Lineuping yao and chuck may be a good option when facing mavs or nuggets whose paint rosters are generally rather soft and undersized. However, what if we use this strategy to cope with some team with harder paint like celtics. we built a huge lead edge in the first half of the game againest celtics, but they turned around the game because we put scolandry in the paint. It's not fair to attribute the failure to scolandry who had to cope with their big guys in pruitte and leon powe, and even their SF miles was even higher than landry. scolandry is a great players but they both seem a little soft, so s hard and unreasonable to locate them in the paint at the same time especially when facing the beefy PFnC. chuck may fit yao a little bit better than scola in defense and his tough defense is gonna help yao by taking fouls. but with hayes at PF, the opponent will definitely double up yao who is gonna lost most of his power when facing the double. so it's not a smart option to strenthen our defense at expense of offense. long story short, solandry is not a good combination even though their names are perfectly combined. yao n scola is a couple while landry n hayes is another, maybe dorsey will join in one of the two groups temporarily but I don't think ric will give him too much time in case of affecting our chemistry. No doubt hayes does a little bit better than scola in defense so that puting him with yao when facing the teams with capable PFs is a good option, and it'll be ideal if landry were as big as yao.
i have yet to see a good reason why scola shouldn't start. what was our record with him as a starter again?
Here are three: (1) Offensively, Scola is very clearly superior to Landry in one area: his post up game. But with Yao and Artest in the starting lineup, we'd rarely use Scola's post up. Instead, you'd want a player who can punish teams from the top of the key. Landry is a better shooter. (2) With Artest and McGrady in the starting lineup, you all want a player who's best suited to take a dump off pass in the paint and finish. Scola is not a great finisher, and further if he's fouled he's not a great foul shooter. Landry is both a superior finisher at the rim, and a better foul shooter. That will make him a better "dump off" option for our two wings. (3) With McGrady, Yao, and Artest in the starting lineup, you'd expect them to take the majority of the shots. That increases the importance of offensive rebounding at the PF spot. Landry is a better offensive rebounder than Scola. I do admit, though, that the don't fix what's not broken argument will likely win out, at least initially. I wouldn't be surprised if Adelman decides midseason to start Landry, though. Hopefully we play great out of the gate and don't let up, so there won't be any reason for him to make that switch.
Not an apt comparison. While Cassell and Smith were incredibly different players, they were actually about even in terms of contribution to the team. If anything, they're like Scola and Landry rather than Scolandry and Hayes. Hayes shouldn't be starting at any time because he's our 4th best big man. You just don't do that unless you plan to use a 10 man rotation.
If Hayes starts, that will allow teams to double team Yao and TMac more. Scola and Landry will demand defenders to stick with them and make life easier for Yao and TMac.
NO WAY JOSE!!! the guy got an easy dunk but went for the lay up instead because of his small vertical leap and got blocked. De ja vu all over again. He should just be in the game for defensive purpose when we need a stop to seal the win period
I like the underdog stories as much as anyone, but hayes should never play more than 10 mins a game unless there is a injury. You can't even run a legit offense with him on the court.
Are you talking offense? IMO Hayes contributes just as much as Scola or Landry. The job Hayes puts on guys like Boozer and Garnett is beautiful to watch. Defense is the most important thing in the world to me. So maybe I am biased.
you don't need to exaggerate that much. I mean, I completely agree with your first sentence, but the rockets have had squads with guys as bad or worse than him out there and have survived. Flashbacks to Cato, Taylor, Spoon, Juwan, and Griffin. Yeah, not all of those were offensive defficient, but all of them had major holes in their games that hurt the rocks and none of em were as good on the whole as Hayes is now. But ... chuck is just a matchup guy now. I don't think he should be getting any consistent minutes if our frontcourt is healthy.
I know its a moot point, but people wouldn't have had a problem with Cato if he was making 2-3m a yr vs 7m. When cato played with Yao, he did some good things. He was a good shot blocker rebounder and finisher. If Cato had the chance to get some of the gimme's hayes gets, those would be throwdowns. His last yr in houston he actually played ok. Not 7m ok, but 3m ok.
Gosh, am I the ONLY ONE WHO REALIZES THAT SCOLA HAS NO LEFT HAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He is also a mediocre defender, inconsistent shooter, and CAN NOT DO ANYTHING ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BASKET. Please to GOD bring him off the BENCH.
The difference is that the Rockets fans are eying the championship this time. They will complain about Cato even if he is free. a team starting with both Rafer and Hayes? no, there is zero chance for that team to be a contender.
