Simmons was sticking up for how great Harden is the whole podcast. He was one of the first to predict great success for Asik for the Rockets on national TV, and he loves Morey. What are you talking about?
Exactly. If we played "normal" offense, or at least normal in the minds of most basketball fans, our offense would suck a lot more and the team would suck more. Nobody at the beginning of the season thought the Rockets had even above average offensive talent. Much less one that is top-5.
To be fair to Bill though... in theory it sort of is a gimmick... the only thing to note though in this case is that it is actually working for this young team the majority of the time when they are buying into the system during the regular season at least. Look Morey himself said just a week or so ago on 790 that the Rockets offense is not nearly as good as it looks on paper, and their defense is not nearly as bad as it look. Its merely a product of the style of play they are running which gives them the best ability to win. So I have no problem with someone from the national media also pointing this out to say...hey look, they really aren't the best offensive team of all team ever essembled... its just the system that puts up points. So when Bill said its Gimmicky I sort of got what he meant which I dont think was meant to discount the success that Houston has had this season, but I dont think its such a stretch to open up a debate about how affective this style of play would be in a 7 game playoff series when teams would find ways to slow the team down. At least that's what I took it to mean. In a way its sort of a complement to the coaching staff to be able to manipulate wins when you are constantly outmatched in talent most nights. Given Bill's relationship with Morey, I feel like he is one of the guys out there in the national media that actually likes to talk about the Rockets, and enjoy his unbridled opinions as a fan of the game. Whether they are right or wrong, I feel like what he adds to conversation is more along the lines of what you or I would be discussing as fans instead of hearing the same old ESPN analysis.
I always got the feeling that Simmons knows a lot more about the Rockets than he lets on. Because of his close relationship with Morey, Simmons is likely muzzling himself from commenting too much on the Rockets, HOU's future trade possibilities, direction of the team, etc. That may be due to his wariness about letting information slip out or because he doesn't want to seem biased w/r/t the Rockets.
You realize Simmons and Morey are buds that go way back, right? He doesn't hate the Rockets, he just hasn't considered them an elite team for some time. That's pretty reasonable.
I agree, except gimmick kind of has a negative connotation to it. And there's nothing to support it not working in the playoffs. The Phoenix Suns were possibly one huge bunch of suspensions away from getting to the finals with a similar style. The only difference between those Suns teams and the Rockets is that they're a hell of a lot more talented.
How is that shameful? He's right... Yes we made our way towards 2 championships with 3 point shooters, but they all surrounded one of the best big men ever to play the game, Hakeem. You still need a low post presence to keep up with the elite teams in the playoffs. We have Harden who is spectacular and we couldn't really ask anything more of him, he's playing that great. But we still need to find a big guy that he can play 1,2 with and break the defense down, in the post/paint as well as on the perimeter. We'll never win a playoff series with a run and gun fast break oriented offense, unless we get a mismatch the way Golden State did with Dallas a few years back.
I'm not making a comment on natural or not. I'm making a comment on safety. You honestly would have me believe that abuse is the only reason these substances are banned? Really? Also, doctor supervision alone is all is that is necessary to make these drugs safe? Give me a break. Show me data saying that PED's are safe, and that the side-effects are trivial when under doctor supervision. Performance enhancing drugs like steroids require quite stringent supervision, it isn't just go see a doc once in a blue moon kind of thing. You are editing the chemistry of the body on a fundamental level. You are giving these men a chemical dependency. If cocaine improved an athlete's ability to score would you want them to take it? Heck, if you have the right conditions doctors will even prescribe cocaine too. Heck, if you want a good reference look at the wrestling community where steroid use is/was rampant. How many wrestlers have died young? How many of them suffered from issues or complications due to steroid usage? Nothing in life comes free, and there will always be a trade-off to long term exposure to chemicals that alter the body's chemistry. It's actually rather scary. This is why this issue has a great deal of government oversight even in the fake sport of wrestling. Oh, and a lot of the wrestlers who did abuse PED's were also under constant doctor supervision as well. If it makes the game better with no cost to the athlete I'm fine with it. I'm not one to say we can't use science to improve our sport. The new camera system some NBA teams have is an example of that. Or, using strength and conditioning workouts in pools when athletes are coming off injury is another example of that. If it doesn't threaten the athlete I'm fine with it. What I am upset with is how athletes are becoming more and more like cattle. We use them up, inject them with hormones, and then send them off to die when they no longer serve the purpose we need. That mentality is what will get PED's legalized in sports, and unfortunately that mentality might also kill sports like football and baseball in the long run.
