Don't confuse people with facts, man! They're having too much fun saying Adelman was/is the "Anti-Christ" of NBA coaches. Going to the Hall of Fame as a coach when you retire? Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, dude.
They peaked after a trade or injury! How the hell do you not see this? guys like you, reality doesnt set does it? You hate one coach so you think the prior was beast. Your like all those people who are experts in politics. How do they say it? The best president was always the previous one since the current sucks. I will re-iterate. Those players you mention did not peak with 10 mins of play time. Period. They showed the same potential and finally proved that potential when given continuous meaningful playtime. How the frick do you know how good someone is with 10 mins a game?? Because thats how much time they were getting until the trades or injuries occurred. Oh. OHHHH. Then they peaked?? That wasnt coaches doing. Coach was forced to play the back up and then all of sudden with meaningful, continuous play time everyone is shocked. Peaked under RA, MAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA. Yeah, cause you can prove so much with back up minutes. Omigoodness. Everyone knew what kinda of potential these players had. Its why they got drafted. Its why we traded for them. But its not until something happens where they get actual playtime to prove it.
Your post has nothing to do with what he just said. LoL. When he is talking about RA playing youngs over vets your talking about the coaches worth??
we lost so many games in the 4th quarter, because McHale not bringing in Camby or Dalembert in the 4th
[ Meaningful worth until they started, are you serious? Give Adelman some ****ing credit. He saw their worth, made those unproven guys part of the rotation and brought them along. The only instance where you are right is that Chase only started when Morey forced his hand with the Battier trade, but even then Chase was Adelman's favorite guy off the bench, even withstanding his slumps. I'm convinced that Parsons would have entered the rotation as soon as he did with McHale and would have supplanted Chase if the latter was equally lost struggling on offense and defense right off the gate. BUT. there's a case to be made that Chase would have kept the form he had when he became a starter thus keeping the starting gig. At least admit that Parsons would be part of the rotation under Adelman.
First of all, I don't hate McHale, I accept him as the coach of my team and will obviously hope and root for his success. Second, what's your point, what exactly can you hold against Adelman? All those players proved themselves before they became starters, we're talking about no brainers here: Do you not think that Adelman was involved with letting Alston go because he knew Brooks was ready? it was a consensus decision, everyone could see that. Aside from the Battier/Chase situation, where is Adelman remotely wrong? By not benching the most improved player in favor of his great back-up until it was obligatory? Or is it that maybe you are butt-hurt because he didn't waste time on T-Will and Thabeet? What Is Your Point? Where Is He Wrong?
Nope, sorry. When it comes to bringing up potential players, RA is horrible. Nope, sorry. If RA did as you say, then Rafer would have been a bench player faster then he was traded. I remember the boards back then, just about everyone was wondering why the hell Rafer was still starting. Are you starting to recall yet???? Think about it, maybe memories will come back on who the 'wanted' starter was. When clutchfans and DM agrees bu Ra doesnt, LoL. Do not get me wrong. I do not think RA was a bad coach. The dude can make stuff happen (including 2 years of non playoffs, but then you might say thats Yao's fault). But honestly, when it comes making plays, yes RA is the better coach. Realistically, we are not in that situation. McHale, imo is only good for getting potential out. RA will help you get out of your slump. McHale doesnt give damn, if your not producing, he will find someone else who will. How many games have we seen our starters not even get minutes during their slumps during McHale? What about RA? Do you see the difference? If Rafer was slumping, he stayed in and this is why Brooks didnt get meaningful minutes. If Shane wasnt doing anything, its okay, RA will keep you in. ROFLMAO, McHale woulda benched him hella fast. There is a scale with coaches. On one side, you got win. On the other is bringing out the potential. RA would be ALL win. Please do not make me out saying this is bad, its not. McHale would more evened out. Half win half bringing out potential. The difference? In a close game, Ra would have his trusted starters in. While Mchale would have the ones producing in even if he is a rookie.
Well not to McHales defense, I remember a bit of those game, they talked about the injuries both our centers had and that minutes would reduced.
You said Rick's players "never even gave a damn on D" and that his defense was "non-existent". I guess you're now modifying that to include only some of his players? I guess his 2 top 4 defensive teams with the Rockets "never even gave a damn on D"? Is that your contention? Oh wait, were those teams only good defensively because the players had already learned defense before joining Rick's teams? Remind me again what teams other than the Rockets didn't have a training camp last year? Oh that's right, it was every other team in the league as well. I notice you weren't in a hurry to trot out that excuse while denouncing Minnesota's 25th ranked defense (which was actually an improvement from the year before), were you? Of course not. Not biased at all. I know what's going on here. You're just trying to prove how smart you were when you said: You can bulls*** in any way you want to make a coach either awesome or putrid
Adelman was never fired. They parted ways due to irreconcilable differences in how the team was run. Really, the Rockets wanted him back but he wanted some unnamed things (probably to do with personnel) that the Rockets could've give him... so they parted ways amicably. That said, Adelman is clearly a better coach than McHale. Anyone who wanted Adelman gone was off their rocker, as far as I'm concerned.
You don't recall that team being the best team we've had since Olajuwon, with Yao + Tmac + Ron.. it definitely had the win now mode always on. You don't recall that with a team so stacked, Alston as hated as he was, was still the best man around to do what was required of the job when the season started. With that team, the better defender and distributor starting the season over the porous defender and undersized shoot-first guard was a no brainer. You don't recall that to this day, it is the philosophy of the team that playing time should be earned and not handed to the players. You don't recall Adelman giving Brooks the opportunity to get his hands on the ropes of the position, the smooth transition between the start of the season and the day he was the starter for good was just the perfect way to handle things in those circumstances. Myth. You don't recall that Adelman was a big part if not the reason why we, out of the blue, drafted that little guy in the first place. You don't recall the staggering list of players that had their best years under Adelman: Porter, Divac, Weber, Christie, B. Jackson, Peja, Bibby, White Chocolate, Martin... When it comes to putting players in a position to succeed, which is in the same vein as bringing up potential in players, Adelman is a hall of famer.
I thought rick the ruler and the fuhrer were all names of endearment. I miss him but we got to move on. We will meet again, my fuhrer.
Its funny how today, clutchfans members mock McHale when he voiced his reasons for drafting one of our three new members but now we all said stop lying you had nothing to do with those picks but ofcourse rick had everything to do with it? 'When it comes to putting players in a position to succeed, which is in the same vein as bringing up potential in players' No, its really not. When you choose vets over youth, your choosing succeed through what you know. Potential is all about the unknown so when you pull unknown equations out of the game because frankly you do not know how they will react or you do not trust them regardless of play, then that is a whole different path from playing your youth over vets. No way in hell thats in the same vein as you say! McHale time and time again has played youngs over vets because of current play. NEVER and I mean NEVER have I seen RA do that for the Rockets. Same vein???? Serious? Sure, RA was a good (is) coach but he has no, none, nothing in the department of raising young players.
You seem to check this thread a lot so: Spoiler the draft for the online association is at 9:30 tonight. I hope to see you there
Just stop posting. What does it tell you when your BEST players don't like the coach? Lowry and Martin both had issues with McHale. Does it tell you anything at all? Every decision a coach makes has an effect on the entire team. If you lose your best players, you have no chance. It's not as simple as 'choosing vets over youngs'. Just stop.
