# Will the real Tracy McGrady please stand up?



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

What happened to this guy? I know it's still early in the season but did he leave his game in the offseason?


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

This IS the real T-Mac. Or should I say Slow-Mac? I'm telling you, this guy's athleticism has somehow vanished. I cannot believe how unathletic he looks. If his jump shot's off he can't score to save his life. I'm NOT exaggerating. I saw 50 something games of the exact same T-Mac last season and ALL of his struggles were attributed to the back troubles. Well, he ain't injured NOW and he looks NO better than last season. Worse, in fact. T-Mac cannot take it to the basket AT ALL. He has no first step. He can't explode. His hops are gone. He runs the floor like Yao Ming. Like last season he's also still carrying more pounds than necessary and he seems to like being 'BIG'. Houston is STUCK with this guy. Their GM IMO has to start thinking of trading him at the AS break. This is the 2nd straight season where T-Mac physically has looked like a shell of his former self and his confidence is at an all time low. Even if he regains his touch he still won't be anything like his old self due to severely diminished athletic ability. Trade him while his stock's still high for another star player. Somebody has to be available by mid-season.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

It is because Coaching problems.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

He looks like a complete shell of himself. Also looks a bit bulky too. He is so content with jacking up that jumper. I guess he is trying to do whatever will keep him on the court. Forget those strong reckless drivves to the paint, thats almost history right now.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

T-Mac is finished and I have been saying so, since the meltdown against Dallas a year and a half ago. The back injury destroyed him.


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

What's this T_MAc gettin fat I don't beleive it????
Has he really been that bad this season
WHOA 16.5 points not countin his 14 point night tonight
And all those people said Toronto chose the wrong cousin


----------



## JoeD (Sep 2, 2004)

He couldn't work out while his back was recovering. Muscles deteriorate fast when not used, and he couldn't use them for a long time. It will take him a while to recover, maybe 1.5 seasons I'd guess, to get back to his superb former level. But he can still get to a decent level before that. Even now he's better than most.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

His athleticism has went down a BIT, he can still get up and everything, he's just playing scared.

But the biggest reason is that he's lost his HANDLES. His ball handling skills have demished the most.

he can still get up when he WANTS to. His first step has never been great, but it's still there.

Like I said, it's his ball handling skills he's missing the most.


----------



## thacarter (Mar 27, 2006)

Give him some time,its been only 3 games..this thread holds no truh at least until 20games into the season or better yet midseason


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

His days of being a top tier superstar are over. By the time he recovers physically, if he ever does, his athleticism will have no shot of ever going back to how it was. He's already said that he doesn't know if he can play past 30. His efficiency has been crap for years and it looks like his body's failing him now.

Of course, he could drop 50 a few nights from now and make me look stupid. Who knows.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

I don't think his days are numbered. He's really just out of shape. All players that have an injury that cause them to not be able to run a lot, or keep their body weight down... which is exactly what he had, are bound to recover if they have the work ethic.

If he does not recover, it's Shawn Kemp syndrome. I find that unlikely.

If he does, I think he will be just as good as he was prior to the back injuries. Give him a month or two to get his quickness back, body fat down, and his confidence up. Once he adjusts back to NBA speed, he will be fine.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

He's made plenty of highly athletic plays, last season and this season. This season, many of them have gone for great passes to teammates or failed conversions at the hoop in traffic, leading to his low point totals.

If McGrady plays out the season at this efficiency, he's done as a top-tier player. However, his play hasn't suggested to me that he's permanently lost anything. He's shown athleticism, great passing, handles and shooting. He simply hasn't been putting it together consistently to be unstoppable as he was before.

I think he will snap those pieces together, as this is his first truly competitive basketball since 2005. Right now, he's been slashing into the lane, going up and finding a teammate for an open shot. Once he begins converting more baskets in the lane (if he does), he'll be back near where he used to be.


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

do you guys think Kobe will return


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

tmac has always been a slow starter, i remember every year theres a thread of asking why isnt tmac playing well in the begining of the season. Also i think he is still trying to blend in with the team, they basically missed a whole year last year, and with Yao dominating the way that he is, it seems like tmac is deferring alot to yao when he's in the game, and when tmac is out of the game he is trying to become more of a play maker. This seems more of Van Gundy's offense than anythign else


----------



## MiNCED (May 24, 2006)

Vinsane said:


> What's this T_MAc gettin fat I don't beleive it????
> Has he really been that bad this season
> WHOA 16.5 points not countin his 14 point night tonight
> And all those people said Toronto chose the wrong cousin


They did choose the wrong cousin. Vince totally screwed Toronto over. With hingsight I still would have prefered T-Mac.


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

MiNCED said:


> They did choose the wrong cousin. Vince totally screwed Toronto over. With hingsight I still would have prefered T-Mac.


look where there at in the career's now


----------



## BullSoxChicagosFinest (Oct 22, 2005)

AIFAN3 said:


> Will the real Tracy McGrady please stand up?


He can't, he'll hurt his back


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

...waiting.


----------



## DuMa (Dec 25, 2004)

its early in the season....... i'll make my judgement in december or january


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Vinsane said:


> look where there at in the career's now


Neither are in tremendous situations, but Tmac is in a much better position that VC. The Nets are a good team, but they really don't have enough to make a big splash. You can knock Houston for whatever reason, but no reasonable person would consider them a worse team than NJ. Careers are defined by championships and/or MVPs. Since neither has any, it's a useless comparison. Carter will not be remembered for putting up 10 more ppg than McGrady for a few years.


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

How is this thread even remotely about Vince Carter?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

MiNCED said:


> They did choose the wrong cousin. Vince totally screwed Toronto over. With hingsight I still would have prefered T-Mac.


Tmac did screw the Raptors way before Vince, so you have no point. He perfered Orlando instead of Toronto.


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Tmac did screw the Raptors way before Vince, so you have no point. He perfered Orlando instead of Toronto.


Choosing to go to another team because of financial or career incentives is hardly "screwing" a team over. Vince essentially forced Toronto to trade him for nothing due to his incessant whining and lack of effort. Though it is also Toronto's fault for letting him go for nothing, Carter's behavior at the time did not allow the organization much choice but a hasty decision.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

bronx43 said:


> Neither are in tremendous situations, but Tmac is in a much better position that VC. The Nets are a good team, but they really don't have enough to make a big splash. You can knock Houston for whatever reason, but no reasonable person would consider them a worse team than NJ. Careers are defined by championships and/or MVPs. Since neither has any, it's a useless comparison. Carter will not be remembered for putting up 10 more ppg than McGrady for a few years.


Well, if their career ends today Carter will be remembered as the greatest dunker in NBA history, I don't know about Tmac. However, this isn't about Vince, so lets stick with the topic at hand.

Tmac is done and was never the same ever since last year. I've been saying that but nobody listened or even cared. Well, he's a shadow of his former great self. Anyone who still think Tmac is as athletic as before or even does have the same great handles needs to get his brain examined. He can't shoot now and i never thought one day i'll say this about him. Can't drive to save his life, he's soft. His game is based now on pick and rolls and shooting jumpers or passing it to an open teamates. His handles are pretty weak. He's done as top tier wingplayer. I'm afraid he won't even make my top 5 list. This is sad to say because Tmac will always be my second favorite player.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

bronx43 said:


> Choosing to go to another team because of financial or career incentives is hardly "screwing" a team over. Vince essentially forced Toronto to trade him for nothing due to his incessant whining and lack of effort. Though it is also Toronto's fault for letting him go for nothing, Carter's behavior at the time did not allow the organization much choice but a hasty decision.


Cool, let's move on.


----------



## Fray (Dec 19, 2005)

MiNCED said:


> They did choose the wrong cousin. Vince totally screwed Toronto over. With hingsight I still would have prefered T-Mac.


They didn't choose either cousin. They are both on different teams now.


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

Toronto didn't choose the wrong cousin, the wrong cousin chose the wrong city.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> his play hasn't suggested to me that he's permanently lost anything. He's shown athleticism, great passing, handles and shooting.


I don't think it's fair to say T-Mac is done, as these are his first games in a year and because he also started the '04-05 season poorly. But have we been watching the same player? 
He hasn't shown anything close to his prior level of athleticism. He missed a slightly contested layup when he would have dunked on the guy's head a couple of years ago. Where he would have normally blown by the switching defender, he attempted a long fadeaway. And he's not getting the same elevation on his jump shot. His shot looks terrible. It's flat and it keeps hitting the front of the rim. And he's missing nearly half his free throws.
Only his passing and ballhandling look up to scratch.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

It will be a real shame if McGrady can't pull it back together. He simply was unreal at times before these back injuries


----------



## MarioChalmers (Mar 26, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> His athleticism has went down a BIT, he can still get up and everything, he's just playing scared.
> 
> But the biggest reason is that he's lost his HANDLES. His ball handling skills have demished the most.
> 
> ...


I disagree, maybe he didn't have the opportunity to use his handles, but he definitely hasn't lost them. I saw him on tour this summer and all he did was crazy handle stuff. I was disappointed 'cause he didn't take a TMac jumper, which I'm a real fan of. But again, my point is that he hasn't lost his handles.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Back injuries can be tricky. Much like knee injuries, even when you're physically 100%, there is still a mental hurdle to overcome. What makes back injuries even more frustrating is that they reoccur, so as soon as McGrady does start to get back up to speed from a mental standpoint, the back could give him trouble again and reset everything.

McGrady is still a good player, but expections of him are going to have to go down. I don't know if he has another 25+ point season in him.


----------



## Cambridgeshire (Jan 15, 2005)

After THREE bloody games. Jumpy lot you are.


----------



## MLKG (Aug 25, 2003)

SPMJ said:


> I cannot believe how unathletic he looks. If his jump shot's off he can't score to save his life. I'm NOT exaggerating. I saw 50 something games of the exact same T-Mac last season and ALL of his struggles were attributed to the back troubles. Well, he ain't injured NOW and he looks NO better than last season.


Because, as we all know, back injuries go away....

And as we also know, T-Mac's game is about getting to the rim.....

So a guy comes into the season a little overweight after missing the better part of the year with back problems. What are we surprised about here?

If you want him to move like he's 20 again, then you are probably going to be dissapointed. But there is no reason to think he will be any less productive than he's been since leaving Orlando. Let him get into shape. 

He's going to get hurt a lot for the rest of his career, and probably retire early, because that's what happens when you have back problems, but in the mean time he's not going to forget how to play basketball.

Something tells me he'll find a way to be effective.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

I don't get how people can say it's his athleticism or ball handling.

One thing has seemed off in the part of two games- his jumper.

His passing is top notch, mainly because he still draws a crowd and gets into open spaces WITH his handles.

But he's not launching the effortless J anymore, Bullard even commented on it. Remember that unguardable pull-up 3 pointer as he brought the ball up the court? He would launch about 3 to 4 times a game in Orlando. 

He stopped becoming a primary rim slasher in about 2003, after that it was mainly jumper.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Hakeem said:


> I don't think it's fair to say T-Mac is done, as these are his first games in a year and because he also started the '04-05 season poorly. But have we been watching the same player?
> He hasn't shown anything close to his prior level of athleticism. He missed a slightly contested layup when he would have dunked on the guy's head a couple of years ago. Where he would have normally blown by the switching defender, he attempted a long fadeaway. And he's not getting the same elevation on his jump shot. His shot looks terrible. It's flat and it keeps hitting the front of the rim. And he's missing nearly half his free throws.
> Only his passing and ballhandling look up to scratch.


I didn't say he's consistently looked like he used to, I said he's shown flashes of everything he's had, thereby my feeling that nothing seems conclusively lost. He's made some very athletic slashes and leaps, many to set up teammates. I explicitly said he's been missing opportunities at the hoop that he would have converted in the past. Also, while his shot has mostly been off, he's had moments where he breaks open, takes the pass and launches a dead-eye shot.

I'm not sure what of this your contesting. Are you saying he's made no highly-athletic moves or that none of his shots have looked good? If so, we definitely disagree. If your point is that he's not consistently looking good, that doesn't contradict anything I said.

I'm not saying McGrady has looked good. To me, he's looked terrible. Simply terrible. My point he's shown instances of everything he's done in the past, so I don't believe it's accurate to say his athleticism is _gone_, or his shot is gone or his ball-handling is gone. That's all.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

i think t-mac just needs to be more aggresive 
i saw the whole rockets-hornets game and half or rockets - mavs
and he just pulls up for jays
or drives for like a dribble or 2 and that passes off
he does get a lot of double teams and has proved himself a terrific passer
but now he needs to be more aggresive and take it to the basket
its almost like he is afraid to get injured again


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

his shooting is off, but he is getting 5 rpg, and almost 7 apg. 

the shooting will come...just a slow start.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Shaq is a better *outside shooter * than T-Mac.

T-Mac stats: fg 34%, 3fg 12%, FT 57%.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Ballscientist said:


> Shaq is a better *outside shooter * than T-Mac.
> 
> T-Mac stats: fg 34%, 3fg 12%, FT 57%.


You're a known T-Mac hater, your opinion is just like it always is, neglected.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

Prolific Scorer said:


> You're a known T-Mac hater, your opinion is just like it always is, neglected.


Not true. Many of you think I bash every superstar.


----------



## SheriffKilla (Jan 1, 2004)

especially manu


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

TMac's passing and rebounding is great this year. Its just his shots and shot motion/release just isnt the same. I think he is going to need a few moregames to get into any sort of shooting rythm


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HKF said:


> T-Mac is finished and I have been saying so, since the meltdown against Dallas a year and a half ago. The back injury destroyed him.



Well, you say alot of things, eventually some things swing your way. 3 months from now when McGrady has settled into his role as a Scottie Pippen-type playmaker for this team, not a bulk scorer, I doubt we'll be hearing from you. The fact that you call his performance or Houston's performance against Dallas a "meltdown" just shows your bias.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

SPMJ said:


> This IS the real T-Mac. Or should I say Slow-Mac? I'm telling you, this guy's athleticism has somehow vanished. I cannot believe how unathletic he looks. If his jump shot's off he can't score to save his life. I'm NOT exaggerating. I saw 50 something games of the exact same T-Mac last season and ALL of his struggles were attributed to the back troubles. Well, he ain't injured NOW and he looks NO better than last season. Worse, in fact. T-Mac cannot take it to the basket AT ALL. He has no first step. He can't explode. His hops are gone. He runs the floor like Yao Ming. Like last season he's also still carrying more pounds than necessary and he seems to like being 'BIG'. Houston is STUCK with this guy. Their GM IMO has to start thinking of trading him at the AS break. This is the 2nd straight season where T-Mac physically has looked like a shell of his former self and his confidence is at an all time low. Even if he regains his touch he still won't be anything like his old self due to severely diminished athletic ability. Trade him while his stock's still high for another star player. Somebody has to be available by mid-season.


He needs to figure out what he can realistically do on the basketball court, then stay within his limits. Things haven't gone well recently when all he has done down the stretch is pull for jumpers. Eventually he'll get a feel for where his 'explosiveness' is, and defer more to teammates (still one of the best playmakers in the league). His stock is at rock bottom right now, trading him isn't a forward move for the franchise.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Mr. Predictable said:


> Well, you say alot of things, eventually some things swing your way. 3 months from now when McGrady has settled into his role as a Scottie Pippen-type playmaker for this team, not a bulk scorer, I doubt we'll be hearing from you. The fact that you call his performance or Houston's performance against Dallas a "meltdown" just shows your bias.


Unfortunately I can't rep, but indeed.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

bronx43 said:


> Neither are in tremendous situations, but Tmac is in a much better position that VC. The Nets are a good team, but they really don't have enough to make a big splash. You can knock Houston for whatever reason, but no reasonable person would consider them a worse team than NJ. Careers are defined by championships and/or MVPs. Since neither has any, it's a useless comparison. Carter will not be remembered for putting up 10 more ppg than McGrady for a few years.


That's pretty funny.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

What's with all the threads with these grand declarations after two or three games?


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> I'm not sure what of this your contesting. Are you saying he's made no highly-athletic moves or that none of his shots have looked good? If so, we definitely disagree. If your point is that he's not consistently looking good, that doesn't contradict anything I said.


