Here comes a logic break. TMac said he has been ready since the start of this season, and the team said no. TOF said, please let TMac play because he was ready. Now, the stats did not show TMac performed better than Ariza, TOF said TMac is on one leg. If TMac is on one leg, why should he play anyway?
The reason Trev takes these shots is cos he is apparently our go to guy, but just dus not do a very good job at being that player. Tmac is better at taking these low percentage shots
a healthy TMAC is a healthy loser. an injured TMAC is an injured loser. TMAC is a superstar loser. I am glad he is not playing.
Let's do a more apt comparison. THIS YEAR'S STATS....and do it on a per 48 minute basis just to make it equal. Link to THIS YEAR'S 48 minute stats Tmac per 48 minutes: 19.8 ppg 5.2 rpg 6.3 apg .368 FG% .395 AFG% Trevor per 48 minutes: 20.3 ppg 7.1 rpg 4.5 apg .379 FG% .439 AFG% So, when you compare apples to apples, in production THIS year, which is really all that matters....it is not that far apart...both are struggling but only one is healthy enough to keep up on the fast break and on defense. DD
Sure, why not? You can draw the line wherever you like, but the facts are the facts. He has not played well, that is the point......you guys are wanting him to get more minutes. Landry played well in his short stints and earned more minutes....why is that so hard to fathom? Is it impossible to play well in 8 minute stints? Just sounds like more excuses.....because he could actually get worse...... And the stats are what they are........and that does not include the lack of being able to keep up with the other guys on the floor or get back on defense...does it? DD
Sure...what else is there? This year is what we are comparing, right. The players THIS year, what they are doing on the floor THIS year.... Nothing else matters. Go ahead and make the excuse about him needing more time, I contend he has not earned more time because he has stunk it up.... He could be more efficient and be forcing the coach to play him more...but...the facts say otherwise. DD
Just stick to your qualitative analyses (if you can call what you do analyses), dakota. Anybody can tell you that per 48 minutes is an effective statistical tool only when player x gets consistently adequate playing time. Tmac has been playing 7:30 minutes per game. That is not enough to draw any sort of conclusion. THIS year, McGrady has played about a games worth of minutes. No, you cannot use that to say that "HE'S PLAYED ONE GAME ALREADY, GEEZ!!!" because these minutes were spread out among 6 games. Additionally, McGrady has looked way quicker this year than last, and with adequate minutes, I'm sure that he would produce better numbers as well.
First it was Skip, then Bonzi, Artest, and now Ariza...maybe you have a point but you'll find at least 1 starter on any average team shoot 40% or below from the field. Of course you need efficient players to win big and that's why neither Ariza or T-Mac fits the bill today. I say keep Ariza but let him play more of a Battier role instead of a scorer.
You just can't make someone a star if he doesn't have the talent required. I don't know what the GM and coach are thinking. If Ariza can be a star, he would have been a long time ago.
Not really, he has looked somewhat better on offense but has not been able to keep up on the break or on defense. And where do you draw the line? Couldn't you say, well...Trevor has only played 30 games, that is too small a sample size to get an accurate viewpoint of what he will become? See, it is a slippery slope, isn't it? Why compare last year's stats, it is not apples to apples... Heck, honestly there is no way to compare them, but if you look at how Tmac has performed you can see why Adelman decided to NOT increase his minutes. DD
that is just lame. extrapolate seven freakin minutes of play? really? and you consider that apples to apples? you are definitely better than that sir!
The point is that is what the Rockets are looking at....how he performed in limited minutes, and that is not even including his inability to run back on defense or keep up on the break. Sorry, he is just not ready......and the team is better with him sitting on the bench right now. DD
we all know tracy has been nothin but lame on D.. but your per 48 mins stat analysis just doesnt make any sense.. there are so MANY factors to consider.. how abt adjusting to team mates? fast style of play? inability to shed old habits of slacking on defense? you cant compare those things without a bigger set of games...
Well sure you can...but if the data doesn't fit your agenda, you are going to complain about the results and make excuses. Now, agreed it is a very small sample size, but......are you saying he could NEVER play well in a small sample size? Because there are tons of cases of players doing well in short stints.....just look at Chase Budinger this year, Von Wafer last year, Carl Landry his first year.... They earned more time by playing well in short bursts, why is that so hard for Tmac's fans to understand...if he was playing well...he would have EARNED more time. But he didn't..... DD
Wow I really don't understand how people argue with DD about T-mac he has never shown an subjective opinions about the situation. It is really like talking too a brick wall that has made his mind up and will never budge, if T-mac became the player he was when he first came to the rockets he would still think we should develop our young players. So my question is why argue with someone who is so close minded???
but your stats comparison was not apples to apples.. you know that.. and yes. i agree he is not yet thr.. and it would take sometime.. but I for one believe that it is ok to give him a chance in a game against a team like the nets etc and see what he is got.. one LAST chance.. no little 7 mins stretches.. but the fact is .. he is not in the long term plans.. that way.. what RA and DM are doing makes absolute sense..
