Hi Silverfuel!
Thanks for pointing that out oohah. Its fine, except that just like the game of basketball has evolved, so has the position of a shooting guard. Shooting is an important skill but so is driving into the paint, passing, defending and rebounding.
The skills you mentioned are very important, and I am pretty sure they were important back in the 50's and before. I don't think we can attribute the usefulness of these skills to "evolution".
However, I stick to my guns that the skill of shooting is the most important skill by a good margin at the position of shooting guard.
Look at Jamal Crawford, is he the all-around MVP caliber player you think Allan should have been? No, in fact watching him play makes many wish for a player just like Allan Houston. An eficient shooter.
Let me ask you this: Don't you think that if Houston and Crawford could have switched places last year the Knicks would have been a better team?
Look at the fantasy backcourt of Marbury/Houston. That is an EXCELLENT backcourt. Period.
Walt Frazier, Monroe did all of those and guess what, Allan Houston didnt.
I think it is folly to compare Houston to Frazier, one of the NBA's all time greats. Unfortuantely, I haven't seen Monroe play enough to compare Houston's game and his based on personal observation. You?
Guess what? Monroe did not win a championship until he was paired with Frazier. The rest of team was pretty damn good too.
Now, just for fun, let's compare Monroe and Houston:
Houston
Career 839 727 33.7 .444 .402 .863 .4 2.5 2.9 2.4 .67 .10 2.10 2.50 17.3
Monroe
Career 926 .464 .807 2,796 3.0 3,594 3.9 473 121 17,454 18.8
I would happily agree that Monroe was a better player solely based on his legend, but statistically he hardly blows Houston out of the water. I don't beleieve you or most of us has watched Monroe play enough to talk about his defense, but his rep was based solely on his offensive game.
Today, Redd, Jason Richardson, Stephen Jackson etc all do those. Give it a break guy, dont make it sound like you no better than the guys that dont like Houston.
I don't think I know better than (most) people who don't like Houston. It has nothing to do with 'liking' anyone. In your case, you seem to have a personal beef with him that I can't put my finger on. You won't even concede that he was a GOOD player! You also forget that when the franchise left him out there by himself he never complained, he just played until he could not play anymore. But you don't give him credit for heart or good sportmanship. He also hit many clutch shots, not just the game winner against Miami. But let's not give him credit for that either. Who needs to give it a break?
The fact is Houston was a very good player in his time if for no other reason than his shooting.
Do you remember the days before Allan Houston? All we Knick's fans ever talked about is how we needed a shooter. Houston was that shooter. He filled that need beautifully. That was his job. He was never brought in to be "The Man" or a Clyde Drexler clone. He was brought in to take pressure off of Ewing because nobody on the damn team could make a jumper consistently.
All those players you named are pretty good, let me talk about them one at a time:
Stephen Jackson? If you think he is better than the Allan Houston that played for the Knicks then I guess that is your opinion and maybe I do know better after all. To me he is a journeyman. But he has played on winning teams.
Stephen Jackson:
Career 311 226 28.6 .421 .336 .779 .8 2.9 3.7 2.2 1.39 .20 2.17 2.50 13.1
Jason Richardson, an exciting player for sure, and a big part of terrible teams his career thus far.
Jason Richardson:
Career 312 307 35.2 .431 .333 .703 1.6 3.8 5.3 3.2 1.24 .40 2.26 2.40 17.5
Michael Redd, a player with a top-heavy career because he had to wait his turn. Really he is very similar to Allan Houston: If you take away his shooting, there isn't much left. His numbers are a touch better, except for the wins. Let's see how things go for him. He certainly has not been successful on a team level yet.
Michael Redd
Career 312 179 30.9 .452 .394 .844 1.2 3.0 4.2 1.8 .92 .10 1.22 1.70 17.7
You cannot defend the fact that he never did anything other than shoot the ball. No one can defend him on that cause he never did anything other than shoot the ball.
I can defend that fact because it is nonsense. I would agree that Houston's skills outside of shooting were average to below average, but he did what he could. He did do what he was supposed to do though: shoot well. Apparently putting the ball in the basket falls low on your chart of important things to do in basketball, because you still won't admit that he was one of the best shooters in the game. There are 5 guys on the floor and Houston pulled his weight and then some. He does not have to be the best rebounder, passer, and defensive player to be a good player. Just about any player who does anything among the best in the NBA is good.
Even the biggest H20 fans agree, Houston was 1-dimensional and that hurt the team a lot.
The problem here is that you are establishing falsehoods as givens. It has nothing to do with being a fan or not. Once again, it was not his job to do EVERYTHING the best on the Knicks. His one dimension, IMO, is the most important dimension in the game of basketball: putting the ball in the basket, because that is when you get 2 points. His being one dimensional did not hurt the team alot, his one dimension helped the team alot!
This is not about who likes or dislikes Houston. Anyone can feel the way they want to. But when you try to make the case that Houston was not good it becomes silly. Even you admit elsewhere on this thread that he was the Knicks' best player! Other times you have described him in derogatory
ways that have nothing to do with basketball, so I really don't think your dislike has anything to do with his game. Outside of the stupid semi-anti-semitic remarks which really weren't, I see his personal behavior record as better than most players.
The quote I referred to:
No true Nalod. When is team is doing poorly, fans tend to blame the the best player on the team. The last 2 years the fans blamed Steph, TT or Craw for the team doing poorly.
If someone says, "houston haters", they are refering to me so I want to respond. If I get personal, you can stop me.
You are hardly the only "Houston hater" around, though I hope you don't consider yourself a Houston hater, because I define a hater as: "Someone who is jealous or envious of another's success because they are not satisfied with their own life." I really don't think that is you. I think your reason for disliking him is because he was only an excellent shooter.
When a team is not going well its important for the fans to attempt to put a face on the failure. We tend to hit on the guy making the most money and must always put a face, or demonize some one for the failure.
Yup.
Allan has been a great player, and the team could have many times thrown him under the bus but the reality is not much would have changed.
Exactly. Maybe nothng would have changed.
If anyone did more harm to the team in the last few years it was Ewings DEMAND to be traded. even in 1996 he applied his leverage to the max and preserved is place on the team and his money. Hey, its just business, and his right, and we followed suit, but it must be recognized.
Ewing should not have demanded to be traded but he was too proud. But I would have to say the mistake was the Knick's. They didn't have to acquiesce to his demands.
Demonizing Allan or pointing out his lack of skills in other areas becomes an exausting read. Many of the players mentioned lack many of the skills or tangable qualities that Allan possessed!
yes... YES!
Defending him point for point is old news. The deal is done.
True, but I am laid up from a knee operation so I have time to waste.
And if anything Isiah needs to keep his mouth shut learn how to handle such matters as ridding players. His handling of Shandon was shamful and very selfish. Im not saying he had a place on the team, but! His fireing of Chaney was awful, and it seemed the Lenny hiring was a knee jerk reaction.
I agree. When has Isiah been a nice guy? Never.
In the end, Allans career will be over soon and both he and the knicks will have handled it the right waY!
Let us hope.
Pointing out houston's lack of skill serves the purpose when someone disagrees he lacks skill. Its exhaustive but thats what fans do. You feel strongly about something, you cannot just ignore it. I felt strongly about Layden being a bad GM and mentioned it over and over. People still mention it. Dolan is a bad owner and people still mention that. Its exhaustive. Every post on every thread is overdone. We are NY fans, not one is bullet proof. You give him a pass, I dont and that what keeps forums going.
We finally agree.
oohah
8/16/2005 12:45 AM
