Rockets aren't a playoff team unless other WC teams get cursed like Minny, and even if the Rockets make the playoffs, they will get crushed.
I would take the 45 win option. That would mean one or two of the young guys broke out into stardom. What I would like the Rockets to do is play the young guys and win. If this young team can win 45 games this year, they likely can win 50 next year, and the year after that they will be a championship contender. If one of the young guys we have now is a star, we don't need to tank to find another one.
Of course no one will like the term, "Tank". But put "Win" next to "Strategic Youth Development" and we'll see who votes for what. Ergo, I don't want freaking average ceiling players like Delfino and Douglas stealing time away from Lamb and White, but that is what it sounds like we are gonna be doing.
You always play to win but given how young and almost completely overhauled our team is, it's as good as tanking.
The worst player in the NBA is talented. Teams have talented players and get stuck in mediocrity for years. Talent is not enough. You need Super Star talent, and those guys almost always go in the top five.
Tanking is overrating. Name a team that had top 5 pick draft and won championship with him last 10 years? The only one that I can think of is Wade. (#5 in 2003). I can't think of any other player.
Play the guys we have vested interest in for our future: Jones, Motiejunas, White, Lamb etc...instead of playing journeymen like Delfino and Douglas. Trade away pieces we don't need or that don't fit our roster like Martin and Morris. Then we can see what the young guys are made of, plus they get valuable development time. That may result in a bad record, and you can label it "tanking", but it is what it is - and it's what's best for our future.
45 wins hands down. Right now I'm projecting the Rockets to put up 30-35 wins over the season even IF K-mart, Lin and Asik play well. This is for several reasons... 1) It takes ALOT of time to gel. You just can't swap 2/3 of the roster and expect them to play well together, especially against experienced teams. By the time they start to really play well as a team, you could be a month or two into the season already with alot of losses on the books. 2) ALOT of Rookies. You can't replace experience, especially experience against the athletic, large, and quick veterans of the NBA. None of these guys have ever played against people as fast, skilled or long in college. Many of the moves/passes they are used to doing will just get picked off, stripped, or denied by the upper echelon players. It will take them alot of time to adjust their games and unlearn some of their moves. 3) The Western conference (and especially the SouthWest division) are stacked. OKC AND SAS (2 potential championship contenders), the Grizzlies AND the Mavs (2 legitimate playoff contenders). It's brutal for a team this young and this new. So, if the Rockets are putting up 45 games, either there were a ton of injuries on alot of teams, or the Rockets have suddenly had a breakout season with multiple players, IE someone playing at Superstar level, 2-3 players at Star/All-star level, or 4-5 players playing at above average level. In other words, if that's happening, you already have a strong team that will do MUCH better next year without picking up another draft pick. At that point, it makes more sense to trade for some key Players to push you into serious playoff/championship contention. Keep in mind, OKC during their FIRST season with JUST Durant went 19 and 63 (29th in the NBA). And in their second season (2008/2009) with both Durant AND Westbrook they had a 24 and 58 record finishing 27th in the league. In their second season they had a 50 and 32 record. And we KNOW now that Durant and Westbrook are bonified superstar/all star players. So why do I think the Rockets can put up 30-35? Mainly on the established play of K-mart, and that Lin and Asik have already performed well against NBA level competition last season. So, if the Rockets put up 45 games, then there should be celebrations indeed... you'll have a young and inexperienced team with loads of additional upside AND loads of cap space to further improve. Now, if they end up trading K-Mart, then 20-25 games suddenly becomes a very real possibility. Then you get the benefits of playing to win (but still losing), and a solid shot at the top draft pick. That said, given how much of a gamble a draft pick is (just look at the discussion on rooks even now), sometimes it's better to just play hard and see what shakes out....
Haha. Pretty sure you have to become a "45 wins" team first before talking about contending. No one goes straight from "25 wins" to contender.
Once we officially get eliminated from playoff contention with our losing record for this coming season, there is no way the management won't encourage playing our rooks to end the season as it would also mean tanking. You give your young guys minutes plus you increase your chances of getting a higher draft pick. But if this thread is referring to tanking a whole season, i don't think anyone does that. At least not until you get an ugly amount of losses and then you trade your reliable vets at the trade deadline. Trying to win games that are typically no bearing is useless. If you're out of the post season race, you tank. It doesn't mean you literally try to lose games. Just plug in all your rookies on the court and odds are, you get losses. In essence, It's similar to playoff teams rest their stars/vets before the post season starts.
