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

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I agree JJ isn't on Lebron's level yet, but the only statistic that tells me that is the assists. Lebron is the one and only option that cleveland has and therefore he gets more points and he plays a few more minutes a game accounting for the couple extra boards. His feel for the game is unparallel though. The guy is as good of a distributer as they come.

As far as freakish athletecism goes, Joe is one ripped dude. He seems like he SHOULD be athletic. He is much more of a finesse player than Bron or Kobe and maybe he doesn't like to use his athletecism. He prefers to shoot from the outside. I remember after the marbury trade he would be able to get to the basket at will almost and he has gone away from that now. He prefers to shoot from the outside now and has developed a deadly stroke.

i think jj played as many, if not more, minutes as bron this year. and that's on a poor rebounding team which would mean that he'd get more chances at rebounds. your logic in the first paragraph is faulty.

and just b/c a dude's ripped doesn't make him a freakish athlete. he's not. he's just not guys. and one dunk in a boston game does not make him one. i'm not saying he can't dunk (man, you guys make some arguments that are just ridiculously extreme), i'm saying the dude can't dunk on someone. not consistently. not to the extreme that can kobe, mcgrady, amare, or bron, or even wade.

i think jj will be an all-star once or twice, or maybe even a few times in his career, i just don't see the ability to become the stratosphere-type player y'all are talking about. that just seems like blind homerism to me. but i love jj and hope to high hell we resign him for any amount. in the long run i think he's much more valuable to this club than even marion.

 

[cepstrum]

i think jj played as many, if not more, minutes as bron this year. and that's on a poor rebounding team which would mean that he'd get more chances at rebounds. your logic in the first paragraph is faulty.

and just b/c a dude's ripped doesn't make him a freakish athlete. he's not. he's just not guys. and one dunk in a boston game does not make him one. i'm not saying he can't dunk (man, you guys make some arguments that are just ridiculously extreme), i'm saying the dude can't dunk on someone. not consistently. not to the extreme that can kobe, mcgrady, amare, or bron, or even wade.

i think jj will be an all-star once or twice, or maybe even a few times in his career, i just don't see the ability to become the stratosphere-type player y'all are talking about. that just seems like blind homerism to me. but i love jj and hope to high hell we resign him for any amount. in the long run i think he's much more valuable to this club than even marion.

JJ playes 3.5 minutes per game less than lebron and the suns averaged 44.1 rebounds per game, whereas the cavs averaged 42.3. Get your facts right before making the claim that someones argument is faulty.

And I said that it seems like he SHOULD be athletic and possibly doesn't use it. I dont know what the hell you're talking about with the whole boston thing. Hell if you read my post correctly, I was agreeing that JJ wasnt as good as Lebron and he probably will never be because Lebron is a better distributor.

 

[playstation]

Joe is not a superior athlete that can get to the rim at will. He is not capable of throwing it down in traffic (for whatever reason). He shies away from contact in the paint while driving to the hoop (hence the floater rather than trying to draw the foul). He has no other weakness.

These are the facets of his game that keep him from being a truly complete player (*something I don't believe anyone in the league is since 1996 MJ).

The thing that will keep him from greatness has nothing to do with a complete game and everything to do with the fact that he is not EXCEPTIONAL at anything other than shooting open 3's (my definition of exceptional is obviously very high). Shaq and kidd and lebron are not complete players, but they are dominant at their strengths. JJ is not.

I think highly of JJ, but he doesn't have greatness in him. IMO, he's successful if he ever makes 3rd team all-NBA and 2nd team all-Defense. basically, i think johnson's prime may be slightly better than finley's prime (which i think is the best comparison for him).

 

[elindholm]

What's the obsession with dunking? Lots of great athletes (players) aren't big dunkers, and there are plenty of big-time dunkers who aren't especially good players.

James is everywhere on the floor simultaneously. I don't see Johnson ever doing that, because he doesn't seem to have that kind of manic personality. If that's a requirement for a great player, then I guess Johnson won't make the cut.

And if the last "complete" player was Jordan nine years ago, the term needs to be redefined.

