RealGM

No, this isn't another Kobe vs. VC thread. But if Starbury and Francis had each lived up to their max potential, who would be better? This means no attitude or off-court issues.

i would go with marbury

Which one would have been the better rock-pounding ball hog?

Marbury I'd think, if only because of size/strength.

Franchise IMO.

Only thing Starbury only really had on him was the jump shot.

Francis was probably the most athletically gifted point guard I have ever seen. Rose may or may not be better, I can't tell yet.

But it depends on whether or not you are limiting their potential to the physical. I don't think Francis necessarily had the mental/instinctive wherewithal to be a great point guard. If we are assuming reaching maximum potential means living up to physical gifts, ie 'learning' how to play the game, etc., than I'd say Francis would be better than Marbury.

But Marbury actually had the mental and instinctive game that Francis lacked, and in that respect is therefore more likely to have been a great point guard had he lived up to his realistic potential, ie not having to know and be something he wasn't by nature.

Harry Palmer wrote:Francis was probably the most athletically gifted point guard I have ever seen. Rose may or may not be better, I can't tell yet.

But it depends on whether or not you are limiting their potential to the physical. I don't think Francis necessarily had the mental/instinctive wherewithal to be a great point guard. If we are assuming reaching maximum potential means living up to physical gifts, ie 'learning' how to play the game, etc., than I'd say Francis would be better than Marbury.

But Marbury actually had the mental and instinctive game that Francis lacked, and in that respect is therefore more likely to have been a great point guard had he lived up to his realistic potential, ie not having to know and be something he wasn't by nature.

I never saw "great point guard" when I watched Marbury. I saw "dynamic player" but he never seemed to really get what it meant to be a pg, I just don't think it was in him and for that reason I don't think that is how I'd measure his potential.

BBall IQ isn't necessarilly something you learn.

conleyorbust wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I never saw "great point guard" when I watched Marbury. I saw "dynamic player" but he never seemed to really get what it meant to be a pg, I just don't think it was in him and for that reason I don't think that is how I'd measure his potential.

Did you see hi, at G-Tech/first few years?

BBall IQ isn't necessarilly something you learn.

Yeah, that was sorta my point. Obviously I didn't make it well enough.

2poor wrote:Marbury I'd think, if only because of size/strength.

Francis has always been bigger and stronger than Marbury.

Marbury

Harry Palmer wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Did you see hi, at G-Tech/first few years?

Yep, he was an awsome basketball player at Tech but he was certainly of the "score-first" variety. Not necessarilly a bad thing but he either never learned how to effectively dictate the pace of a game or he was misused his entire career.

All I want to say is that Francis never had that much PG potential to begin with, he always had an awfully low basketball IQ and never showed me the ability to develop it somehow.
Never liked Marbury either, but he at least had some PG skills.

Marbury when he had his game on was just nasty.

Honestly, I think Francis was close to meeting his potential when he was in Houston. He just never got the team concept...but when he was on he was quite an exciting player, if never a winner.

Marbury never really got close to reaching his potential because he got caught up in his own ego...