Scola is the best player on the team, and the teams silent leader. He is a World Champion, which is more than anyone else has in that locker room. I believe the younger players look up to him a lot. Who knows? Some of them may even go play where he is from some day! Ever think of that? The game has changed. On a roster level, I think that Scola is more of a finesse player at his position, and those types of players often have a longer shelf life. Keep Scola At least let him teach the younger players many fundamentals like not many others can.
http://www.82games.com/0809/08HOU12.HTM Look up counterpart production per 48 minute stat. In that year, Scola was basically our backup center, where Adelman inserted Landry when Yao left. So you can easily see Scola's defense w/ Yao and w/o Yao.
I used you as an example of someone who has repeatly busted Scola for his defense, yet I can recall little, if any, posts from you doing the same to AB for his defense. Now it could be that my memory is faulty. It wouldn't be the first time. So you tell me, am I completely off base with that comment? (I admit that I could have left out the "crickets chirping" line!)
We have to consider that we are the 22th defense for a reason. If Scola is a decent defender, Hayes is great, Shane and Kyle are also very good; Lee is very good, Chase is not that terrible, etc... how can we be one of the worse defensive teams in the league? Sincerely, I think we overrate the defensive level of our players in this forum at the same time that we demand a better level. - I don't consider Hayes' defensive impact as "great", so I disagree with Adelman here (and most of the forum). He can be very good defending stars, he has great fundamentals, no doubt about it, he has a great attitude, love it... but he is simply too-short. He can do a help from the weak side, but often won't have incidence on the play. You see Gortat's impact and that's a true defensive impact. He alters ton of shots, even penetrations, the offense get scared at him; he grabs every defensive rebound, he's the king of the paint, and he's also very good defending outside. Hayes is far from that impact. Morey has been saying that we need a center -during all the year- for a reason. - Scola. Since I know him, defense has never been one of his strengths. It was critized already in Spain at Euroleague level. In the NBA he has gained some muscle, strength, but sorry, I just disagree with the fact that he always gives 100%. Bullard, Clyde, they can say it as many times as they want, but I see another thing. When he plays hard, with his limitations, he can be that decent defender, but I just don't see that consistency in his effort that often. I always see his limitations, sometimes the effort and concentration is there, sometimes he's really passive at helping or soft/permissive at the 1on1 D. Overall... below average, absolutely. - Lee. Lee has very good abilities, the effort and willingness, he lacks a little bit of experience, craftiness and height. Yes, sometimes I see him playing a good defense, and still the SG/SF shoots with some ease above of him. If you see a good defense by Jordan Hill (being overall a terrible defensive player right now), you rarely will see the basket by the offensive player. Despite all, I see Lee's D as above average. I think we have a player who could become elite at that position, Terrence. Battier is obviously a very good defensive player (maybe still elite at his position), and so is Kyle, in my opinion. Chase is soft, but certainly is improving with time (I would like to see him at the SG spot to prove his lateral speed; he would have always advantage in height/weight), and Martin is VERY bad, like Brooks was and still is. If we have improved our defensive level since the deadline despite of Shane's march, it is thanks to Patterson and Dragic. I consider them already above average defenders with chances of becoming very good. Great predisposition and compromise, that's what you always want to get no matter the role, winning players.
With all due respect, I find it rather incredible that you would describe Scola in such a fashion when in the 2008-09 season, his second season in the league, when he started all 82 games at the 4 spot, the Rockets were ranked 4th in the league in defense. This was while the Rockets, as per usual, had injuries to key players. McGrady played 35 games. Deke played in 9 games. We traded a much better defensive point guard mid-season in order to start Brooks, who is an awful defender. It was a team littered with lousy defensive players. Yes, we had Yao playing his best season (imagine that) and Artest, who played 69 games, Battier, who played in 60 games, and Chuck, who played 12 minutes a game. Luis Scola was the only Rocket who played every game. How on earth were we ranked 4th if Scola was "really passive at helping or soft/permissive at the 1on1 D. Overall... below average, absolutely." I guess it was dumb luck.
That seems like a measurement vs. counterpart. While I don't remember substitution patterns per se for that particular season I know the big men consisted of Yao, Mutumbo, Hayes, Scola and Landry. I find it hard to imagine that Scola played better defense than any of those guys other than Landry, which leads me to believe he subbed out for Landry. So if your suggesting that Scola is a better defender than Landry, then I would agree with you. Those stats also say that he was a bad offensive player last year, which just isnt true. They also say he was a bad defender last year. I think whats most likely is we had really good perimeter D so guys werent getting by their man as much which hid his weaknesses. But neither that nor playing with Yao makes Scola a better defender. So I dont know about all your statistics, but I know what I see...and it is not Scola being a decent defender..... Brooks is an awful awful defender. The reason I don't bring it up is because 1.) We arent talking about Brooks and 2.) I believe the 3/4/5 positions are much more important defensively than 1/2. People still think I am some Brooks nuthugger and no one ever bothered to read what I was arguing for with him. All I said was he played better with the starters and he played worse with the bench, while Lowry fit both so why switch that up. This apparently made me some irrational idiot. Whatever though, I stand by my reasoning. I don't even want to talk about that anymore because people get too worked up.
