I think that's an accurate statement that I agree with. The 09er's did not tap into the "potential" that they had hoped they would do in the time-frame that was given to discover that "potential." Thats a fact, and thats on the players first and foremost. Its up to them to put in the work to make it a "no-brainer" decision to play them over the other guys. Practices aside, a major factor that gets left out on here was also the duplication leftover from the lack of trades that happened before the season really hurt the development of players such as T-Will and Morris. Giving Morris or T-Will time would have had a negative affect on Parsons, or Bud's development. There was so much overlap that really you would be robbing Peter to pay Paul. The fact is that this fanbase and most fans always have a "grass is greener" mentality, means that they are naturally going to say "This guy should have played more" or "Throw him in and see what happens." Easier said than done. If Morris would have played more, would we have seen the kind of growth that we saw in Parsons this season? Fact is, because of the duplication, they couldn't even develop in a Trial by Fire scenario with everyone all at once, much less because of the ramifications that the lockout caused on the lack of development over the summer. All-in-all, I dont think this past season speaks to the Rockets ability to develop young players the way that they have been able to develop them in the past. Especially anyone that was a fan of Landry or Brooks would know this. Would those type of players been as effective in this league if they were "Thrown into the Fire".... I personally dont think so at all.
Beal and Zeller are probably out of reach, but I could live with Lamb and Leonard as selections. I really see the first half of the season as featuring Scola and Martin, and then packaging them up at the deadline along with Morris. This would give them time to mentor a SG and PF. Hopefully Scola and Martin play like animals to improve their trade value. After the trade deadline the roster may look a lot like the one you proposed, plus a decent player obtained in a trade. I see Lowry/??? Lee/Lamp Parsons/Bud Motie/PPat Camby/Leonard. I also would not be disappointed too much see us trade down from 16 to grab Fab Melo and a second rounder. The Syracuse zone makes evaluating players extremely difficult. And Fab has most of the tools you want to see in a developing true center.
Yes and no. It's not that hard to figure out whether a guy can play or not. It was obvious that Thabeet can't play a lick, so there was no reason to play him. T-Will was talented and probably should have gotten more of a chance. That said, T-Will wasn't exactly impressive when given a chance, so you can't really blame the coach here either. This more or less applies to Marcus Morris as well. Now, the Rockets didn't exactly put either guy in a situation to succeed. Having depth and competition is nice, but it also can hinder the development of young players. It's a GM's job to put the players he acquires in a good situation. You can very well argue that Morey failed to do so, but let's not forget that SF was probably the most worrisome position for us as Budr was the only 'proven' guy, yet certainly not somebody you play 30 minutes+. Parsons wasn't expected much of, Morris had to adjust to a new position without a real training camp and you didn't really know what to expect of T-Will, as he hadn't been given any kind of chance yet. So you had one guy you knew could play and three talented players that had more value to your team than any other team. The only thing the Rockets could have done differently here is trade Budinger some time during the season or at the deadline, but by then we knew T-Will was cancerous and we don't know if there was anything out there that made sense either. As for playing time in general, while it's important for young players to get minutes, it's even more so important that every possessions matters when you're out there. You just can't play guys when it's obvious that they're not ready. Also, if you're a young player on a crappy team (e.g. Cousins on the Kings) you will without question pick up bad habits. If you play less, yet more meaningful minutes (on a good team) it's pretty much the other way around. Finding the right balance, like with most things in life, is key here.
HMMMM You are mostly right. However T-Will had played under 3 head coaches and never got meaningful PT, so it was pretty much obvious he was a lost cause. I do not agree it is the GM's job to put players in a position to succeed. Their job is to provide the coaching staff with the players needed to help the team succeed. I doubt very much that Morey has much input into McHale's playing time choices. And that coaching staffs can and do recognize talent quickly is enforced by how quickly people like Parsons all of a sudden are in the starting lineup. Coaches hate to lose so every playing time decision is predicated on their view of how much a player can help the team. Those that can't help don't play much. The only time this is not true and completely unfair is when a player is behind someone like Kobe. But that really does not change the analysis. Especially for a team like the Rockets.
