Scola just falls in line with the other marquee PF's in the league?

This is where it comes down individual defense vs. team defense. Howard is never going to be the one-on-one post defender Hayes is. But his shot blocking and presence make his team a better defensive team over all.

 

Nobody is, but he's surely worthy of appreciation that many fans in this forum deny to him.

 

Absolutely correct. It's not like we've got a superstar in waiting. Hes going to be a really god player, but his development is not being hurt that much.

 

Actually, I think the best way for us to upgrade our PF position IS to trade Scola -- but not for a different 4, but for a true center that would then allow Chuck Hayes to play the four.

I think Patterson has a bright future (he really reminds me of David West), but I agree with others that he is not quite ready and that we can't count on him as the starter going into next season. I also agree that it would be hard for Houston to acquire a 4 from outside the team that would be better than Scola (there are plenty of 4'd better than Scola, but I doubt they are gettable).

However, I would rather Patterson play behind Chuck. Chuck will be more effective from his natural position, and, with his improvement on offense, is a more complete player -- Chuck no longer kills the offense, meanwhile Scola does kill the defense.

Houston could then use Scola, their draft assets and contracts to go after a center, thus making this an actually functional roster for the first time in a couple years (credit to Adleman and the players for overcoming the roster as it is).

Basically I think a serviceable 5 is a much more realistic target for Morey than a 4 better than Scola,AND that Hayes is better than Scola AND that Scola has more trade value for the aforementioned 5.

 

Scola is a beast and theirs not much out there available that can replace his production.

Aside from his defensive woes, my only pet peeve with him is how sloppy he gets late in games. Turnovers like careless passes, fouling shooters, and being out of position for any kind of defensive assignment. This all relates to loss of possession and point/opportunity to the other team. Sure, he may come through and score a huge bucket on the next play but if he doesn't, that's ball game. Better to have not caused that situation in the first place.

I would still pick Scola over many PF besides Lamar Odom or Lamarcus Aldridge.

 

The thing with scola is the same with martin, does his offense outweigh his poor defense? On a team like the rockets as constructed, probably so, but not on a championship caliber team. Is scola and hayes worth having if it negates a shot at howard and williams? Thats my bigger point.

 

I've been as guilty as anyone about fighting posts without thought to the OP.

Luis deserved his contract. He's a joy to watch. And with Yao going down, he's just on the wrong team.

If we spend the next 2 years complaining about his contract I hope this bbs grows up. It has before.

 

My thoughts exactly

 

I like Scola a lot. But he is not an elite PF. He is above average, very solid, very tough competitor. If we had a couple of star players at other positions, I'd go to war with him.

Patterson should our future PF. I wouldn't trade Scola AND Patterson's development for any PF even if it means a slight upgrade from Scola, maybe with the exception of Griffin. I'd trade Scola to upgrade the 3 or the 5 spot.

 

I agree with this to an extent. The only caveat is I do not see the Rockets being successful playing Chuck with just any dumb tall center (ie, JaVale McGee, DeAndre Jordan, etc.).

As much as Hayes has improved on offense I don't think you can pair him with another less than average offensive player in the front court. Certainly not if we plan on having the same type of offense in the future as we did this season. Scola's post game and mid-range threat has played a huge yet underrated part in our offensive success.

If we can trade Scola and assets for a two-way center then I'm all for it. If we trade him for just a big body, then I feel like we'll be filling one hole just to create another.

 

You people need to stop acting like there's something horribly wrong with our starting lineup, that somehow Scola and undersized Hayes is an incompetent frontline defensively despite numbers speaking to the contrary. Literally only a handful of starting lineups in the entire league have performed better than ours this year, namely LAL, DAL, and BOS. The problem was Hill, Brooks, Bud. Period.

 

The defensive problem with our front line right now isn't that other teams' front lines are destroying us. Hayes is good enough to shut down pretty much most big men and Scola can take on the worse offensive player in the post. What we lack is a paint patrol to stop perimeter penetration. In this league, especially with the hand check rule in place, it is almost impossible to stop penetration even with good perimeter defenders, let alone poor defenders like Martin.

Right now, it is just too easy for opponents to get into the paint unmolested. Too many layups, either by the penetrator or by dishing to an open big. Having an tall and athletic big man in the middle would eliminate a lot of easy layups, this is what Hayes and Scola can't do.

 

Analysis

Scola plays below the rim.....
Everyone else, above the rim

 

Don't forget that none of those guys you listed flo-- ... um ... draws charges better than Scola!

 

The OP misses a lot of marquee PF's- David West, Zach Randolf (seriously, you missed him?), Pau Gasol, David lee.

In terms of young guys who aren't == Scola right now, but probably have bigger upside, the list gets even longer, including, hello??!! Carl Landry.

Not insulting Scola- but there are some really, really good power forwards in this league.

My position is if we keep Scola, I love him, and I love keeping him. I'm not sure there's anyone who's a huge upgrade (probably Zeebo), but I could see trading him for a small or potential upgrade, especially to facilitate other trades- I wouldn't be mad.

 

Again, why nobody coment this FACT?

In the current NBA market, young players are a better trade bait than an older guy, no matter how reliable the older guy is.

Said that, Ppat, Hill, Budinger or Lowry would make better trade assets right now that a player labeled as 'old'like Scola (no matter how players relying on fundamentals rather than athleticism, like Nash, can play until 37).

So, if a true defensive C is to be gotten, it's more likely that a young desired player would have to go, not Scola.

 

bah, the other guys are always better than Scola.

First he beat out Hayes for the starting spot.
Then he beat out Landry.
And now he is beating out Patterson and Hill.

Coaches know something about basketball...

And if Patterson weakness are on offense, playing behind Scola should help him more than playing behind most players in this league, fundamentally Scola might be in par with Duncan.

 

Too much analysis from the Morey clones on this board. A big shot- blocking/rebounding center would cure alot of ills. Size matters, period.

 

Signed,
The Griffin/Jordan tandem which is worse defensively than Scola/Hayes, despite being on ESPN a lot.