Why do Rockets fans want our rookies to strive for mediocrity by giving them PT quickly?

Our rookies are better basketball players than the players we have on our roster. In the past we were title contenders. Carl Landry was our third best player, and Brooks became our staring point guard for a time. Chase Budinger became our starting small forward. Steve Francis was our only all star. Luther Head was our only productive bench player under Van Gundy.

 

I watched him a lot and he looked very solid and was scoring in double figures consistently. He also changed systems, changed teammates, and wasn't on a good team in Houston. IMO he just lacks the "it's on me" mindset and that's fine, most players don't have that.

 

Its a hypothetical argument because we cant test it. We cant go back and say "would luther head have become a star if Jvg didnt coach him into a specialist with immediate PT?"

Comversely I can argue with full conviction that it wasnt immediate playing time that ruined Steve Francis either. A player like that comes into the already eith bad habits, a big ego, an inability to be coached, a lack of court vision, and a proclivity for drugs and strippers.

The current management account for this in their scouting. We pick up players who fit our scheme, work really hard, can be coached up. Patrick Patterson, Marcus Morris, Chandler Parsons, Terrence Jones are all lunchpail style guys who maximize talent with dedication to their profession. Luis Scola. Carl Landry. Kyle Lowry. In the instances where we gambled on talent with baggage, it backfired. Terrence Williams. Royce White.

Coaching and PT dont have nearly the impact that good or bad habits do. Play the youngsters to find out if they do. The end

 

Because as long as a rookie hasn't played, many fans can cling to the hope that we have an instant all star just sitting on the bench.

 

I believe that anyone espousing PT for the rookies is actually just lobbying for a chance for the fans to see the rookies on the floor. In a very selfish sort of way. The coaches, with their NBA experience and much added information, know almost exactly what the rookies are capable of. Any fan who thinks they know better than the coaching staff must be both ignorant and an egomaniac.

 

i can kind of agree with the perception that players that dont earn play time wont improve. But the answer to your question is really about high motor players, the truth in my opinion we haven't drafted a player that is set on improving regardless of playing time for a while. We havent seen a player make big improvements after their break out year.

1. Carl landry - He is the same as his break out year
2. Parson - hasn't been that much better than last
3. Brooks - we had him at his peak
4. Patterson - came out big at first but leveling out now

The list goes on - only the true alpha type ppl work harder every year - those are the players that become Super stars. Everyone else fall into a niche and stay there because they don't want to loose their spot or they aren't gifted.

In life there are on 3 type of ppl that succeed

1. Super rich wealthy background
2. Super talented
3. Super hard working

Out of all 3 only the last one a person has control of. IF you have all 1 of the 3 you are fine but if you have all 3, it is a lock. In basket ball money doesn't make you star only the last 2. but only number 3 will make you relevant.

 

So if you have control of someone four years, you're saying sit him 1-2 years and then extract 2-3 good years? Why not get 4 good years with year #4 having that player MUCH MUCH more mature than he would be if he had sat the whole time?

Your rationale is the same one that made the Astros call up 27yr old rookies in the mid-2000's.

 

"Why do Rockets fans want our rookies to strive for mediocrity by giving them PT quickly?"

That's like saying all rookies are mediocrity which is not true? Look at Lillard of Portland...dude is a good player. There is a difference between letting them play and see what they can do and not letting them play and not knowing what they can do. The problem w/ the Rockets is that they aren't EVEN giving them minutes let alone prove they're good player or not. The ONE player that stand out is Terrence Jones and that's why he's not being sent to the D-League and EVEN HE didn't get much minutes.

 

Lilliard was drafted 5th by a team that lacked a serviceable point guard. Jones was drafted 18th by a team with 5 (?) power forwards. Are you sure you are comparing apples to apples?

 

First of all, minutes are earned in practice. Second, just because Jones didn't go to the D-league doesn't mean he should be given playing time. Third, we have a log-jam at the 4 spot.

Coaches have seen these rookies play everyday and if they say they're not ready, then that means they're not. Plain and simple.

Again, just look at Parsons and Morris as an example. Both were rookies last year but you can see the difference between how both guys approached the game as a rookie.

If Jones just stays patient and earns the coaching staff's trust, then he'll play.

 

Now that you mentioned him, Kenny Thomas seems ALOT like Patrick. Who do yall think is better between the two?

 

Why all the New Orleans team played massive minutes their rookies.

And almost beat us yesterday?

Why Jeremy Lambe is playing in almost all games at OKL, sometimes just 1 minute?

Improve? Learn?

 

I'm fine with the rookies not getting playing time if the Rocket's feel the players in front of them are better options. That being said, you seem to be presuming that sitting first would have some how equaled more future success for your "fail" list. There is no reason to think these guys you listed would have had a higher peak level of performance if they sat for a season or more first.

The list is too limited if you just list Rocket's players, when clearly there are rookies every year who have major impact for other teams and improved their games over subsequent seasons. Almost every current all star fits that bill.

Not really, it shows us that some players are just better than others. Coaching and self improvement plays a role in a player's future. It's true that playing from day one does not guarantee future improvement, but that in no way means that sitting first will increase the player's ultimate ceiling in potential.

 

Narrow way of thinking.. So lump every rookie into that category?
Thats a limited way of thinking

 

Also, its not simply about 'fans wanting rooks to reach for mediocrity'
The front office officianados preached that theyre going to play the youngsters as justification to firing Rick A, and enter Kevin Mcfail, he was preaching that same verse but what happened? Rick 2.0
I dont want to be lied to or misled, stick to your word or youre going to hear about