I'm saying he hasn't at any point this season looked as athletic as he used to. He has made some athletic moves. But all players make athletic moves now and then. He has hit some shots, and those have looked good. But all made shots look good. When he has missed, he has mostly missed badly. I'm not saying he's playing like a cripple. He simply looks like an ordinary player out there.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Hakeem said:


> I'm saying he hasn't at any point this season looked as athletic as he used to. He has made some athletic moves. But all players make athletic moves now and then. He has hit some shots, and those have looked good. But all made shots look good. When he has missed, he has mostly missed badly. I'm not saying he's playing like a cripple. He simply looks like an ordinary player out there.


I've seen him make moves that were as athletic as before. Not consistently, but it's been there in flashes. So yes, obviously all good plays look good and all made shots look good...my point is simply that I don't think he's conclusively lost anything for good. He certainly doesn't have all his previous abilities working for him consistently, but the fact that he can show _everything_ occasionally suggests that he's still capable of getting back to where he was. Maybe not likely, I don't know the likelihoods...but potentially capable.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> ...my point is simply that I don't think he's conclusively lost anything for good.


I don't think so either.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> I've seen him make moves that were as athletic as before. Not consistently, but it's been there in flashes. So yes, obviously all good plays look good and all made shots look good...my point is simply that I don't think he's conclusively lost anything for good. He certainly doesn't have all his previous abilities working for him consistently, but the fact that he can show _everything_ occasionally suggests that he's still capable of getting back to where he was. Maybe not likely, I don't know the likelihoods...but potentially capable.


There is no potential whatsoever. He's playing same as last year and some of you blamed it on his back, but the truth was he's just not the same player anymore. Tmac will never be the same athletically (to even suggest that, all i have to way is wow so much you know about your fav player)he lost his ball handling skills. Those high assists numbers he makes are nothing special, it's just regular passes which his teamates were able to hit. This is the reality that Tmac and Rocket fans have to deal with --- otherwise, keep hoping but to no avail. Tmac is never coming back, though he'll remain as a good player nothing more.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Air Fly said:


> There is no potential whatsoever. He's playing same as last year and some of you blamed it on his back


Some of us blamed it on his back? You mean, when he was having back spams? Strange...what a weird excuse.



> he lost his ball handling skills. Those high assists numbers he makes are nothing special, it's just regular passes which his teamates were able to hit.


Uh huh. And if he scored 25-30 PPG, you'll say "Those high point totals don't mean anything, they're just regular baskets."

Keep trying.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> There is no potential whatsoever. He's playing same as last year and some of you blamed it on his back, but the truth was he's just not the same player anymore. Tmac will never be the same athletically (to even suggest that, all i have to way is wow so much you know about your fav player)he lost his ball handling skills. Those high assists numbers he makes are nothing special, it's just regular passes which his teamates were able to hit. This is the reality that Tmac and Rocket fans have to deal with --- otherwise, keep hoping but to no avail. Tmac is never coming back, though he'll remain as a good player nothing more.


Remember those days when VC was oft injured? Everybody said he wasn't athletic anymore, he was soft, if his shot wasn't falling he was just an ordinary player nothing more, and etc.

It's three games folks. The guy was injured last year. His game is obviously rusty. This is evident by his shot which has all but disappeared. Physically he is also rusty but can you blame a guy who is coming off back injuries? 

If TMac continues to play like this by the end of December then I'll be really be concerned. Even then it might still be too early to call TMac a has-been. All I have to say is VC. Many people prematurely gave up on him too.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Some of us blamed it on his back? You mean, when he was having back spams? Strange...what a weird excuse.


That's what you and others like to believe. Back spasm that let you play 40 awful minutes and look spectacular some nights, ha? Well, so far this season what are you gonna blame that on? And it's not only 3 games like some here say. It's been going ever since last season. Many people were blinded by his "Back spasm" to notice it.



> Uh huh. And if he scored 25-30 PPG, you'll say "Those high point totals don't mean anything, they're just regular baskets."


IF --- but it hasn't happened, so keep living by it if that's what makes you feel better.



> Keep trying.


Keep denying.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Air Fly said:


> Well, so far this season what are you gonna blame that on?


3 games.

If he plays like this the rest of the season, there will actually be reason to believe what you're trying to allege.



> It's been going ever since last season.


Last season:

McGrady (with severe back spams): 22.0 PER
Carter (as healthy as he's ever going to be): 21.6 PER

So let's keep things in perspective a bit. Even racked by serious injury, McGrady was able to put up star-performance. That warrants giving him more than 3 games this season to show what he has, eh?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Vince is better than Tmac right now, its quite obvious when watching the two of them. Tmac cant even go into the lane anymore, and his jumper isnt exactly money either


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Tmac will be fine. He is doing other things outside of scoring well and has been a slow starter in just about every NBA season since when he started playing in Orlando. He's never going to be the 30 ppg scorer he was in Orlando but he'll be in the mid-20s in ppg and putting up the other numbers as well. And it seems like maybe Houston has a few guys this year that will actually hit the wide open shots he is creating for them ...


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> 3 games.
> 
> If he plays like this the rest of the season, there will actually be reason to believe what you're trying to allege.
> 
> ...


Pointless comparison, and another reason why PER is a worthless stat. It was obvious last year and this season who helps his team more. 

But I would like everyone to just stick with Tmac "please stand up" at the moment. It's only been 3 games? Alright, we'll check back on this topic one month from now.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Air Fly said:


> Pointless comparison, and another reason why PER is a worthless stat. It was obvious last year and this season who helps his team more.


Remember this? Rockets @ Nets 



> For the first time I admit he's better than Vince Carter.





> Tmac = God


 :wave:


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Is this the obligatory "Tmac is washed up" thread?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> Remember this? Rockets @ Nets
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 :laugh: 

I overreacted that night, but Tmac was unbelivable that game so no shame in saying that. But, we all know what happened couple of games from there. VC back on track and Tmac falling back.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> :laugh:
> 
> I overreacted that night, but Tmac was unbelivable that game so no shame in saying that. But, we all know what happened couple of games from there. VC back on track and Tmac falling back.


Dude you're mumbling, I can't understand a word you're saying *unecessary- HB*


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

Its sad that Tmac has gone from probably the best offensive player in the league in 2002-03 to a borderline all star. I really hope somehow he can play like he did earlier this decade, he was a special player. I mean the guy had a *30PER* -- was averaging 32ppg! Not to mention he RARELY turned the ball over, and was a very good passer.

Only Jordan, Shaq, and Drob have ever reached that kind of statistical production. Even before that Tmac was around 25PER with solid defense.

Those injuries must have affected him severely. I seriously doubt the fact that he is a Rocket and playing under a new offense as the main reason he isn't as productive as he used to be. This guy in reality is a player who would be just as productive as Wade, Bron, and Kobe had he been healthy. And to be honest his 2003 season was even better than any of those guys seasons in 2005-06 (going by PER).


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Dude you're mumbling, I can't understand a word you're saying *unecessary- HB*


It's okay, I don't wanna join your club becasue I disagree.


----------



## larry89 (Dec 18, 2005)

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=xtalman


just to remind you what the Real T-Mac looks like


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Hakeem said:


> Remember this? Rockets @ Nets
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Win some games first man. Hakeem is retired!


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

HB said:


> Vince is better than Tmac right now, its quite obvious when watching the two of them. Tmac cant even go into the lane anymore, and his jumper isnt exactly money either


Lamar Odom is also better than Tmac right now. Better than Vince Carter, too. Doesn't mean jack.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Nikos said:


> Its sad that Tmac has gone from probably the best offensive player in the league in 2002-03 to a borderline all star. I really hope somehow he can play like he did earlier this decade, he was a special player. I mean the guy had a *30PER* -- was averaging 32ppg! Not to mention he RARELY turned the ball over, and was a very good passer.
> 
> Only Jordan, Shaq, and Drob have ever reached that kind of statistical production. Even before that Tmac was around 25PER with solid defense.
> 
> Those injuries must have affected him severely. I seriously doubt the fact that he is a Rocket and playing under a new offense as the main reason he isn't as productive as he used to be. *This guy in reality is a player who would be just as productive as Wade, Bron, and Kobe had he been healthy. And to be honest his 2003 season was even better than any of those guys seasons in 2005-06 (going by PER).*


Which is exactly why people don't rate players strictly by PER...


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> Which is exactly why people don't rate players strictly by PER...


True, especially after 1 week of games!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Drewbs said:


> Which is exactly why people don't rate players strictly by PER...


That's not why. McGrady's 2002-03 was legitimately one of the greatest seasons ever. It's not in the least surprising that it was better than Bryant, James or Wade last year.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> That's not why. *McGrady's 2002-03 was legitimately one of the greatest seasons ever.* It's not in the least surprising that it was better than Bryant, James or Wade last year.


That loser?

LMAO!


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> That loser?
> 
> LMAO!


Most players would be considered losers if they had the same supporting cast as Tmac did earlier this decade. He didn't have much, yet he still put up big numbers and was efficient. How can you call someone like that a loser? Do you mean his teamattes were losers?


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

Drewbs said:


> Which is exactly why people don't rate players strictly by PER...


Well just looking at his stats they are still superior to all of those superstar wing players of 2005-06. 
He scored 32 efficient points, didn't turn the ball over, passed well, had a below average supporting cast and led his team to a mediocre record. Not his fault Mike Miller was his best teamatte (mediocre player at best at the time). 

I understand people don't like the fact that he complained about zones, that his team in 2004 was horrible. But the man was surely a superstar on par or better than pretty much any modern wing (2001-2003).


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Mcgrady gets no love from me.

I love how over half the people on this board claimed that if he had an interior guy his numbers would go up (when comparing him to kobe) back then. Hate to say I told you so. Actually I love it, payback is awesome.

Tmac is a really great scorer, a very good player, but was never going to be a legend. The primary reason was passion IMO. I'll be the first to admit that he had better tools then all the swingmen of his generation, but he's never going to win a title.

I always hated tmac's comparisons to Nique in terms of what they've achieved. Nique carried his team a lot further then Tmac ever did. Comparing tmac to nique wasn't a discredit to tmac, it was a discredit to Nique.

I think when healthy, mcgrady is going to hover close to 20 ppgs or so for remainder of his career.

ahh, sweet redepdemtion


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

How is Wilkins superior to Tmac? I can't think one thing on the basketball court that he did better than Tmac. Take Wilkins three best seasons and Tmac's three best. Wilkins isn't even the superior scorer. Let alone passer, defender, rebounder.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> Mcgrady gets no love from me.
> 
> I love how over half the people on this board claimed that if he had an interior guy his numbers would go up (when comparing him to kobe) back then. Hate to say I told you so. Actually I love it, payback is awesome.


Actually, no one said that. People said that McGrady could have _won_ as much as Kobe Bryant had he been playing with a dominant big man like Shaq.

Nobody was saying that McGrady would be putting up better numbers than his 30-32 PPG / 6 RPG / 6 APG. Those types of numbers were better than Kobe's and _couldn't_ realistically go up, already being all-time great sort of numbers.



> Tmac is a really great scorer, a very good player, but was never going to be a legend. The primary reason was passion IMO.


Ah, the classic "I have no argument against him, but I want to discredit him somehow, so let me pull out a hazy unproveable."

Wilkins had better teams relative to his league that McGrady did. I know it's boring to be logical and note that overall team talent matters to winning...it's much more fun to concoct make-believe stories about how a player on a losing team earned the losing by having some deficiency of character. Hey, remember when Kobe Bryant was a noble winner until Shaq left and then suddenly became a vile loser? Weird. Almost like losing a dominant big man affects your chances of winning...but we know it was really that Kobe lost his heart, will, passion, love of the game, clutch, desire or something else. Why else did the Lakers go from Finals to out of the playoffs?

After all, Wilkins has led his team further into the playoffs than Kobe ever did without Shaq. Wilkins, you see, had clutch. Or heart. Or something.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Nikos said:


> How is Wilkins superior to Tmac? I can't think one thing on the basketball court that he did better than Tmac. Take Wilkins three best seasons and Tmac's three best. Wilkins isn't even the superior scorer. Let alone passer, defender, rebounder.


he dunked better ...


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

EHL said:


> Lamar Odom is also better than Tmac right now. Better than Vince Carter, too. Doesn't mean jack.


Lamar Odom isn't in the same class as Vince and Tracy
Even in T-Mac's funk right now I would say the 2 are even
And how could you even think about sayin Lamar is better than VC, Vince will dust Lamar 365 days a year every year
*Not appropriate, please refrain from such language*


----------



## Crossword (Jun 7, 2002)

Vinsane said:


> *Not appropriate, please refrain from such language*


How is this possible?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

EHL said:


> Lamar Odom is also better than Tmac right now. Better than Vince Carter, too. Doesn't mean jack.


You can't be serious. I mean, seriously.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Actually after thinking this over carefully. I think Tmac is actually playing smart basketball. You dont need to go out there and score 40 or 50 points to guarantee your team. Let your teammates help you out in that aspect. He had a couple of nice passes tonight

And Lamar Odom being better than Tmac and Vince is a big joke.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

EHL said:


> Lamar Odom is also better than Tmac right now. Better than Vince Carter, too. Doesn't mean jack.


:laugh:


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

HB said:


> Actually after thinking this over carefully. I think Tmac is actually playing smart basketball. You dont need to go out there and score 40 or 50 points to guarantee your team. Let your teammates help you out in that aspect. He had a couple of nice passes tonight
> 
> .


As long as his team keeps winning, I think Tmac will be happy as well. But we both know, this generation fans rate players by their stats or how many points they score, PER etc, so Tmac will be lost among top tier wingplayers if he continues this "smart" play of his.


----------



## Rule_By_His_Own_Hand (Jun 20, 2006)

Nikos said:


> How is Wilkins superior to Tmac? I can't think one thing on the basketball court that he did better than Tmac. Take Wilkins three best seasons and Tmac's three best. Wilkins isn't even the superior scorer. Let alone passer, defender, rebounder.



Now hold on a minute dude.


It's obvious T-Mac is a more gifted, more all around talented, and potenitally better than "Nique ever was, HOWEVER that post is hating on "Nique a bit.

I can think of several things he was better at than T-Mac.

If you can't then I suggest that it's pretty obvious that you apparently didn't watch much bball back in the 80s.


----------



## ChristopherJ (Aug 10, 2004)

EHL said at this point Odom is putting up better stats and so therefore THIS year he is the better player so far. He isn't saying Odom straight up is the better player than Carter or Tmac(obviously).

Nets fans should just take off their goggles and learn to read objectively. Then you guys wouldn't have to get so defensive.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

KidCanada said:


> EHL said at this point Odom is putting up better stats and so therefore THIS year he is the better player so far. He isn't saying Odom straight up is the better player than Carter or Tmac(obviously).
> 
> Nets fans should just take off their goggles and learn to read objectively. Then you guys wouldn't have to get so defensive.


Heh thats why I mentioned it was a joke and followed it up with a laugh symbol to show the hilarity of the post


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Actually, no one said that. People said that McGrady could have _won_ as much as Kobe Bryant had he been playing with a dominant big man like Shaq.
> 
> Nobody was saying that McGrady would be putting up better numbers than his 30-32 PPG / 6 RPG / 6 APG. Those types of numbers were better than Kobe's and _couldn't_ realistically go up, already being all-time great sort of numbers.
> 
> ...


I definately heard many Tmac fans saying Kobe wasn't a good of a scorer because he had lower PPG, despite the fact that he had the ball in his hands more at orlando.

Even saying Tmac would have won as much as Kobe is completely wrong, he hasn't and I don't believe he will.

Even with Yao, Battier, bonzi, I wouldn't be surprised if the rockets somehow miss the playoffs or barely make it.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Actually, no one said that. People said that McGrady could have _won_ as much as Kobe Bryant had he been playing with a dominant big man like Shaq.
> 
> Nobody was saying that McGrady would be putting up better numbers than his 30-32 PPG / 6 RPG / 6 APG. Those types of numbers were better than Kobe's and _couldn't_ realistically go up, already being all-time great sort of numbers.
> 
> ...


with regards to the "Ah, the classic "I have no argument against him, but I want to discredit him somehow, so let me pull out a hazy unproveable."", 

maybe you need to reread my post? I don't like Tmac and have always thought he was overrated. Tmac is the type of guy that can put up big numbers on a bad team and have massive outbursts in scoring. However, he lacks either mental willingness or desire to lead his team.