 

[playstation]

What's the obsession with dunking? Lots of great athletes (players) aren't big dunkers, and there are plenty of big-time dunkers who aren't especially good players.

James is everywhere on the floor simultaneously. I don't see Johnson ever doing that, because he doesn't seem to have that kind of manic personality. If that's a requirement for a great player, then I guess Johnson won't make the cut.

And if the last "complete" player was Jordan nine years ago, the term needs to be redefined.

dunking is a high percentage shot. so are FT's. Those are the shots that persist when games get physical. if you can't do it, then you have a lesser chance of success when the game is on the line (see nowitzki, garnett when they don't attack)

every player has a weakness (except MJ in '96, although the last healthy year of grant hill, '99 maybe, was pretty close). if you have a weakness, you are not complete. sounds pretty simple to me...

 

[cepstrum]

dunking is a high percentage shot. so are FT's. Those are the shots that persist when games get physical. if you can't do it, then you have a lesser chance of success when the game is on the line (see nowitzki, garnett when they don't attack)

I agree that dunking is great, but it certainly isn't a requirement to be great. Tim Duncan is an average dunker at best. He is certainly no dunk machine yet he still dominates.

 

[elindholm]

How many games did Jordan win in the closing seconds on dunks? None. How many did he win by hitting difficult fadeaways with a defender right in his face? Many.

 

[Biclops]

JJ is a great all around player. He showed last year that he can be the 1st or 2nd offensive option if he has to be. But like George said JJ is not the kind of guy who wants to be the main man. He does not constantly look for his shots and looks to score through the flow of the offense (which is great for the Suns team)

I dont know if he is Lebron-esque yet but in the next few years (or even this year) he might become the second most important player for the suns behind Amare, as Nash starts to decline

In retrospect, it is interesting to read all this talk about how great JJ can be. Considering how he used to be inconsistent few years ago and alot of people did not like him

Looking back in the draft, it is scary to see who was drafted ahead of him.... rodney white, eddie griffin, saga diop, shane battier, jason richardson, eddy curry, pao gasol (good pick), tyson chandler, kwame brown

 

[playstation]

I agree that dunking is great, but it certainly isn't a requirement to be great. Tim Duncan is an average dunker at best. He is certainly no dunk machine yet he still dominates.

i never said it was required to be great, i said it was required to be complete (aka, the ability to do anything on the court). Like i said, the great ones have weaknesses, but their strengths are so far superior compared to their contemporaries (aka shaq)

 

[se7en]

If my memory serves me, I’m pretty sure that Jordan virtually eliminated the dunk from his game during his last couple of championship years. But that certainly didn’t alter his effectiveness (As Eric noted) with the fadaway, falling tear drop with 5 guys in his face shot. Some of those shots that Joe made felt downright Jordan-esque. And before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, no I’m not comparing Joe to Jordan. Although when looking at their complete all-around game… Relax guys, I’m just joking on that one…

 

[playstation]

How many games did Jordan win in the closing seconds on dunks? None. How many did he win by hitting difficult fadeaways with a defender right in his face? Many.

LOL. How many times did MJ penetrate to the hoop and draw contact to get to the FT line at the end of games? Knowing that he had the ability to do that at will, teams would play him soft (or softer, at least), and he'd make them pay by making the jumpshot (or passing, he was unique, in '96 especially, in that he was superior at just about everything). If he didn't have the killer finishing ability in his pocket, those jumpers would not be available.

what's more, jj's fadeaway looks in slow motion compared to the quickness of jordan's turnaround. puhleeze. next question.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

The only reason you see all those dunks by McGrady, LeBron, and Kobe is because they get to the rim way better than JJ. You can also see the difference in that aspect of their games by looking the amount of free throws those players shoot compared to JJ. That's why I initallly brought up the Finley comparison in that they're both primarily focused on the perimeter and mid-range game on the offensive side of the ball. I think JJ is/will be the far better than player than Finley who is a scorer and nothing else, but they do remind me of each other sometimes in offensive halfcourt sets.

 

[Joe Mama]

here you are flat out wrong. jj is not the athlete that bron, kobe, and mcgrady are. he cannot jump as high, he doesn't have the shake to brake ankles, and he doesn't have the suddeness to blow by people. rarely, if ever (and i can't remember once) do you see jj dunk on someone. the other guys listed do it regularly. and it's not an inclination, it's ability.

