one of these threads again, especially when it's clear you haven't watched McGrady play much at all.


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

i agree with nathenlan completley
captain u can argue with the math


----------



## barfo (Jan 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> If CRAPPY TEAM + MCGRADY = CRAPPY TEA, then MCGRADY= 0.


I get MCGRADY = - M 

barfo


----------



## Captain Obvious (Jun 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazerben4</b>!
> i agree with nathenlan completley
> captain u can argue with the math


Actually I can. It's true that they couldn't have got worse than the worst record. But, the Magic were much worse without McGrady. Last year they were 2-13 without him (winning only the last 2 games of the season when nobody gave a crap). The average margin of victory for the opposition was double digits in those games.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Captain- why presume that I haven't watched him play when it's so easy for you to be wrong on that?

I have, in fact, watched McGrady play SEVERAL GAMES.

The man has never had a winning moment in his life. The only game winning shot I can think of is a putback vs the Knicks on opening night last season.

Vs the Hornets in the playoffs, he had a chance to win the game with the ball in his hands, but Baron Davis picked his pocket. In another game, he had ANOTHER chance to win the game, but forced up a terrible looking shot and missed. Ultimately, despite his guarantees, his team lost in 5 games. But they EASILY could have won in 4 if he had taken care of business in either of the previously mentioned games.

Vs Detroit, his team had a 3-1 lead and he couldn't put the Pistons away. In the one game 7 of his life, he was just awful. I watched the whole thing. He was TERRIBLE.

As for looking at 15 games in which McGrady didn't play last season, that is not an accurate way to determine how the Magic would have played the WHOLE SEASON without him.

After all, if you get to pick a 2-13 stretch without McGrady, can I pick an 0-15 stretch WITH McGrady?

The bottom line is.... you can make excuses for him all you want and he's still a loser.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

barfo- that's frickin hilarious.

I will leave that typo of mine so that your post continues to make sense. Hilarious.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

Yeah, TMac down right sucks.. Maybe we can trade NVE for him..


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

*Re: Re: OT: Is Tracy McGrady washed up?*



> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> 
> I get MCGRADY = - M
> ...


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

Never was.:no: 

Another one of Sterns "Superstars":hurl:


----------



## MongolianDeathCloud (Feb 27, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Now he has Yao Ming on his side, but the early returns are not good. He doesn't have the "stuff" to either make his teammates better or lead his team to victories. And his numbers are falling. In the past years, he was usually one of the Top 5-10 players in Efficiency at NBA.com. But NOW, he's ranked 36th below such players as Keith Van Horn, Bobby Simmons, and, ironically, DREW GOODEN (one of the players McGrady played with last year when everyone said he didn't have "help.")


Well, his NBA.com efficiency ranking is going to suffer a bit because Houston plays a very low possession game. For example, they average ten less possessions per game than TMac's former team Orlando (the leader in posssessions per game). 

I'm not going to suggest that this is enitrely responsible for his decline in stats, just pointing out that the NBA.com EFF stat does not have a pace factor in it. Stats like John Hollinger's PER, used in Basketball Prospectus and 82games.com does account for pace/possessions/ball usage etc. Much better efficiency measure.

Although I admit I haven't checked the two stats for McGrady to see how close they come out, so perhaps there's only a minimal/insignificant diference and this is all moot.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Tracy washed up???
That ranks with the Portland will win the championship statement.

To say he is a loser really takes the cake.
How on earth does one come up with these gems??

Me thinks it's from a fan that doesn't have League Pass to see
these players,or simply a simpleton.

If Tracy is "washed up"..
what would have been the description for the aging Sabas or
the aging Pippen ??
Even those players, I wouldn't utter those words..
it's just not appropriate..


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> Tracy washed up???
> That ranks with the Portland will win the championship statement.
> 
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> This guy is not a winner. He blew TWO chances to get a team out of the first round of the playoffs in the 2002 and 2003 seasons, but choked. He never REALLY improved Orlando as they were a mediocre team the year BEFORE he got there.


A couple things:

1) When Vince wilted under the Knicks pressure in the playoffs, Tracy rose to the occasion and proved nearly unstoppable. The next year he absolutely exploded in Orlando.

2) Orlando gave up a fair amount to get him and Hill, and half that equation never materialized. It's safe to say they would have improved dramatically had both been healthy. That would've been a _very_ difficult combo to match up with.

I've said numerous times how the NBA game is largely being in the right place at the right time. Scrubs can becomes stars in the right situation, and vice versa. Perhaps McGrady's 2-3 spectacular years were merely due to the planets aligning in his favor...

Many will point to the role reversal of Orlando and Houston this year as proof of McGrady's shortcomings, but you have to take into account that Orland added a pretty solid backcourt in Francis and Mobley, *finally* got Hill seemingly healthy, added a surprisingly effective Dwight Howard, and got Garrity back from injury. That's a pretty major talent influx in one year.

