A Review of the Top Free Agents

4 August, 1996

Below, I print the stats for some of the most prominent free agents on the market, including some of those that are signed to contracts paying them $2000 per hour they are awake. Out of the generosity of my soul, I have included Production Ratings and Approximate Values at the far right of my ratings (the bottom table). Other people like these numbers a lot more than I do because they proclaim to account for everything, but they don't mean anything. Rather than ranting and raving now about the inappropriateness of them for any detailed sort of analysis, I refer you to another time I ranted and raved.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Smith Steve 80 80 2856 494 1143 0.432 140 423 0.331 318 385 0.826 124 202 326 224 207 1 68 151 17 1446 18.1 32

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Smith Steve 650 1306 0.497 108.5 1418 673 0.236 0.372 109.8 0.600 3.3 2.2 0.451 1.7 2.1 0.61 0.74 -0.3 9 15

Steve Smith had a poor season last season. He has played better in previous seasons and was hurt, in my opinion, by not being sure of his role. After adapting to being a point guard in the NBA, he is back to a shooting guard. He doesn't seem sure of when he should shoot and perhaps doesn't have the skills to be a top flight shooting guard. I've generally held a lower opinion of Smith than others, particularly when he was named to the World Championship team a couple years ago. But now, I think people have lowered their expectations, possibly too low. Smith is now pretty much an average NBA starter.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Ehlo Craig 79 8 1758 253 591 0.428 82 221 0.371 81 103 0.786 65 191 256 138 138 0 85 104 9 669 8.5 28
Rooks Sean (T) 65 7 1117 144 285 0.505 1 7 0.143 135 202 0.668 81 174 255 47 141 0 23 80 42 424 6.5 19
Anderson Kenny (T) 69 64 2344 349 834 0.418 92 256 0.359 260 338 0.769 63 140 203 575 178 1 111 146 14 1050 15.2 39

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Ehlo Craig 301 668 0.451 101.9 681 490 0.279 0.440 107.1 0.347 1.0 1.9 0.305 0.7 1.5 0.38 0.86 -0.9 5 9
Rooks Sean (T) 211 393 0.537 102.2 402 224 0.200 0.525 103.7 0.358 1.5 2.8 0.441 2.0 2.6 1.81 2.29 -0.3 4 8
Anderson Kenny (T) 582 1077 0.540 117.9 1270 390 0.167 0.430 110.8 0.758 8.7 2.8 0.735 7.6 2.8 3.26 1.18 1.6 9 18

Kenny Anderson supposedly ripped the Blazers off. Or should I say, David Falk ripped the Blazers off. Anderson has not yet produced anything in the NBA, gaining attention in NJ as being part of the problem, then moving with great fanfare to Charlotte, where his play had several people hoping Mugsy Bogues would return. Despite Anderson's 42% shooting from the field last year, his overall numbers were actually better than in years past and made him look like a decent free agent catch. His assist-to-turnover ratio improved (finally) and, although he still seems to want to score too much, his three point range could not be ignored. Rod Strickland produced a lot for Portland and, though I'm not sure Anderson's abilities fit in quite as well with his new teammates, he won't be missed severely with Anderson at the helm.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Hancock Darrin 63 7 838 112 214 0.523 1 3 0.333 47 73 0.644 40 58 98 47 94 2 28 56 5 272 4.3 16
Jordan Michael 82 82 3090 916 1850 0.495 111 260 0.427 548 657 0.834 148 395 543 352 195 0 180 197 42 2491 30.4 53

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Hancock Darrin 134 266 0.504 99.4 264 132 0.157 0.406 111.8 0.158 0.4 2.4 0.126 0.4 2.7 0.46 3.17 -1.9 2 4
Jordan Michael 1130 1924 0.587 121.8 2344 676 0.219 0.565 97.3 0.964 20.1 0.8 0.976 16.8 0.4 5.43 0.13 7.3 17 29

Money, money, money. Ignoring the absolute values, it is easy to say that Jordan is the best player in the game and finally getting paid (by the Bulls) for it. It's just hard to ignore the money.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Rodman Dennis 64 57 2088 146 304 0.480 3 27 0.111 56 106 0.528 356 596 952 160 196 1 36 138 27 351 5.5 12