Because the Rocket's clearly got what they wanted on the trade. They didn't risk or lose anything but getting Harden. That doesn't make for an interesting conversation. The discussion is much more interesting from the Thunder perspective. They went to the Finals, and they traded 1 of their 3 best players. It would be like the Spurs trading away Manu 10 years ago. Or the Pistons trading Hamilton after the 2003 season. It's a huge gamble. And like Simmons/Stein/Bucher said, the regular season and how the Thunder produce won't be that telling of the trade (I guess, unless they completely just regressed this season and lost a top 4 seed). Whether the trade was a good deal for them will be determined during the playoffs. In my opinion, whether trading Harden was worth it for the Thunder will immediately be determined this playoffs. Not next, not even 3 years down the road - but this year's playoffs. They were in the Finals last year with Harden a huge part of it. He was their 6th Man of The Year, almost as important to them as Jason Terry was to the Championship Mavs. If Kevin Martin goes into the playoffs, and shoots 20% from 3, and 30% from the field, or averages 10PPG. Or if Kevin Martin gets injured, the entire trade will be a loss. Because it meant they took a contending core (that went to the Finals), and blew it up. And as the 03-08 Pistons have shown, once you have a core than can consistently contend deep into the playoffs, anything can happen.
I think OKC screwed up big time. Don 't talk to me about cap space or any of that stuff. Perennial NBA chapionships or finals were worth hundreds of millions to OKC. Arguably three of the top 5 NBA players in a couple of years would have been unreal.
ignorant post. creatine is banned or its use discouraged by many sporting federations/organizations internationally. it's been linked to kidney failure. it take decades before we know enough about "new" drugs or supplements to deem them safe. creatine use blew up in the early 90s. 10 yrs later years health concerns arose. another 10yrs and there still isn't enough research on it.
Couldn't agree more about Bucher. The dude is just plain awful. He was clearly making **** up and his jealousy of Simmons is embarassing.
I think you just inadvertently made my point for me. There's quite a big difference between usage by pro athletes in real sports and those juice monkeys in 'wrestling' lmfao. That is exactly what I mean by use vs. abuse. Who are you to tell an athlete what he or she can/can't do with their own bodies? It's not up to you to look out for their safety. That's like forcing someone to wear a seat belt... sure, it's in their best interest, but if they don't want to, too bad for them. People like you get on your high horse and have to play white knight for 'all those poor athletes putting themselves at risk'... I don't get it. BTW, actors juice all the time for roles, but nobody cares (i.e. Will Smith for Ali, Marky Mark various, Ed Norton American History X etc.) It's human nature... we will always try to find a shortcut to get where we want... no matter how many rules or regulations you try to impose, it will always happen and that will NEVER change.
Eh, everything is 'linked' to something or another. Frequent cell-phone use is linked to cancer... are you gonna stop using your phone? Same with overuse of the microwave, etc. BTW, I don't have time to do extensive research right now (about to head to the Rockets-Warriors game!), but I cherry picked this from the Mayo Clinic real quick: 'There is less concern today than there used to be about possible kidney damage from creatine, although there are reports of kidney damage, such as interstitial nephritis'
I don't think you've read my post, because if you did you'd be back here with data supporting your crazy theory that oversight from a doctor can make PEDs more innocuous. Wrestlers didn't necessarily overdo it, and in many cases they HAD oversight from a doctor while on steroids. A lot of wrestlers weren't getting these steroids off the street, they were getting them via prescription from their doctors! I didn't prove your point, I showed how ignorant your point was to start with. Where's the data chief? Furthermore, if the norm of the NBA becomes steroid use, how long will it be until an ultra competitive player here and there over uses? (Of course I'm humoring your idea that there is a such thing as an acceptable level of use to begin with. If you look at my previous post I outlined how when this alters your body chemistry and creates a chemical dependency there is no real acceptable level) How blood are you ok with on your hands? The NBA should always be about protecting the players. Why are flagrant fouls in place? So you don't have the Detroit Piston bruisers going and knocking people's teeth out night after night. Why does a clear path foul exist? Because before said foul players would blindly foul other players from behind making a player all the more dangerous. The NBA wants to protect its players, as they should. It's not about being a white knight, it's about protecting the sport. If players routinely have careers shortened by devastating plays, die at young ages, and max out their respective careers at 28 the sport will die. Mothers won't let their kids play the sport, and the sport dies. I for one like basketball and would love it to still be around in 50 years. Let me throw it at you another way. If we don't regulate PEDs, it becomes the norm. Then future players who had great skills similar to players like Dream, like Jordan, like LeBron may not rise to the ranks they could. Maybe a guy like Steve Nash would have hung up his shoes earlier in his career if he was faced with a decision between not playing and taking PEDs. Taking these drugs and threatening your own safety should never be a requisite to play. Why did pitchers in baseball take PEDs? Easy, to catch up to the hitters who were on PEDs. It's a vicious cycle that should never ever make its way to basketball. Period.
I see your points, and I'm not ignoring them, but we'll just have agree to disagree for now... may get back to this later tonight or tomorrow, but I'm heading to the game now. Go Rockets!
