How complete is Joe’s game? Lebron-esque yet?

[Chaz]

See... there - all of a sudden a JJ thread is about Shawn Marion!

Thanks Cheese!

What was the question again?

Is this thing on? :tapsmicrophone:

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

alright, so exactly what is YOUR point? i stated my point to you, and you disagree with it, thats fine. are you saying that taking it strong to the hoop is not required to be called great?

Yes, my point is that taking it strong to the hoop is not required to be an elite player. I'll leave out the question of "complete," since your standard for that is impossibly high. If only one player a decade can be "complete," then no, Johnson isn't it.

how do you quantify efficiency? i quantify it through adjusted field goal % and points per shot, along with the ability to self-create the shots one takes.... {and} the ability to take it strong to the hoop (you don't have to do it every time, just have the ability). JJ doesn't have this.

I'd say that's a reasonable way of quantifying it. It would be nice to figure assists into it somehow, but I'll leave that chore to the guy who writes those fastidious analyses for Insider.

Since Jordan isn't playing anymore, we can't do a direct comparison of his efficiency to Johnson's. But my guess is that Johnson's is comparable to the league's current elite wing players. Remember that since he shoots threes so well, his points per shot statistic gets a big boost.

Also, it's not true that Johnson "doesn't have" the ability to throw it down in traffic. It has happened a couple of times this season -- plays that made me go "Wow, I didn't realize Johnson could do that!" I don't remember the circumstances, but there have been some very authoritative, extremely aggressive plays, taking it right at the defense. Maybe someone else following this discussion -- if there's anyone left, that is -- can refresh my memory.

Of course he does not do it nearly as much as someone like Jordan, and it would be better if he did it more. Maybe in a year or two, if he stays with the Suns and becomes the #2 offensive option, we'll see more of it.

the fact that after three years of watching him you can still say "wow, i didn't know he could that" proves that he can't do it consistently.

 

[Suns_fan69]

hogging the ball is one thing, taking it strong to the rim is another. you can attack the hoop without being selfish.

You can also attack the rim without dunking. This argument started out about dunking and then morphed into attacking the hoop; these are 2 completely seperate things.

Shawn Kemp (in his pre child-bearing years) could dunk like his children depended on it but most of them came from transition and setups from GP. He wasn't particularly good at attacking the rim though.

KJ on the other hand could attack the rim very well to draw fouls and such and even though he did have one of the most memorable dunks of all time, he wasn't a great dunker.

So to say that dunking == taking it strong to the rim isn't completely true.

 

[yotes1921]

the fact that after three years of watching him you can still say "wow, i didn't know he could that" proves that he can't do it consistently

Not true, it proves that he doesn't not that he can't

 

[Cheesebeef]

how stoked are you guys that we actually gte to debate the level of play JJ actually attains rather than what we're gonna do int he offseason. Man - what a game last night! I'm already super-pumped for manana.

Little known fact - we are the first team to rally and win down 0-3 on the other team's homecourt in the Conference Finals since Philly did it against Boston in 1969.

 

[Chaz]

the fact that after three years of watching him you can still say "wow, i didn't know he could that" proves that he can't do it consistently.

It also shows he is still growing into his game.

 

[coloradosun]

See... there - all of a sudden a JJ thread is about Shawn Marion!

I could make this JJ thread into a Q thread.

But I won't.

 

[Cheesebeef]

the fact that after three years of watching him you can still say "wow, i didn't know he could that" proves that he can't do it consistently

Not true, it proves that he doesn't not that he can't

but wouldn't you say that odds are that he doesn't BECAUSE he can't? I mean if you COULD get all the way to the rim and get either a layup, dunk or a FT, why wouldn't you when they are higher percentage shots?

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

You can also attack the rim without dunking. This argument started out about dunking and then morphed into attacking the hoop; these are 2 completely seperate things.

Shawn Kemp (in his pre child-bearing years) could dunk like his children depended on it but most of them came from transition and setups from GP. He wasn't particularly good at attacking the rim though.