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Rodman Dennis 213 460 0.462 93.1 428 535 0.256 0.662 93.4 0.239 1.2 3.8 0.486 3.6 3.8 1.74 1.84 0.0 8 18

No one is quite sure of Rodman's value. One very good team (the Spurs) thought his value was essentially that of Will Perdue, whereas the greatest team in the history of the NBA (the Bulls) apparently think his value is close to that of Chris Webber.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Majerle Dan 82 15 2367 303 748 0.405 146 414 0.353 120 169 0.710 70 235 305 214 131 0 81 93 34 872 10.6 25

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Majerle Dan 373 790 0.473 110.4 872 401 0.170 0.486 104.5 0.700 6.6 2.8 0.713 6.8 2.7 2.89 1.16 1.0 7 11

Dan Majerle came into the league as a bruising guard/forward that did his damage by doing the dirty work. Since he has converted into a long range bomber, his floor percentage has dipped, but his offensive rating has climbed, a sign of a high variance player. Last year, Majerle scored on only 47% of his possessions, a very poor record. I estimated his winning percentage using the individual win percentage calculator and came out with about 55%. If he increased his floor percentage to 50% with the same rating (in other words, taking more two-point field goals), his individual winning percentage would go up to about 58%. Of course, if he could increase his floor percentage to 54% and score 20 ppg, his winning percentage would go up even more, but this isn't who Dan Majerle is anymore.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Ellis Dale 81 52 2626 459 959 0.479 150 364 0.412 136 179 0.760 88 227 315 139 191 1 57 98 7 1204 14.9 33
Stith Bryant 82 77 2810 379 911 0.416 41 148 0.277 320 379 0.844 125 275 400 241 187 3 114 157 16 1119 13.6 27

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Ellis Dale 495 947 0.522 116.7 1106 395 0.150 0.384 109.4 0.833 8.4 1.7 0.745 7.4 2.5 2.81 0.96 1.3 8 13
Stith Bryant 536 1069 0.501 103.1 1103 496 0.176 0.450 106.7 0.393 4.5 6.9 0.363 4.1 7.2 1.46 2.56 -0.7 8 14

A year ago, I had Bryant Stith as one of the most underrated players in the league. Now that he had an off year and still got a big contract, I can no longer say this. Until this past season, Stith shot decently, passed well, rebounded well, got to the line well, and generally played within himself. This past season, Stith's shooting percentage, which has always been mediocre, dropped to only 42%. If it stays there, he's a liability, but if it returns to just the 45% range, he's a valuable player.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
MacLean Don 56 5 1107 233 547 0.426 14 49 0.286 145 198 0.732 62 143 205 89 105 1 21 68 5 625 11.2 38

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
MacLean Don 297 590 0.502 99.9 590 188 0.170 0.433 107.4 0.275 1.7 4.5 0.232 1.2 4.1 1.11 3.69 -1.9 4 9

Don MacLean has always been able to shoot the lights out when he doesn't have to create his own shot. Now that he's in Philadelphia where Allen Iverson will be creating open shots, I think MacLean will surprise some people. This isn't to say that his big contract didn't surprise people already. For someone who has been as inconsistent from season to season as he has, he is certainly making a lot of money.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Mutombo Dikembe 74 74 2713 284 569 0.499 0 1 0.000 246 354 0.695 249 622 871 108 258 4 38 150 332 814 11.0 22

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Mutombo Dikembe 406 769 0.528 100.9 776 743 0.274 0.699 96.8 0.311 2.5 5.6 0.666 7.3 3.7 2.69 1.35 0.6 12 22