But some may recall a conversation this summer about Paul Pierce and his declining effectiveness the past 2 years. I voiced similar concern over McGrady's game the past year... I remember Minstrel commenting that he had noticed the same thing, but figured it was more due to team considerations and injuries.

Dan


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

3 Tmac misconceptions:

1) He's a selfish ballhog....

This guy models his game after Penny.... meaning he's a past first guard. If you've watched many games this season, you'll see how he's constantly setting up teammates, trying to get them involved one way or another.... on countless occasions I've watched him feed the ball to yao within 2 feet of the basket.. and yao ends up bricking it... He's been doing this since his orlando days.. and unlike Kobe, he doesn't have to be called out by the media to play unselfishly.... 

2) Tmac has always been lazy, and never had much intensity.

When he had a supporting cast ( and carried his team to the playoffs 3 seasons in a row) back in orlando, he seemed to be much more involved in the game. I read something about a year ago talking about how he had lost 9 of his close family and friends within a course of a year or two.... just one right after another.... After going through something like that I wouldn't imagine that basketball is the first thing on his mind every morning..... But I think it'll all come back... 

3) He's a horrible defender

Those that watched him in his Toronto days would think otherwise... averaging 2 blocks, 1.15 steals a game in 99 while only starting 34 of the games.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

*Re: Re: OT: Is Tracy McGrady washed up?*



> Originally posted by <b>barfo</b>!
> 
> I get MCGRADY = - M


You are correct, of course, but you don't go far enough.

Divide each side by M.

cGrady= -1

cGrady + 1 = 0

I don't know where that gets us, exactly. I suppose we could plug in the speed of light, or c=ë*f.

Ed O.

P.S. McGrady is very good and not a loser.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Lets get a few things straight here. 

I'm not a Tmac fan. I have debated against him in comparison to Kobe many times guys here know me for that. 

But calling Tmac washed up playing in Van Gundy's system is a joke. Steve Francis was washed up last season also now away from that system he's back to superstar level. 

Now lets also be clear. 

Kobe and Tmac are the best wing players in the league not Wade nor Lebron.

Tmac is a much better scorer than either Lebron or Wade is and is just as good a playmaker. He has a much better outside touch and is just as explosive athletically. 

The one area I think Tmac is really lacking is intensity. He never plays with a sense of urgency. He's always in a relaxed mode and rarely ever cranks the intensity late in games. 

He isn't as creative a ball handler as Kobe, Wade are. So at the end of games he doesn't have the go to move or handle to create space or fool oppnents with the dribble he always goes to the hard dribble and pull-up which is so predictable while Kobe and Wade have cross over spin dribbles and hanging shots in the lane. 

With Tmac its all mental. he's not a real leader nor a real warrior mentality when it comes to motivating teammates. 

But on raw talent he's almost as talented as Kobe is who is the best wing in the game. 

Wade and Lebron have alot to prove. 

Wade only averaged 16ppg without Shaq , Shaq has enabled him to post some gaudy stats. Without Shaq he wasn't bringing those sorts of numbers. I'll concede some of it is his natural improvement from being a more mature better player but alot of it is having the big fella down low. 

At least thats what everyone said about Kobe all the time for Wade it must apply also just the same or there are some hypocrits on the board.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Wade averaged 16 ppg in his ROOKIE YEAR. He was due to improve with or WITHOUT Shaq.

DId you watch the playoffs? The Wade we are seeing this year was emerging during LAST YEAR'S PLAYOFFS long before Shaq joined the team.

And LeBron is scoring more easily than McGrady. McGrady's outside shot has been terrible this year. How is that Van Gundy's fault?


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

*Re: Re: OT: Is Tracy McGrady washed up?*



> Originally posted by <b>MongolianDeathCloud</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, his NBA.com efficiency ranking is going to suffer a bit because Houston plays a very low possession game. For example, they average ten less possessions per game than TMac's former team Orlando (the leader in posssessions per game).


Actually, LESS POSSESSIONS should HELP his ranking if anything.

Cuz you shouldn't miss as many shots or turn the ball over as often.

And yet, that is what he is doing. Missing more often and turning the ball over more often. And with LESS POSSESSIONS. Ouch.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

A) Pointing to Toronto only proves my point. He's not doing it now. You have to go back two teams to talk about him being an impact player.

B) JackieJackal- I've had NBA League Pass from the beginning of its inception. I probably watch more NBA games than anyone. My statement is absolutely based on watching the game. And watching it closely. McGrady doesn't help his teams win. And he's blown COUNTLESS opportunities to carry his team down the stretch over the years. Honestly, how many game winning moments can you remember that involve McGrady? I can remember SEVERAL times in which he's coughed up the rock or clanked a bad shot at the buzzer. Cuz I have NBA League Pass.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Wow..
"I watch more games than anyone"

:|


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jackiejackal</b>!
> Wow..
> "I watch more games than anyone"
> 
> :|


You misquoted him, first of all. He said he "probably" watches more games than anyone. That's a pretty important word.