This isn't some hazy unproveable. This is seen when Tmac complains about countless BS and threatens to retire. Tmac is a quitter. There, I said it. Quitters won't win jack, that's why Tmac was never as good a defender as he should have been.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Also, everyone keeps talking about how Tmac never had a good enough team. Now there should be no more excuses, yet, somehow you tmac fanboys will still make one up when the rockets either get knocked out of the 1st round again, or more likely, barely miss the playoffs.


----------



## Rule_By_His_Own_Hand (Jun 20, 2006)

KennethTo said:


> I definately heard many Tmac fans saying Kobe wasn't a good of a scorer because he had lower PPG, despite the fact that he had the ball in his hands more at orlando.
> 
> Even saying Tmac would have won as much as Kobe is completely wrong, he hasn't and I don't believe he will.
> 
> Even with Yao, Battier, bonzi, I wouldn't be surprised if the rockets somehow miss the playoffs or barely make it.



I think just going by my memory it IS fair to say that T-Mac's best season is better than Kobe's best season.

I think it's also fair to say T-Mac was better than Kobe that year.

Now if you want to say Kobe has had the better career then no arguing. But I honestly can't see complaining about that season, because T-Mac was unreal that year.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> maybe you need to reread my post? I don't like Tmac and have always thought he was overrated. Tmac is the type of guy that can put up big numbers on a bad team and have massive outbursts in scoring. However, he lacks either mental willingness or desire to lead his team.


Thanks for clarifying. I said you resorted to unproveable intangibles to dismiss the actual facts of his production. Clearly, I completely misinterpreted the post...you actually meant that his stats are empty because he doesn't have enough "mental toughness," "desire" and "leadership." 

I appreciate you pointing out where I went wrong about your post.

Can you tell me which of the following Kobe Bryant lost going from a Finals participant to out of the playoffs: mental toughness, desire, leadership, clutch, heart, love of the game or will to win? Thanks.

Also, considering that Dominique Wilkins went further in the playoffs than Kobe Bryant when neither had a dominant center, can you also tell me what winning qualities Wilkins had that Bryant lacks? Is it the same as the answer to my above question or something different?


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Ah, the classic "I have no argument against him, but I want to discredit him somehow, so let me pull out a hazy unproveable."
> 
> Wilkins had better teams relative to his league that McGrady did. I know it's boring to be logical and note that overall team talent matters to winning...it's much more fun to concoct make-believe stories about how a player on a losing team earned the losing by having some deficiency of character. Hey, remember when Kobe Bryant was a noble winner until Shaq left and then suddenly became a vile loser? Weird. Almost like losing a dominant big man affects your chances of winning...but we know it was really that Kobe lost his heart, will, passion, love of the game, clutch, desire or something else. Why else did the Lakers go from Finals to out of the playoffs?
> 
> After all, Wilkins has led his team further into the playoffs than Kobe ever did without Shaq. Wilkins, you see, had clutch. Or heart. Or something.


I know you dislike use of 'intangibles' in arguments, but please don't impute one individual's very poor attribution of intangibles to every possible use of them!

On another note...when was Kobe a "noble winner"?? As far as I can remember, he was always a churlish spoiled brat during the years with Shaq, even if Jackson tried the tactic of gushing about Kobe's unselfishness to media. Honestly, he only recently seems to have mellowed out somewhat.

I'm not sure I buy some of the arguments about Wilkins and McGrady. It's probably just as well to leave any athletically talented G/F from pre-Jordan days out of a direct statline comparison with today's athletic G/F's since they are just developed and utilized differently in today's game.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

02-03 ORL 75 74 39.4 .457 .386 .793 1.6 4.9 6.5 5.5 1.6 0.8 2.60 2.10 32.1

02-03 LAL 82 82 41.5 .451 .383 .843 1.3 5.6 6.9 5.9 2.2 0.8 3.51 2.70 30.0

also put into account, Kobe was playing awesome defense and often guarding the other teams best guard, whether it was a shooting guard or point guard, also note Tmac's defense was mediocre

He was by no means better then kobe that year, or any of years around that time period.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> I know you dislike use of 'intangibles' in arguments, but please don't impute one individual's very poor attribution of intangibles to every possible use of them!


I accept each individual argument on its own merits. 



> On another note...when was Kobe a "noble winner"?? As far as I can remember, he was always a churlish spoiled brat during the years with Shaq, even if Jackson tried the tactic of gushing about Kobe's unselfishness to media. Honestly, he only recently seems to have mellowed out somewhat.


Well, to some, winners are automatically noble, because they win due to a certain character (beyond basketball production) that others don't have. Similarly, when players lose, it's due to a deficiency in character. This is the only way to ensure that every individual "deserves" any team success or failure. Otherwise, you have to muck around with team talent, a similar or better player could have less team success due to teammate talent and it just gets messy.


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Thanks for clarifying. I said you resorted to unproveable intangibles to dismiss the actual facts of his production. Clearly, I completely misinterpreted the post...you actually meant that his stats are empty because he doesn't have enough "mental toughness," "desire" and "leadership."
> 
> I appreciate you pointing out where I went wrong about your post.
> 
> ...


look at my above post, when you cite tmac's year as one of the greatest, is it clearly better then Kobe, when Kobe was also noted as being a much better defender in those years, I don't think so.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

KennethTo said:


> look at my above post, when you cite tmac's year as one of the greatest, is it clearly better then Kobe, when Kobe was also noted as being a much better defender in those years, I don't think so.


It's better, in my opinion. Not by a huge amount, but who particularly cares? I don't rest much importance on it. I said McGrady's season was among the greatest ever because I believe that and advanced measures bear that out. I believe that Bryant's season last year was also one of the great ones ever. Both McGrady and Bryant are among my two favourite current players and rapidly becoming two of my favourite ever. So I don't really care which one is "better." I just tend to argue when I think someone uses what I consider bad logic to dismiss either one (I spent a bunch of posts defending Bryant in another current thread on this forum)...or any player, for that matter.

In my opinion, the two have had roughly equal careers in terms of on-court performance. Raw stats for their careers show pretty mirror career paths and they have near equal PERs. If I had to bet which would be better from now on, I'd bet on Bryant, because he has less serious injury issues. I don't evaluate individuals by team success, because there's a difference in playing with Shaquille O'Neal and playing with Pat Garrity when it comes to winning games.

So that's the pocket version of my stance on McGrady and Bryant. I can go much longer...they're amazing players and have paralleled each other in so many ways, there are plenty more words that can be said.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Well, to some, winners are automatically noble, because they win due to a certain character (beyond basketball production) that others don't have. Similarly, when players lose, it's due to a deficiency in character. This is the only way to ensure that every individual "deserves" any team success or failure. Otherwise, you have to muck around with team talent, a similar or better player could have less team success due to teammate talent and it just gets messy.


This makes it pretty tough to determine when a team's success _was_ due in part to a player's (as yet) unmeasurable basketball characteristics. I somehow doubt that Vince Carter would be able to lead his team as effectively as Kobe or TMac even if their statlines were identical.
(it's so easy to pick on Vince, sorry VC fans)

Would you say that's an accurate assessment?


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> Also, everyone keeps talking about how Tmac never had a good enough team. Now there should be no more excuses, yet, somehow you tmac fanboys will still make one up when the rockets either get knocked out of the 1st round again, or more likely, barely miss the playoffs.


Barely miss the playoffs? You want to take that bet? Tracy may not be the scoring powerhouse he once was, but his role has changed with the Houston team.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> This makes it pretty tough to determine when a team's success _was_ due in part to a player's (as yet) unmeasurable basketball characteristics. I somehow doubt that Vince Carter would be able to lead his team as effectively as Kobe or TMac even if their statlines were identical.
> (it's so easy to pick on Vince, sorry VC fans)


Based on what, though? Before Carter became known as a quitter for his actions to get out of Toronto, he was actually viewed quite positively for his franchise player skills. When he led his team to a close defeat at the hands of the eventual Eastern champion Sixers, trading clutch shots back and forth with Iverson, he was considered a perfectly fine leader.

Today, why would he lead a team astray? How would he cost his team points or wins based on his attitude? It seems so subjective and based on the eye of the beholder that I can't see how it can effectively be weighed into an objective analysis of a player.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

KennethTo said:


> 02-03 ORL 75 74 39.4 .457 .386 .793 1.6 4.9 6.5 5.5 1.6 0.8 2.60 2.10 32.1
> 
> 02-03 LAL 82 82 41.5 .451 .383 .843 1.3 5.6 6.9 5.9 2.2 0.8 3.51 2.70 30.0
> 
> ...


Kenneth, excepting arguments about intangibles, I think it's possible that McGrady was SO good on the offensive end that even if his defense suffered (and remember defensive value can be very dependent on how good your team's defense is) relative to Kobe's, he still had the better season.

I think everyone gets caught up in the Michael Jordan Model which goes something like "score a bunch of points, grab boards, pass off doubles for assists, and make big defensive plays"...but really, with all the Jordan clones we have in today's league, how many would you say are better than Magic Johnson or Larry Bird (two players not known for their D)??


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Based on what, though? Before Carter became known as a quitter for his actions to get out of Toronto, he was actually viewed quite positively for his franchise player skills. When he led his team to a close defeat at the hands of the eventual Eastern champion Sixers, trading clutch shots back and forth with Iverson, he was considered a perfectly fine leader.
> 
> Today, why would he lead a team astray? How would he cost his team points or wins based on his attitude? It seems so subjective and based on the eye of the beholder that I can't see how it can effectively be weighed into an objective analysis of a player.


I think Vince's desire to succeed was questioned LONG before his pathetic last season in Toronto.

My point isn't really that we can mathematically factor that sort of analysis into a player's PER, for instance (which is why I said that the player's statlines should be identical), but that it's simple enough to say that _any_ differentiation between players that isnt encompassed in the currently available stats is still potentially significant. 

We all know that there isn't really a comprehensive measure of a player's defensive value and that defensive value is still very important. Without measures, defensive value is very subjective, with observation, reputation, and anecdotal evidence dominating our assessments.

How much of a stretch is it really to allow that there are other not currently measured factors which affect (even if not as much as defensive value) a player's value?

So, to answer, I think most of Vince's defects are mental. I somehow doubt that's heavily disputed by impartial observers. The tricky part is that most of that is probably _already_ encompassed in his numbers (as we saw in that pathetic half season with Toronto). 

If mental factors can have such an affect on the portion of a player's value we have well-established measures for, who is to say that such factors don't have an affect on the portions of a player's value which we don't have well-established measures for, and thus, an affect on his overall value that we cannot currently measure but need to acknowledge in any comprehensive evaluation?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> My point isn't really that we can mathematically factor that sort of analysis into a player's PER, for instance (which is why I said that the player's statlines should be identical), but that it's simple enough to say that _any_ differentiation between players that isnt encompassed in the currently available stats is still potentially significant.


I agree; it _could_ potentially be significant. But there's no way to know, in any specific instance, whether it is or not and who it favours. It strikes me as pure speculation.



> We all know that there isn't really a comprehensive measure of a player's defensive value and that defensive value is still very important. Without measures, defensive value is very subjective, with observation, reputation, and anecdotal evidence dominating our assessments.


That's a good point, but there's a critical difference: we can _observe_ defense. Even if it can't be perfectly quantified, it's still a tangible in that we know that defense, conceptually, has about 50% factor in who wins and we can at least watch people play defense to determine how they relate to that 50%.

When it comes to intangibles, we don't know how much, if any, effect it has in general. We also can't "observe" it directly. We can read some quotes, try to read between the lines and guess...but we can't actually see intangibles in play and size up how good one player is at them or another.

So to sum up my position: I'm not saying that intangibles have no effect. I don't know if they do or not...I'm agnostic on the subject. I'm saying that we have no solid information one way or the other, nor do we have a good way of measuring OR observing it in specific players...so we're left to guess, which brings into play biases of all types.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> I agree; it _could_ potentially be significant. But there's no way to know, in any specific instance, whether it is or not and who it favours. It strikes me as pure speculation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think we _can_ observe many of these intangibles' effects. When you see a player in a clutch playoff situation "choke", what do you see? Maybe forced shots with plenty of time on the clock, dribbling into defensive traps, desperate passes to unprepared or out-of-position teammates, gambles for steals, fouling jump shooters, inattention to cutters/backdoor plays, etc. A myriad of difficult to quantify decisions made by a player with _any given statline_. 

So my argument about Vince and his intangibles would be that in the more crucial situations, he would be more likely to commit the above errors than some players like Kobe or TMac, even if their statlines were fairly similar. It's not that Vince can never take over a game in the 4th, hit a game winner, or make a big defensive stop, but that he's less likely to do it.

Yes, you're right, we don't know how to quantify it (even if it is somewhat observable), but we do know that it influences the defensive half of the game, and thus _does_ have a not currently measured impact on a player's value (if you assume that we have perfectly assessed a player's offensive value).

I am willing to say this: that intangibles can be observed in the context of a player's oncourt play, and potentially in his statline _if_ we have sophisticated enough measures to accomplish this. It may be the case that Vince's observable failings (assuming my observations arent simply biased and mathematically incorrect) could be realized with a better turnover stat, better passing stats, stats that measure the defensive pressure a player is up against, etc

I just don't think we're quite that close yet. And so, I am unwilling to take PER, AsR, ToR, PPR, etc and say that our offensive measures obviate the need for consideration of intangibles in offense.

I think there is a gap somewhere...how can I prove to you that anyone's observations can be correct without a statistical measure? I can't. That is why I argue the above; based on simple proportions of a total (player value) that we can agree exists.

I know you're not a robot Minstrel and do have observations of a player that are not encompassed by the available measures, and I admire your steadfast discipline in not using those in your formal assessment/defense of a player's value, but surely there comes a point when you can see that your observations _do_ coincide with the current measurements and must consider the possibility that you can, to whatever extent, use these observations to evaluate the unmeasured portions??


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

JPSeraph said:


> So my argument about Vince and his intangibles would be that in the more crucial situations, he would be more likely to commit the above errors than some players like Kobe or TMac, even if their statlines were fairly similar. It's not that Vince can never take over a game in the 4th, hit a game winner, or make a big defensive stop, but that he's less likely to do it.


Wrong, just wrong with no facts supporting your argument. Vince almost made it to the ECF with a weak supporting cast. And he did it taking games over, same as last year with the Nets.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> I think we _can_ observe many of these intangibles' effects. When you see a player in a clutch playoff situation "choke", what do you see? Maybe forced shots with plenty of time on the clock, dribbling into defensive traps, desperate passes to unprepared or out-of-position teammates, gambles for steals, fouling jump shooters, inattention to cutters/backdoor plays, etc. A myriad of difficult to quantify decisions made by a player with _any given statline_.


Except I don't tend to see that from players not prone to that at any time. I mean, of course players can have isolated bad games where they force things or make unforced errors, but I don't recall seeing a player who simply went from poised and great to making mistakes or forced shots systematically in the clutch. The closest thing, I suppose, would be David Robinson if you define "clutch" as the playoffs. I can't explain Robinson, especially since it didn't seem to happen at "close and late" clutch situations nor against top teams in the regular season.



> So my argument about Vince and his intangibles would be that in the more crucial situations, he would be more likely to commit the above errors than some players like Kobe or TMac, even if their statlines were fairly similar. It's not that Vince can never take over a game in the 4th, hit a game winner, or make a big defensive stop, but that he's less likely to do it.


That hasn't been my experience. Carter has hit a lot of big shots through his career, both in Toronto and New Jersey.



> I just don't think we're quite that close yet. And so, I am unwilling to take PER, AsR, ToR, PPR, etc and say that our offensive measures obviate the need for consideration of intangibles in offense.
> 
> I think there is a gap somewhere...how can I prove to you that anyone's observations can be correct without a statistical measure? I can't. That is why I argue the above; based on simple proportions of a total (player value) that we can agree exists.


How do you reconcile opposite opinions on those intangibles for a player? You feel Carter is more prone to getting worse in the clutch, I think he's capable of making big shots. Many people think Pippen wasn't a leader...based on what Phil Jackson, Jordan and Steve Kerr have said, I think he was a tremendous leader.