No one has to tell me the value of a good defensive center, but someone better prove to me that Mutombo is one. I know he blocks a lot of shots and controls the backboards as well as the other dominant centers in the league, but there are several factors that make me question his ability to anchor a defense. Most importantly, of the teams with dominant centers (Houston, San Antonio, New York, Orlando, Charlotte/Miami), Denver has had the worst team defense for two years in a row now. Teams generally have both shot well and committed extremely few turnovers against Denver, both uncharacteristic against a team with a good defensive center. Mutombo is now headed to Atlanta, a team with the same 105.9 defensive rating that Denver had last season, but without a supposed dominant center. If Atlanta's defense doesn't improve significantly, they could be in trouble because Mutombo certainly does not add offense... Mutombo is a lot like Mark Eaton. They both didn't start playing until they were older and, probably as a result, did not develop great offensive skills. Both have an uncanny ability to block shots, but really are not that mobile to cut off interior passing like Olajuwon or Robinson. Both had their best seasons at age 28. One thing that I preferred about Eaton was that he understood that he wasn't much of an offensive threat and did not hurt his team much by handling the ball too much, whereas Mutombo seems to think he should be the offense when he is not very effective even against the single teams he usually gets. If we can use this comparison to make a prediction, note that Eaton declined steadily after his great season at age 28 until he became ineffective at age 34. Mutombo is 30.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Houston Allan 82 75 3072 564 1244 0.453 191 447 0.427 298 362 0.823 54 246 300 250 233 1 61 233 16 1617 19.7 38

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Houston Allan 692 1419 0.488 108.9 1546 465 0.151 0.408 106.5 0.698 11.0 4.7 0.592 8.0 5.5 2.62 1.80 0.5 9 15

Allan Houston is making how much? Eight million per season? Allan Whoston? In reality, I am not debating that Houston has promise. He has played far better than his college numbers would have indicated, but he really is just another risky bomber in a league of bombers. He is replacing John Starks at two-guard in New York, but Surprise! his numbers are not really any better than Starks'. I would be very surprised if Houston holds up any better amidst the New York pressure cooker than Starks has, too. New York's love-hate relationship with its players always starts with love.... He's not Michael Jordan or Reggie Miller, that's for sure.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Thorpe Otis 82 82 2841 452 853 0.530 0 4 0.000 257 362 0.710 211 477 688 158 300 7 53 195 39 1161 14.2 27

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Thorpe Otis 570 1066 0.535 104.7 1116 564 0.198 0.535 101.4 0.548 6.5 5.3 0.629 7.5 4.4 2.64 1.56 0.6 10 17

Otis Thorpe has contributed a lot to Sacramento, Houston, Portland, and Detroit, but no one recognizes it. Though he is aging (34), Thorpe should still be a prized player in Detroit, having missed only 29 games in his twelve year career and never having a bad season.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Sprewell Latrell 78 78 3064 515 1202 0.428 91 282 0.323 352 446 0.789 124 256 380 328 150 1 127 222 45 1473 18.9 32

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Sprewell Latrell 697 1381 0.504 105.4 1456 533 0.174 0.439 108.8 0.403 5.9 8.7 0.373 5.0 8.4 1.63 2.74 -0.7 10 17

Sprewell's floor percentage in '94, his All-Star season, was 0.506 and his offensive rating was 108.2. The following year, when the Warriors traded both Billy Owens and Chris Webber and let Avery Johnson go, his numbers dropped to 0.480 and 100.5. Last season, they rebounded a bit to 0.504 and 105.4, both below the league average. He could be supporting cast on a good team, but he's not going to lead the Warriors to greatness. I think they know this. I hope they know this.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Elie Mario 45 16 1385 180 357 0.504 41 127 0.323 98 115 0.852 47 108 155 138 93 0 45 59 11 499 11.1 20

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Elie Mario 234 423 0.552 121.4 514 219 0.158 0.402 108.5 0.906 4.0 0.4 0.864 4.2 0.7 3.03 0.48 1.9 4 13

Elie's numbers are consistent from season to season. He is a fantastic support player. I don't know why he floats around the league as much as he does. I would love to have this guy as a reliable sixth man on a good ball club.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Smith Kenny 68 56 1617 201 464 0.433 91 238 0.382 87 106 0.821 21 75 96 245 116 1 47 100 3 580 8.5 22

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Smith Kenny 275 568 0.483 113.9 648 220 0.136 0.345 110.8 0.773 4.6 1.4 0.613 3.6 2.3 2.22 1.41 0.5 4 9

I don't know if people just don't like Kenny Smith or whether there is something about his game that people have always questioned. For years, he had solid numbers, if not good numbers, but Houston was always looking for his replacement. Now he finally is a marginal player, but I wouldn't doubt that he could put up another good season.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Miller Reggie 76 76 2621 504 1066 0.473 168 410 0.410 430 498 0.863 38 176 214 253 175 0 77 189 13 1606 21.1 40

