|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Getting to the point
Posted: Friday March 10, 2000 02:46 AM
Click here to send a question to Phil Taylor's NBA Mailbag. The Lakers-Blazers and Knicks-Heat games recently were enough to make people care about the regular season for a while, but make no mistake, we are entering the dog days of late winter/early spring. We know who the title contenders are, and we even know who the 16 playoff teams are going to be, for the most part. All that's left now is a little jockeying for position over the next 25 games, while teams talk about the importance of gaining a home-court advantage that they could lose after the first playoff game. Let's face it, it's the Lakers, Blazers and Spurs in the West, and the Knicks, Pacers and possibly the Heat in the East. Barring injuries, nothing that happens in the next month or so is going to change that. Makes last year's 50-game season seem like the right idea, doesn't it? But on to other matters:
Who is the better point guard, Damon Stoudamire or Terrell Brandon? Could you please rate the league's PGs, 1 through 10? Very tough question. It's difficult to pick between Stoudamire and Brandon. They can both score and they're both at a disadvantage on defense because of their size. Brandon's a little more of a pure point guard -- he looks to set up teammates a little more than Stoudamire does. But Stoudamire is more creative off the dribble and sometimes opens up things for teammates with his penetration. I would lean slightly towards Damon because I think he plays with more fire. It's just a gut feeling, but I'd feel better with the ball in his hands at the end of a game than I would Brandon. As for my top 10, I expect lots of disagreement, but this is the way I stack them up. Keep in mind that I didn't pay much attention to stats. I just went with my perception of them, based mostly on how they are playing this year, but with some consideration of their career performance: 1. Gary Payton: The best combo of offense, defense and leadership. 2. Jason Kidd: Payton with a shaky jump shot. 3. Stephon Marbury: Shoots too much, but his ability to dominate a game can't be ignored. 4. Sam Cassell: Really blossoming in Milwaukee, even if George Karl doesn't always like his defense. 5. Nick Van Exel: Can still be erratic, but after Payton and Kidd, everyone has major flaws. 6. John Stockton: Can still run an offense as well as anyone, but Jazz have to cover for him on defense -- and he only plays about half the game these days. 7. Tim Hardaway : Injuries have left him unable to blow by people at will anymore. 8. Darrell Armstrong: One of the most underrated players in the league. Scores, defends and, most of all, hustles. 9. Damon Stoudamire: Could average 20 a game on a lesser team. 10. Terrell Brandon: Has all the tools -- except passion.
What do you think about the Mavericks? They've created a really exciting atmosphere now that Mark Cuban has taken over the team. With Don Nelson retiring from coaching, who would you consider to be a legitimate coaching candidate for this team, and who would you like to see? Please do not say Magic Johnson. Trust me, I wasn't going to mention Magic. His efforts to get back in the league are getting pretty pathetic. Now that Lionel Hollins has been hired in Vancouver, I think the most underrated assistant in the league may be Maurice Cheeks in Philadelphia. As a former point guard he knows the X's and O's, and benefited from working with Larry Brown and seeing a franchise rebuilt from the bottom up. I think someone like Cheeks, Rick Carlisle or Rod Higgins (if he doesn't go to the Wizards) would be a good pick for the Mavs. By the way, I wouldn't get too carried away by that exciting atmosphere, since much of it is due to Dennis Rodman, and Rodman is a very temporary phenomenon. The Mavs are still a decent distance from being a playoff-contending team.
Glen Rice supposedly wants a $14 million-per-year contract, and it's been well-documented that the Lakers have no intention of giving it to him. My question is, would anyone else be willing to give it to him? It seems like the only teams with that kind of cap room (Orlando, Chicago, etc.) are looking at other, younger guys. How much do you think he'll get, and where do you expect him to be? I think it's possible that after all this turmoil, Rice may wind up re-signing with the Lakers at less than the maximum. His agent, David Falk, said recently that Rice wouldn't necessarily ask for the max when his contract expires, which is a sign that he realizes that the market for Rice might not be as good as they originally believed. But there will be teams who will try to make it work. If Miami flames out in the playoffs again, expect Pat Riley to start looking at ways to fit Rice into the Heat's salary structure, maybe by getting the Lakers to work some sort of sign-and-trade deal. Another thing to remember is that the Indiana Pacers have a bunch of guys in the last years of their contracts, including Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson, Rik Smits and Jalen Rose. They could let some of those guys walk and clear cap space to pursue a guy like Rice.