I haven't missed one Phoenix Suns game in the last two years, and I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've seen JJ go by somebody and throw down a vicious slam dunk. He's good. He's played very well in the playoffs, but he hasn't on the level of a LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, or even Dwayne Wade.

Joe Mama

 

[playstation]

If my memory serves me, I’m pretty sure that Jordan virtually eliminated the dunk from his game during his last couple of championship years. But that certainly didn’t alter his effectiveness (As Eric noted) with the fadaway, falling tear drop with 5 guys in his face shot. Some of those shots that Joe made felt downright Jordan-esque. And before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, no I’m not comparing Joe to Jordan. Although when looking at their complete all-around game… Relax guys, I’m just joking on that one…

your memory does not serve you. in jordan's last year with the bulls, he avg'd 8.8 FTAs/GM (which he upped to 10.6 per game in the playoffs). if you think you get that shooting fadeaways all day, you would be wrong. His ability to get to the hoop at 34 was still very good. that is greatness.

that is also why i would bet on amare winning a title in his career. he can create high percentage shots for himself all day (dunks, layups, FT's, although nash helps him out he is capable of doing it himself as well). the rest can be learned.

 

[elindholm]

Knowing that he had the ability to do that at will, teams would play him soft (or softer, at least)

Give me a break. No one played off of Jordan with the game on the line. They pressed him as much as they could.

what's more, jj's fadeaway looks in slow motion compared to the quickness of jordan's turnaround.

Don't change the subject. I'm not comparing Johnson to Jordan; I'm just asking why dunks are worth more than other kinds of baskets. I don't care if Johnson turns the wrong direction and grannies the ball backward over his head, so long as it goes in a high percentage of the time.

 

[elindholm]

in jordan's last year with the bulls, he avg'd 8.8 FTAs/GM (which he upped to 10.6 per game in the playoffs). if you think you get that shooting fadeaways all day, you would be wrong.

We were talking about the ends of games. Obviously Jordan got lots of whistles during a typical 48 minutes once he had been anointed as The Greatest Athlete in the History of Civilization. And sure, his ability to get to the basket was terrific. But when the game was on the line, he had to use other weapons.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

JJ playes 3.5 minutes per game less than lebron and the suns averaged 44.1 rebounds per game, whereas the cavs averaged 42.3. Get your facts right before making the claim that someones argument is faulty.

And I said that it seems like he SHOULD be athletic and possibly doesn't use it. I dont know what the hell you're talking about with the whole boston thing. Hell if you read my post correctly, I was agreeing that JJ wasnt as good as Lebron and he probably will never be because Lebron is a better distributor.

ugh . . . stats. by now can we all agree that comparing stats for the suns and other teams is mostly meaningless as the suns' games provide for many more possessions and thus more shots, more rebounds, more assists, etc, etc? 3.5 mins is relatively minor given the respective rebounding numbers. and just comparing the total rebounds per game is asinine given my earlier comment.

and boston comment was a response to yote, just didn't feel like drafting two posts. sorry, not meant at you.

this really is a somewhat stupid argument we're having b/c i think we largely agree.

 

[Yuma]

here you are flat out wrong. jj is not the athlete that bron, kobe, and mcgrady are. he cannot jump as high, he doesn't have the shake to brake ankles, and he doesn't have the suddeness to blow by people. rarely, if ever (and i can't remember once) do you see jj dunk on someone. the other guys listed do it regularly. and it's not an inclination, it's ability.

I have seen JJ dunk, so he has ability. He lacks the agressiveness to do it all the time. If you notice, he usually pulls up and puts a soft jumper in as his defenders keep going the same direction away from him. Very few guys have the kind of intermediate off the dribble jumper JJ has. He uses it to his advantage. He has the height to shoot over most guys in the league, so why does he "have" to dunk?