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Miller Reggie 686 1255 0.546 119.7 1502 403 0.154 0.406 108.0 0.892 12.3 1.5 0.845 10.0 1.8 3.83 0.70 2.7 10 18

It's only been in the last few years that people have noticed Reggie Miller. He's been a tremendous player for years and is living up to the promise he showed in his rookie year. Now, however, with the shortening of the three point shot and the extra attention he's gotten, he is not as special as he once was. Don't get me wrong, Reggie deserves to be a Dream Teamer and should be a Hall of Famer (though there will be debate), but these two factors hurt him. Because he was such a good three point shooter, making the shot easier didn't really benefit him, but it brought others near his level. Because of the extra attention he got by being successful (when Larry Brown took over), he has started turning the ball over more in recent years as he has tried to pass more. This is why his floor percentage isn't 57% as it was pre-1994. On the other hand, Miller's defense has improved under Brown and he is a legitimate floor leader. He is definitely one of the top free agents available.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Davis Dale 78 77 2617 334 599 0.558 0 0 #### 135 289 0.467 252 457 709 76 238 0 56 119 112 803 10.3 21
Davis Antonio 82 14 2092 236 482 0.490 1 2 0.500 246 345 0.713 188 313 501 43 248 6 33 87 66 719 8.8 26

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Davis Dale 392 722 0.544 102.8 742 571 0.218 0.576 101.2 0.402 3.2 4.7 0.565 5.6 4.3 2.14 1.65 0.2 9 16
Davis Antonio 343 606 0.565 107.0 648 407 0.195 0.514 103.7 0.566 3.8 2.9 0.627 4.9 2.9 2.34 1.39 0.5 7 11

Dale Davis is the more consistent of these two. Antonio Davis' play has fluctuated more, having higher highs and lower lows. The two together have certainly helped make Indiana a title contender. As good as Larry Brown has been to mesh the Indiana talent together though, I still think the chemistry is bad. Poor defense at center, good defense at the forward positions, and medium defense at the guards. Good offense at center, medium offense at the forwards, one awesome guard, and a questionable point position. Basically, the most important defensive player -- the center -- is weak and one of the most important offensive players -- the point -- is weak. It's hard to win a title that way.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Campbell Elden 82 82 2699 447 888 0.503 0 5 0.000 249 349 0.713 162 461 623 181 300 4 88 137 212 1143 13.9 29

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Campbell Elden 556 1013 0.549 107.3 1086 647 0.240 0.611 99.2 0.604 6.5 4.3 0.784 9.2 2.5 3.42 0.94 1.5 11 19

I don't know about Campbell. This was his breakthrough season. At his age (27), it is rare for a player to break through and stay at that level. Dennis Rodman did and we know he is an oddball. But so did ...

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Threatt Sedale 82 8 1687 241 526 0.458 60 169 0.355 54 71 0.761 20 75 95 269 178 0 68 74 11 596 7.3 27

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Threatt Sedale 300 575 0.522 115.7 665 250 0.148 0.378 108.5 0.841 5.2 1.0 0.741 4.6 1.6 2.72 0.95 1.2 5 8

Sedale Threatt became a prominent player with Seattle in '88 at age 27. Prior to that, he was a drifter, apparently not understanding his role as a point guard. Then he lead Seattle to the playoffs from a substitute's role. I don't know if he's a starter anymore, but a title contender (Indiana or the Lakers) could certainly use him as first point guard off the bench.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Mourning Alonzo 70 70 2671 563 1076 0.523 9 30 0.300 488 712 0.685 218 509 727 159 245 5 70 262 189 1623 23.2 50

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Mourning Alonzo 784 1433 0.547 104.9 1503 660 0.247 0.642 96.2 0.599 9.3 6.2 0.807 11.3 2.7 4.24 1.02 2.2 13 25

There is no doubt that he is in the upper echelon of centers in the league. His defense is better than Shaq's, but he travels a lot and, I think, can take his team out of its offense. Certainly, Pat Riley needed Mourning more than Juwan Howard, but he is constructing another team built around defense, like the Knicks. Let's just hope that they're not thugs.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Hardaway Tim (T) 80 46 2534 419 992 0.422 138 379 0.364 241 305 0.790 35 194 229 640 201 3 132 235 17 1217 15.2 31