You rarely have such totally unreconcilable opinions on defense. Sometimes you do (noteably when it comes to someone who gambles on steals), but most of the time, everyone's going to say Payton in his prime was good to great. No one's going to say Payton was a crap defender. No one's going to say Nash is a good defender...you're going to get varied opinions only on how poor he is, not whether he's poor. So, there does seem to be a fairly significant difference between observing defense and observing intangibles.



> I know you're not a robot Minstrel and do have observations of a player that are not encompassed by the available measures, and I admire your steadfast discipline in not using those in your formal assessment/defense of a player's value, but surely there comes a point when you can see that your observations _do_ coincide with the current measurements and must consider the possibility that you can, to whatever extent, use these observations to evaluate the unmeasured portions??


I come from a cognitive science background. Study after study shows human perception is extremely flawed, biased by what we expect to see, hope to see, poor memory for tiny details, etc. Further, I know I don't see everything. If I see a player hang his head when something goes wrong, it's easy to say he checked out. How do I know he didn't go into the time out, get his head together and come out determined to win the game? I don't like trying to infer things I really have no basis inferring. I don't like making conclusions based on the latest three games I saw that are more memorable than the five games I saw before that. That's what leads to people claiming LeBron James is a choker, after three or four games where the Cavs lost in the final seconds, only to see James hit big shot after big shot after that.


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Study after study shows human perception is extremely flawed, biased by what we expect to see, hope to see, poor memory for tiny details, etc. Further, I know I don't see everything. If I see a player hang his head when something goes wrong, it's easy to say he checked out. How do I know he didn't go into the time out, get his head together and come out determined to win the game? I don't like trying to infer things I really have no basis inferring.


Exactly my thoughts on this issue. 

Many posters make blanket statements like Tmac has no desire, that his 32ppg was meaningless. Same goes for players like Kobe Bryant and Vince Carter. Sure these guys are prone to have bad games but just because they don't live up to their superstar labels in the playoffs under different contextual situations then some other highly touted NBA greats, doesn't mean they don't measure up. 

Team context is never factored into the equation. It is assumed that if the team doesn't live up expectations led by their superstar, that the superstar has some deficit in character and that the players numbers were irrelevant and came at the expense of winning.

Stats such as PER or any type of derative/standardized measurements drawn from an entire regular season sample can be extremely informative and useful. Of course you have to consider defense and other team contextual factors to accurately compare and evaluate players contributions and production value on the court. I think statistics do get a bad rap, because I think they present a nice baseline to evaluate players. Its not conclusive in and of itself, but its a good indicator of the quality of player when combined with other observations such as team context, defensive capability etc...Assuming you can 'watch and see for yourself' without any consideration of stats is just as bad as blindly using statistics to judge players value.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Not too take this offtopic but Jseraph's posts on Vince seem like someone who hasnt really been paying attention to Vince and just going by the majority stance on him.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

HB said:


> Not too take this offtopic but Jseraph's posts on Vince seem like someone who hasnt really been paying attention to Vince and just going by the majority stance on him.


Actually, I've seen him quite a bit. 



Nikos said:


> Exactly my thoughts on this issue.
> Stats such as PER or any type of derative/standardized measurements drawn from an entire regular season sample can be extremely informative and useful. Of course you have to consider defense and other team contextual factors to accurately compare and evaluate players contributions and production value on the court. I think statistics do get a bad rap, because I think they present a nice baseline to evaluate players. Its not conclusive in and of itself, but its a good indicator of the quality of player when combined with other observations such as team context, defensive capability etc...Assuming you can 'watch and see for yourself' without any consideration of stats is just as bad as blindly using statistics to judge players value.


Nikos, my line of reasoning is in no way negating the value of statistical measures. Indeed, I support _accurate and comprehensive_ quantitative measures of a player's value wherever we can find them. For instance, I believe that PER is an excellent stat for comparing players with similar offensive roles. However, I'm sure we can agree that, as yet, we do not have an accurate and comprehensive assessment of a player's value; only distorted portions of the picture.

It is for this reason that I have proposed the use of 'intangibles' in evaluating a player's value - the idea being that the best current statistics do not provide an accurate and complete picture of a player's value, so it is necessary, when considering the player as a _whole_ to use the best available measures for the rest of the whole, even if it's anecdotal, observational, intangible, etc.

Minstrel's stance, as I understand it, is simply that using poorer measures such as those I advocate is primarily a waste of time because it actually distorts our estimation of a player's value even more than simply using the best available measures and ignoring the parts of a player we cannot measure.

There's a much finer line than you would make out with "statistics are important and their detractors are biased".


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Except I don't tend to see that from players not prone to that at any time. I mean, of course players can have isolated bad games where they force things or make unforced errors, but I don't recall seeing a player who simply went from poised and great to making mistakes or forced shots systematically in the clutch. The closest thing, I suppose, would be David Robinson if you define "clutch" as the playoffs. I can't explain Robinson, especially since it didn't seem to happen at "close and late" clutch situations nor against top teams in the regular season.


I've always thought Robinson was simply less aggressive than everyone thought he should be. But who knows, with intangibles, you could call if fifty different names, and mean the same thing.



> That hasn't been my experience. Carter has hit a lot of big shots through his career, both in Toronto and New Jersey.


Yeah, I didn't mean that Vince couldn't hit big shots anymore than I would say Carmelo Anthony can't hit big shots. There isn't really much preventing one great wing player who shoots 45% from hitting a game winning shot as often as another great wing player.

My observation with Vince is that the more crucial or contested the situation, the more likely he messes up. I don't hate Vince. He just seems like a fairly consistent example to me. But who knows, maybe all the people who think Vince chokes are biased and those who don't are objective?



> How do you reconcile opposite opinions on those intangibles for a player? You feel Carter is more prone to getting worse in the clutch, I think he's capable of making big shots. Many people think Pippen wasn't a leader...based on what Phil Jackson, Jordan and Steve Kerr have said, I think he was a tremendous leader.


I wouldn't try to reconcile an opposing opinion on intangibles really. It's easier to point out why "Efficiency" is an inferior stat to PER, for instance, but in the realm of applying logic to written/spoken language, it's much more difficult to come to agreement on terms that can have multiple meanings, let alone examine the soundness of one another's conclusions. I guess there's a very fine line between a specious "majority rules" approach and one that explores all options equally (if not rigorously).

Let's face it: math is more precise.

And hey, Pip was a fine leader. I think what he gained from playing alongside Michael, he may have lost from playing in MJ's shadow, but he's amply demonstrated that he can lead playoff teams, right?



> You rarely have such totally unreconcilable opinions on defense. Sometimes you do (noteably when it comes to someone who gambles on steals), but most of the time, everyone's going to say Payton in his prime was good to great. No one's going to say Payton was a crap defender. No one's going to say Nash is a good defender...you're going to get varied opinions only on how poor he is, not whether he's poor. So, there does seem to be a fairly significant difference between observing defense and observing intangibles.


Yes, because defense isn't entirely "intangible", more like "invisible" within the current scheme of official NBA Stats. I was forced to work with that, because I cannot use "heart" to prove "clutch", for instance.



> I come from a cognitive science background. Study after study shows human perception is extremely flawed, biased by what we expect to see, hope to see, poor memory for tiny details, etc. Further, I know I don't see everything. If I see a player hang his head when something goes wrong, it's easy to say he checked out. How do I know he didn't go into the time out, get his head together and come out determined to win the game? I don't like trying to infer things I really have no basis inferring. I don't like making conclusions based on the latest three games I saw that are more memorable than the five games I saw before that. That's what leads to people claiming LeBron James is a choker, after three or four games where the Cavs lost in the final seconds, only to see James hit big shot after big shot after that.


Social science and a bit of philosophy here, so I guess it shows in our respective approaches. What you just said is entirely correct. Nobody can do it perfectly, and the vast majority do it very poorly. Which doesn't eliminate the possibility that some do it well. But, you'll just ask me for an accurate and reliable measure of that and we'll go in loops, right? :wink:


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Nikos said:


> Exactly my thoughts on this issue.
> 
> Many posters make blanket statements like Tmac has no desire,




Why "blanket statements"?. T-Mac has showned plenty of times that he has no real desire for the game. I sure don't need to provide examples, do i?



> that his 32ppg was meaningless.


And it was. Same thing with Kobe's 35ppg.



> Same goes for players like Kobe Bryant and Vince Carter. Sure these guys are prone to have bad games but just because they don't live up to their superstar labels in the playoffs under different contextual situations then some other highly touted NBA greats, doesn't mean they don't measure up.


I'm working on a new theory: I'm calling it the "Only-Playoffs-Matter". When i get it ready i'll post it. But, in sum, yeah, you guessed it, i think regular season is for sissies.



> Team context is never factored into the equation. It is assumed that if the team doesn't live up expectations led by their superstar, that the superstar has some deficit in character and that the players numbers were irrelevant and came at the expense of winning.


And it's the proper thing to do. Truly great players win. And that's the bottom line. No great player in history played for a bottom-5 (or 3) team in the league. There were great offensive players in the history of the NBA who couldn't get the job doen when it mattered, like Wilkins, Dantley, English, King, T-Mac. 



> Stats such as PER or any type of derative/standardized measurements drawn from an entire regular season sample can be extremely informative and useful. Of course you have to consider defense and other team contextual factors to accurately compare and evaluate players contributions and production value on the court. I think statistics do get a bad rap, because I think they present a nice baseline to evaluate players. Its not conclusive in and of itself, but its a good indicator of the quality of player when combined with other observations such as team context, defensive capability etc...Assuming you can 'watch and see for yourself' without any consideration of stats is just as bad as blindly using statistics to judge players value.


I, for one, don't care about PER. Trusting PER stats would mean that THAT T-Mac season should be considered a greater achievement than Tiny Archibal's legendary "leading-the-league-in-ppg-AND-apg" season. so it's the wrong measuring stick to use.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

I think the real T-Mac's finally stood up tonight. 26pts on 10-15 shooting, 5reb 5asst 1stl and 2blk, and still 2mins to go in the 3rd Q. Ah its good to see him back...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> I wouldn't try to reconcile an opposing opinion on intangibles really. It's easier to point out why "Efficiency" is an inferior stat to PER, for instance, but in the realm of applying logic to written/spoken language, it's much more difficult to come to agreement on terms that can have multiple meanings, let alone examine the soundness of one another's conclusions. I guess there's a very fine line between a specious "majority rules" approach and one that explores all options equally (if not rigorously).


I'm all for chatting about such things. I think leadership or aggression and those sorts of things make cool bar room debates, as it were? I just think that they're so at the margins of real value and so hard to evaluate in a satisfying way, that I have trouble accepting adjusting a player's value significantly based on them.



> And hey, Pip was a fine leader. I think what he gained from playing alongside Michael, he may have lost from playing in MJ's shadow, but he's amply demonstrated that he can lead playoff teams, right?


Right! And Jackson said that Pippen was as much a leader on the Bulls teams as Jordan; Jordan led by harsh words and example, Pippen led by encouragement and instructing teammates in how to do things. Different thread topic though. 



> Social science and a bit of philosophy here, so I guess it shows in our respective approaches. What you just said is entirely correct. Nobody can do it perfectly, and the vast majority do it very poorly. Which doesn't eliminate the possibility that some do it well. But, you'll just ask me for an accurate and reliable measure of that and we'll go in loops, right? :wink:


I love philosophy! And it's a part of the cog-sci discipline. Some may do it well...how do we know which people do?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Tracy McGrady tonight: 32 points (11-19), 6 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal

Reports of his demise may be premature.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

Thank you.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

And he made four straight free throws in the last 10 seconds. Clutch!


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

decent numbers, his shooting was going great until he missed about 4 in a row. But the rest of his numbers are great. Hopefully he can carry this over into the next game and build some momentum.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Hakeem said:


> And he made four straight free throws in the last 10 seconds. Clutch!


And he won, making his numbers meaningful.


----------



## neoxsupreme (Oct 31, 2005)

I've been waiting for TMac to light it up since he's on my fantasy team. Finally he has a good game. More of an Orlando Magic TMac type of game tonight except his team wins :wink:.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> And it's the proper thing to do. Truly great players win. And that's the bottom line. No great player in history played for a bottom-5 (or 3) team in the league. There were great offensive players in the history of the NBA who couldn't get the job doen when it mattered, like Wilkins, Dantley, English, King, T-Mac.
> 
> ..



Can you name one great player who won with the quality of teammates that Tmac had in that terrible Orlando season? Can you Paula? I don't think you can.

At the beginning of that season, Orlando's starting SF was Britton Johnson. BRITTON JOHNSON! HELLO? MCFLY? And I don't think I need to run through the rest of that cast ... many of which are currently NOT in the NBA.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

HB said:


> *Not too take this offtopic* but Jseraph's posts on *Vince* seem like someone who hasnt really been paying attention to *Vince* and just going by the majority stance on him.





HB said:


> *Vince is better* than Tmac right now, its quite obvious when watching the two of them. Tmac cant even go into the lane anymore, and his jumper isnt exactly money either



Thread title: "Will the real Tracy McGrady please stand up?"


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> There's a much finer line than you would make out with "statistics are important and their detractors are biased".


What do you mean exactly? I am not sure I understand this statement even though it seems clear enough. I don't know if there is a fine line. Some posters completely say PER is useless because it doesn't validate their biases. How is that a fine line? Wasn't really trying to insinuate that you even felt that, just saying that some posters flat out do ignore PER because it doesn't fit their beliefs.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Tracy McGrady tonight: 32 points (11-19), 6 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal
> 
> Reports of his demise may be premature.


Oh yeah, all this and the OP just said TMac was washed up?!


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

JPSeraph said:


> Yeah, I didn't mean that Vince couldn't hit big shots anymore than I would say Carmelo Anthony can't hit big shots. There isn't really much preventing one great wing player who shoots 45% from hitting a game winning shot as often as another great wing player.
> 
> My observation with Vince is that the more crucial or contested the situation, the more likely he messes up. I don't hate Vince. He just seems like a fairly consistent example to me. But who knows, maybe all the people who think Vince chokes are biased and those who don't are objective?


Your observation is an opinion not a fact.

Seriously, just stop. Vince isn't consistent? how about this, #1 in nestle crunch points both in the regular season and the playoffs. Vince is a chocker? The most laughable thing i've heard. The irony of this is that you forgot to direct those comments towards Tmac whos been known to majority of nba fans as a chocker.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Tracy McGrady tonight: 32 points (11-19), 6 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal
> 
> Reports of his demise may be premature.


Great, I'll wait to see your response when he falters in his next game. (though I don't wanna see that happening)


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> Your observation is an opinion not a fact.
> 
> Seriously, just stop. Vince isn't consistent? how about this, #1 in nestle crunch points both in the regular season and the playoffs. Vince is a chocker? The most laughable thing i've heard. The irony of this is that you forgot to direct those comments towards Tmac whos been known to majority of nba fans as a chocker.


he leads in a stat named after a candy?


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Pimped Out said:


> he leads in a stat named after a candy?


Sounds appropriate enough!



> What do you mean exactly? I am not sure I understand this statement even though it seems clear enough. I don't know if there is a fine line. Some posters completely say PER is useless because it doesn't validate their biases. How is that a fine line? Wasn't really trying to insinuate that you even felt that, just saying that some posters flat out do ignore PER because it doesn't fit their beliefs.


If you were just making a general statement about some posters, then sure, I don't think we disagree about anything. 

But making a general statement about some posters who say PER isn't valid because it doesn't suit their biases in reference to my posts regarding using intangibles as a supplement to PER is misleading; hence, my 'finer line' statement.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Vince Carter tonight 30 pts 8 rebs 2 assists

13 of those points came in the 4th

Say what you want to say about Air fly bringing up the nestle crunch time points. But the point of that was obvious. The man steps up his game in the 4th. Its very common to see the Nets just throw the ball to him in the 4th whenever you need a basket. Thats why I laughed at the guy who said he chokes when the game is on the line.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Mr. Predictable said:


> Thread title: "Will the real Tracy McGrady please stand up?"


Heh are you sure you read everything that lead up to that. I am pretty sure you didnt or you wouldnt have made those quotes


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Jesus Christ, enough with Vince Carter. He's not a superstar on the level of Tracy McGrady, most certainly is not clutch, and is quite obviously no where near the best perimeter players in the game; i.e. LeBron, Kobe, and Wade. Stop hyping Wince.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

EHL said:


> Jesus Christ, enough with Vince Carter. He's not a superstar on the level of Tracy McGrady, most certainly is not clutch, and is quite obviously no where near the best perimeter players in the game; i.e. LeBron, Kobe, and Wade. Stop hyping Wince.


