Where Do the Rockets Go From Here – The Power Forward Position

wow

Wow. harden looks like a good player.

 

I recommend you drop the attitude because you are making a fool out of yourself

Duhhhhhhh! We're talking about the 2 going OVER, not UNDER. Why on earth would you think the 2 was going under.

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

I agree. The original poster doesn't have a clue. His argument weakens by the day.

 

How does 2 big man wins with a penetrating guard?
Lets see the last 10 seasons, unless you consider bosh as a stretch 4/5. I counted 3 teams in the last 10 seasons to win with a stretch 4/5. And other than spurs at 05, the other 2 teams do not have ball dominant guards.

So is spacing still an issue for you?

2013 - Lebron and Bosh
2012 - Lebron and Bosh
2011 - Dirk and Chandler
2010 - Bynum and Gasol
2009 - Bynum and Gasol
2008 - Garnett and Perkins
2007 - Duncan and Oberto
2006 - Shaq and Haslem
2005 - Duncan and Horry
2004 - Wallace and Wallace

I believe you would than counter that times have change, then looking at last season, all 4 teams in the conference finals do not have a stretch 4. Heat wins with Lebron playing inside, not by Lebron shooting the 3.

I do agree that Howard and Asik will be an offensive negative as neither poccess the ability to play the high post, but 3p shooting is not the most important skill set for a PF. And their defensive work will far out weight any offensive negative.

 

Looks like the original poster finally gave up. Lol

 

Very nice post jtr. Helps an average fan like me understand the fit/lack of fit better. Appreciate the post.

 

Thanks to JTR for the hard work he put into this thread. Some very interesting stats. One question for you: earlier, when you were asked who would be a good 4 to go after, you said you couldn't think of anyone except maybe Love. What do you have against Ilyasova and Anderson?

 

Because a 2 point lay-up is a better shot that a 3 point shot from a 4???

you never countered after your mistake of assuming the 2 guard was going under instead of over

 

This has nothing to do with that - I just showed you how Asik at the 4 could work better than with a stretch 4 on the PnR and your criticism was that you thought the 2 guard was going under the pick instead of over it (which if you watched even your own tape you'd see most of the time the pick goes OVER and NOT under).

Can't you just admit when someone has made a point? Is that so hard?

 

I am getting so tired of people not understanding the value of a 2-point shot, especially from a big man. So here it goes.

Because a 2-point shot from time to time:
1. Changes things up--it becomes easier and predictable to play defense if you know the offense is only going to shoot 3-pointers and layups, and nothing in-between.
2. Shooting from closer to the basket puts you (especially if you are a big man) in better offensive rebounding position and prevents the defender from being to leak out on a fastbreak (also prevents long rebounds).
3. There is less setup time to take a 2-pointer than a 3-pointer, in that the ball rotates to you more quickly off the pass, you can release more quickly, so it is harder for the defense to react. Whereas on a 3-pointer, you really need to be balanced and get your weight behind the shot or else you won't make it. In the playoffs, defense is amped up and refs swallow their w
4. It is easier to make a 2-pointer when you are tired in the 4th quarter than a long 3-point jumper.
5. It is far easier to make a 2-pointer when you have not yet warmed up or when you haven't shot in awhile than to chuck up a 3-pointer cold. This is BASIC.
6. When there is some contact (playoffs/end-of-game physical play), you've got way more margin for error shooting closer to the basket than trying to hit a 3-pointer, where the slightest bump or grazing of your shooting arm (often NOT called as a foul) will throw off your shot.
7. It is easier harder to get your pass intercepted when you make a pass to someone for a 15-17 footer than when you have to swing the ball all the way back out to the arc. Moreover, it is easier to pass on-target, and the receiver to catch it. Furthermore, the shooter doesn't have to check his feet to be sure that he is behind the line or too close to step out of bounds (especially on baseline threes).
8. You've already got 2-3 other guys (e.g., Parsons, Harden, Lin ) standing around the 3-point line, so it is much easier to find space and a passing angle for either a big to swing the ball to you or an off-balance driving guard to sneak the ball over to you to shoot a 2-pointer.

Look, I love the 3-pointer, and it is a key, necessary, and critical part of the game. But so is the midrange 2-pointer. I don't love the 21 foot 2-point shot, but the 14-17 foot 2-pointer absolutely has its place in the game.

 

Lol

Totally agree with you on the 2 or 3 pointer. We can obviously see that the Rockets agree because they also value the 3 or close in 2 pointer. The Rockets also seem so far to keep using this strategy.

The arguments seem to be that if we do get a PF that has a good 2 point shot but a bad perimeter shooter is OK as at least they make the 2 pointer at a high rate.

I also can't see why the Rockets would all of a sudden veer away from what seems to be established team policy than they are now pursuing. The only need for arguments sake to have is what PF fits into this team philosophy the best and not why they should go after a player and then just try to fit them in. (Play with what we have)

 

You fools. There is no power forward position.