Zone defense is an excuse used for today's players that don't know how to beat the zone. That kinda requires that our "best" KNOW how to pass (team ball) AND, also score based on ones individual talent. I'm quite sure that Barkley, Hakeem, Jordan and Drexler would know *how* to beat the zone (just like NCAA). They would adjust no problem. The zone affected those the worst that *only* had strengths in the ISO game. That's their fault! I'm glad the zone was implemented. This will force our *best* players to learn how to beat it. It will raise the bar! This doesn't mean that we wont have spectacular plays. They'll still be able to show their talents. But these "elite" players will ALSO know both sides of the game: TEAM BALL and INDIVIDUAL BALL. If they don't. They will fade away like the dinosaurs (boo hoo!). By the way...you wanna know something funny? I remember the Rockets being called the "iso team" by *all* the commentators on NBA League Pass. Everyone knew we played that way. It got so bad that I have a feeling that the league (David Stern) brought the zone in to stop that type of play. Hell! It was getting to the point that 50% of our plays were clear-outs! Well, it caugh the NBA's attention to the point that it forced a rule change. Yep. The Rockets and "Francis/Mobley" ball was a strong factor in that rule change.
Last year's Pistons team won the title scoring 90.1ppg, shooting 43.5% from the field and 34.4% from beyond the arc. Last year we averaged 89.8ppg, shooting 44.2% from the field and 36.6% from beyond the arc. The year before San Antonio won the title scoring 91.5ppg, shooting 44.2% from the field and 35.8% from beyond the arc. We'll be all right. Like the NFL, the NBA's turning into a defensive-first league. BTW, DavidS, I have a hard time believing that the zone wouldn't have affected Hakeem's game at least a little bit. George Karl, Gary Payton, and co. would probably agree with me.
(1) Please stop attributing your fantasies as "what I think." Not once did I say or even imply "100 or bust." I would love to watch a team scoring 100ppg, but don't expect it. (2) I think JVG coaching Drexler, Olajuwon, and Barkley would've averaged 91 or so PPG. I also think it wouldn't have lasted very long. Will T-Mac and JVG?
Yes, if would have affected Hakeem's game...if he refused to adjust (pass). I noticed that you didn't mention Drexler, Jordan or Barkley. I guess because you knew they were capable passers. Am I right? In the end it's still a TEAM game. It's funny though....It's a give-and-take with Akeem/Hakeem. Think about it. Back in the 80's Akeem was a physical defensive force that could jump out of the gym. He was sooooo quick and powerful! He basically was a one-man wrecking crew! He had the luxury to do that. I never really thought of him as a good passer during that time. It was "gimme the ball" Akeem. As the eighties came to a close he started to loose that explosives (bulk up a bit). All you have to do is look at film. You can *see* the change. He found is religion (inner piece) and started to expand his game; better passing, post moves, and the mid-range jump shot (18 footer off the screen; remember that?). All this even though his physical explosiveness was lessened a bit (due to age). Now, since he really wasn't a "great passer" his whole career. It was kinda of a learned skill in his later years (still kinda rusty). He really never was really a creative passer, but more a structured passer (obvious plays). Plus, his mobility led him to be trapped in the post when he picked up his dribble. The Sonics knew that the Rockets main offense was Hakeem. Collectively they always had us beat. They knew it, we knew it. And we didn't play the same level of collective ball that the Soncis did (partly due to Hakeem's passing skills and lack of a 2nd option! And a 3rd and 4th in the Sonics case!). The Sonics *relied* more on ball movement and team ball. While we were mostly Hakeem-centric. After we got Drexler, things changed. He gave Hakeem better options to beat the traps. And that was the key. Zone does AFFECT INDIVIDUAL PLAY! No doubt. But, if that player KNOWS how to pass well also, then they will always be dangerous. If they stubbornly don't give the ball up during a zone or trap (even if they "succeed" individually). Then, their over-all team game will suffer for it.
Ok, what then? What will it take to make you satisfied? If not 100. Then what? 92,93,94,95,96,97...what? Nothing. You will never be happy. You really want Rudy and Francis back. That's what's really at issue here. Sour puss. Watch...next year we'll average 94+, make it to the 2nd round. And there you'll be saying "JVG must be fired."