Sorry he obviously isnt as good as Tmac. I will refrain from mentioning his name again even when people who dont know what they are talking about try to make up invalid points. Does that make you feel any better your highness


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

HB said:


> Sorry he obviously isnt as good as Tmac. I will refrain from mentioning his name again even when people who dont know what they are talking about try to make up invalid points. Does that make you feel any better your highness


You're hyping Vince Carter in a Tmac thread. 

Tmac is clearly the better player; statistically and in terms of accolades won and games played. It's not debatable, it's like the owners claiming Vince was better than Wade last season. We all know how that ish turned out.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Air Fly said:


> Your observation is an opinion not a fact.
> 
> Seriously, just stop. Vince isn't consistent? how about this, #1 in nestle crunch points both in the regular season and the playoffs. Vince is a chocker? The most laughable thing i've heard. The irony of this is that you forgot to direct those comments towards Tmac whos been known to majority of nba fans as a chocker.


Mmmmm...Nestle Crunch chocker...


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

I dont think HB is trying to say "vince is better than tmac" so much as he just believes vince is a clutch player and doesnt deserve any sort of "choker" reputation.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

JPSeraph said:


> I dont think HB is trying to say "vince is better than tmac" so much as he just believes vince is a clutch player and doesnt deserve any sort of "choker" reputation.


Thanks. Some people just skip to the last page without taking time to actually read what lead to that


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

JPSeraph said:


> I dont think HB is trying to say "vince is better than tmac" so much as he just believes vince is a clutch player and doesnt deserve any sort of "choker" reputation.





HB said:


> Vince is better than Tmac right now, its quite obvious when watching the two of them.


He desperately wants to believe it. If Tmac is relatively healthy this year he'll, yet again, be the superior player to Carter.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

HB said:


> Thanks. Some people just skip to the last page without taking time to actually read what lead to that


Just be thankful that you didn't spend much of your time trying to articulate a difficult point of view only to have someone do the same!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

EHL said:


> You're hyping Vince Carter in a Tmac thread.
> 
> Tmac is clearly the better player; statistically and in terms of accolades won and games played. It's not debatable, it's like the owners claiming Vince was better than Wade last season. We all know how that ish turned out.


I dont even know why I am replying to this, because you obviously are just making comments that have no basis whatsoever.

Call me when Tmac actually wins a playoff series and then we can talk about those 'accolades' he has over Vince


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

EHL said:


> He desperately wants to believe it. If Tmac is relatively healthy this year he'll, yet again, be the superior player to Carter.


Lol if you say so. For a guy who is supposedly below Tmac's level he is doing quite well for himself dont you think?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

HB said:


> I dont even know why I am replying to this, because you obviously are just making comments that have no basis whatsoever.


No basis in what? You wanted desperately to talk about Carter in a Tmac thread, and even claimed he is better than Tmac this season (as if that's relavent or even worthy of discussion). Don't think the Nets homer stuff is going to fly. We've seen your posts on Marcus Williams. 



> Call me when Tmac actually wins a playoff series and then we can talk about those 'accolades' he has over Vince


Call me when Vince Carter wins more rings than Randy Brown.



HB said:


> Lol if you say so. For a guy who is supposedly below Tmac's level he is doing quite well for himself dont you think?


You mean 10 days into the regular season? Stupendous.


----------



## unluckyseventeen (Feb 5, 2006)

Oh, by the way...

McGrady: 32pts, 11-19 FGs, 3-5 3PT, 6reb, 5ast, 3blk


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

EHL said:


> No basis in what? You wanted desperately to talk about Carter in a Tmac thread, and even claimed he is better than Tmac this season (as if that's relavent or even worthy of discussion). Don't think the Nets homer stuff is going to fly. We've seen your posts on Marcus Williams.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Once again read through the thread and see exactly why Vince was brought into this discussion. Dont act like people just want to throw his name out of the blue. 

You have seen my posts on Marcus Williams, so what? Lol let me guess, he is a fluke player also


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

HB said:


> Once again read through the thread and see exactly why Vince was brought into this discussion. Dont act like people just want to throw his name out of the blue.


I've read through the thread, thanks. 



> You have seen my posts on Marcus Williams, so what? Lol let me guess, he is a fluke player also


I don't know how good Williams will be; all I know is that you were hyping him like a deity. 

But I'll leave this alone.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

<img src="http://img9.imagepile.net/img9/395jerry.gif">


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Tracy McGrady tonight: 32 points (11-19), 6 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 blocks, 1 steal
> 
> Reports of his demise may be premature.


Yao Ming, 23 points 7 rebounds 4 assists.

Rockets will not win a championship with Tracy MacGrady is the first option of the team!


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

EHL said:


> No basis in what? You wanted desperately to talk about Carter in a Tmac thread, and even claimed he is better than Tmac this season (as if that's relavent or even worthy of discussion). Don't think the Nets homer stuff is going to fly. We've seen your posts on Marcus Williams.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You? Do u play in the NBA? Some guy who cant even play in the NBA? Borrow from Earl Boykins? LMAO! I bet he is stronger than you!


----------



## K-Dub (Jun 26, 2005)

John said:


> Yao Ming, 23 points 7 rebounds 4 assists.
> 
> Rockets will not win a championship with Tracy MacGrady is the first option of the team!


Only Yao was the first option, taking 24 shots in the game


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Vince Carter fans pray for McGrady's downfall, simply for the fact that they are looking for anyway to try to put Vince over Mac.

Ever since McGrady has left Toronto he's been better than Vince at every aspect of the game, period....and will continue to do so.

McGrady's Noteable Teammates (00-04)

Troy Hudson
John Amaechi
Horace Grant
Steven Hunter
Andrew Declercq
Pat Garrity
Bo Outlaw
Darrell Armstrong
Mike Miller
Drew Gooden
Jaryl Sasser
Pat Burke
Patrick Ewing
Shawn Kemp
Don Reid
Monty Williams


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Let it go prolific. Tmac is better than Vince, if that makes Tmac fans sleep well at night then great. The season is still unfolding though, might want to wait for the finale.


----------



## Jizzy (Aug 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Vince Carter fans pray for McGrady's downfall, simply for the fact that they are looking for anyway to try to put Vince over Mac.
> 
> Ever since McGrady has left Toronto he's been better than Vince at every aspect of the game, period....and will continue to do so.
> 
> ...


lol.. Has T-Mac ever made it to the second round? Didn't he just choke away a 2-0 series lead to Dallas? Has he played more then 70 games the past two seasons?

You can look at T-Mac's teammates all you want but if you can get a team with guys like Rodney Buford and Jabari Smith into the playoffs while still being new to the team and losing your third best player to injury, then you've proven something. I would put Vince and T-Mac on an equal level for now.

Hey, BTW, what happened to your D-Ho stat updates?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Jizzy said:


> Didn't he just choke away a 2-0 series lead to Dallas?


No, he played exceedingly well on both offense and defense, one of the best series by a perimeter player on both sides of the ball since Jordan considering how he took Nowitzki out of his game.



> Has he played more then 70 games the past two seasons?


Only if you believe that 78 is more than 70.


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

EHL said:


> You're hyping Vince Carter in a Tmac thread.
> 
> *Tmac is clearly the better player*; statistically and in terms of accolades won and games played. It's not debatable, it's like the owners claiming Vince was better than Wade last season. We all know how that ish turned out.


Wow this soooo wrong... T-Mac WAS the better player.. We don't know yet if he'd get back to his old form..It's like using Amare's sophomore year to conclude he's better than say Gasol...We don't know yet whether he will get back to his old form.. So to say Vince is the far superior player now isn't to farfetched...

BTW thank you Vinsane for successfully turning this thread into a Vince Vs.T-Mac thread...


----------



## duncan2k5 (Feb 27, 2005)

why is this an arguement? t-mac is top 5 swingman in the NBA. vince isnt. never count t-mac out. he is still young. younger than kobe even. just because he was injured doesnt mean he sucks. and the rockets are a force now that Yao ming has learned how to ball. he is top 3 big men in the NBA IMO.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Only if you believe that 78 is more than 70.


which i dont. only a stat geek would believe numbers like. you and hollinger are probably the only 2 people who believe 78 is more than 70.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

For me it's simple.

At this point in their careers, neither of them are guys I would pick first to start a team, and neither of them are gonna be no.1 guys for contenders. At this point.

However, for Vince that point started many years ago after that playoff series in which he just wanted to be one of the guys, despite getting paid three or four times as much as "one of the guys"

That point for Tmac hit last year, but unlike Vince it was no choice of his. Injury did him in, as he was looking every bit of a go to guy on a team that _could possibly_ contend in that playoff series. (lets not forget they were undermanned, and were the lower seed).

I keep that 19 win season out just cuz that was the season from hell, and I don't think any player would have done better, or much better.

Now on the Nets Vince has faced a rejuvenation, but don't twist it, Kidd is still the leader and Richard Jefferson is a vocal guy. You cannot stick Vince on a team where he has the pressure of producing without guys like Kidd and RJ, you can't take that chance.

The biggest difference is that now one is slightly hobbled, and the other is not.

But make no mistake, the Rockets need McGrady more than the Nets need Vince. (in the sense that the Nets have more offensive options)


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

Tragedy said:


> For me it's simple.
> 
> At this point in their careers, neither of them are guys I would pick first to start a team, and neither of them are gonna be no.1 guys for contenders. At this point.
> 
> ...


Great Post..END HIJACK HERE


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Aug 2, 2006)

So after five games this early in the season T-Mac sucks, is injury prone, and will never regain form.

If that's so then the Mavericks and Suns suck, will only win 20-25 games, and be in the Greg Oden sweepstakes.

Also, the Hawks and Hornets will challenge the Bulls 72-10 record, meet in the Finals, and give us one of the greatest 7 game series of all time with unheard-of ratings.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

Spaceman Spiff said:


> So after five games this early in the season T-Mac sucks, is injury prone, and will never regain form.
> 
> If that's so then the Mavericks and Suns suck, will only win 20-25 games, and be in the Greg Oden sweepstakes.
> 
> Also, the Hawks and Hornets will challenge the Bulls 72-10 record, meet in the Finals, and give us one of the greatest 7 game series of all time with unheard-of ratings.


 Im basing it on last season too, and my own knowledge on what back injuries can do. I sustained a minor back injury last may and i haven't been the same since then.

I can't imagine having it and being 6'8 and playing basketball at the highest level. At the very least there will be SOME discomfort.


----------



## Dream Hakeem (Apr 20, 2006)

Tragedy said:


> Im basing it on last season too, and my own knowledge on what back injuries can do. I sustained a minor back injury last may and i haven't been the same since then.
> 
> I can't imagine having it and being 6'8 and playing basketball at the highest level. At the very least there will be SOME discomfort.



But you dont have Tmac money and can visit top doctors


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

EHL is one funny poster, don't ever take him seriously. Vince has been better than Tmac ever since last year. Hey, we all know who didn't wanna be second banana to who? lol

Those VC haters never seem to amaze me. It's like they throw everything he does out of the window, whether his awsome first year with the Nets, or the playoffs last year, just because they like putting him down for whatever stupid reason. They make no sense and have no basis behind their argument. Carter is clearly better than Tmac now, and anyone who can't see that is just kidding himself. Carter is up there in the top tier shooting guards. Hate him all you want, but please don't discredit what he does on a basketball floor or at least don't ignore it. Man is clutch, a winner and an elite Superstar player in this league.

*30 PPG - 7 RPG - 5 APG - 2.0 STL - Last year's playoffs.

27.3 PPG - 7.7 RPG - 4.0 APG so far this season.*

Hate but don't ignore. Respect what you see.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Air Fly said:


> They make no sense and have no basis behind their argument.


McGrady 2005-06: 22.0 PER
Carter 2005-06: 21.6 PER

What you mean, of course, is that you won't accept any reasoning or basis that doesn't agree with the conclusion you want to reach.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

JNice said:


> Can you name one great player who won with the quality of teammates that Tmac had in that terrible Orlando season? Can you Paula? I don't think you can.
> 
> At the beginning of that season, Orlando's starting SF was Britton Johnson. BRITTON JOHNSON! HELLO? MCFLY? And I don't think I need to run through the rest of that cast ... many of which are currently NOT in the NBA.


You wanna talk greatness? Here is the list of players *Rick Barry * won the championship with: Jamaal Wilkes (rookie), Butch Beard, Charles Johnson, Clifford Ray, Derrek Dickey, Phil Smith, Jeff Mullins, George Johnson, Charles Dudley, Steve Bracey, Frank Kendrick and Bill Bridges.
And here is the list of players *Bill Walton * won the championship with:
Maurice Lucas, Lionel Hollins, Bob Gross, Larry Steele, Dave Twardzik, Herm Gilliam, Johnny Davis, Lloyd Neal, Robin Jones, Wally Walker, Corky Calhoun, Clyde Mayes.

Now, eventhough i consider Barry and Walton to be great players, none of them crack my All-Time Top 15 list.

So, booohooo... T-Mac had no help.....


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> You wanna talk greatness? Here is the list of players *Rick Barry * won the championship with: Jamaal Wilkes (rookie), Butch Beard, Charles Johnson, Clifford Ray, Derrek Dickey, Phil Smith, Jeff Mullins, George Johnson, Charles Dudley, Steve Bracey, Frank Kendrick and Bill Bridges.
> And here is the list of players *Bill Walton * won the championship with:
> Maurice Lucas, Lionel Hollins, Bob Gross, Larry Steele, Dave Twardzik, Herm Gilliam, Johnny Davis, Lloyd Neal, Robin Jones, Wally Walker, Corky Calhoun, Clyde Mayes.
> 
> ...


What does Rick Barry and Bill Walton winning championships with far better supporting casts have to do with JNice's point?


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> McGrady 2005-06: 22.0 PER
> Carter 2005-06: 21.6 PER
> 
> What you mean, of course, is that you won't accept any reasoning or basis that doesn't agree with the conclusion you want to reach.


But also because you ignore winning basketball games. Stick to your PER stats all you want but they're worthless in my book.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> McGrady 2005-06: 22.0 PER
> Carter 2005-06: 21.6 PER
> 
> What you mean, of course, is that you won't accept any reasoning or basis that doesn't agree with the conclusion you want to reach.


Mind you, last season their stats were pretty similar. Although considering that Tmac has the greenlight to do as he pleases on that team, I am surprised he didnt score more.

Anyways like I said its pretty evident to anyone watching the two right now that Vince is better. Tmac is barely averaging 20 points. Whilst Vince is at a healthy 27. Now those numbers might eventually equal out, but its just funny to read when people are trying to actually make it out like Tmac is miles ahead of Vince.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> What does Rick Barry and Bill Walton winning championships with *far better supporting casts * have to do with JNice's point?


Please explain...

I'm putting forth great players who won the championship with lesser companion than most (or almost avery) championship-winning superstars.

T-Mac hasn't won a playoff round. And was once the Franchise player for the worst team in the NBA (IIRC).

Am i being too subtle? :biggrin:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

HB said:


> Mind you, last season their stats were pretty similar.


And the PERs bear that out, as they're pretty close. There's nothing to support Air Fly's claim that Carter has been better than McGrady since last season.



> Although considering that Tmac has the greenlight to do as he pleases on that team, I am surprised he didnt score more.


Bear in mind that McGrady was doing what he did through serious back spasms last year.



> Anyways like I said its pretty evident to anyone watching the two right now that Vince is better. Tmac is barely averaging 20 points. Whilst Vince is at a healthy 27.


By that token, as EHL said, Odom is better than both. A few games to start the season doesn't prove very much. It's evident that Carter has played better in the first few games; it's not clear that Carter _is_ better. He hasn't been in quite a few years, and it'll take quite a lot more than the first few games of a season to argue that it has changed.

Bear in mind, Zach Randolph leads the league in PER so far this season. Is it evident that he's now better than Duncan or Garnett?

I think Carter is a tremendous player. I don't think he's as good as Kobe, McGrady, James or Wade, but he's with Paul Pierce, just behind that level.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Please explain...
> 
> I'm putting forth great players who won the championship with lesser companion than most (or almost avery) championship-winning superstars.


