You didn't address my point. I think Battier was flat out a better player last year. We would have lost more games and had less of a chance of advancing with Gay. So, based on last season, I don't think it was obviously a bad trade. Based on last year, it was a good trade. Your argument rests on Gay's potential to be a very good player. You think he's already realized that potential based on a preseason game. But I think that's presumptuous, based on his history of being inconsistent and, well, the fact that it's a preseason game. I think we should wait to see how he develops in real regular season games, and how Battier contributes this season. Then, we can judge with more certainty whether it turned out to be a "good trade" or "bad trade". Agree? I would say that individual +/- stats tell you little to nothing over a short sample of game, and particularly when the matchups between the teams are fixed (as is the case in a playoff series). But if you think they you can glean something useful from it, here you go: http://www.82games.com/0607/playoffs/0607HOU.HTM
the layups are not worth a damn if you cant stop your man EVER. They look nice. For every good play he made there were two better plays made by lowry on him.
Francis was never good defensively. he's probably one of the worst defensive PGs in the league, much worse than Rafer. however much he scores on offensive he'll give up just as much on defense. people bash rafer for his defense, francis is even worse.
Lowry started off hot on James? Lowry scored: 3 points with Mike James in the game (all in third quarter) 16 points with Steve Francis in the game 2 points with Aaron Brooks in the game (final seconds) In the fourth quarter and two overtimes, Lowry had 14 of his 21 points and 7 of his 12 assists.
When you acquire players, the goal is to increase your chances of advancing in the playoffs. And, yes, improving win/loss record is a part of that (for obvious reasons). This is how rational decision making works. And I think that's the appropriate way to judge any decision, in any field. Just to illustrate, suppose I say I'm going to randomly pick a number between 1 and a 100, and I tell you to guess whether it's below 60 or above 60. You decide to guess "below 60". That's a rational decision (there's a 60% chance you'd be right). And if it turns out the number was above 60 I'm not going to retroactively say you made a bad choice. You still made a good choice. With respect to basketball, you have to make decisions that increase your chances of being successful (i.e. advancing in the playoffs, typically). If that decision doesn't actually translate into increased success, that may or may not reflect back on the decision making process. You can only make decisions based on the information available, and there's always factors outside your control. Based on what was known, it was believed that Battier would contribute more than Gay in ther short term. And that, in turn, would increase our chances of playoff success. I think that was shown to be the case last season, and it remains to be seen if that expectation also holds this season.
i had some info available, battier has never been out of the first round of the playoffs, including a 50 win team in memphis because his effectiveness +/- goes down in the playoffs, because everyone plays hard and takes charges, like utah did, in the playoffs. so no, two or three extra games wasn't worth when you gave up a potential star player
Still don't understand how this is about Battier. Why not discuss the Pippen trade or the Otis Thorpe trade? I'm serious -- it's history. Beyond this pre-season game and Stevie's D there, seriously look at some Knick games from last year. And I don't think "oh, he didn't fit in, it was a depressing situation..." is a legit explanation. Stevie has always had a good motor and passion for the sport, even when the Rox stunk. I don't think that went away, but bless him, he's lost a step IMHO.
my bad, so francis had a guard score 16 on him, didn't give up the game winning shot, and actually shut the guy down and his last play of regulation. stevie isn't a good one on one defender but he is probably a better team defender than the other guys. no one is disputing the fact that james is clearly the best one on one defender of the group
Not at all. Crissakes, post away. And I will too. What I want to talk about is Stevie's D, and I thought this looked like a good thread for that. My bad. Battier is the worst thing ever, the harbinger of Rockets doom. But James Bailey was truly the tipping point of our long-term failure.
Not that I want to argue, but why didn't he give up the game winning shot? Because he fouled out so that he didn't have to play if there was a third overtime. If he hadn't fouled, that was the likely scenario. There is nothing wrong with having some defensive issues as a young player, like say Steve Novak, after trying and just failing. But he's not exactly a veteran leading by example when a second year "tweener" flies past him every time down the court on a drive through the lane.
in other words, francis has a good game, i'm going to nit pick. we know francis isn't a good defensive player, if he fouled out, I'm not sure you can equate that to failed, he doesn't move well laterally, never has.
Why don't you also mention that he didn't get out of the first round against a 57-win SAS team (2004), a 62-win PHO team (2005), and a 60-win DAL team (2006). Kind of relevant. Memphis was never close to being in their category. It goes down because in the playoffs his Memphis teams were playing against the Western Conference elite. When the level of your competition rises, your team won't perform as well relatively speaking. +/- stats of star players will tend to decrease in the playoffs as well. This kind of pattern isn't really indicative of anything except that when you player better opponents, your team is less likely to sustain a strong point-differential.
did i say that. i just found it interesting that no one wanted to discuss it so when one of his biggest backers came in this thread i chose to address. didn't want to start another thread is that explaination satisfactory
and he didn't get out the first round against a 5 seed utah team so knowing that he is less effective in the playoffs, why was this a good trade?
The reason it was a good trade was seen on one sequence in the first quarter. Gay took and missed a few jump shots, then he rammed a big dunk home. Very next possession, he stood there while Tmac cut to the rim, took a pass from Yao and dunked it while gay stood there. We dont need another player who needs a lot of shots to be effective. We need someone to play defense and hit open threes. Battier does both. Gay is a good player, but his strengths are not what the Rockets need, Battier's are.