Funny how JVG averaged 95.4ppg with Ewing, Houston, and Johnson. Yet, JVG would only achieve 91 (or so) with Drexler, Olajuwon, and Barkley. Really? Here's what I think would happen... Rudy + Drexler, Olajuwon, and Barkley = 98-100ppg (This works because Rudy's free-style offense gives these vertans the flexibility to make decisions on their own. They are seasoned vets. They CAN think on their feet and improvise.). JVG + Drexler, Olajuwon, and Barkley = 96-97ppg (Lower PPG than Rudy. But this works too! Because these veterans are capable of understanding a more structured offense. They've been around. They knew a few things, don't ya think?). Throw Francis into ANY equation and it messes everything up (both coaching philosophies) because of this... 1) Francis under Rudy produces an aberration. Yes, Rudy/Francis would average a higher ppg than JVG/Francis. But that's because Rudy's use of Francis and the increased PPG *seems* "better" on paper. Francis plays better individually and statistically under Rudy. Rudy's offensive coaching style allows for this. But in the end, the turnovers and "wild/wooly" offense would never lead to a successful team. Even though it produces a "better" ppg average. 2) Francis under JVG produces yet another aberration. Yes, JVG/Francis would produce a lower PPG due to JVG's half-court offense AND Francis's inability to run a structured offense (and keep his turnovers down). Of course, you would blame JVG for the losses and point out the 89ppg for the root cause. Which is not the case. In reality, Francis is the "mokey wrench" for BOTH coaches. The moment you use him in any statistic, it skews the whole thing. Yep. He's an anomaly. "To the bench with you edc!" - JVG
I give credit to Rudy where it's due, he helped the Rockets (with Hakeem in his prime of course) win the Champ, but the Phil Jackson comparison is just BS. Jordan's Bulls was the ultimate definition "One Man Team" in the 80's, not to mention there were 2 dynasties (Lakers, Pistons) fighting for the title. The fact that Jordan was young also didn't help his cause. Shaq already proved he can take a team to the finals basically as soon as he entered the league and back then, both he and Kobe weren't in their prime, so there wasn't this "it's my team issue." Any below average NBA coach could take the say, 98 Bulls and 2001 Lakers and make it interesting. The question you should be asking is, would Phil Jackson had won ANY rings without Jordan/Pippen and Shaq/Kobe and had to build his own team.
What would make me happy? Zero ten point quarters. Zero thirty point halves. Tracy McGrady being allowed to use his skills, and leading the league in scoring (or at least top 3). As many 110 point games as 80-point games. I've already told you what results I want to see. More than 51 wins, 6 or 7 games in the second round. Any less than that, and yes, "JVG must be fired." Additionally, anything less than a championship, and I will still believe Phil Jackson is the better man, and should be pursued. You take one season's statistics and call them "the average." That isn't so. 1996-1997 95.4 PPG 1997-1998 91.6 PPG 1998-1999 86.4 PPG 1999-2000 92.1 PPG Seems to me "the average" when JVG had Ewing, Houston, and Johnson was 91.375 PPG.
any other coachin the laegue...I wouldn't say a damn thing. but this infatuation with that smug, coattail riding, afraid to coach a rebuilding team Phil Jackson is just.....so......ugh. I cant stand Jackson...if we needed to placate a bunch of whiny big ego stars...then I might see the point.....but Houston has always been a classy organization....and Jackson is anything but classy. anyone but Phil. btw...nice to see you can actually argue something and not just stick with quick oneliner posts against our current coach. btwbtw....Im not a fan of VG....but if he can keep our defense in the top 3 and help our players play better than they did before he came...then I am ok with him. btwbtwbtw...I would really rather have Rudy back.
Why should he be fired? Exactly what has he done to warrant that? His first year, he went to the playoffs against the team that ended up being in the finals. A few inches to the left, and the Rockets had a legitimate chance at winning the series. Again, what has he done? I don't care if we score 130 a night. I want to win. I hold winning over everything. JVG has done nothing to warrant such hatred. Be honest. You hate him because he replaced Rudy. Plain and simple. JVG has given CONSTANT praise to Rudy. JVG has been a class act about the situation -- he is not one to tip toe around issues. But for some reason, you think he's evil. And when Rudy says anything about his leaving was his own choice, it was a class act. When JVG talks about how great Rudy is and etc., you dismiss it and call this guy an **hole. I just don't get it. I'll say it. I love JVG. I love having him as the Rockets coach. He got them to dig down and actually work. Cato had one of his best seasons for us playing out of position. Look at what he's doing. He makes everyone stay in shape, and checks, all summer. You won't see Cato or Mo T come into camp overweight like years previous. The man is obsessed with the game -- and I'm glad he's on our side.
Nope. Sorry, try again. (1) I don't "hate" JVG. I've repeated that endlessly. I find him an average NBA head coach. Deserving of a job, but the Rockets want a championship, and I don't see him delivering one. (2) I've disliked JVG's style on-court since his Knick days. Seeing it daily has reinforced my opinion that he deflates the basketball. You may not care about the aesthetics, but 72-68 games are no fun to watch, and he delivers those in spades. (3) I will certainly listen to arguments against Phil Jackson. However, the guy knows how to build chemistry, and is a winner with winning players. If you believe Yao and T-Mac are Shaq/Kobe reincarnated, then Jackson is a shortcut to the championship.
Yet that seems to be your logic when you went off about Steve Francis' 97 point season. Hakeem, Drexler and Barkley were also together for one complete season as well.