Secondly, in my experience with NathanLane, I find it likely he DOES watch as much NBA basketball as just about anyone. That you (or anyone) would simply write off his observations because they come from someone who doesn't watch games shows a startling degree of ignorance about NathanLane.

I'm not saying this because I agree with him here (I certainly do not) but I don't think that disagreeing with the poster, rather than the post, is the way to go here.

Ed O.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

"During an interview with SportsRadio610 McGrady blamed his 1-11 shooting performance on Yao, saying he didn't expect to get double teams with Yao on the team and that Yao hasn't been a factor lately."<===== this is from the Rockets Forum

Yo, Check it. McGrady is POISON. The guy only makes 1 shot and blames it on Yao??? Wow. He's systematically figuring out a way to ruin the Houston Rockets.

Yo, even when Kobe played with Shaq, he still got double teamed. And who gives a crap? Jordan saw double and triple teams all his career and didn't make excuses.

McGrady is a LOSER. Recognize.

Go Blazers


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

P.S. Flicker of hope for Rockets= Bob Sura's healthy.


----------



## NastyOne (Nov 30, 2004)

I think that McGrady is a great player, but he isn't a great leader. Everyone wants to label people with the term superstar and such, but that doesn't mean that they can carry a team or should be asked to.

There are only a handful of players that ever played the game of basketball that could singlehandedly make the team win. Just because McGrady isn't one of those guys doesn't mean he is washed up.

The Rockets need a second scorer in the worst way. Yao is not and probably will never be a great/dominating player. He just doesn't have that killer attitude. 

While Rahim also doesn't have a killer attitude, I could see him putting the wheels on the bus in Houston ... is there something Portland could use from that team?


----------



## arcade_rida (Jun 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> A couple things:
> 
> ...


1) actually Vince Carter never did fall under the pressure. I remember 1 game in which he never played well.. But he stole the ball to Allen Houston for an open dunk.. It was 88-88 I believe something like that and because of that we won the game.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Now that i have stopped laughing..
I find it hard to imagine that someone who states they 
probably watch more games than anyone thought that the 
Portland Trailblazers were going to win the title last year.

Somehow those statements just don't go together.

Calling players losers,washed up,chokers,will be champions,etc
just doesn't impress me as a real solid fan who watches
"probably " more games than anyone.

And to be told to "learn the game" "recognize" bla bla
It doesn't remind me of anything real sports fans say. People with
condescending attitudes and posts make me sick.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Yo, Check it. McGrady is POISON. The guy only makes 1 shot and blames it on Yao??? Wow. He's systematically figuring out a way to ruin the Houston Rockets.





> McGrady is a LOSER. Recognize.


Yo, who needs to "recognize"?? Saying TMac is "Poison", "Washed up", and "a loser" is a little harsh. To bad we don't have such a "Poisonous", "Washed up", "Loser" on our team.

Oh, I've had league pass for about 5 yrs, so everyone better recognize.. :allhail:


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Ed O</b>!
> Secondly, in my experience with NathanLane, I find it likely he DOES watch as much NBA basketball as just about anyone. That you (or anyone) would simply write off his observations because they come from someone who doesn't watch games shows a startling degree of ignorance about NathanLane.


In my experience, I also believe he probably does watch more NBA games than most people, but that proves absolutely nothing. I think it's easy to write off someones observations when they say the Blazers could still win the championship last year, say TMac is washed up, and say Mikki Moore and about 25 other centers were better than Theo. Writing off NathanLanes observations on TMac is easy. It's just HIS opinion.

Scout


----------



## Buck Williams (May 16, 2004)

McGrady is not washed up just is no longer a A grade superstar
he can always bust 4 40 at anytime he wants
McGrady<Pierce,Allen,Kobe,Redd,Carter,LeBron,AI,Ginobili,Artest
McGrady=DA,L Murray,Housten,EJ,Lenard,Qrich,S Jackson


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> 
> In my experience, I also believe he probably does watch more NBA games than most people, but that proves absolutely nothing.


It proves that his opinions are not crippled by a failure to watch basketball games.

I'm not saying that his opinions are necessarily more valuable than anyone else's.

Ed O.


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> A) Pointing to Toronto only proves my point. He's not doing it now. You have to go back two teams to talk about him being an impact player.
> 
> B) JackieJackal- I've had NBA League Pass from the beginning of its inception. I probably watch more NBA games than anyone. My statement is absolutely based on watching the game. And watching it closely. McGrady doesn't help his teams win. And he's blown COUNTLESS opportunities to carry his team down the stretch over the years. Honestly, how many game winning moments can you remember that involve McGrady? I can remember SEVERAL times in which he's coughed up the rock or clanked a bad shot at the buzzer. Cuz I have NBA League Pass.