KJ on the other hand could attack the rim very well to draw fouls and such and even though he did have one of the most memorable dunks of all time, he wasn't a great dunker.

So to say that dunking == taking it strong to the rim isn't completely true.

oooh, i wouldn't say that kj wasn't a great dunker, au contraire, he was extraordinary for his size. he dunked on big men. numerous big men. he dunked on ewing, hot rod (saddled him like a nag), and hakeem.

jj wouldn't have likely dunked on any of those guys.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I could make this JJ thread into a Q thread.

But I won't.

I don't think that would be much of a thread anymore colorado. It's pretty damn obvious now that JJ is leaps and bounds more important to the overall future and present of the Suns than Q. Doesn't mean Q isn't important, but the injury and subsequent performance by both Q and JJ sold that story beyond reproach.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

the fact that after three years of watching him you can still say "wow, i didn't know he could that" proves that he can't do it consistently

Not true, it proves that he doesn't not that he can't

then that would make him stupid, which i don't think he is. 'cuz if he could dunk on people, not only the highest percentage shot available, but also a way to get the other team in foul trouble, and CHOOSES not to, what does that say about not only his courage, but his intelligence? no, i prefer to think that jj understands his limitations. he realizes he's a good, but not upper-echelon (by nba standards) athlete, and plays within his limitations.

 

[Cheesebeef]

oooh, i wouldn't say that kj wasn't a great dunker, au contraire, he was extraordinary for his size. he dunked on big men. numerous big men. he dunked on ewing, hot rod (saddled him like a nag), and hakeem.

the guy dunked on Mark Eaton for Pete's Sake. KJ WAS a great dunker before his hammy's started giving him problems - he still had that first step after that, but that that explosive ability to jam on people's head was curtailed after his first couples years.

 

[elindholm]

I mean if you COULD get all the way to the rim and get either a layup, dunk or a FT, why wouldn't you when they are higher percentage shots?

Maybe because it's not always the best option. What happens when Stoudemire tries to dunk every time? The defense adjusts and he starts forcing bad shots. If Stoudemire's 15-foot jumper were more reliable, don't you think he'd be using it a lot more?

 

[Suns_fan69]

the guy dunked on Mark Eaton for Pete's Sake. KJ WAS a great dunker before his hammy's started giving him problems - he still had that first step after that, but that that explosive ability to jam on people's head was curtailed after his first couples years.

Ok, maybe KJ was a bad example... how about Isiah Thomas?

 

[Cheesebeef]

I mean if you COULD get all the way to the rim and get either a layup, dunk or a FT, why wouldn't you when they are higher percentage shots?

Maybe because it's not always the best option. What happens when Stoudemire tries to dunk every time? The defense adjusts and he starts forcing bad shots. If Stoudemire's 15-foot jumper were more reliable, don't you think he'd be using it a lot more?

Yes - but consider that Joe ALMOST NEVER attacks the rim - it's different. I'm not saying Joe should ALWAYS attack the rim, but the fact that he so rarely does shoudl tell you something.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Ok, maybe KJ was a bad example... how about Isiah Thomas?

I don't remember the question - but, sure - that's a better example.

 

[playstation]

JJ's 1.19 points per shot (# 25 shooting guard in league, #77 overall).

JJ adj. field goal % is 53.6%, #2 shooting guard in league to Mike Miller.

so the question is why does he shoot so well but not get more points per shot? the answer is free throws, which was the exact point i was making. the elite player shoots well and draws contact on the way to the hoop, thus getting free points at the line. to show the contrast:

Amare's 1.56 points per shot (# 1 center and overall in league, shaq #2 at 1.52)

Amare's adj. field goal % is 56% (#2 center in league to shaq)

Nash 1.36 points per shot (#2 point guard in NBA)

Nash's adj. field goal % is 55.7% (#3 point guard in NBA)

since Nash is a point guard, Nash's asts is 11.4 (#1 point guard in NBA)

that's elite, that's efficient, that's unstoppable.

