It is known that our team is infinitely better when Chuck Hayes plays significant minutes. Last year, Chuck added a relatively decent free throw, as well as a solid jumphook to go with his natural talent. His lateral quickness, court vision and handle are tops in the league for his position, not to mention his impact on defense and in the form of leadership. Hello triple-double man... I am positive that he has been Patrick Patterson's blueprint on the defensive end, which is AWESOME. Who is to say he can't add a little jumper to his game in the offseason? In my opinion, Kyle Lowry and Chuck Hayes are the rocks/nuts/jewels of this team. They came to the Rockets as role players that were effective without statistical production, and have become invaluable players now that they actually do produce, because they still do the little, character/heart driven things. Assuming we can grab a center at some point, our frontcourt becomes very, very crowded. Maybe I am wrong in assuming that Scola is trade bait, but it sure feels that way. Back to my initial question. How much can we play Patsquatch at the 3? He has shown that he can be an elite midrange shooter, and in the summer league last year his 3-point stroke looked very promising. I would love to hear from some Kentucky fans about how he handled that position in his Junior year, Offensively and defensively. How would he look for stretches of the game at the SF? 3. Patsquatch 4. Chuck Hayes 5. Enes Kanter 3. Patsquatch 4. Luis Scola 5. Chuck Hayes Spoiler Spoiler
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Wm7lJmMENlE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Pat struggled on Lebron, but I do believe that he also showed some potential as a SF for stretches in that game. The problems he had were very fixable, and in some cases were just Lebron being Lebron. (What awful weakside defense too... This is Lebron James folks! Wake up Adelbrains!)
I show that video as an example. What advantage, beside maybe his size, will he have playing the 3? SFs are quicker and most can put the ball on the floor & score off the dribble. Hayes on the floor with Pat and blank center would be lead to bad spacing. Teams could double off Hayes if Pat ever had a mismatch where he could post up a smaller 3. Utilizing Patterson more in the post than the perimeter would be ideal. He already has the jumpshot that players have to respect. Have him learn to be aggressive like Landry. When in the post, face-up and use his quickness to attack other PFs with a dribble or two to get to the rim. I much rather see him add that to his game then trying to become a SF. Maybe a stretch PF like Kevin Love would be a better idea.
I don't believe we have seen enough of Patrick to make a judgement on his quickness when it comes to defending SF's. He did it in Kentucky for an entire year, so I would like to hear an unbiased opinion on his perimeter defensive play at that time. His lateral quickness is promising. The advantage of having Patrick at the SF would be added shotblocking, rebounding and general presence of physicality on the defensive end. Offensively, I would like to hear a Kentucky fan's view on his ability to improve and extend his jump shot to the three point line. Spacing is a very interesting point that you make, and a big reason that the lineup could NOT be used all game. I do believe that Chuck is a FANTASTIC offball cutter, and has a nifty way of making teams pay for losing track of him. At many points of the game, I would GLADLY take a contested shot from the post, with two monster offensive rebounders. Playing big is a huge advantage. For instance "Lamar-Pau-Bynum" looked AWESOME in certain situations this year, because they have great passing bigs. Something I think we have in Chuck and Patrick. Plus, Kanter can shoot 3's!!! :grin: (You misunderstand my post. Obviously he is not going to abandon the PF spot altogether. Come on man, this is clutchfans! )
Forget it. Patterson is just not fast enough to guard threes. Players like Derrick Williams and Marcus Morris will soon find this out. Leave Patterson at the 4 where he is most efficient. Enough with the experiments.
I would venture to say that Patrick Patterson has comparable lateral quickness to Lamar Odom. In spurts, Big ball can be every bit as effective in changing the course of the game as small ball. Waiting for the unbiased Hayesfan post!!!
Idk why you would put him at sf... he's hardly undersized.. he's actually 6'9", which is 1inch off being a center, and he's thick.. He's a great fit for the 4 spot and his perimeter game is as good as i'd ever like to see it. Maybe he can step out to the occasional 3, but if he learns some of those post moves from Scola(or just gets his own), he will be our starting 4 for a long time...
I agree with all of that. As for why you would put him there for spurts, well, because Chuck Hayes is a stud in his own right, and big ball can be very effective for stretches If you have intelligent bigs. Plus, I want Patrick and Chuck to play as much as possible, because I think they will be two of our top 5 players next year.
I t would actually be best to play Patterson at the 5 rather than the three. With him and Chuck on the floor together. In time he could probably be just as strong as Chuck and get better at defending big men. The person we need to worry about getting minutes at the three is Williams. Get those three on the floor with Lowry and Martin and now you're talking about something.
That's for certain! I bet Patsquatch is going to be looking Karl Malone/Larry Johnson-esque this season... 265+ :grin:
Hopefully all muscle.:grin: The one Rocket i am most excited to see next season is Patterson. The kid is a star in the making.
I don't see it. It takes a special type of player who can guard both forward spots with ease. The last Rocket who could do that was Robert Horry, who IMO was the most underrated defender of the championships(especially the second one when we lost Otis). No one since had that kind of ability. And certain Patterson does not, especially in this era.
He's good at the 4. No need to change him to a different position. From the way things look, we're most likely going to be using our lottery pick on a SF anyways so no real need to move Pat to the 3.
I don't want to make Patrick a SF, I wanted to ask If he could possibly play the 3 for stretches, and would playing some big ball be beneficial. I am very aware of the fact that Patrick is a natural PF...
mastering one position is hard enough. pat is a natural 4 with potential to be really good. i wouldn't want to confuse the kid with multiple roles until he has one pat down. if given too many responsibilities too early, he might become a tweener fail. i know everyone doesn't have much to talk about right now, but please come up with a better topic.
But isn't Valorita a woman's name? So basically, there are no benefits to playing Patrick at the SF for stretches, because he might become a "tweener fail". I'll make better topics when you make better replies...
I think he's a 4, and he is quick. I think that's one of the things that makes him such a good 4. He has better quickness than most 4's and his explosiveness and atheticism (especially for that position) really jumps out at you when you watch him play. Let's not take away one of the advantages of his game by moving him to the 3.