I was just commenting on something similar to this to a friend earlier this season. I was telling them what a complete stud Dwane Wayde has become, and how he has carried over his performance in the playoffs into this season. I had just seen the game where Wade had 20+ points in the 4th quarter and overtime to lead the Heat from a deficit to eventual victory over the Jazz. He just took over the game. He made great plays. He made smart plays. He made two free throws with 1 second left in regulation to send the game to OT. After Shaq had fouled out Wade scored the final 6 points for Miami. Tie game with less than 30 seconds left, he smartly held the ball for as long as he could, ran a screen roll with Doleac diving to the hoop, drove the lane behind Okur, and when Okur saw him and went for the block, Wayde calmly waited before taking a close shot. He didn't panic, even though there was only 1 sec left when he took his shot - which he made. Utah made 2 free throws to tie again. 4 seconds left, they clear out for Wade, who canned a long jumper for the win as time expired.

I contrasted this performance with Tracy McGrady for the Rockets against the Knicks. 40 seconds left, nursing a 4 point lead after Mo Taylor makes a short jumper off McGrady's assist. Kurt Thomas makes a long jumper on a kickout from Jamal Crawford. 26 seconds left. 2 point lead. All the Rockets have to do is score, or get to the line, or run most of the clock out. Any of those should work. What does McGrady do? He gets the ball on a clearout. Holds til about 8 left on the shot clock. Drives toward the hoop, pulls up and takes an awkward jumper that misses. 4 seconds left on the clock. As the play happened, I questioned it. Why not take it all the way to the rack? It would have used more time, may have led to an easier shot, may have got a foul call. McGrady is an outstanding 3 pt shooter. Another option - drive with 4 sec left on shot clock and take a step-back three point attempt. Even better, make it a rainbow. Assuming the basket is no good, there would be little time left on the clock. Certainily not the 4 seconds that allowed New York to run the play that won the game.

The sample size is too small to draw any conclusions, but Wayde has proven (in some very limited opportunities) he can be a closer, and McGrady hasn't proven recently that he can. (He did make 2 FTs at the end of reg to send the Clipper game into OT, but was otherwise very average during the 4th and OT).


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> 1) actually Vince Carter never did fall under the pressure. I remember 1 game in which he never played well.. But he stole the ball to Allen Houston for an open dunk.. It was 88-88 I believe something like that and because of that we won the game.


He stole a pass and dunked? Whoa, stop the presses! I guess that makes up for his ineffectiveness throughout most of that 1st round series.

Anyone know where to look up stats from a specific playoff series?

Dan


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Masbee gets it.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Yo Scout. Theo really isn't all that good.


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

> McGrady is not washed up just is no longer a A grade superstar
> he can always bust 4 40 at anytime he wants
> McGrady< Pierce,Allen,Kobe,Redd,Carter,LeBron,AI,Ginobili,A
> rtest
> McGrady=DA,L Murray,Housten,EJ,Lenard,Qrich,S Jackson



:no: :no: :no:  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Yo Scout. Theo really isn't all that good.


Yo, thanks for your opinion. IMO, looking at the centers of the league, he's good in my book. I'd take him over about 75% of the other centers in the league.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> 
> 
> Yo, thanks for your opinion. IMO, looking at the centers of the league, he's good in my book. I'd take him over about 75% of the other centers in the league.


??? Explain.

What does he offer nightly? 4 pts, 5 rebs, 2.5 blks?

Yo, about 75% of the centers in the league offer more than that.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> 
> 
> ??? Explain.
> ...


No explanation is needed. Theo isn't great, but he is good. Does 75% of the centers offer the help D and that many BPG(remember, that is low for him and he's still 7th in the league)? No. Last year his presense dropped the opponents FG% drastically. We were like dead last in that category until Theo showed up. We finished 21st in that category. It's not great, but it was a huge improvement in a short amount of time.

That's fine if you don't don't like Theo, but when you mention people like Mikki Moore as being better... well, that just shows you may have a personally thing with Theo.


----------



## NastyOne (Nov 30, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> ??? Explain.
> 
> What does he offer nightly? 4 pts, 5 rebs, 2.5 blks?


Statistics aren't the only thing a player offers on a nightly basis.

He single-handedly alters the defensive makeup of the Portland team. He takes a rather pathetic defensive team and makes it tolerable. 



> Yo, about 75% of the centers in the league offer more than that.


Yo, name 75% of the centers that truly alter the offensive attack of another team.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

*My thoughts.*



> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Never was.:no:
> 
> Another one of Sterns "Superstars":hurl:


:yes:


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

good thing portland doesn't have a washed up player like Tmac... 

I don't think our backcourt combined has never put up numbers as good as his tonight..


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

Big freaking deal they lost...And I wasnt paying that much attention but didnt he miss a free throw at the end that would have put them up by one?:hurl:


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Big freaking deal they lost...And I wasnt paying that much attention but didnt he miss a free throw at the end that would have put them up by one?:hurl:


Yes, but he also scored a crapload of points in the fourth to bring them back in to the game.... 

