I'm going to go against popular opinion and say with our current roster, Reefer is our best option to start with Yao and Tracy. Mike James is probably our best defender at the point but, he has a scorer's mentality. Steve Francis plays more like a undersized 2 guard. Hell, I still have nightmares of that man dribbling out the shot clock on most possessions. Not only that but his passes to Yao always seemed to come too late in the offense. Aaron Brooks really impressed me in the summer league but, he is still unproven against NBA players. Reefer, on the other hand, looks to set up his teammates before he looks for his own shot. I think he has built a bad rep because he forced to play roles that do not fit his game. So try to look past those disgusting teardrops and the inflated police reports because I predict him as our starting point. Check this out: http://www.82games.com/0607/ppairs0607.htm The formula that hasn't been perfected. It rates which teammates make each other better in their own stats. It lists the combo of TMac and Reefer as the best pair on our squad.
Yes to #1, Yes to #2, NO to #3. If Brooks pans out I think Rafer will be benchwarming the rest of the season. However, he's a more than adequate backup should Brooks not be NBA ready or if some of our other guards (Francis) get injured.
I'll have a hard time watching the rockets if Rafer see's much court time and especially if he is starting. I just don't see it.
I think, there are a lot of people here who don't mind Rafer starting, so much as they mind him playing so many minutes. Plus the dissenters are just louder than those that think Rafer can play. Personally I figure there was a reason our starting lineup had a great Lenovo stat ranking, and a big part of that was Rafer.
Totally agree. Its not who starts, its who plays the most minutes and finishes. Above everything else JUST WIN BABY.
well said. All aroud there was also a reason the offense was sompletely incompetent when he was off the court as well. ANd it isnt about starting...you think some people would understand that. the complainers are certainly louder than those that can understand the valid and legit reasons why rafer would see time on this team.
There's going to be an even ruder awakening when Steve Francis doesn't play like he did 03-04, Mike James doesn't play like he did in 05-06, and Bonzi Wells doesn't play like he did for 2 weeks in April 2006. If Rafer is kept for no other reason than insurance against suckage, he should be kept.
Insane. If Rafer ends up starting after we acquired 3 players to take his position, then the moon is made of cheese. He himself already said publicly the Rockets are obviously going another direction. Do you know something Rafer doesn't? When you add in his two embarrassing well-publicized incidents, that should seal any doubt if one was delirious enough to have any. Rafer doesn't fit Adelman's mold of PG, which is not the traditional distributor first, shoot 2nd type. In Adelman's offense, the PG handles the ball less and must be adept at scoring, specifically after receiving passes. The passing and assist duties are shared more equally between all 5 players. There's going to be some rude awakenings this season for certain players on the Rockets, but Rafer in the starting lineup over MJ and SF definitely will not be one of them. If that happens, Adelman needs to take a drug test.
What is missing in this picture is you have to remember his statistical effectiveness was gaged versus JL3, VS or Head playing the PG spot. A lot different story with James, Francis and Brooks as your reference. That said I think Rafer is trashed more than he should. He was much better than our other options last year and helped us to the 4th seed. Rafer could help quite a few other teams in the league too, including some excellent to average ones like the Celts, Heat, Cavs, Pacers and Nugs. However I think Rafer only starts if James shoots worse than he did last year--that if last year was the start of a big decline for James. James doesn't have to duplicate his success of 2 years ago, he just needs to play like he has most any year to be the better option.
exactly...Adelman does not equal JVG...Rafer will not be starting this season unless injuries occur (knock on wood)
True about the comparision, but that's only half of the story. While Alston was on the floor, the Rockets outscored the other team 109.1 per 100 possession to 100.7 per 100 possession. That's a +8.4 difference, a very good number, and the suckage fo JL3, VS, or Head at PG do not contribute to this number.
The Lenovo stat is just +/-. +/- does not care who your replacement is. All it says is that a player's team outscored the opposing team with him on the floor. You are confusing it with +/- differential. Rafer had a +/- of +7.3/48 minutes. That means that on average, with him on the floor, the Rockets outscored their opponent by 7.3 points. That has nothing to do with his replacement. He had a +/- differential of +10.5. That means that on average, without him on the floor, the Rockets were outscored by 3.2 points (7.3-10.5 = -3.2). That has a lot to do with his replacement.
That is true, but great play of Yao and Tmac, and very solid play of Battier and Hayes as well--often on the floor with Rafer, is a huge part of that story. The Yao-Hayes-Battier-Tmac-Rafer lineup really killed folks. True the +7.3 doesn't involved his replacement, but it does involve Tmac and Yao on the floor a lot of the time. Hayes has the best Lenovo stat of the team at 9.1, but it is more the fact he was so frequently paired with Yao (and I think he was a good compliment on top) than him being the most effective player on the court. The alternatives to Alston and Hayes were so inferior in key ways I think it skews the comparison--our best and most frequent lineups had them in there. You have to wonder if James or Francis got those minutes of Rafer would their Lenovo be +8, +9? Don't know but very possible. These are good points to bring up fellas. I argued a while back it is no obvious thing that Scola should start over Hayes based on certain good things Hayes does well (part of such a good 5 man unit, really complimenting Yao's weaknesses) that potentially Scola may not (e.g., having his man get him and Yao in foul trouble early)--certainly you can make a case for Rafer, but IMO he has better & deeper competition for the PG rotation (James, Francis, Brooks) than we have at PF.
We all love Chuck but let's get real. Chuck is, and forever will be, reserve material. He only started last season because of our glaring lack of depth at PF. He is not big enough and not talented enough to be a starter in the NBA. He is a nice guy to have as a reserve when you need some hustle but that is where it ends.
My main point was that just because Chuck (#1 on the team) and Rafer (#4 on the team) have great Lenovo +/-s doesn't mean they should be starting. Yes both played well with Yao and Tmac and were part of our most effective 5 man units, but that doesn't mean their alternatives we now have (James, Francis, Brooks, Scola) won't do even better. But I'd defintely say Hayes has a better chance than Rafer for starting, though I know it is quite possible (maybe probable), Scola starts over Hayes.