Deck, Scola is not the only reason why we are not a good defensive team. But he is a pretty poor man defender. He simply doesn't have the physical tools to be very good at it. Hayes is short. But Hayes has great foot speed and is very strong with very quick hands. Scola has none of those. The only thing he has is hustle. And since he is not clueless like Hill so he is decent at rotation. He just can't guard any skillful bigs. I can't believe I'd ever side with leebigez against you.
I've always liked Scola (check out my sig), but the time to move him has come. I proposed trading him for Serge Ibaka earlier in another thread, but people felt that Ibaka was untouchable and I understood where they were coming from. The dynamics have now changed though. OKC traded for Perkins AND signed him to an extension. I believe the time is right for the Rockets to offer Scola to the Thunder in exchange for Ibaka. They'll have to get a third team involved to make the money work, but Scola would immediatiely become OKC's best post player and make them even more dangerous: Westbrook/Maynor Thabo/Nate Robinson Perkins/Collison KD/Harden Scola/Collison That is a win-now lineup for OKC and the Rockets would benefit by finally getting a young, athletic shot blocker/finisher (on a rookie contract) with an offensive game that is better than a lot of people give him credit for. I'm on board with with D12 & DWill in 2012 plan, and this would put the Rockets in better position to make a run at both of those guys.
The problem I see is that by the time the Rockets build a contender Scola might be to old to produce like he does,and then the salary might be a problem. He needs a stud center to mask his block shot deficiency.
If you are basing your entire argument in this thread on "what you saw on tape", then the bolded statement alone should disallow your entire argument. Mutumbo was never in the rotation. He played 96 minutes THE ENTIRE SEASON. That's an average of 1 minute per game. And Scola OTOH averaged 30 minutes for 82 games started. The subsitution pattern wasn't 5 guys. If you've watched any Rockets game under Adelman, you'd know he doesn't play 5 bigs in any game that doesn't involve blowouts or in-game injuries. It was Yao/Deke(Deke played the few games Yao was out), Scola, and Landry/Hayes(Hayes being the defensive specialist and Landry the regular). I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that if a player cannot play defense at the level of Yao or Deke, then that player is a horrible defender? In that case, ~95% of the NBA is filled with terrible defenders. So you're saying Scola can't protect the paint. Well, I never said anything to the contrary. I said Scola was a good defender as long as someone else protects the rim. He can guard his guy. He just can't help out. Hence, why I said he's "limited" rather than "bad". So no, he's not Hakeem or Deke or Ben Wallace or Camby. Well, again. If that's your idea of "not a horrible defender", then our differences are based on the English language and not basketball. Well, you apparently saw that Adelman had a rotation of Hayes/Yao/Deke/Scola/Landry in 2008-2009 season. So I'm glad I don't watch the same games you do.
this. 1 on 1 he's not good vs very athletic opponents, but the guy is a good defender due to hustle alone. People may forget he toned it down a couple of notches due to the ticky tak fouls he was inundated with his rookie yr.
scola is getting some decent rest. He's not the type of player that relies on athleticism, which is why you can't make the same extrapolations. His body is just a little worn because the dude gives it 1000% every ****ing night no matter whath our position or what game it is. whether its game #1 or 82.
would not do. Scola hasn't given reason enough to be traded or that hes on a decline. dude will always be way more valuable than what he's paid. There would no benefit in trading him in most cases.
another post i really liked. This team's identity is starting to change a lot, and some for the better. When it comes to the all hustle/heart cat. , it seems we're trying to move away from that which I'm really not liking. Landry, Shane, Lowry, Scola were the cover for all this during our most successful season. Theres a reason we beat the odds when they were insurmountable at times. We moved away from everything this team was in the past, a team that underperformed and seemed to lack the drive to win.
Easy, I don't think he's a good man defender either, unless he's matched up against someone in the same ballpark athletically, or it's an athletic big who's dumb as a post (there are several out there... we've had some on the Rockets). I don't have a problem with a guy giving Scola a hard time about that part of his defense. I've said before that he struggles playing man defense against the better athletic bigs. I do have a problem with people ignoring the fact that that's only one aspect of defense. I have a problem with people getting on him for a lack of effort on defense. In other words, I have a problem with grand pronouncements that "his defense sucks!" Scola has physical limitations that are never going to allow him to be a good man defender against skilled players that have more athleticism. Scola does, however, have a pretty good idea of his physical limitations and plays very decent team D, at least in my opinion. Got it and I'll make a deal. I won't bring up Brooks with you unless you're already talking about him. -
A team with interior defenders Luis Scola and Fabricio Oberto beat a Tim Duncan / Jermaine Oneal frontcourt TWICE. I say the man has some idea how to play team defense, it's obvios to me that the defensive schemes have to change if you have no shootblocker on the team. Adelman has not noticed that and the team still defends as if Yao was guarding the rim. Look at how Argentina defends with Scola and Oberto and you'll see he doesn't suck when the team doesn't throw slasher after slasher and bigs with no help defense at him. Argentina defends with a lot more helps and rotations than the rockets because we have no shootblocker and the world "athletic" doesn't apply to anyone wearing the blue and white.