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Hardaway Tim (T) 652 1293 0.504 112.8 1458 467 0.184 0.478 102.7 0.833 11.6 2.3 0.823 10.0 2.1 3.94 0.84 2.5 10 17

Hardaway is the inconsistent point guard for Miami, kind of like Starks and Harper were for New York.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Chapman Rex 56 50 1865 289 679 0.426 125 337 0.371 83 113 0.735 22 123 145 166 117 0 45 79 10 786 14.0 39
Williams Walt (T) 73 73 2169 359 808 0.444 114 293 0.389 163 232 0.703 99 220 319 230 238 0 85 151 58 995 13.6 29

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Chapman Rex 332 687 0.483 112.7 774 280 0.150 0.390 106.3 0.830 6.2 1.3 0.724 5.2 2.0 2.77 1.06 1.1 5 12
Williams Walt (T) 455 927 0.490 107.9 1000 420 0.194 0.503 101.8 0.704 7.1 3.0 0.724 6.9 2.6 3.17 1.21 1.3 7 14

Letting Chapman and Williams go was primarily a financial decision at the end, but I don't think Riley was very high on their defensive efforts. I have never been too high on either of them myself. They can be supporting players on a championship team, but they seem to demand more money than that.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Gatling Chris (T) 71 2 1427 326 567 0.575 0 1 0.000 139 207 0.671 129 288 417 43 217 0 36 95 40 791 11.1 24

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Gatling Chris (T) 366 639 0.574 111.2 710 329 0.231 0.599 97.9 0.798 5.5 1.4 0.891 6.0 0.7 4.18 0.51 2.9 7 13

I don't know if Riley wanted to lose Gatling, even though they signed Howard (maybe) and PJ Brown. Gatling's numbers are typical for him, very good with the number of possessions he gets. Gatling is as good or better than the Davises of Indiana. Dallas got a good player here.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Gilliam Armon 78 76 2856 576 1216 0.474 0 1 0.000 277 350 0.791 241 472 713 140 180 1 73 177 53 1429 18.3 32

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Gilliam Armon 667 1256 0.531 104.3 1311 573 0.201 0.520 103.0 0.485 6.6 7.0 0.555 7.1 5.7 2.48 1.99 0.3 11 19

Armon Gilliam reminds me of Antoine Carr, a solid player that will not lead a winning team, but keeps bad teams like New Jersey from being pitiful. I don't know what Gilliam's emotional role was for New Jersey and I know he was expecting to make significant money, but the Nets could have rebuilt with him.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Childs Chris 78 54 2408 324 778 0.416 95 259 0.367 259 304 0.852 51 194 245 548 246 3 111 230 8 1002 12.8 30
Brown P.J. 81 81 2942 354 798 0.444 3 15 0.200 204 265 0.770 215 345 560 165 249 5 79 133 100 915 11.3 30

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Childs Chris 543 1065 0.510 110.1 1172 412 0.171 0.444 106.0 0.695 8.0 3.5 0.651 6.8 3.6 2.82 1.51 0.9 8 15
Brown P.J. 450 871 0.517 101.7 886 546 0.186 0.482 104.5 0.383 3.6 5.8 0.391 4.2 6.5 1.42 2.21 -0.4 8 15

How two marginal players who are not young and who played for a losing team get the money these two got is a mystery to me. I expect disappointment from one or both of these guys.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
O'Neal Shaquille 54 52 1946 592 1033 0.573 1 2 0.500 249 511 0.487 182 414 596 155 193 1 34 155 115 1434 26.6 49

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
O'Neal Shaquille 695 1217 0.571 108.8 1325 462 0.237 0.611 99.7 0.636 8.2 4.7 0.809 8.9 2.1 4.57 1.08 2.7 11 27

Shaq is already a great player and he is only 24 years old. There are definitely chinks in his armor -- his free throw shooting is the most obvious, but his defense could use work, too. Since he is so young, though, you have to aniticipate that he will improve, at least defensively. In a year or two -- probably not this year -- the Lakers should make the Finals.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Grant Horace 63 62 2286 347 677 0.513 1 6 0.167 152 207 0.734 178 402 580 170 144 1 62 64 74 847 13.4 29