Tmac is better than any player the Trailblazers ever had.... I don't get why people on this forum don't see it.


----------



## SheedSoNasty (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Big freaking deal they lost...And I wasnt paying that much attention but didnt he miss a free throw at the end that would have put them up by one?:hurl:


:rings:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> But some may recall a conversation this summer about Paul Pierce and his declining effectiveness the past 2 years. I voiced similar concern over McGrady's game the past year... I remember Minstrel commenting that he had noticed the same thing, but figured it was more due to team considerations and injuries.


I remember that discussion. For both players, the biggest issue was declining field goal percentage. Both had put up fantastic field goal percentages of 45% or so for several seasons running and were seeing declines from that lately.

My point was that Pierce had declined from that level two years running, which I considered more troubling than McGrady falling from that level for one season. Which I still believe.

However, he's showing the same general field goal percentage as last season, which would make it two seasons in a row...which would put him in the "troubling" category as well. But we'll see if he ends up at 41-42% at the end of the season.

For what it's worth, I still believe McGrady is simply a higher class of talent than Pierce. Also interesting to note is that Kobe Bryant is also now experiencing that decline in field goal percentage. He's declined significantly the past two years and is down to a very pedestrian 41% this season.

So...are both 25 year old players, who are the best guards since Jordan entered the league in my opinion, declining? Or are defenses figuring them out? Or are defenses just getting tougher again, maybe forcing us to re-adjust again what "elite" field goal percentages are?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blazerben4</b>!
> McGrady is not washed up just is no longer a A grade superstar
> he can always bust 4 40 at anytime he wants
> McGrady<Pierce,Allen,Kobe,Redd,Carter,LeBron,AI,Ginobili,Artest
> McGrady=DA,L Murray,Housten,EJ,Lenard,Qrich,S Jackson


McGrady won't be at that level until he's well and truly washed up. And probably dead and buried for a decade.

At that point, you may be right.


----------



## Freshtown (May 24, 2004)

Hello:

48 points. 9 rebounds. 9 assists. 6 threes.

End of discussion.

Regards:

Freshtown.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> 
> Tmac is better than any player the Trailblazers ever had.... I don't get why people on this forum don't see it.


ever? I'd put him in the elite company of the all time Blazer greats, but not above. 

TMAC is a special player IMO. He's one of my favs to watch... Dirk too.

STOMP


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

:laugh:


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Last night is PROOF that McGrady is washed up.

The team LOST. And what did he say afterwards? He talked about what a great game it was!!!

This guy only cares about HIMSELF and making HIS statline look good.

I would be MUCH more impressed if he scored 22 pts last night in a WINNING EFFORT.

His team is now 6-11.

McGrady is a loser. ZERO IMPACT. He can score 20, he can score 48. But his team loses. When he scores a lot, he's often more interested in scoring a lot than making the plays to close out the game.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>yangsta</b>!
> good thing portland doesn't have a washed up player like Tmac...
> 
> I don't think our backcourt combined has never put up numbers as good as his tonight..


Ummm.... would you rather the Blazers be 6-11? That's the record that McGrady's super talent has led his to. Couldn't the Rockets be 6-11 without him?

TRUE talents make the players around them good enough to at LEAST win half their games. McGrady has Jim Jackson, Yao, Howard, Mo Taylor... decent players. Why can't he get wins?

McGrady is a ZERO IMPACT player. A few days he was *****ing about how Yao isn't opening up things for him. He SHOULD be talking about how HE can open up things for YAO.

So the guy shoots 1-11 and a couple other atrocious games and now he finally puts together 48 pts, but isn't even the top scorer in the game, his team loses, and he's happy.

I'm not impressed..... at ALL.


----------



## NastyOne (Nov 30, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Last night is PROOF that McGrady is washed up.
> 
> The team LOST. And what did he say afterwards? He talked about what a great game it was!!!
> ...


I hope you feel the same way about Randolph, because a lot of the time it seems he cares about the same thing.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> McGrady is a loser. ZERO IMPACT. He can score 20, he can score 48. But his team loses.


Keep in mind that Houston wasn't a very deep team last year, and they gave up 3 starters to get McGrady. When Mo Taylor and Jimmy Jackson are neck and neck for 3rd best player on the team, with #5 being a huge dropoff from there, you know you're little more than a shell of a team.

But they've got the key inside/outside core in place and will surely fill out the roster in the next year or two.

Dan


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

One thing I've noticed from Tmac's past seasons is that he usually doesn't do that great the beginning of the season (even before the 0-19)... As long as JVG allows him to be aggressive on offense, I think he'll find his groove.