Fab Melo had some serious judgement problems at Syracuse. The red flags are fully on display. They will take him out of the lottery and if the scouts are not satisfied about what they discover it could take him out of the first round completely.
So, can we finally conclude that if a player is not getting playing time it is because the NBA coaching staff (the best talent evaluators on the planet) view them as not ready to contribute? Maybe this will stop all the PT b****ing that goes on at clutch fans. NOT!
You're calling Mchale one of the best talent evaluators on the planet? Mchale's Minnesota T'Wolves say something totally different.
That depends upon where you are as a franchise, the Rockets should be more "ALL IN" with their youth, Scola (My favy player) is not going to get better, neither is Kmart.....those guys need to be traded or have their role significantly diminished. You learn on the floor, not on the pine. DD
Well... we traded a lottery protected 1st for him and then canned the 3rd coach who didn't play him. I still think the Rockets had hopes for T-Will going into this season. Oh no. That's not what I meant. I meant from a roster-building standpoint. It does no good to have 3 or 4 interchangeable players who play the same position on your team. You ideally want to have a certain hierarchy from 1 to 9-10 and then round out the roster with either veterans or talented players who may turn into something down the road. I pretty much agree, although I'd add there certainly are coaches who develop players better than others, as they find a way to combine the short-term approch with the long-term approach, even if this comes at the cost of a game or two (in the regular season). Popovic and Rivers do this well for example. Larry Brown is probably the worst in this area.
That may be true, but that's on the GM. Or in the case the owner. I might have missed your point, but I thought you were in part complaining about McHale not playing the young guys. I think we can all agree that this team, as currently constructed isn't perfect to develop young players.
Nope - I am saying that the Rockets organization as a whole is one of the best talent evaluators on the planet. I would not be surprised if they employed 25 full time employees - scouts, coaches and analytic people - all of whom have input into the organization and many who are earning 6 figures because the are really good at what they do. That said - the best talent evaluation team on the planet works for the Spurs.
Not to be difficult, but your post read "NBA Coaching Staffs" are the best evaluators of talent. But anyways I agree the Spurs are top notch.
Again have to disagree (respectfully) with you DD. Practice is for learning, games are for perfecting execution.
The Rockets have given plenty of minutes to young guys in recent years: Carl Landry, Aaron Brooks, Budinger, Hill, Parsons, Patterson each got significant minutes either in their rookie year or within the first 2 or 3 years of their careers. Lowry and Dragic are two relatively young guys who managed to blossom after being traded to Houston. Some of the young guys showed more improvement than others, and for some of them it's a bit too early to judge, but there certainly is no systematic prejudice against giving young guys minutes and you can't really blame the team for players not getting better quicker. There were young guys who didn't get minutes or got less minutes than some fans want, of course. Teams don't have 15 man rotations so it is bound to happen on all teams. Hell, there are Bobcats and Pistons fans complaining about how their teams did not give this rookie or that young guy enough minutes. Most of the discarded guys are not ones I'd cry over. The one exception, I guess, is Jeremy Lin, but he had two better (and rather young) PGs ahead of him. In any case, the teams overall % on hits and misses is above league average for the resources they had. Some stupids who obsess over pet players might cry over the loss of Thabeet or Jordan Hill, but that's just trolling.
The Rockets didn't keep D-Mo in Europe for basketball reasons. They kept him in Europe for money reasons. The Rockets are so transparent, it's hilarious.
Actually he was there for basketball reasons. He signed a contract to play in Europe when there was a possibility that the NBA would not have a season. In the grander scheme of the cost of the Rockets basketball operation his 1.3 million dollar salary was chump change. And if there had been no NBA basketball season he would not have gotten paid. And I don't believe that the Rockets could even sign him to a contract until late November. Why would you ever think otherwise?
I have no doubt that if there had not been a lock out that DMo would have been in a Rockets uniform this season.