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Grant Horace 419 723 0.579 115.8 837 492 0.215 0.554 102.0 0.830 6.4 1.3 0.890 7.9 1.0 3.46 0.43 2.1 9 20

If Orlando gets a good defensive center who can pass and score a little, they can still contend with Grant resigned. If they had Bill Cartwright, they might remind some of the Bulls of the early '90's with tremendous talent at the other four spots.... As a rookie, I pegged Grant as a clone of Larry Nance. That comparison remains valid now with the high floor percentages and general style, though Nance scored more often than Grant does.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Maxwell Vernon 75 57 2467 410 1052 0.390 146 460 0.317 251 332 0.756 39 190 229 330 182 1 96 215 12 1217 16.2 41

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Maxwell Vernon 566 1242 0.456 100.7 1251 398 0.161 0.413 112.4 0.165 2.2 11.1 0.141 1.6 9.9 0.66 4.00 -2.8 7 13

Maxwell has always been my foremost example of a high variance player, someone who would not be in the league if it weren't for the three point shot. Yes, Maxwell plays good defense, but his primary skills -- shooting and passing -- are so weak that he really hurts an offense.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Dumas Richard 39 14 739 95 203 0.468 2 9 0.222 49 70 0.700 42 57 99 44 79 0 42 49 6 241 6.2 20

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Dumas Richard 120 247 0.484 95.8 237 134 0.181 0.463 110.4 0.080 0.2 2.4 0.089 0.3 2.6 0.34 3.53 -2.3 2 7

Richard Dumas put up great numbers in his one full season with Phoenix. He was a slasher in the mold of Cedric Ceballos. Some compared him to Dr. J. That was premature anyway, but you have to wonder how much the drugs and distractions have taken away from the talent.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Robinson James 76 5 1627 229 574 0.399 102 284 0.359 89 135 0.659 44 113 157 150 146 0 34 111 16 649 8.5 22

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Robinson James 285 632 0.451 102.9 650 244 0.150 0.383 106.1 0.543 3.6 3.0 0.374 2.4 3.9 1.44 2.42 -0.6 4 7

See the Vernon Maxwell comment. Similar skills.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Williams Buck 70 10 1672 192 384 0.500 2 3 0.667 125 187 0.668 159 245 404 42 187 1 40 90 47 511 7.3 21
Robinson Rumeal 43 14 715 92 221 0.416 30 79 0.380 33 51 0.647 19 59 78 142 79 1 0 72 5 247 5.7 20

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Williams Buck 248 474 0.523 100.4 476 336 0.201 0.512 101.0 0.444 2.2 2.8 0.479 2.9 3.1 1.71 1.87 -0.1 5 10
Robinson Rumeal 136 296 0.458 102.3 303 96 0.134 0.343 107.7 0.519 1.6 1.5 0.297 0.8 2.0 1.16 2.75 -1.1 2 6

Rumeal Robinson is no top free agent. I include him here because he is well known as having had to go to the CBA. In other words, his numbers are representative of something near NBA replacement value.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Grant Brian 78 75 2398 427 842 0.507 4 17 0.235 262 358 0.732 175 370 545 127 269 9 40 185 103 1120 14.4 32

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Grant Brian 533 1009 0.529 103.3 1042 483 0.202 0.511 105.6 0.338 3.6 7.0 0.409 4.3 6.2 1.79 2.58 -0.5 9 16

I would guess that most people do not know much about Brian Grant. I personally have rarely seen him play, but I know he is a pretty good young talent. After three seasons, he is unlikely to be an All-Star, but there is little reason to think he cannot be a role player or a fourth/fifth starter on a very good ballclub.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Payton Gary 81 81 3162 618 1276 0.484 98 299 0.328 229 306 0.748 104 235 339 608 221 1 231 260 19 1563 19.3 38

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Payton Gary 802 1532 0.524 112.0 1716 635 0.201 0.506 100.2 0.855 13.7 2.3 0.862 12.5 2.0 3.95 0.63 2.7 13 22