Well I dont know what "limited defensively" means. If thats a fancy way of saying he is not good, but thats okay because _______ then fine. Yea, I agree, Yao covers alot of defensive mistakes. But that doesnt make Scola a decent defender. When I say "what I saw" I mean this year when I rewind my DVR after a layup, when its usually Scola who is responsible. But what the heck, lets dive into your statistics and comments: So here is your top lineups used: http://www.82games.com/0809/0809HOU2.HTM So the bigman rotation consisted of Hayes, Yao, Landry, Scola and a little Mutumbo which I think is what I said? I, of course, was talking about the bigmen used in the calculation of that +/- number since thats what you referenced, but your right Mutumbo was not a regular in the rotation. Incorrect, he played less than 140 minutes as center. You said he insterted Landry when Yao left...incorrect. Landry was paired the majority of the time with Hayes and Yao. My point is, the +/- you use as evidence (btw I am not even sure thats what your using) that Scola is a good defender is a counterpart +/-. Landry and Scola played a grand total of 86 minutes together. Landry was Scola's counterpart, thus your def +/- is primarily a comparison of those two. I would agree Scola is a better defender than Landry because he rotates, this doesnt however make him a decent defender, it just makes him better than Landry. Furthermore since Yao tended to play with Scola and Landry tended to play with Hayes this def +/- number is actually more of Yao/Scola vs Hayes/Landry. And I want to emphasize that bad defenders can exist on good defensive teams, but that in itself doesnt make them good defenders. Case in point - Brooks, who we all agree is a bad defender, is in numerous lineups with decent sample sizes where the def rating is below 1 opp ppp. Anyway, back to Scola. The top 3 worst defensive lineups that year with opponent ppp of 1.27, 1.24, and 1.17 all had Scola in the lineup. Opponent PF PER was 16.3 with league average being 15, which says to me "below average" Moving onto last year, again, 3 of the top 4 worst defensive lineups (1.15. 1.13 and 1.29) had Scola in them. Conversely, only 1 of best 5 (.92, .95, .96, .96, .98) had Scola in them. Opponent PF PER jumped to an astounding 20.3 by far the worst on the team. Maybe I am misreading these fancy statistics, Im sure you can point me to any errors, but I stand by what I see and what these stats say to me.
I am not in the camp of "trade Scola before he brakes down and we have to shoot him". Scola still has a lot of (playing at a high level) miles left on him. If we lose Scola we would be missing some very important things this team can not be a winner without. #1. Long flowing hair. Sure Jordan Hill and the new guy Carroll have long hair, but they have dreadlocks or braids, not long flowing hair. Hell for all we know Hill and Carroll are almost bald and those are just Fancy weaves to fool us with. #2. Spanish: Before we had Scola we had Deke. Mutombo spoke 7... yeah thats right, 7 different languages and Spanish was one of them. Sure no one could understand him even when he spoke to his people in his native language but he was vital when it came to ordering off the menu. French, Italian, German, Japanese, Vietnamese, Polish, Chines. Deke would even order Chines for Yao and get the order perfect every time!... How you ask?.... Because Deke spoke Spanish and Luis Scola speaks perfect Spanish. Without Scola ordering for them the team would starve to death. #3. Dancing: In his rookie year, Scola won the Championship Trophy and he is still the Reining Champion all these years later and he will never be defeated. Clyde Drexler ain't got what it takes anymore, on the court or the dance floor. Every team needs a Championship Caliber Dancer. #WINNING !!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osQ7PkHuo2w zzpot puff puff
Well, sorry that you wasted so much of your time on plus/minus and 5-man rotations. I never brought it up, and don't really want to use it in this case. I was talking about opposing PF/C numbers when matched up against Scola. Plus/Minus introduce a lot of stuff that makes things convoluted, and results in such long, windy arguments like the one above. So I purposely didn't bring it up. As for being "limited", not sure why you'd have trouble understanding the concept. Players play differently in different situations given different tasks. Scola's task was to basically complement Yao inside in his first two years. His last two years, his task was to complement Hayes. If you believe that they entail the same defensive skillset and same type of play, then we can just agree to disagree here. No fancy numbers here. I just see a different game from you. I see a mediocre-to-bad fit with Hayes/Landry, and an excellent fit with Yao. I mentioned stats more to confirm my own eyes rather than using them as my only source of info. Btw, you're basically saying that a horrible defender and some tall guy who stands inside and take up space made up one of the best interior defense that year. It doesn't take fancy numbers to think that smells fishy.