 

[elindholm]

I didn't realize that Points Per Shot doesn't include free-throw attempts as "shots." That makes it a misleading statistic. I'm not sure how they should be figured in, but they should be figured in somehow.

If someone makes a jump shot, that's two points in one shot. But if he drives for a layup, is fouled, and makes both free throws, that's two points in zero shots. That just doesn't make sense. Maybe each free-throw attempt should count as half of a shot, or something.

Since Johnson doesn't shoot many free throws, his standing versus other SGs in the league would be improved if FTA were figured in somehow as shots.

Even so, I agree that he should get to the line more. Most (not all) of the players ahead of him on the list -- which is available through ESPN.com, by the way -- are the first or second option while they're on the floor, so that explains part of it, but not all of it.

Still, I don't think anyone was arguing that Johnson is as "complete" or "great" now as he will ever be. He still has room for improvement, and he already does some things very well that other stars have come to only later in their careers.

Considering how far he's come in the last year and a half or so, I think it's far too early to start setting limits on what kind of player he can become.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Considering how far he's come in the last year and a half or so, I think it's far too early to start setting limits on what kind of player he can become.

that's probably the best argument I've heard for him yet.

It's gonna be his and Amare's team - they're the twosome that will lead this team into the realm of DYNASTY (much the same way the duo of Manu and Duncan operate).

 

[playstation]

for the record, i think joe rules! 1.5 years ago, the night before the marbury trade, i was talking with a friend about possible trade opportunities to rid ourselves of joe. how wrong i was.

 

[Billythekid]

To see the improvement in Joe Johnson has been pretty amazing. The sky is the limit with him. He's on the verge of being a top flight SG who can do it all and i think he'll be an allstar within 2 years.

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

JJ's 1.19 points per shot (# 25 shooting guard in league, #77 overall).

For games in the regular season:

JJ's points per possesion (viewed as his overall scoring effectiveness) on the other hand is in the 87th percentile of the ENTIRE NBA.

He is in the 100th percentile for PPP in the entire NBA in all spot up opportunities.

He is in the 80th percentile for ISOs.



For his jumpshots -

He is in the 100th percentile when shooting a shot while guarded
He is in the 91st percentile when shooting a shot while open

 

[thegrahamcrackr]

I have been a big Joe supporter from day 1.

Here is my take on the discussion (I browsed over it):

JJ is a complete player, in the sense that he will have a strong impact in every aspect of the game. Lebron and KG are other examples.

The magnitude of his impact is not on the same level as those guys, but he is one of a small group of players that have the all around impact on the game.


Saying a player needs to take it to the hoop strong in order to be considered a complete player is ridiculous in my opinion. A 15 foot jumpshot counts for just as many points as a dunk. A player needs to be able to score in order to be a complete player, it doesn't matter how it comes (the efficiency has the be there as well).

Saying a player needs to take it to the hoop strong in order to be considered a great(im changing it to offensive) player is also ridiculous in my opinion. Like before, a player needs to be able to score - it doesn't matter how it happens. Taking it strong is certainly a big part of it, because like playstation pointed out there is a good likely hood of making the shot or getting to the line. However, it is definitely possible to make up for the lack of explosiveness in other areas. Cheese's example of Reggie is perfect. You knew he couldn't get to the rim of you, but were you intimidated when he had the ball at the end? Of course.

 

[goldseraph]

I think you guys are going a bit JJ-crazy - he is a full notch below Wade, LeBron, Kobe, etc. And how did Jordan come into this conversation?

 

[Yuma]

Another question is how do we know JJ couldn't be an attack-the-rim kind of guy? He isn't now, but not because he can't--he doesn't because he doesn't need to.

Again, you so eloquently and succinctly say what took me several paragraphs to illustrate! Kudos to you Chaplin!