But still very good supporting casts. Meanwhile, McGrady had arguably the worst supporting cast in NBA history in that final year in Orlando, as some of those players didn't even remain in the NBA.



> Am i being too subtle? :biggrin:


No, you're just not making a very good point.

Walton and Barry won championships with good but not amazing supporting casts.

McGrady didn't get out of the first round with mostly very mediocre to terrible supporting casts. He's only had one chance in the playoffs with another star, and that time he pushed the favoured Mavericks to 7 games, a team that made the NBA Finals the following year.

I don't think those facts relate.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> And the PERs bear that out, as they're pretty close. There's nothing to support AIRFLY's claim that Carter has been better than McGrady since last season.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



2004-2005 Nets run to the playoffs with Kidd, Vince was clearly better than Tmac. Vince played a relatively injury free season last year with a strong run in the playoffs. Tmac didnt exactly have a good season, his team regressed from the previous season's success. I honestly dont know how you could say Tmac has played better than Vince in the last 3 seasons. Just because PER says otherwise doesnt mean I have to disregard that. Anyways am not a big fan of Hollinger. You yourself just pointed out that Z-bo is leading the league in PER this season.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> No, you're just not making a very good point.
> 
> Walton and Barry won championships with *good but not amazing supporting casts*.
> 
> ...


Please relate this:

1- How many All-Nbaers played with Rick Barry and Bill Walton in the years they won championships?
2- How many ALL-Stars played with Rick Barry and Bill Walton in the years they won championships?
3- How many names from both teams do you remember? (and yeah, Silk and Mo are recognizable)
4- CAn you recall a superstar player winning championships with lesser companion?
5- Do you consider Barry or Walton, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?
6- do you consider T-Mac, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?
7- Do you consider Kobe Bryant, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

HB said:


> 2004-2005 Nets run to the playoffs with Kidd, Vince was clearly better than Tmac. Vince played a relatively injury free season last year with a strong run in the playoffs. Tmac didnt exactly have a good season, his team regressed from the previous season's success. I honestly dont know how you could say Tmac has played better than Vince in the last 3 seasons.


Because McGrady was more productive and a better defender.



> Just because PER says otherwise doesnt mean I have to disregard that. Anyways am not a big fan of Hollinger. You yourself just pointed out that Z-bo is leading the league in PER this season.


Randolph leading the league in PER shows the flaws of a small sample size, not a flaw in PER. Randolph is legitimately leading the league in PER, as he's scored and rebounded like a monster. The problem is, he's only done it for a few games and no one would expect him to keep this rate up all year long.

Carter having played better over the first few games of the season means very little. If Ginobili puts up better stats than Carter over a five-game stretch, are you going to agree that Ginobili is a better player than Carter?

Pretty much since McGrady left Toronto, he's been the better player. Some of that is Carter's decline, but McGrady's best has been significantly better than Carter's best.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Please relate this:
> 
> 1- How many All-Nbaers played with Rick Barry and Bill Walton in the years they won championships?
> 2- How many ALL-Stars played with Rick Barry and Bill Walton in the years they won championships?
> ...


Again, this is irrelevant. Just because they had less*er* supporting casts than other title contenders (but still good ones) in no way relates to McGrady having an outright terrible supporting cast.



> 3- How many names from both teams do you remember? (and yeah, Silk and Mo are recognizable)


Jamaal Wilkes, Butch Beard, Clifford Ray, Maurice Lucas, Lionel Hollins, Larry Steele, Dave Twardzik, Herm Gilliam, Johnny Davis and Wally Walker. And that's without having even been watching basketball at the time.



> 5- Do you consider Barry or Walton, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?
> 6- do you consider T-Mac, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?
> 7- Do you consider Kobe Bryant, career-wise, All-Nba Top-20?


No, no and no.

There, now instead of trying to avoid the issue by throwing up more and more questions, answer MY question straight-forwardly: What does any of that show?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> Pretty much since McGrady left Toronto, he's been the better player. Some of that is Carter's decline, but McGrady's best has been significantly better than Carter's best.


Agreed, Tmac has definitely HAD better seasons than Vince BUT whilst Vince has managed to shed the injury label, Tmac seems to be battling that. Hence the reason why Vince is the better player because he doesnt have to struggle to stay healthy for the season.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

HB said:


> Agreed, Tmac has definitely HAD better seasons than Vince BUT whilst Vince has managed to shed the injury label, Tmac seems to be battling that. Hence the reason why Vince is the better player because he doesnt have to struggle to stay healthy for the season.


One injury-plagued season doesn't make a player worse (except for that season). If his injuries continue, I agree...Carter will be more valuable because he can stay on the floor.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Please explain...
> 
> I'm putting forth great players who won the championship with lesser companion than most (or almost avery) championship-winning superstars.
> 
> ...



Maybe they won championships with "lesser" supporting casts but what does that have to do with a superstar succeeding with an absolutely dreadful supporting cast?

Seriously ... I don't understand how people cannot realize how bad that team was. The best PG that team had all year was the 3 weeks they had signed Rod Strickland. They signed numerous guys that season to 10 day contracts and not to sit on the bench .. they were actually playing. 

Should they have won some more games? Probably, but the season was over after a month. Tmac could have played the single greatest season for any single player and that team would have been lucky to sniff 30 wins.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> One injury-plagued season doesn't make a player worse (except for that season). If his injuries continue, I agree...Carter will be more valuable because he can stay on the floor.


Even if Tmac stays injury free I doubt he will ever play to the level he once did.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> There, now instead of trying to avoid the issue by throwing up more and more questions, answer MY question straight-forwardly: What does any of that show?


That no great player plays for a bottom-5 team in the league. And the fact that T-Mac DID play on one (well, to be fair, it easn't only bottom-5, was it?) shows how much he can elevate his teammates' games - to mee, the true mark of a Great player.

Off course, i'm assuming this, for i didn't actually check if any other considered great player did actually play for a bottom-5 team in the league... so maybe i'm wrong... :biggrin:


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> That no great player plays for a bottom-5 team in the league. And the fact that T-Mac DID play on one (well, to be fair, it easn't only bottom-5, was it?) shows how much he can elevate his teammates' games - to mee, the true mark of a Great player.
> 
> Off course, i'm assuming this, for i didn't actually check if any other considered great player did actually play for a bottom-5 team in the league... so maybe i'm wrong... :biggrin:



Seriously .. I mean how couldn't Tmac have elevated the games of Britton Johnson .. and Andrew DeClerq ... and Ty Lue ... and Desmond Penigar ... and Shawn Kemp ... and the immortal Steven Hunter ... and the incredible Pat Garrity ... how about Reece Gaines? ... maybe Sean Rooks? ... or possibly Donnel Harvey? ... no, must be Shammond Williams.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> That no great player plays for a bottom-5 team in the league. And the fact that T-Mac DID play on one (well, to be fair, it easn't only bottom-5, was it?) shows how much he can elevate his teammates' games - to mee, the true mark of a Great player.
> 
> Off course, i'm assuming this, for i didn't actually check if any other considered great player did actually play for a bottom-5 team in the league... so maybe i'm wrong... :biggrin:


Great, you just shorted out JNice. 

You can't "elevate" untalented players. You can make talented players better, by giving them better opportunities, but if the players are bad enough, even giving them open looks isn't sufficient to win ball games.

McGrady set his teammates up for great looks time and time again, and his teammates missed the shots. At that point, what can one player do? Score a ton and efficiently? Check and check. McGrady did that WHILE setting his teammates up. He did what was possible to elevate his teammates, but when you have guys _who didn't even last in the NBA_, there's a limit. Even if you give them Magic Johnson.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JNice said:


> Seriously .. I mean how couldn't Tmac have elevated the games of Britton Johnson .. and Andrew DeClerq ... and Ty Lue ... and Desmond Penigar ... and Shawn Kemp ... and the immortal Steven Hunter ... and the incredible Pat Garrity ... how about Reece Gaines? ... maybe Sean Rooks? ... or possibly Donnel Harvey? ... no, must be Shammond Williams.


Their second-best player was, I think, a 72-year old Rod Strickland?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

JNice said:


> Seriously .. I mean how couldn't Tmac have elevated the games of Britton Johnson .. and Andrew DeClerq ... and Ty Lue ... and Desmond Penigar ... and Shawn Kemp ... and the immortal Steven Hunter ... and the incredible Pat Garrity ... how about Reece Gaines? ... maybe Sean Rooks? ... or possibly Donnel Harvey? ... no, must be Shammond Williams.


Hah! This is amusing!

So, let's see... Kobe Brynat is playing with megastuds Smush Parker, Luke Walton and and a 19 year old center. Not an all star in sight, although Odom is a decent player. In the bench: household names like Ronny Turiaf, Radmanovic, Cook, Evans, Vujacic, Farmar, Evans and the same Shammond Williams and absolutely nobody is expecting the Lakers NOT put a fight to get into the playoffs... If this team, even with the arrival of perennial all-star players (yet injured) Chris Mihm and Kwame Brown, drops to lowest of the lower teams in the NBA, people would be absolutely shocked! Hecj, didn't the same team sneak into the playoffs last year?

Yeah, T-Mac is the SOLE great player in the freaking history of the NBA  to play for the worst team in the NBA. Yeah, keep believing that...


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Their second-best player was, I think, a 72-year old Rod Strickland?


I knwo you can remember guys like Juwan Howard (yeah, that 17-7 player) and Drew Gooden, so don't try to go intelectually dishonest on me...


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I knwo you can remember guys like Juwan Howard (yeah, that 17-7 player) and Drew Gooden, so don't try to go intelectually dishonest on me...


Well, since you asked! (Didn't you?)

Juwan Howard: 15.6 PER
Drew Gooden: 15.6 PER
Rod Strickland: 15.*8* PER!!!


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> Well, since you asked! (Didn't you?)
> 
> Juwan Howard: 15.6 PER
> Drew Gooden: 15.6 PER
> Rod Strickland: 15.*8* PER!!!


lol


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Hah! This is amusing!
> 
> So, let's see... Kobe Brynat is playing with megastuds Smush Parker, Luke Walton and and a 19 year old center. Not an all star in sight, although Odom is a decent player. In the bench: household names like Ronny Turiaf, Radmanovic, Cook, Evans, Vujacic, Farmar, Evans and the same Shammond Williams and absolutely nobody is expecting the Lakers NOT put a fight to get into the playoffs... If this team, even with the arrival of perennial all-star players (yet injured) Chris Mihm and Kwame Brown, drops to lowest of the lower teams in the NBA, people would be absolutely shocked! Hecj, didn't the same team sneak into the playoffs last year?
> 
> Yeah, T-Mac is the SOLE great player in the freaking history of the NBA  to play for the worst team in the NBA. Yeah, keep believing that...



You kidding me? I take those guys 10 times out of 10 over what Orlando had. Plus, you have to factor in Phil Jackson who always gets more out of those types of role players than any coach I've ever seen.


----------



## Tragedy (Dec 9, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Hah! This is amusing!
> 
> So, let's see... Kobe Brynat is playing with megastuds Smush Parker, Luke Walton and and a 19 year old center. Not an all star in sight, although Odom is a decent player. In the bench: household names like Ronny Turiaf, Radmanovic, Cook, Evans, Vujacic, Farmar, Evans and the same Shammond Williams and absolutely nobody is expecting the Lakers NOT put a fight to get into the playoffs... If this team, even with the arrival of perennial all-star players (yet injured) Chris Mihm and Kwame Brown, drops to lowest of the lower teams in the NBA, people would be absolutely shocked! Hecj, didn't the same team sneak into the playoffs last year?
> 
> Yeah, T-Mac is the SOLE great player in the freaking history of the NBA  to play for the worst team in the NBA. Yeah, keep believing that...


 That's a pretty weak argument. Bynum is looking damn good, Lamar Odom is putting up great numbers and the lakers role players have been producing.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Bynum and Odom alone are a ton more talent than McGrady had. 

Keep this in mind: That Orlando supporting cast didn't win a single game without McGrady, until they faced two split-squad teams in their final two games of the season. Even bad supporting casts win a few games without their star. The Sixers of that year were also considered to have a bad supporting cast around Iverson...but that supporting cast won something like five games without Ivy including a game against Minnesota (the same Minnesota team that went to the WCF).

The Lakers supporting cast won games the last couple of years without Kobe and opened this season winning with Kobe.

So, no. Not the same.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Well, since you asked! (Didn't you?)
> 
> Juwan Howard: 15.6 PER
> Drew Gooden: 15.6 PER
> Rod Strickland: 15.*8* PER!!!


Ooohhh, you really got me with that one. How could i completely forget about PER?????? Oh, i'm so ashamed. How could i forget the stat that made Tracy McGrady (playing for a 42-40 team, i might add) a better player than Oscar Robertson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, etc., etc.

Oh, the humanity!!!!


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Ooohhh, you really got me with that one. How could i completely forget about PER?????? Oh, i'm so ashamed. How could i forget the stat that made Tracy McGrady (playing for a 42-40 team, i might add) a better player than Oscar Robertson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, etc., etc.


Well, for one season, at least.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

JNice said:


> You kidding me? I take those guys 10 times out of 10 over what Orlando had. Plus, you have to factor in Phil Jackson who always gets more out of those types of role players than any coach I've ever seen.


WTF???? 

THAT Laker team got into the playoffs and THIS Laker team will do the same. I'm talking about a great player playing with a decent one and a bunch of role players (at best) getting into the playoffs. The other case was a supposed "great" player playing with an almost-decent one and a bunch of role players being THE WORST TEAM in basketball.

Is that so hard to see?

I know you don't want to adress the real issue, here, and i'm not going to force you.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Well, for one season, at least.


Yeahy, "for one season, at least", T-Mac was as great as Wilt Chamberlain...

Good grief.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Bynum and Odom alone are a ton more talent than McGrady had.
> 
> Keep this in mind: That Orlando supporting cast didn't win a single game without McGrady, until they faced two split-squad teams in their final two games of the season. Even bad supporting casts win a few games without their star. The Sixers of that year were also considered to have a bad supporting cast around Iverson...but that supporting cast won something like five games without Ivy including a game against Minnesota (the same Minnesota team that went to the WCF).
> 
> ...


Weren't you talking about small sample sizes a day ago?


----------



## DaGreat1 (May 18, 2006)

I don't really see any point arguing here. _WAS_ T-mac a great player? Yes. _IS_ T-mac a great player? Wait and see how this season unfolds. Either way, I would take T-mac over 90% of other SG/SF in the league right now.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I'm talking about a great player playing with a decent one and a bunch of role players (at best) getting into the playoffs. The other case was a supposed "great" player playing with an almost-decent one and a bunch of role players being THE WORST TEAM in basketball.
> 
> Is that so hard to see?


Kobe has never had a supporting cast as bad as that Orlando supporting cast. Despite that, his team in 2004-05 was one of the worst in basketball and crashed at the end of the season in a losing run almost as bad as Orlando's 1-19 run.

Is that so hard to see?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Weren't you talking about small sample sizes a day ago?


Yes, so I'm not comparing winning percentages or that sort of thing. There aren't enough games to make that precise. Fact still remains that Kobe's supporting was good enough to win games _without_ him while McGrady's wasn't (and both supporting casts got a number of tries).


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> WTF????
> 
> THAT Laker team got into the playoffs and THIS Laker team will do the same. I'm talking about a great player playing with a decent one and a bunch of role players (at best) getting into the playoffs. The other case was a supposed "great" player playing with an almost-decent one and a bunch of role players being THE WORST TEAM in basketball.
> 
> ...



Who is the decent one and the almost-decent one? Are you kidding? Lamar Odom is far away a better player than anyone that was on that Orlando team. There wasn't a single player on that team that could create offense other than Tmac. Odom can do that and has been an All-Star caliber player in the past. And you can throw around Bynum because he is so young, but that doesn't really matter when he is playing well. He could be 12 yrs old ... if he is producing, he is producing. And guys like Parker and Walton are perfect fits in Phil Jackson's system ... I'm not having trouble seeing here but you seem to be blinded by the light .. 

Not to mention Orlando's two best players behind Tmac played the same position (not great, btw) and neither was capable of efficiently playing any other position .. though Gooden was stuck most of the year playing SF or C, which he sucked at. And Orlando's 4th best player, Giricek (gag), only played about half the season and didn't play at all at the beginning of the year when the team really collapsed. That team had the worst set of PGs in the league and the worst set of Cs in the league. There was ZERO interior defense to speak of. Howard and Gooden can score a little inside, but defensively .. yack. 

