Courtney Lee should be playing back-up SF, not PG.

I don't care where he plays, but with the way he is playing he has go be on the floor a lot.

DD

 

How about a lineup of Lowry/Brooks/Lee/Miller/Hill to end the first quarters...

Lightning quick on the perimeter... Miller would work the system to perfection.

 

Jermain Taylor talk? He, is a black hole.. pass him the ball and you usually wont get it back. He's a high risk, high reward player. Oh, and I'm okay with Courtney Lee at the point for bigger pg's, defensively speaking.

 

Plus Defensively you dont have to guard your position.......Kobe plays SG but Battier is a SF often guards him,so defensive match-ups change.

 

It's pretty funny how everyone assumes playing against weak competition in D-League is going to do anything for Chase. He's in a slump... Do you know how you get out of a slump? You keep shooting, plus he's coming off of a good game. The line-up is fine where it is, Rick is just playing Lee at PG because he obviously doesn't feel Ish is ready. If anyone belongs in the D-League to develope i'd say it's Ish Smith.

 

Exactamundo.

 

I like the fact that Lee can defend the elite point guards. This allows the Rockets to play Brooks at the shooting guard position a lot more.

In the past Rick Adelman has played Brooks at the shooting guard with Lowry at the point. But heck, I would rather have Lee, with his defense, 3 point shooting, amazing hops, and 6'5" height; playing along side Brooks.

I think that Lowry plays better with Martin though.

 

Well said!! Budinger is in a rough shooting slump. But he is a good shooter overall. It just happened to be that he'd been snake bitten. But, I think that when all is said and done Chase is going to be a very good role player in this league.

 

the main purpose for moving Ish Smith to the d-league is to evaluate Jermaine Taylor (and most likely, showcase him for a trade). Lee's move to PG was a result, not the cause, of that (because who else would play point?). However, it just so happens that with his speed and size advantage, he might be our best choice to guard Paul, Curry, DWilliams, etc. So it becomes a Battier-type situation where we hope that his lack skill at the point is outweighed by his defensive contributions.

 

Lee needs to continue his development at the point. He is a combo guard with a very good handle and loads of athleticism to toss at DWill, Westbrook, Rose, etc. I am convinced he can be an effective point in Adelman's system.

 

I think Lee goes from being a very good defender to an average defender when you move him from PG to SF.

He's best guarding PGs and the quicker SGs.

 

What "pg skills" did Ron Harper have when he quarterbacked the '96 Bulls to 72 wins (assuming you know who Ron Harper is)? Why do people still pine for prototypical point guards when it's been proven many times over that they're not needed to win championships? Lastly, why would anyone argue with Rick Adelman about offense? It just makes you look stupid.

 

I have no problem with lee as the back up point especially when miller's in there with him running the offense..

 

That doesn't make him is a better PG than Ish.

 

He's still a better defender and is more effective than Ish at making sure opposing PGs don't destroy us.

Our offense hasn't been the problem this season...

 

Personally, I am pretty satisfied with his playing, he seems to be getting more confortable by the day. I'm with durvasa regarding him playing SF.

Just wanted to paste this tidbits about C. Lee (this isn't thread worthy so I' m posting it in the most similar one)
From (his trainer) D. Thorpe's chat on ESPN.com. It seems he is raising his value, at least his reputation around the league.

Link

I think he would be a great fit in Chicago, but there's no way I'd like that to happen.

For Chicago's needs I think Lee is a better fit.

What do you think about Lee for Landry? I wouldn't pull the trigger.

 

Landry can help with closing the fourth quarter but we are so packed at the 4 with Hill, Scola, Hayes. This would be interesting. I like how Lee is coming around as well. His defense has really helped win a few games. We would be giving up some defense for more offense. Not sure if this helps right now.

 

So, everything that Rick Aldeman tries is fine because he is Rick Aldeman? lol You are the one looking stupid with that kind of argument.

Are we talking about the same Aldeman who sometimes subs players who are playing well for the sake of starters just to kill any chance of winning a game? The same coach who has got 900+ NBA victories, but has zero wins in any playoff series against the zen master, despite having very talented squads in the early 90's and 00's?

Please Aldeman is a good coach but he is not great, and your crap about anybody questioning his moves simply because of who he is, is simply pathetic.

 

I agree. I dont want to give up Lee because he has (defense) what the Rockets are in dire need of (2 dimensional players).