If Gary Payton didn't play defense so well, he would not be a star. His offense is only average, but nearly every measure of defense has Payton as one of the best. My numbers put him just above Mookie Blaylock and Jason Kidd as the best defensive point guard in the league. Doug Steele's numbers also have him 1st or 2nd. What is odd, though, is that so many of the point guards (Payton included) cannot touch John Stockton for offensive ability even though point guards of the '80's typically had very high floor percentages.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Hawkins Hersey 82 82 2823 443 936 0.473 146 380 0.384 247 283 0.873 86 211 297 218 172 0 149 164 14 1279 15.6 35

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Hawkins Hersey 542 1054 0.514 115.4 1216 509 0.180 0.454 102.3 0.906 10.0 1.0 0.879 9.7 1.3 3.42 0.47 2.3 9 15

By my numbers, last season's Charlotte-Seattle trade of Kendall Gill for Hersey Hawkins was tremendously lopsided. Hawkins is so far the superior player, it is not even close. Hawkins has all the tools to be a star -- from the shooting skills to the defense. For him, it is unfortunate that there are so many good off guards in the league right now -- Jordan, Miller, Drexler, Mitch Richmond, Sean Elliott, Michael Finley (my opinion), Dennis Scott, and tweeners like Glen Rice, Grant Hill, Anfernee Hardaway, and Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Perkins Sam 82 20 2169 325 797 0.408 129 363 0.355 191 241 0.793 101 266 367 120 174 0 83 82 48 970 11.8 26

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Perkins Sam 399 817 0.488 109.9 898 430 0.198 0.500 100.5 0.812 6.9 1.6 0.815 7.1 1.6 3.26 0.74 1.7 7 12

Perkins is aging so well (35 yrs old) that he could almost play for the Bulls. Perkins' numbers have dropped before, most recently in '94, but last year was his worst in terms of floor percentage. He is still valuable but just barely. Seattle can afford to lose him and still contend.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Brickowski Frank 63 8 986 123 252 0.488 32 79 0.405 61 86 0.709 26 125 151 58 185 3 26 78 8 339 5.4 21
Murray Tracy 82 37 2458 496 1092 0.454 151 358 0.422 182 219 0.831 114 238 352 131 208 2 87 132 40 1325 16.2 40

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Brickowski Frank 150 322 0.467 100.5 323 179 0.181 0.457 102.2 0.498 1.7 1.7 0.433 1.6 2.0 1.58 2.07 -0.3 3 6
Murray Tracy 542 1081 0.501 111.4 1204 415 0.169 0.427 110.8 0.555 6.3 5.1 0.520 5.5 5.1 2.24 2.06 0.1 8 14

Tracy Murray had decent numbers on a bad ballclub. He hardly played for two good ballclubs in Portland and Houston. Kinda like graduating with a 3.0 from Podunk St. after failing out of Caltech. Success is always good, regardless of the level of competition, but does that merit $40 million?

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Miller Oliver 76 72 2516 418 795 0.526 0 11 0.000 146 221 0.661 177 385 562 219 277 4 108 202 143 982 12.9 35

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Miller Oliver 495 964 0.514 101.4 978 565 0.225 0.569 105.2 0.211 2.1 8.0 0.355 3.9 7.0 1.54 2.79 -0.7 10 18

I hate being wrong about a player, but it is getting a little late to be right about Oliver Miller. Coming out of Arkansas, Miller had great passing skills, good hands, and good defensive presence (he could block shots). What he lacked was some height for a center and the will to say no to a Big Mac. I thought he would overcome those things and turn into a good power forward or center in the NBA. Apparently he has not overcome his weight troubles and does not get along well with coaches. It's too bad because he has talent.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Stockton John 82 82 2915 440 818 0.538 95 225 0.422 234 282 0.830 54 172 226 916 207 1 140 246 15 1209 14.7 31

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Stockton John 724 1232 0.588 126.7 1561 477 0.164 0.430 106.4 0.960 12.9 0.5 0.947 11.7 0.7 4.01 0.22 4.1 13 22

Stockton is the best pure point guard in the league. I know he hates the "pure" qualifier, but Penny Hardaway plays point and he certainly dominates a game more than Stockton can.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Howard Juwan 81 81 3294 733 1500 0.489 4 13 0.308 319 426 0.749 188 472 660 360 269 3 67 303 39 1789 22.1 42