But still, I agree, it was all Tmac.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JNice said:


> Not to mention Orlando's two best players behind Tmac played the same position (not great, btw) and neither was capable of efficiently playing any other position .. though Gooden was stuck most of the year playing SF or C, which he sucked at. And Orlando's 4th best player, Giricek (gag)


*whisper* You forgot Rod Strickland...if you edit quickly enough, no one will know...


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol @ people trying to defend the fact that Tmac the supposed best wingman in the game at that point was on a team that lost 18 or so straight games.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Minstrel said:


> *whisper* You forgot Rod Strickland...if you edit quickly enough, no one will know...



Shh.. I forgot Derrick Dial too. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Lol @ people trying to defend the fact that Tmac the supposed best wingman in the game at that point was on a team that lost 18 or so straight games.



Hey, it's better than tanking a good portion of a season. ROFLCOPTER.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

JNice said:


> Hey, it's better than tanking a good portion of a season. ROFLCOPTER.


Your math must be really bad. 15 games = good portion of season LMAO

And even with that fact of yours, the raptors didnt lose 18 straight :laugh:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

HB said:


> And even with that fact of yours, the raptors didnt lose 18 straight :laugh:


That's right, because the Raptors' supporting cast was better and capable of winning without Carter. :laugh:


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Your math must be really bad. 15 games = good portion of season LMAO
> 
> And even with that fact of yours, the raptors didnt lose 18 straight :laugh:



Oh, I'm sorry, he only tanked 15 games. My bad. :greatjob:


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Tanking, spanking lol whatever you call it. 

Tmac fans act like this is a guy who hasnt said or done some questionable things also.

Wasnt this the same guy that after 5 or so straight losses said he was thinking of quitting the game

How about the same guy that publicly lambasted his teammates on national TV

Oh wait, how about him shutting things down once he wrapped up the scoring title

Tssk Tssk cant believe Tmac fans are one to talk


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Tanking, spanking lol whatever you call it.
> 
> Tmac fans act like this is a guy who hasnt said or done some questionable things also.
> 
> ...


Oh yeah, because tanking and screwing over an organization are on the same level as some dumb comments of frustration. Good call.

And as far as Tmac calling out teammates ... Tmac called out his teammates twice that year. And egads, can you believe it, after each time it was the only two times the team won 2-3 straight games at any points during the season. For anyone other than Tmac, people would call that leadership.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

JNice said:


> Oh yeah, because tanking and screwing over an organization are on the same level as some dumb comments of frustration. Good call.
> 
> And as far as Tmac calling out teammates ... Tmac called out his teammates twice that year. And egads, can you believe it, after each time it was the only two times the team won 2-3 straight games at any points during the season. For anyone other than Tmac, people would call that leadership.


You do know that plays werent even being run for Vince. His minutes were also drastically decreased. Of course those things actually dont have a say in how a player produces on the court. Its funny that Toronto decided to go a different direction with Bosh and once Vince gets his act back with Jersey they try finding ways to slander the man.

Leadership LMAO. Leadership in street clothes.

WTH is leadership from the bench going to do


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

HB said:


> You do know that plays werent even being run for Vince. His minutes were also drastically decreased. Of course those things actually dont have a say in how a player produces on the court. Its funny that Toronto decided to go a different direction with Bosh and once Vince gets his act back with Jersey they try finding ways to slander the man.


Yeah, it was all Toronto. They wanted to tank Vince's value so they could get jack back for him. Uh-huh.



> Leadership LMAO. Leadership in street clothes.
> 
> WTH is leadership from the bench going to do


Tmac didn't shut himself down. The team shut him down. They didn't want him to get injured in meaningless NBA games because John Weisbrod was intent on trading Tmac the minute his *** hit the chair.


----------



## thacarter (Mar 27, 2006)

how did this thread become a VC and Tmac bash???....both players are great talents,they play casually and dont take the game SOOOO serious like other players do. If anything, VC is the best dunker of all time and well TMac had a wet jumper which has been missing lately,hopefully he finds it back


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

thacarter said:


> how did this thread become a VC and Tmac bash???....


Because it's fun ... gotta throw some salt when HFly feel the need to bring their Carterjecture into any thread which even mentions The Mac.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

On a more realistic note, I wish Tmac and the Rockets the best this season. I always enjoy watching Tmac. Hopefully he has a relatively injury free season


----------



## AIFAN3 (Sep 17, 2005)

JNice said:


> Oh, I'm sorry, he only tanked 15 games. My bad. :greatjob:


Didn't T-Mac ADMIT to tanking some games??


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

AIFAN3 said:


> Didn't T-Mac ADMIT to tanking some games??



No. And neither did Vince.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

thacarter said:


> how did this thread become a VC and Tmac bash???....*both players are great talents,they play casually and dont take the game SOOOO serious like other players do*. If anything, VC is the best dunker of all time and well TMac had a wet jumper which has been missing lately,hopefully he finds it back


Very bold statement my friend, very bold.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

JNice said:


> Because it's fun ... gotta throw some salt when HFly feel the need to bring their Carterjecture into any thread which even mentions The Mac.


Think again?



> Originally posted by *Gilgamesh *
> 
> Remember those days when VC was oft injured? Everybody said he wasn't athletic anymore, he was soft, if his shot wasn't falling he was just an ordinary player nothing more, and etc.





> Originally posted by *Minstrel*
> 
> Last season:
> 
> ...


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Air Fly said:


> *Very bold statement my friend, very bold*.



They are only bold because you bolded them.

See, your statement is now very bold.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

JNice said:


> They are only bold because you bolded them.
> 
> See, your statement is now very bold.


 :laugh:


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Wow, I really screwed up this thread.


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

seriously shut the **** up about wince carter. this is about our boy t-mac. it's good to see him getting back into form, i hope he keeps it up...


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

JNice said:


> Who is the decent one and the almost-decent one? Are you kidding? Lamar Odom is far away a better player than anyone that was on that Orlando team. There wasn't a single player on that team that could create offense other than Tmac. Odom can do that and has been an All-Star caliber player in the past. And you can throw around Bynum because he is so young, but that doesn't really matter when he is playing well. He could be 12 yrs old ... if he is producing, he is producing. And guys like Parker and Walton are perfect fits in Phil Jackson's system ... I'm not having trouble seeing here but you seem to be blinded by the light ..
> 
> Not to mention Orlando's two best players behind Tmac played the same position (not great, btw) and neither was capable of efficiently playing any other position .. though Gooden was stuck most of the year playing SF or C, which he sucked at. And Orlando's 4th best player, Giricek (gag), only played about half the season and didn't play at all at the beginning of the year when the team really collapsed. That team had the worst set of PGs in the league and the worst set of Cs in the league. There was ZERO interior defense to speak of. Howard and Gooden can score a little inside, but defensively .. yack.
> 
> But still, I agree, it was all Tmac.


Hmm... Let's see...

Orlando in 2003 (year before The Year): 41-41, lost in the 7th game of the first round.
Man, the players around T-Mac should have been a MAJOR upgrade from the roster in The Season.
Hmm... Let's check it out.

Pat Garrity? 49 games of Mike Miller? Darrell Armstrong? Shawn Kemp? JAcque Vaughn? 29 games of Grant hill? 27 games of Gordon Giricek? Andrew DeClercq? Pat Burke? 19 games of Drew Gooden? Jarryl Sasser? Steven Hunter? Etc., etc..

Wow.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Kobe has never had a supporting cast as bad as that Orlando supporting cast. Despite that, his team in 2004-05 was one of the worst in basketball


8 teams were worse. A very significant difference, considering the Lakers won 13 more games than that Orlando team.



> and crashed at the end of the season in a losing run almost as bad as Orlando's 1-19 run.


Yes, they did. And it was a horrible end of the season. That team was mediocre and Kobe is to blame for that, too. Like ALL Franchise players should be.



> Is that so hard to see?


What i have trouble seing is the mad love being thrown at someone who is simply not THAT good.

Come on, Minstrel, don't you remember the "T-Mac is the most athletically gifted player in the history of the game" thread? The "Most memorable offensive display ever" thread regarding his X pts in Y minutes? The amount of threads being put bashing Kobe for the season you just mentioned? Etc., etc.?

I'm also very well aware of the strange fenomena that happens around here regarding Kobe Bryant, which is kind of a reverse-hate thingy: because i hate Kobe Bryant and will never, never, never admit he is a great player, i'll be supporting every other superstar wing player over him, wether it's AI, T-Mac, Lebron James or Dwyane Wade. 

Yeah, T-Mac is a fantastic player. I agree, although i hate the dude. But he is not THAT good. And he is a quitter. In fact, i was anxious to see him play for the Rockets, for now all the excuses should be non-existant. But, helas, karma bit me in the ***.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

CiMa said:


> seriously shut the **** up about wince carter. this is about our boy t-mac. it's good to see him getting back into form, i hope he keeps it up...


Heh, Tmac isnt even averaging over 20 points this season. Mind you 'Wince Carter' has played more games than all your other boys in the last 3 seasons.

Hey and before someone says I hijacked a Tmac thread again, I only respond to what I feel is unjust.

I am Justice!!! :clown:


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

HB said:


> Heh, Tmac isnt even averaging over 20 points this season. Mind you 'Wince Carter' has played more games than all your other boys in the last 3 seasons.
> 
> Hey and before someone says I hijacked a Tmac thread again, I only respond to what I feel is unjust.
> 
> I am Justice!!! :clown:


i was referring to his last game against the Bucks. he tore it up...


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> McGrady 2005-06: 22.0 PER
> Carter 2005-06: 21.6 PER
> 
> What you mean, of course, is that you won't accept any reasoning or basis that doesn't agree with the conclusion you want to reach.


Wow, Owned.

Great Point


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

This is what separates them.....

McGrady is capable and able to do everything for his team, being a primary option.

Carter isn't.... 

Carter is a good player and all, but I hate to see where he'd be if his dunking wasn't such a crutch for him for / against his fans.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> This is what separates them.....
> 
> McGrady is capable and able to do everything for his team, being a primary option.
> 
> ...


I'll admit the VC's dunking did prematurely elevate him, but to conclude that without his dunking ability he may not be the player he is, is off base. Carter is a gifted offensive player with or without his dunking ability.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> This is what separates them.....
> 
> McGrady is capable and able to do everything for his team, being a primary option.
> 
> ...


:laugh:

Another arguement that has no merit whatsoever. His dunking were responsible for his playoff numbers right? How about now? Or the season before.

Once again Tmac isnt even averaging over 20 points, the season before he had very similar numbers to Vince's on a team where Tmac was actually the primary option. Only a Tmac fan would actually think Tmac is a better player than Vince right now. Even Tmac himself will tell you he is nothing close to that 30ppg scorer he was a few years ago.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

ralaw said:


> I'll admit the VC's dunking did prematurely elevate him, but to conclude that without his dunking ability he may not be the player he is, is off base. Carter is a gifted offensive player with or without his dunking ability.


Not really, His ball-handling is garbage considering what the rest of his package includes.

IMO that was the main thing that separated Carter from Kobe or any of the other All-Time Greats, was his ball-handling.

When you can't do something on the court, that really effects your mindset IMO.

That's why Carter disappears so much.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

LOL and the funny thing about this is, this prolific scorer is the same guy that is anointing Dwight "I can dunk hard" Howard as the next best thing in the league. Talk about someone whose dunking gives him a crutch in the eyes of fans :laugh:

I notice you stopped with the updates after the kid came back down to earth.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Not really, His ball-handling is garbage considering what the rest of his package includes.
> 
> IMO that was the main thing that separated Carter from Kobe or any of the other All-Time Greats, was his ball-handling.
> 
> ...


Again another terrible arguement on your path. His ballhandling is adequate. He doesnt need and 1 type skills to be a good player. Where exactly did Kobe's ballhandling get him last year.

Once again pull up Carter's numbers in the playoffs and see how this lack of ball handling affects him.

Mind you the Nets exploit Vince's advantage in the post. 70% of the way he is used on that team comes from post play. He doesnt need much fancy ball work to get his points in the post. Kapish!!!


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

HB said:


> LOL and the funny thing about this is, this prolific scorer is the same guy that is anointing Dwight "I can dunk hard" Howard as the next best thing in the league. Talk about someone whose dunking gives him a crutch in the eyes of fans :laugh:
> 
> I notice you stopped with the updates after the kid came back down to earth.


Yeah, but Power and Dunking is Dwight's game.

I don't really want a Graceful 6'10 270 Lb PF like playing like Chris Bosh.

I stopped with the Dwight updates due to popular demand.

I must've struck a nerve , HB don't get mad


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Yeah, but Power and Dunking is Dwight's game.
> 
> I don't really want a Graceful 6'10 270 Lb PF like playing like Chris Bosh.
> 
> ...


Welp that graceful Chris Bosh is a better player than Dwight. Just because Dwight slams the ball harder than him doesnt make him a better player. Where are the Kenyon Martins of the game right now with all their powerful slams.

Struck a nerve, lol. I find your posts amusing. Its very easy to dispel them, you dont have any basis whatsoever for most of your arguements.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

HB said:


> Again another terrible arguement on your path. His ballhandling is adequate. He doesnt need and 1 type skills to be a good player. Where exactly did Kobe's ballhandling get him last year.
> 
> Once again pull up Carter's numbers in the playoffs and see how this lack of ball handling affects him.


[email protected] fans coming out of the closet in 05/06 after they hid for the last 4 years.

As the Franchise Player in Toronto, I could only remember him having one great Playoff Series.

I remember him folding in the 2000 Playoffs against the New York Knicks, I remember the 20 year old Tracy McGrady trying to lead Toronto to the Big Stage instead of Big Cousin.

But now he comes to NJ, and can hide behind the his Security Blankets, he feels more comfortable.....but whatever floats his boat, I just know he isn't nor ever was a Franchise Player.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Not really, His ball-handling is garbage considering what the rest of his package includes.
> 
> IMO that was the main thing that separated Carter from Kobe or any of the other All-Time Greats, was his ball-handling.
> 
> ...


It's amazing how Carter's ball handling is such an issue, yet he has consistently been among the top offensive players in the league throughout his career (with or without Kidd). It's also amazing because Carter does a great deal of ballhandling while creating for himself or his teammates. Jordan was often times accused of being a weak ball handler, yet his career went pretty well. Carter's ball handling isn't up there with Kobe's or McGrady's but who says it has to? Kobe and McGrady are exceptional ballhandlers for thier size, but that shouldn't be used as a knock against VC. VC handles the ball well enough and his career numbers provide that fact.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Don't compare Jordan's ballhandling to Carter please.

That's why Kobe / McGrady / Wade / LeBron's are over the Shawn Marion-esque Secondary Role Player that is Vince Carter.....I never said Carter wasn't a great offensive player, but his Value isn't on par with the Above mentioned names.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Vince Carter - Will sabatoge his own play, effecting your whole team like a plague.....just to get traded, Carter is scum.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Don't compare Jordan's ballhandling to Carter please.
> 
> That's why Kobe / McGrady / Wade / LeBron's are over the Shawn Marion-esque Secondary Role Player that is Vince Carter.....I never said Carter wasn't a great offensive player, but his Value isn't on par with the Above mentioned names.


Mcgrady :laugh:

Dude let go of the past and see whats going on here. Tmac will never be the same player he was a few years ago. And if he isnt, he is nowhere as good as the players you have mentioned. Of what use is he to the Rockets come playoff times if he struggles to even have a 25 point game, because trust me they will need those points from him.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Vince Carter - Will sabatoge his own play, effecting your whole team like a plague.....just to get traded, Carter is scum.


Umm Tmac did similar buddy, guess he is scum also.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

[email protected] Chris Bosh to Dwight Howard.

It's easy to draw conclusions now.

Bosh is Toronto.

Dwight doesn't get the ball like Chris Bosh.

Chris Bosh could average 36 and 25 Right now and i'd still Draft Dwight over Bosh.

Dwight will end up becoming the most dominant player in the NBA soon.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

HB said:


> Umm Tmac did similar buddy, guess he is scum also.


<strike>I don't know how you became a mod</strike>, you're basketball knowlege is limited.