Assuming that the Lakers and Blazers meet somewhere in the playoffs, who do you think will win the series, and why? After watching them go into Portland and win recently, I think you have to pick the Lakers. They showed poise and a willingness to play defense for entire possessions, two things they haven't done against good teams in the playoffs in recent years. Put it this way: If the Lakers play their best and the Blazers play their best, I think the Lakers win a close series. But don't count out Portland, because I think we've seen that the Lakers don't always play their best when it counts.
Tracy McGrady wants to go to a major market and make big bucks. At the same time, he says he doesn't want to be Pippen to Vince Carter's Jordan. But any team that could sign McGrady (Chicago, Orlando) is going to be a special kind of horrible for the next several years. Why wouldn't he stay in Toronto, make the cash he wants (and Toronto could pay him), and get the TV exposure that Carter provides, especially after his 51-point domination of the Suns? Would a TV network really put McGrady's Bulls on prime time ahead of Carter's Raptors? You have to remember, at 20 years old, McGrady never played in a situation where he wasn't far and away the best player and focal point of his team before he came to the Raptors. It's not surprising that a young guy with that background would be interested in going somewhere he could be the undisputed star. I think you're right -- the best decision for him would be to stay in Toronto and develop as a great partner for Carter, but I just don't know if he's mature enough yet to see it that way. We're going to find out a lot about McGrady based on the decision he makes after this season.
Why doesn't Donyell Marshall receive more attention/play more? He's putting up some great numbers with Antawn Jamison out, and he looks like he could finally be living up to the potential he displayed coming out of UConn. Also, why aren't the Knicks playing John Wallace more? He seems to be one of the greatest players in the NBA in terms of points per minute played. Donyell has certainly played great since the All-Star break. He was saddled with a reputation as a bust after his first few years in the league -- which he richly deserved, by the way. To his credit, he has turned himself into a solid player, but it's hard to shake your original rep, no matter what it is. It's even harder when you play for a lousy franchise like the Warriors, because nobody pays close enough attention to notice his improvement. He may wind up with all the playing time he wants if the Warriors trade Jason Caffey, as they almost did before the deadline. You might see Jamison and Marshall at the forwards. As for Wallace, his points-per-minute might be high, but his points-given-up-per-minute would probably be higher. Jeff Van Gundy thinks the Knicks rely too much on their defense to let an indifferent defender like Wallace get too much playing time. Wallace also isn't known as the most energetic practice player. I'm not saying Van Gundy is right to keep his minutes so limited -- he was certainly wrong about Marcus Camby's upside when he buried him on the pine early last season -- but with Wallace, you have to look at more than his ability to fill it up.
Brian Grant is not the dominant player he was last year. Is he still hurt, having a hard time coming back from the injury, or did he lose his confidence after the Karl Malone elbow and the blowout by the Spurs last year? Grant's problems are physical, not mental. He had surgery on his left knee during the off-season and it took him more than half the season to get back to 100%. The Blazers have reduced his role, partly because of the knee and partly because they're so deep that someone had to sacrifice some minutes, and they knew that Grant was mature enough to do it without sulking or complaining. He's definitely not putting up the numbers that he used to, but he'll still be a valuable piece for Portland in the playoffs. I could see him becoming a Charles Oakley type who scores when he needs to, but concentrates more on the little things.
Click here to send a question to Phil Taylor's NBA Mailbag, and check back each Thursday during the season to see his answers. On weeks where there isn't a new 'Bag, Phil will join us for an online chat.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