 

[playstation]

Knowing that he had the ability to do that at will, teams would play him soft (or softer, at least)

Give me a break. No one played off of Jordan with the game on the line. They pressed him as much as they could.

this is not a true statement. if anybody bodied up on jordan 20+ feet from the hoop, he would take them to the hole and either finish or get fouled. they gave him room, usually in the 2-3 feet range (assuming he wasn't in the post). at that point he had a choice of either attacking the hoop and risking a no-call when the contact took place (like game 5 vs. indiana in '98), since he was getting the cushion, or using his rediculous lift to get off a jumpshot (which is something else JJ doesn't have: he does not get enough lift on his jumpshot to be unstoppable with it like rayray or tmac).

I am a bulls fan and suns fan, and i've basically seen every game jordan has ever played, so you might want to concede this point.

 

[playstation]

in jordan's last year with the bulls, he avg'd 8.8 FTAs/GM (which he upped to 10.6 per game in the playoffs). if you think you get that shooting fadeaways all day, you would be wrong.

We were talking about the ends of games. Obviously Jordan got lots of whistles during a typical 48 minutes once he had been anointed as The Greatest Athlete in the History of Civilization. And sure, his ability to get to the basket was terrific. But when the game was on the line, he had to use other weapons.

i don't have stats for his 4th quarter average's, but having seen every game i know that he did not solely rely on the fadeaway. jordan posted up about 30% of the time in his latter years, and on the other occasions he'd get the ball out about 22ft at the elbows and create (and yes, that includes getting to the rim if the opportunity presented)

 

[elindholm]

I am a bulls fan and suns fan, and i've basically seen every game jordan has ever played, so you might want to concede this point.

How can I concede the "point" when you keep changing what it is? Is your "point" that Joe Johnson isn't Michael Jordan? Fine, I concede. But if your "point" is that a dunk is magically worth more than other baskets, I don't care if you've watched every game in the history of the league, I am going to disagree with you.

 

[playstation]

look, here's the bottom line: imo, you can't play a passive game and be regarded as either complete or great. JJ is passive. This means that while he can score, he does not attack. Whether by lack of ability or choice is irrelevant.

yao is passive, garnett at the end of games is passive. if you're talking about greatness (or completeness), you're talking about a very few number of people, and to say JJ belongs in that company is nonsense.

 

[elindholm]

imo, you can't play a passive game and be regarded as either complete or great.

Since by "regarded" you mean "regarded by playstation," I agree with you. There are some people who "regard" Robert Horry as great, since he has won five championships and is on the verge of a sixth. I think that's one of the biggest piles of bovine excrement in sports history, but people will "regard" whatever and however they like.

You have defined "passive" to mean "not trying to get to the rim at all costs," and I just don't think that's a useful definition. Jordan's greatness didn't come from driving to the hoop on every play. It came from being able to do other things when that option wasn't available.

Great players take the best shot that the defense gives them. If Jordan thought that heading for the rim every time was his best option, that's what he would have done. But he understood that sometimes another weapon was more likely to be effective. Too bad he isn't still on the Bulls; maybe you could watch a few more of his games and eventually pick that up.

 

[playstation]

I am a bulls fan and suns fan, and i've basically seen every game jordan has ever played, so you might want to concede this point.

How can I concede the "point" when you keep changing what it is? Is your "point" that Joe Johnson isn't Michael Jordan? Fine, I concede. But if your "point" is that a dunk is magically worth more than other baskets, I don't care if you've watched every game in the history of the league, I am going to disagree with you.

my point is that as the dunk is the most efficient shot in the league, and the ability to get to the hoop and draw fouls/finish results in the highest offensive efficiency. any basketball player needs this ability imo to be called complete, and any shooting guard needs this ability to be called 'great.' Jordan had this ability, even in his later years, despite what you may think. JJ does not have this ability, and the reason is irrelevant. although i am interested to see if you can come up with a sg who could not take it strong to the hoop and draw fouls/finish yet is still great...

 

[yotes1921]

JJ may not take it to the rim like Kobi or TMac but he can take you off the dribble and hit that floater every time, for the same results 2 points (maybe 3).

Also by him not going to the rim it may increase his longevity, in fact the only time that he has missed games due to injury was when he went to the rim, Kobi and TMac have missed many games due to injuries from going to the rim. This has some merit.