Marcus Williams is hot doodoo.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

HB said:


> Mcgrady :laugh:
> 
> Dude let go of the past and see whats going on here. Tmac will never be the same player he was a few years ago. And if he isnt, he is nowhere as good as the players you have mentioned. Of what use is he to the Rockets come playoff times if he struggles to even have a 25 point game, because trust me they will need those points from him.


You're very ignorant, but it's not your fault.

Savor these 5 Games, Because this will be the only oppertunity for you to even humor the idea of Carter being remotely on a McGrady type level.

Your post is pure hatred, but it's okay, it isn't your fault.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> I don't know how you became a mod, you're basketball knowlege is limited.
> 
> Marcus Williams is hot doodoo.


Sigh I am sorry I even wasted my time trying to prove you wrong. You always skip around when your points have been disproved. From talking about Vince's crutch with dunking to eventually ending up at Marcus Williams.
I guess whatever floats your boat though. Tough guys on an internet forum always give me a chuckle.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Come on, Minstrel, don't you remember the "T-Mac is the most athletically gifted player in the history of the game" thread? The "Most memorable offensive display ever" thread regarding his X pts in Y minutes? The amount of threads being put bashing Kobe for the season you just mentioned? Etc., etc.?


Sure, I remember them. And I _didn't_ bash Kobe for that season. Because it wasn't his fault as a basketball player. Just as it wasn't McGrady's fault that the Orlando team sucked. This isn't tennis, one player can't win alone.



> Yeah, T-Mac is a fantastic player. I agree, although i hate the dude. But he is not THAT good. And he is a quitter.


When did he quit? One can as easily say that Kobe "quit" on his team in Game 7 of last year's playoff series versus Phoenix. Great players sometimes do or say silly things in moments of intense frustration. It doesn't mean they're not great. Here's a good hint how to judge a player: What frustrates him? If it's not winning, that's a really really good thing. That's what it is for Kobe and McGrady.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

HB said:


> Sigh I am sorry I even wasted my time trying to prove you wrong. You always skip around when your points have been disproved. From talking about Vince's crutch with dunking to eventually ending up at Marcus Williams.
> I guess whatever floats your boat though. Tough guys on an internet forum always give me a chuckle.


You're only disproving someone's decision to make you a Mod, you haven't proven anything except that you hate McGrady....It's okay, Haters are a reality, People hate what they can't have.

As for the Flip Flopping, i'm just trying to keep up with you, you went from Talking about T-Mac, to bring up Carter, to trying to downplay Dwight Howard. :SMH:


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Prolific Scorer said:


> You're only disproving someone's decision to make you a Mod, you haven't proven anything except that you hate McGrady....It's okay, Haters are a reality, People hate what they can't have.
> 
> As for the Flip Flopping, i'm just trying to keep up with you, you went from Talking about T-Mac, to bring up Carter, to trying to downplay Dwight Howard. :SMH:


Lol now its hate huh. 

Post #209 of this thread by me. Bet you didnt read that far



> On a more realistic note, I wish Tmac and the Rockets the best this season. I always enjoy watching Tmac. Hopefully he has a relatively injury free season


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Don't compare Jordan's ballhandling to Carter please.


Why not? Because you know Jordan's ball handling wasn't the greatest in the league, yet he still produced? As I said, VC's "lack of ballhandling" hasn't stopped him from being a consistent offensive force. However, I'll leave it alone since it obviously doesn't help your argument. My fault.

Due to your backtracking, in a span of 30 minutes you have went from VC not being an offensive force due to his ballhandling to him being a secondary role player, so can we keep this argument consistent and one topic at a time?


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

AIFAN3 said:


> Will the real Tracy McGrady please stand up?


he can't, his back is killing him...


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

ralaw said:


> Why not? Because you know Jordan's ball handling wasn't the greatest in the league, yet he still produced? As I said, VC's "lack of ballhandling" hasn't stopped him from being a consistent offensive force. However, I'll leave it alone since it obviously doesn't help your argument. My fault.
> 
> Due to your backtracking, in a span of 30 minutes you have went from VC not being an offensive force due to his ballhandling to him being a secondary role player, so can we keep this argument consistent and one topic at a time?


No, because Jordan's ballhandling was lightyears ahead of Vince currently.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> No, because Jordan's ballhandling was lightyears ahead of Vince currently.


I find it comical that you're making it seem as if VC's ballhandling is on par with Dikembe Mutombo's,
but hey.....you're entitled to your opinion. Maybe you should send an email to Lawrence Frank, because I don't think he knows that.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

ralaw said:


> I find it comical that you're making it seem as if VC's ballhandling is on par with Dikembe Mutombo's,
> but hey.....you're entitled to your opinion. Maybe you should send an email to Lawrence Frank, because I don't think he knows that.


Stop jumping to conclusions, I didn't say Vince is a Horrible Ballhandler, I just said when compared to Kobe, Wade's , LeBrons, and McGrady he isn't on par.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Sure, I remember them. And I _didn't_ bash Kobe for that season. Because it wasn't his fault as a basketball player. Just as it wasn't McGrady's fault that the Orlando team sucked. This isn't tennis, one player can't win alone.


I guess we have different meaning to the Franchise Player icon...



> *When did he quit? * One can as easily say that Kobe "quit" on his team in Game 7 of last year's playoff series versus Phoenix. Great players sometimes do or say silly things in moments of intense frustration. It doesn't mean they're not great. Here's a good hint how to judge a player: What frustrates him? If it's not winning, that's a really really good thing. That's what it is for Kobe and McGrady.


Let's see:

1- When he said he wanted to retire because of the zone defense;
2- When he skipped town because he wanted to win straight away instead of playing with a #1 pick;
3- When he got to Houston and boasted "I've never worked so har in pre-season".


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I guess we have different meaning to the Franchise Player icon...


Well, if your meaning of "franchise player" is a player who can win all by himself, that's fine. It just means that there's never been a franchise player in the history of the NBA.



> Let's see:
> 
> 1- When he said he wanted to retire because of the zone defense;
> 2- When he skipped town because he wanted to win straight away instead of playing with a #1 pick;
> 3- When he got to Houston and boasted "I've never worked so har in pre-season".


So...he never quit? Got ya.

Magic Johnson quit when he:

1-Defied head coach Paul Westhead's instruction to pass the ball to Kareem, and instead took the shot himself. He airballed it, the Lakers lost and were eliminated from the playoffs. Assistant coach Pat Riley said Magic had suffered from "disease a moi."
2-Campaigned to have Paul Westhead fired
3-Kissed Isiah Thomas

Just as meaningful a list as yours. Neither is a list of "quitting examples," just a list of random things, really.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> Well, if your meaning of "franchise player" is a player who can win all by himself, that's fine. It just means that there's never been a franchise player in the history of the NBA.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is getting better and better by the post, i swear...

Minstrel is providing as an example to save T-Mac's face a certain Magic Johnson. Yeah, the guy that has 5 championships. And was a perennial 1st teamer in the league.

Try to draw a paralell, if you'd like. For i can't. And maybe you can't. But Minstrel sure seems like he can... :clap:


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> This is getting better and better by the post, i swear...
> 
> Minstrel is providing as an example to save T-Mac's face a certain Magic Johnson. Yeah, the guy that has 5 championships. And was a perennial 1st teamer in the league.
> 
> Try to draw a paralell, if you'd like. For i can't. And maybe you can't. But Minstrel sure seems like he can... :clap:


I didn't draw a parallel. I just showed how you can create a list of random events for any player and call it quitting. Just as you did with McGrady. You didn't actually provide a single example where McGrady quit, on himself or his team.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> I didn't draw a parallel. I just showed how you can create a list of random events for any player and call it quitting. Just as you did with McGrady. You didn't actually provide a single example where McGrady quit, on himself or his team.


Please read my past posts on this thread. It was T-Mac quiting.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Please read my past posts on this thread. It was T-Mac quiting.


Just because you say it is, doesn't make it so. I hate to actually dignify such weak examples with refutations but:

1-Saying he wants to retire, but not actually retiring and, instead, playing great ball is not quitting. It's sort of the opposite.

2-Players switch teams all the time. The fact that McGrady switched teams in order to win more shows what his priorities are. Also, he did say he was willing to stay in Orlando...John Weisbrod chose to trade him, saying he wasn't a "hockey player."

3-Stepping up his regimen says nothing if you don't know what his previous regimen was. In any event, whether you think he does or doesn't train enough, this has nothing to with "quitting."

Were you up in arms when Magic Johnson quit on his team by kissing Isiah Thomas?


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> I guess we have different meaning to the Franchise Player icon...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Those aren't examples of quitting ... maybe you need to take a hit of the dictionary.

1 was stupid comment. 2 is completely untrue. Tmac was gone regardless of what he wanted. The great John Weisbrod wanted him out no matter what and then proceeded to be booted from his GM position to supposedly "take a position in hockey" .. which ended up as a glorious scout position. 3. Again, completely irrelevant.


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

T-Mac is ova


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

T-Mac is ova
sorry 2 say we got the suns on espn in 2 weeks i think


----------



## Burn (Feb 2, 2003)

The biggest reason his stats are down can be exemplified by the following line: 15-21, 33 Pts
15 Rebs, 7 blks

When you have a monster like this on your team, the UNSELFISH thing to do is work within an offense that makes him the focal point. Do you really think TMac couldn't still score 30 a game if he wanted to? He could go ahead and do that, and then Houston could be just as good as Orlando was. Give the guy credit for being a team player.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Vinsane said:


> T-Mac is ova
> sorry 2 say we got the suns on espn in 2 weeks i think



An incredibly compelling argument.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

Tracy is still getting those assists and rebounds.......He is helping his team out there, and I think things are looking good for him to be his old self

all he has to do is hit some shots. Who thinks Tracy will be this cold for awhile? Its a bad stretch, and its always good to see a player find other ways to produce during a cold shooting stretch.I dont think Tracy is going to be alright, I think he is going to be terrific, and those saying he is done will figure out not to doubt a superstar based off a few # of games.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Nobody should be surprised. He almost always starts the season slowly shooting the ball.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

McGrady played at a high level last season with back spasms. People think he's actually _worse_ now that he's healthy(er)? That doesn't make sense.

He's obviously off right now, probably due to losing half a season. He's still breaking down defenses, getting into the paint, which is leading to high assist totals and teammates scoring well. The only thing that isn't there is what can very easily be off if rusty, his shot.

It's possible that he won't regain it but, considering last season, it's pretty unlikely.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

JNice said:


> Nobody should be surprised. He almost always starts the season slowly shooting the ball.


and its gonna take him longer to shoot himself out of this slump because he isnt shooting the ball as much.


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

I hope he recovers his form.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Burn said:


> The biggest reason his stats are down can be exemplified by the following line: 15-21, 33 Pts
> 15 Rebs, 7 blks
> 
> When you have a monster like this on your team, the UNSELFISH thing to do is work within an offense that makes him the focal point. Do you really think TMac couldn't still score 30 a game if he wanted to? He could go ahead and do that, and then Houston could be just as good as Orlando was. Give the guy credit for being a team player.



I just checked the boxscore of tonights Rockets game ... I was wondering where that line came from. Damn Yao. 33, 15 and 7 blocks. That's nice. 8 TOs but who cares.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

JNice said:


> I just checked the boxscore of tonights Rockets game ... I was wondering where that line came from. Damn Yao. 33, 15 and 7 blocks. That's nice. 8 TOs but who cares.


the box score hasnt updates. its 35/17


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Wow. Yao really wasn't a fluke at all in the second half of last season.

On topic, 8 more assists for McGrady. I think it's really impressive that even when his shot is off, he can still be highly valuable as a play-maker for others.

I hope he can regain his scoring touch, but it's nice to see he can adjust when he's not a scorer.


----------



## kisstherim (Jul 15, 2004)

JNice said:


> I just checked the boxscore of tonights Rockets game ... I was wondering where that line came from. Damn Yao. 33, 15 and 7 blocks. That's nice. 8 TOs but who cares.


It's actually 35, 17 and 7. :biggrin: The boxscore didn't update in the last like 50 seconds, the total score doesn't even add up.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Pimped Out said:


> the box score hasnt updates. its 35/17



It's too bad Yao doesn't have "it" ... or he'd be really good.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

JNice said:


> It's too bad Yao doesn't have "it" ... or he'd be really good.


 yeah, he probably put up the softest 35 pts, 17 rebounds, and 7 blocks ever.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> Wow. Yao really wasn't a fluke at all in the second half of last season.


Did anyone really think it was a fluke? I think it was more a question of if he'd be able to maintain that level of production with T-Mac on the court.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Hakeem said:


> Did anyone really think it was a fluke? I think it was more a question of if he'd be able to maintain that level of production with T-Mac on the court.


A fluke as to whether he really was a potential 30/12 guy as he was in those final two and a half months, or closer to his career averages of 21/10 or so. I didn't think his ability was a fluke, but I wondered if his aggression would remain as high.

I'm glad to see it has.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

I think finally the Rockets are getting the idea of actually running the team through Yao. He has just been a monster and with Tmac in a shooting (that’s all) slump, he has stepped up from last year and is just dominating. 

As for all the Tmac problems... Yes his shots are off, and his PPG and FG% are down from career averages, but he is putting up career numbers in assists, and still pounding the glass. His ball distribution is working great this year with our shooters, and he is still setting up Yao, and the perimeter players for open shots.

I do have a problem with his shooting. It just isnt the same, and I just want him to elevate his averages above 45% right now. We need still more of a 1-2 scoring punch in order to get anywhere this season/post season. I just hope though, that the Rockets maintain this "Yao first" mentality.


----------



## JPSeraph (Dec 17, 2005)

Who said Jordan couldn't handle? Sounds obscure...



Minstrel said:


> A fluke as to whether he really was a potential 30/12 guy as he was in those final two and a half months, or closer to his career averages of 21/10 or so. I didn't think his ability was a fluke, but I wondered if his aggression would remain as high.
> 
> I'm glad to see it has.


"He was 24/11 from February through the end of the regular season." Quoting myself from last spring when you said he was 25/12. I know he's very tall, but that's a little _too_ tall.


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> Stop jumping to conclusions, I didn't say Vince is a Horrible Ballhandler, I just said when compared to Kobe, Wade's , LeBrons, and McGrady he isn't on par.


That's great, but VC not being as great a ballhandler as Kobe, Wade, LeBron and McGrady, really has no value on him being consistently being a top 5 offensive force throughout his career. It's well known that Kobe, Wade, LeBron and McGrady are all some of the most elite ballhandlers for their positions of all-time, so I really don't see the purpose behind using them to devalue what VC does. In the end VC is an elite offensive force and that already been established, with elite ballhandling or not.


----------



## TheImpossible (Nov 10, 2006)

Very well said.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

JPSeraph said:


> "He was 24/11 from February through the end of the regular season." Quoting myself from last spring when you said he was 25/12. I know he's very tall, but that's a little _too_ tall.


My mistake then. I thought I had seen it quoted as larger numbers before.


----------



## LuckyAC (Aug 12, 2004)

JPSeraph said:


> Who said Jordan couldn't handle? Sounds obscure...
> 
> 
> "He was 24/11 from February through the end of the regular season." Quoting myself from last spring when you said he was 25/12. I know he's very tall, but that's a little _too_ tall.


He was 25.7 and 11.6 after the All-Star break.


----------



## Chris Bosh #4 (Feb 18, 2005)

Prolific Scorer said:


> [email protected] Chris Bosh to Dwight Howard.
> 
> It's easy to draw conclusions now.
> 
> ...


lol hilarious post... so if Bosh averaged 36 points 25 rebounds, you still wouldn't take him over Howard? Lets take Bosh out for a second. If player A averages 36 points, 25 rebounds you would take Dwight over him knowing that Dwight will probably never match that?

I smell homer.


----------



## JNice (Jul 13, 2002)

Chris Bosh #4 said:


> lol hilarious post... so if Bosh averaged 36 points 25 rebounds, you still wouldn't take him over Howard? Lets take Bosh out for a second. If player A averages 36 points, 25 rebounds you would take Dwight over him knowing that Dwight will probably never match that?
> 
> I smell homer.



I think he may have been exaggerating. Obviously if someone is averages 36 and 25 .. well, who cares, that ain't happening.


----------