Houston desparately needs a better 3rd scorer (seeing that yao isn't pulling his weight)... Shareef would be a wonderful pickup for them in the offseason if they can manage to trade some of their players for expiring contracts.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>dkap</b>!
> 
> Keep in mind that Houston wasn't a very deep team last year, and they gave up 3 starters to get McGrady. When Mo Taylor and Jimmy Jackson are neck and neck for 3rd best player on the team, with #5 being a huge dropoff from there, you know you're little more than a shell of a team.


That didn't stop people from predicting that this Rockets team would make it to the second round and beyond, because of the "superstar impact" of McGrady. Just like they predicted that the Magic would make it to the second round and beyond last year. These people also talked about how stupid the Magic were to trade McGrady without getting a superstar in return, but it seems the Magic are doing just fine.

That's Tracy McGrady for you, during the offseason he's the MVP, during the season he has a neverending army of apologists and excuse-makers.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RP McMurphy</b>!
> That didn't stop people from predicting that this Rockets team would make it to the second round and beyond, because of the "superstar impact" of McGrady. Just like they predicted that the Magic would make it to the second round and beyond last year. These people also talked about how stupid the Magic were to trade McGrady without getting a superstar in return, but it seems the Magic are doing just fine.
> 
> That's Tracy McGrady for you, during the offseason he's the MVP, during the season he has a neverending army of apologists and excuse-makers.


I'm not sure who made all those predictions, but they seem a little far fetched. 

First off, TMAC is a nice addition to Houston, but without a decent PG, the team isn't going very far. Also, I think a lot of people are praising Yao to much. He's been good here and there, but I don't ever see him as being a great center. TMAC has some more talent with his Houston team, but now he's in a tougher conference as well.

Secondly, TMAC never had the services of Grant Hill while he was there. That's a big help for Franceis. Oh, and D. Howard isn't a slouch either. If Hill was still injured this year, Orlando wouldn't be as impressive so far.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> I'm not sure who made all those predictions, but they seem a little far fetched.


It's easy to call them far-fetched in hindsight. Do you know what the Las Vegas over/under was on how many games Houston would win this year? *50* (I'm going to make a nice bit of money on that one because I took the under, by the way). And if you look at the predictions contest that's stickied on the NBA board, out of 40 posters, 17 picked the Rockets to make it to at least the second round, 18 more picked them to lose in the first round, and I was one of only two people who said they'd have a losing record. Obviously these predictions weren't considered far-fetched at the time.

Then you have the 2003-04 predictions where 8 people said the Magic would win in the first round, 6 people said they'd lose in the first round, and *not one* person said they'd miss the playoffs completely (I didn't post in that thread, but I also thought they'd lose in the first round). And this was the worst team in the league!

What always happens with McGrady is, people say at the beginning of the year that he finally has the help he needs, and then they change their minds about his supporting cast when it turns out that his team sucks. It happened last year, it's happening this year, and it will happen again next year too.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RP McMurphy</b>!
> 
> 
> It's easy to call them far-fetched in hindsight. Do you know what the Las Vegas over/under was on how many games Houston would win this year? *50* (I'm going to make a nice bit of money on that one because I took the under, by the way). And if you look at the predictions contest that's stickied on the NBA board, out of 40 posters, 17 picked the Rockets to make it to at least the second round, 18 more picked them to lose in the first round, and I was one of only two people who said they'd have a losing record. Obviously these predictions weren't considered far-fetched at the time.


I see I need to start gambling again..  I did pull off a $10, 6 team parlay last year.. Paid off a cool $600.. 

Anyways, that was a pretty good bet with Houston this year. 50 wins would have been a stretch. There's just to much competition in the west. 

When it comes to what other posters predicted, well, there's not much credit in that. I thought you were talking about so called NBA analysts. 



> Then you have the 2003-04 predictions where 8 people said the Magic would win in the first round, 6 people said they'd lose in the first round, and *not one* person said they'd miss the playoffs completely (I didn't post in that thread, but I also thought they'd lose in the first round). And this was the worst team in the league!


I didn't think the Magic would miss the playoffs either, but I wouldn't have predicted them to move past the 1st round. TMAC just didn't have anyone around him.



> What always happens with McGrady is, people say at the beginning of the year that he finally has the help he needs, and then they change their minds about his supporting cast when it turns out that his team sucks. It happened last year, it's happening this year, and it will happen again next year too.


Well, I haven't seen much of a supporting cast around TMAC. Not in Orlando and not in Houston. TMAC is one of the best in the game, but he's still lacking. People are ready to crown the next MJ. TMAC isn't that guy. He'll be a top scorer in the league and get his rebounds and assists, but he lacks the desire and leadership. I don't watch a lot of TMAC, but it was spelled out last night when the announcers of the Mavs/Rockets game said TMAC doesn't take the leadership role. He doesn't really want it and J. Jackson is the leader by default. That's not good.