Sorry, wasn't me. I go to the trouble of providing all the numbers. Hakeem/Drexler/Barkley? They were actually together for two seasons. 1996-97 100.6 1997-98 98.8 For completeness' sake: 1998-99 94.2 (Olajuwon/Barkley/Pippen) 1999-00 99.5 (Olajuwon/Francis/Mobley, Barkley mostly injured) The numbers beyond that can be found elsewhere in this thread.
You'll have to take your medicine next year because of all the things I've told you about. Players matter. And when JVG has better/smarter offesnive players, his YEARLY average will go up. And your desire for the "Zero ten point quarters. Zero thirty point halves. Or Tracy McGrady being allowed to use his skills" will change for the better (increased ppg for the team). By the way, what's with the, "McGrady being allowed..."? He didn't' play for JVG last year. Are you thinking that McGrady was the same player as Francis? Do you think that JVG will hamper McGrady's game for the *same* reasons that Francis was "hampered?" There was a reason that Francis was "grounded." SF was dumb. Don't you understand the difference? McGrady = Not turnover prone Francis = turnover prone Huh? Let me explain something to you. One CAN take ONE year and average out the season. That's what I did. It's called "THE AVERAGE for the YEAR." And that's what I asked. I didn't ask you to take a four year average, where circumstances, players, injuries, Ewings knees, worse case situations, new players, etc... and then use that "four year span" to use as your "average (to predict what JVG would achive w/Hakeem,Barkley,Drexler)" I said, given that Ewing, Houston, and Johnson and JVG ACHIEVED 95.4 ONE YEAR with that talent. Yet, you think that JVG couldn't do the same or better with Hakeem, Barkley, and Drexler. You wont admit it will you? (grumble, grumble...grudgingly you might). Nah. You just conveniently combine a four year avarage just to try and prove your point (91ppg). Give me a break! And yes, taking a four year period can be averaged too. But again, you span a four year period, completely avoiding answering my question, and overlooking the circumstances. That's like me trying to include Francis WORST YEAR (migraine) just to make his stats look worse. Do you see what you are doing?
Yeah, and? Show me a year that Francis (w/out Hakeem) had better than a 97ppg year. My point is that players matter (smart ones). And SF's responsibility to run the team had an huge affect on this. Turnovers have a way negatively affecting the point production. I bet you wont admit that *players matter* when it comes to Pat Riley (JVG's mentor). Or are you saying that Magic, Kareem, Worthy don't have an effect on the ppg? Maybe you think that Riley can just magically produce 99ppg's out of a hat w/out his players having something to do with it. I mean, it's not like Mourning or Hardaway are of the same caliber of those past players. Are you going to say that? On a side note...Explain the 1998-99 94.2 (Olajuwon/Barkley/Pippen) year. Why did they average 94.2 and not 98+ like other years with Rudy coaching Hakeem/Drexler/Barkley? Rudy was coaching too. Could it be because of Pippen and Rudy's use of him (trying to make him into the "2nd coming of Bullard")?
Are you incapable of remembering any previous exchanges? I called this a fricking players' league. Players absolutely matter. So does coaching. However, In general, I contend that JVG limits offenses. No matter who is playing for him, their offensive output will be significantly less than it would be under another head coach, and total team offensive output will be roughly 90-92 PPG. Playing with him as head coach might as well be shooting at a 15-foot basket. Is it possible for there to be local highs and lows outside that range? Sure. Overall though, your offensive output will be moderate compared to the rest of the league shooting at 10-foot goals. You keep harping on that 95.4PPG season (JVG's first full season as head coach in NY). What about that tremendous 86.4 PPG average a mere two years later? Same guys. Seems to me you did exactly that. Not with Francis, but with the stats in general. They did drop the following year, and continued upward the next year, until dropping prodigiously with the introduction of Jeff Van "shot put" Gundy as the head coach.
The reason I bought up that 95.4PPG season is because you seem to think it's impossible from JVG to get back to that average. Now, you say, 86.4PPG (Ewing 38 games), then say, "same guys." Well, I say, not so. Is the Hakeem of 1997 the same as the Hakeem of 1999? No. It's called "age" and "knees" and "injury." This is the same thing with Ewing. See? So, you can't just say they were the "same guys." Thus, my question about JVG coming to the Rockets during the mid-nineties, was to get you to admit that JVG would have achieved around 96-97ppg, while Rudy was achieving 98-99 ppg (there's your "JVG limits offenses)". But you wont see that either. You refused to. You just say, "four year average, 91ppg, blah, blah, blah..." Which? Yeah, and? And what's the common denominator? ONE player, two coaches. I already explained to you why Francis was incapable of playing within a structured offense, vs a free-style offense. Either way, it's still losing basketball. What does it matter if one offense gets 3.4ppg more than the other (plus, no defense under Rudy)? He'll do the same thing in Orlando. You watch.
