Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Sonics - Daniels and Ridnour

Expand Messages
  • tajallie@hotmail.com
    Or perhaps injuries, particularly late in the year help explain this . .maybe he just breaks down. I consider Casell a shoot first PG, but like Marbs or
    Message 1 of 36 , Dec 17, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Or perhaps injuries, particularly late in the year help explain
      this . .maybe he just breaks down.

      I consider Casell a shoot first PG, but like Marbs or Iverson, I also
      think he consistently attacks the defense. Damon, Stevie, Mobley were
      more players I had in mind about gaurds who get assist basically from
      playing PG not from being PGs. Sounds like Best, who I often thought
      put up pretty good numbers per minute also sufferred from this
      afflication. 'Course, if you are good as Francis at taking a guy off
      the dribble maybe it doesn't hurt your team that much . .. but for
      Damon and the Blazers, ouch.

      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "ryanfaerber"
      > <ryanfaerber@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Sam Cassell and histories of poor team success? As I recall he
      > was
      > > a critical part of two Houston teams that won the title, and was
      a
      > > starter for some very good Milwaukee teams and of course
      Minnesota
      > > last year. Could you explain a little more what you mean?
      >
      > I can try.
      >
      > Cassell was a rookie/2nd-year sparkplug off the bench in Houston.
      > He went on to be a starter in New Jersey (via Phoenix and Dallas),
      > and then in Milwaukee.
      >
      > While posting big numbers, he wasn't elected to any allstar game (I
      > think) until last season (his best, by my reckoning). Those Bucks
      > teams always got the early playoff exit, except for '01, when Sam
      > played very badly, by his standards.
      >
      > Even with his first 2 years of playoffs in Houston -- 22 games each
      > year, at high level of production -- his playoff career numbers are
      > only at 76% of his regular-seasons. These are year-by-year
      > comparisons, and are quite dreadful.
      >
      > No doubt, when one of your big guns is misfiring, your team has
      > little chance in the playoffs. Here's the career season/playoff
      > rates for Cassell:
      >
      > . . . . Gms Eff% Sco. Reb Ast Stl - total
      > Seasons 743 .542 20.0 4.0 7.4 1.4 - 32.5
      > Playoff 103 .530 16.6 3.5 6.1 1.1 - 26.8
      >
      > It's not so much that he doesn't shoot well, as he can't get a
      shot;
      > and his other numbers are down, across the board.
      >
      > Prior to last year, his statistically-best year was '02, and his
      > team missed the playoffs.
      >
      > I've often wondered why this player doesn't get allstar votes.
      > Perhaps he got tabbed as a "playoff star" in his early days, and
      has
      > coasted since.
    • tajallie@hotmail.com
      Or perhaps injuries, particularly late in the year help explain this . .maybe he just breaks down. I consider Casell a shoot first PG, but like Marbs or
      Message 36 of 36 , Dec 17, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Or perhaps injuries, particularly late in the year help explain
        this . .maybe he just breaks down.

        I consider Casell a shoot first PG, but like Marbs or Iverson, I also
        think he consistently attacks the defense. Damon, Stevie, Mobley were
        more players I had in mind about gaurds who get assist basically from
        playing PG not from being PGs. Sounds like Best, who I often thought
        put up pretty good numbers per minute also sufferred from this
        afflication. 'Course, if you are good as Francis at taking a guy off
        the dribble maybe it doesn't hurt your team that much . .. but for
        Damon and the Blazers, ouch.

        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "ryanfaerber"
        > <ryanfaerber@y...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Sam Cassell and histories of poor team success? As I recall he
        > was
        > > a critical part of two Houston teams that won the title, and was
        a
        > > starter for some very good Milwaukee teams and of course
        Minnesota
        > > last year. Could you explain a little more what you mean?
        >
        > I can try.
        >
        > Cassell was a rookie/2nd-year sparkplug off the bench in Houston.
        > He went on to be a starter in New Jersey (via Phoenix and Dallas),
        > and then in Milwaukee.
        >
        > While posting big numbers, he wasn't elected to any allstar game (I
        > think) until last season (his best, by my reckoning). Those Bucks
        > teams always got the early playoff exit, except for '01, when Sam
        > played very badly, by his standards.
        >
        > Even with his first 2 years of playoffs in Houston -- 22 games each
        > year, at high level of production -- his playoff career numbers are
        > only at 76% of his regular-seasons. These are year-by-year
        > comparisons, and are quite dreadful.
        >
        > No doubt, when one of your big guns is misfiring, your team has
        > little chance in the playoffs. Here's the career season/playoff
        > rates for Cassell:
        >
        > . . . . Gms Eff% Sco. Reb Ast Stl - total
        > Seasons 743 .542 20.0 4.0 7.4 1.4 - 32.5
        > Playoff 103 .530 16.6 3.5 6.1 1.1 - 26.8
        >
        > It's not so much that he doesn't shoot well, as he can't get a
        shot;
        > and his other numbers are down, across the board.
        >
        > Prior to last year, his statistically-best year was '02, and his
        > team missed the playoffs.
        >
        > I've often wondered why this player doesn't get allstar votes.
        > Perhaps he got tabbed as a "playoff star" in his early days, and
        has
        > coasted since.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.