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RP McMurphy</b>!
> 
> 
> It's easy to call them far-fetched in hindsight. Do you know what the Las Vegas over/under was on how many games Houston would win this year? *50* (I'm going to make a nice bit of money on that one because I took the under, by the way). And if you look at the predictions contest that's stickied on the NBA board, out of 40 posters, 17 picked the Rockets to make it to at least the second round, 18 more picked them to lose in the first round, and I was one of only two people who said they'd have a losing record. Obviously these predictions weren't considered far-fetched at the time.
> ...


Good points he's the its never his fault guy. When in the never ending Kobe/Tmac threads it always comes down to its all Kobe's fault and never Tmac's fault. 

At some point Tmac has to step up and earn the superstar status that he's given by the media and some fans. 

Its not his fault the Rockets lose its Yao's fault but its funny that Yao was in the playoffs last season that seems to be the growing sentiment by some fans. 

I thought Van Gundy said a telling thing at halftime of yesterdays game. He said Tmac SHOULD be a great defender. 

Why isn't he because he doesn't give the effort and doesn't seem all that aware on the court. Thats what seperates Kobe from Tmac and now seems to be seperating Lebron in that same sense. Level of awareness. 

His whole career will be stat driven unless he's the 2nd best player on a team. The sooner a gm realizes that the better for Tmac's career. He and Yao both are 2nd best player on a team type players. The more they masquerade as 1st option guys the worst off their careers are gonna be. 

There is trouble on a team when you have either 2 1st option guys as in Shaq and Kobe or 2 2nd option guys like Tmac and Yao.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Scout226</b>!
> When it comes to what other posters predicted, well, there's not much credit in that. I thought you were talking about so called NBA analysts.


To the contrary, my experience is that there are a good number of posters on this message board whose opinions are worth more than those of almost every NBA analyst. Sportswriters are paid to entertain, not to offer intelligent analysis.

But if you want the opinions of analysts, here you go.

Mark Stein: 4th in the West, 7th in the NBA.

Mike Kahn: 4th in the West, 5th in the NBA.

Inside Hoops: 6th in the West, 10th in the NBA.

Frankly, I'm not sure how much attention you paid during the offseason, because it seemed everyone was hyping up the Rockets (not that I blame you for ignoring offseason hype, because that's all it is, hype).


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Interesting observation: Before T-Mac scored 48, everyone said it was Van Gundy's fault that T-Mac's numbers were down. Now that we've seen T-Mac score 48, it turns out, it WASNT Van Gundy's fault when T-Mac shot 1-11 and had a bunch of crappy games. It turns out it was TMAC's fault. If he could score 48 last night, what was his excuse for struggling earlier in the year? And they lose whether he struggles or not, so what does it matter anyway?

For the person who asked me about Zach, I remind that person that Zach's team is 8-6. T-Mac's team is 6-11. 

This 48 point game just PROVES my point. The dude never cares about winning, but occasionally he'll throw down a big game (like his 62 point game) to make sure his averages look good. But he never puts out the effort to make sure his team wins on a nightly basis. I can't BELIEVE he had the gall to blame Yao a few days ago. Why is he so concerned with Yao making HIM better? If he were a true star, he would be making YAO better.


----------



## Scout226 (Sep 17, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RP McMurphy</b>!
> Frankly, I'm not sure how much attention you paid during the offseason, because it seemed everyone was hyping up the Rockets (not that I blame you for ignoring offseason hype, because that's all it is, hype).


Yeah, the dog days of summer do get boring. I usually just skim over those pre-season rankings. See what they say about the blazers and any fantasy guys I'm looking at. I did here the hype about the Rockets, but I didn't buy into it to much. Like I said, I don't value Yao to much, and they were bound to have PG issues. The PG by committee doesn't work to good.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Excuses, excuses. People said that the Spurs didn't have a point guard, back in the Avery Johnson days. Same with Charlie Ward on the Knicks. And both teams made the Finals. Kobe or Jordan never had terrific point guards playing with them.

If McGrady was any good, he would personally do whatever it took to lead the Rockets to .500.


----------



## NastyOne (Nov 30, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> For the person who asked me about Zach, I remind that person that Zach's team is 8-6. T-Mac's team is 6-11.


And that person will turn around and point out that Zach isn't the playing the best basketball on the team and in fact, the team won against the best team in the league ... with him on the bench most of the game.

I do not credit Zach with the record, nor do I credit Tracy with his record. This is a team game. 

Just as Stoudamire/Anderson can shoot Portland out of a game, Houston can lose by the poor play of two or three guys ... regardless of the personal exploits of one.

It all goes back to the simple fact that a team is more than one man.


----------



## NastyOne (Nov 30, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Excuses, excuses. People said that the Spurs didn't have a point guard, back in the Avery Johnson days. Same with Charlie Ward on the Knicks. And both teams made the Finals. Kobe or Jordan never had terrific point guards playing with them.
> 
> If McGrady was any good, he would personally do whatever it took to lead the Rockets to .500.


Don't you constantly champion Rasheed Wallace? 