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Howard Juwan 895 1760 0.509 101.3 1782 615 0.187 0.471 105.9 0.321 5.9 12.5 0.322 5.1 10.8 1.56 3.28 -1.2 12 21

Given all the fuss about Juwan Howard, you'd think that he was actually a superstar. He's not and he probably will not be. His numbers are very comparable to those of Terry Cummings, a good player throughout a long career, but certainly not a franchise player or a Hall of Famer. Howard is better than the numbers I have for him, only because his defense is better than my numbers can assess. But his offense is limited for the same reasons Cummings' offense is limited. He is a relatively short post player without great quickness either in getting his shot away or getting away from defenders. Basically the lesser known players on the Bullets last year that played so well didn't get the credit they deserved. That and a lot of media hype over any Fab 5 member has added a lot of pressure to Howard to live up to his contract. For $14 million per season, he should be able to handle the pressure, but he simply may not have the talent to live up to the expectations.

Team/Player G GS MIN FG FGA FG% Three Point Shots FT FTA FT% OR DR TR AST PF DQ STL TO BLK PTS PPG High
'96 FG FGA FG%
Pack Robert 31 31 1084 190 444 0.428 26 98 0.265 154 182 0.846 29 103 132 242 68 0 62 114 1 560 18.1 35
Price Brent 81 50 2042 252 534 0.472 139 301 0.462 167 191 0.874 38 190 228 416 184 3 78 153 4 810 10.0 30
Price Mark 7 1 127 18 60 0.300 10 30 0.333 10 10 1.000 1 6 7 18 7 0 6 10 0 56 8.0 13
McIlvaine Jim 80 6 1195 62 145 0.428 0 0 #### 58 105 0.552 66 164 230 11 171 0 21 36 166 182 2.3 12

Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Stops Def. Off. Off. Net Net Net Wins Loss Net AV PR
Poss. Pct. Prod. Total /Min /Poss Rtg. Win% Wins Losses Win% W L Per 1000 Min. Pts/48 1 140
Pack Robert 302 600 0.503 106.4 639 210 0.194 0.489 105.2 0.517 3.2 3.0 0.547 3.0 2.4 2.73 2.26 0.3 4 19
Price Brent 404 761 0.531 125.2 953 356 0.175 0.440 107.2 0.940 7.5 0.5 0.929 7.5 0.6 3.65 0.28 3.2 8 13
Price Mark 24 64 0.377 92.4 60 20 0.160 0.403 108.7 0.094 0.1 0.6 0.064 0.0 0.5 0.29 4.26 -4.0 0 5
McIlvaine Jim 92 196 0.470 85.9 168 292 0.244 0.617 100.1 0.030 0.1 2.0 0.073 0.3 3.6 0.24 2.99 -1.1 3 6

Team/Player	G	GS	MIN	FG	FGA	FG%	Three	Point	Shots	FT	FTA	FT%	OR	DR	TR	AST	PF	DQ	STL	TO	BLK	PTS	PPG	High
'96							FG	FGA	FG%
Smith Steve	80	80	2856	494	1143	0.432	140	423	0.331	318	385	0.826	124	202	326	224	207	1	68	151	17	1446	18.1	32

	Scor.	Poss.	Floor	RTG	Points	Def.	Stops		Def.	Off.	Off.		Net	Net	Net	Wins		Loss	Net	AV	PR
	Poss.		Pct.		Prod.	Total	/Min	/Poss	Rtg.	Win%	Wins	Losses	Win%	W	L	Per	1000	Min.	Pts/48	1	140
Ehlo Craig	301	668	0.451	101.9	681	490	0.279	0.440	107.1	0.347	1.0	1.9	0.305	0.7	1.5	0.38		0.86	-0.9	5	9
Rooks Sean (T)	211	393	0.537	102.2	402	224	0.200	0.525	103.7	0.358	1.5	2.8	0.441	2.0	2.6	1.81		2.29	-0.3	4	8
Anderson Kenny (T)	582	1077	0.540	117.9	1270	390	0.167	0.430	110.8	0.758	8.7	2.8	0.735	7.6	2.8	3.26		1.18	1.6	9	18