Yet, he didn't lead Portland to a .500 record last year. Nor did Zach Randolph. 

Both those players are very good players. Yet neither of them broke .500.

Who's fault is it?

It is the team's fault. The team. 

This will always be a team game. One man cannot make a team win or lose. It takes the effort of more than one human being.

I mean, using your logic, Michael Jordan is among the worst players in the league. Because I promise that if we grabbed a team comprised of the guys on this board and threw them into the NBA, we wouldn't win a single game. Yet, using your logic, Jordan should be able to at least force them into a .500 record otherwise he isn't very good.

Now, you can't start making caveats about the teams ... you have plainly stated that a single player can dictate the outcome, regardless of team.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Wallace absolutely DID lead the Blazers to a .500 record last season. Look at all the games HE PLAYED last season. Check the win loss for those games. Recognize.

As for Zach, he played more than he sat and he hit big shots down the stretch to help us win the game.


----------



## cimalee (Apr 17, 2003)

No Van Gundy system just sucks , Great defensive coach bad offensive coach


----------



## yangsta (May 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>NathanLane</b>!
> Interesting observation: Before T-Mac scored 48, everyone said it was Van Gundy's fault that T-Mac's numbers were down. Now that we've seen T-Mac score 48, it turns out, it WASNT Van Gundy's fault when T-Mac shot 1-11 and had a bunch of crappy games. It turns out it was TMAC's fault. If he could score 48 last night, what was his excuse for struggling earlier in the year? And they lose whether he struggles or not, so what does it matter anyway?


Actually if you did your research, you'll know that JVG talked to Tmac before that game, and told them they're going to change the system... He was telling Tmac that he now wants him to think about being more aggressive offensively versus their "getting everyone invovled" type of system...


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

anybody see Nathan tonight??
wonder if he caught the Rockets game tonight..

boy oh boy do I wish we had a washed up player like him..
NBA scoring champ..
literally took the team on his back..scores a ton of points..
unbelievable game !!!


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Yo, I already posted about it.

Yo, McGrady had never done that before in his career.

That was amazing. THAT is exactly what I was complaining about him NOT doing. Now, I've seen it. Now I'm impressed.

Remember- the title of this thread was a question. I believe McGrady just answered it. And it turns out, it wasn't Van Gundy's fault that he wasn't playing well. It was HIS. But now he's broken through.


----------



## KingSpeed (Oct 30, 2003)

Also, if you read my first post, I said that I thought every team in the NBA would love to have him.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

:laugh:


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

Go back and read it yourself..
"free falling" ??
:laugh:


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

I was going to bump this thread but couldnt find it...I still stand beside my "never was" statement...That was an awesome come back, but he rarely has a game like this...I was very impressed at what he did in the last minutes of the game..To bad he doesnt give that kind of effort every night..And until he does he will never be a winner.


----------



## jackiejackal (Nov 7, 2002)

you and Nathan have a really remarkable standard that you 
have set for a player to be called a good player.


You watch him play on the League Pass??

"And until he does he will never be a winner"


what do you want ?
a championship ring for every year he plays????????


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

I've watched him enough to have an opinion on him..I also watched him bail on his team last year..That's enough for me.

Tonight was awesome no doubt, and I would love to see him play up to expectations...I just dont see it yet, maybe one day he will...But for now he gets props for tonight, thats it.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> 
> but he rarely has a game like this


If you mean the overall numbers, he's generally had better games than this, until he ended up in Van Gundy's poorly-designed offense.

If you mean the comeback, I don't know if any player in history has ever had a game like this, so I don't think it's reasonable to expect McGrady to commonly have games like this.

He's made many big shots in his career, in clutch moments. He's simply been on losing teams because he's been surrounded by weak teammates.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

Yeah you're right it was a once in a lifetime thing...A very LUCKY once in a life time thing. He will never win a championship. 

I've seen a lot of "superstars" never win championships, he'll just fall in that bracket in the history books.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Blaze_Rocks</b>!
> Yeah you're right it was a once in a lifetime thing...A very LUCKY once in a life time thing. He will never win a championship.
> 
> I've seen a lot of "superstars" never win championships, he'll just fall in that bracket in the history books.


Depends on whether he's lucky enough to get the right supporting cast. Had Jordan never had Pippen and a whole slew of good supprting players like Grant/Rodman, Kukoc, Paxon, Armstrong, etc, he wouldn't have won a championship either.

It takes a great player *and* the right supporting cast. Otherwise you end up like Karl Malone.


----------



## Blaze_Rocks (Aug 11, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Depends on whether he's lucky enough to get the right supporting cast. Had Jordan never had Pippen and a whole slew of good supprting players like Grant/Rodman, Kukoc, Paxon, Armstrong, etc, he wouldn't have won a championship either.
> ...


I cant argue that.:no:Karl Malone came close though, I kinda feel bad for the dude.


----------

