sheesh TheFreak, Dream has always guarded Robinson his whole life. Robinson is 5 inches taller than Mo. What your plan results in is a more effective Robinson while Duncan moves to the high post to test Dream's defense out there. Dream is not the answer to Duncan in a "MAJOR way", as you put it. We can double Duncan and man Robinson with Hakeem in the closing minutes. That is pretty much how the entire leagues play them TheFreak. MAJOR complaint??! If that is a major complaint for you, then you'd have to say the entire league is wrong. I'll give you a creative match-up try for putting a 6'9 PF on a 7'2 center and a 38-yr Hakeem in the high post defense, but MAJOR....please! Yeah, TheFreak has a brilliant solution to the twin towers that doesn't require a double team. Maybe we should call Rudy! Rudy would roll his eyes. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited February 05, 2001).]
Hoop-T, Yeah, and what else is funny is this cry to match Rogers on Duncan when you are resting Mo'. Oh yeah, Rogers is 6'11 right. It is all about height match-ups. lol Too bad Duncan is so tall, but Rogers is NOT going to defend Duncan better than KT (who's 6'8 if Mo is 6'9--look at them in person), especially when considering how KT makes Duncan's defense worse by pulling him out. People like crash are saying nothing. They want Mo' to play 44 minutes, like a tired Mo' can stop Duncan. So, they agree to rest him. Then they say put in the taller Rogers, but don't consider that makes it easier for Duncan to drop down and stop Mobley's drives, who generates most all our offense while SF is resting. KT, WW, SA, CM, MN is an attacking offense for a short period to rest Mo' and SF. This offense is unfortunate, and I'd rather have two PFs in there. But it is understandable considering our need to keep Duncan out of the lane on defense, and it has produced some great offense when Walt and SA nail their shots. If the role players make their open shots, we beat SA in games when SF and CM produce like they did Saturday. Hell, we beat everybody. case closed!
Duncan is 4 inches taller than Mo. I guess that one extra inch Robinson has makes all the difference. I'll take a 'more effective Robinson' anyday over guarding the best player in the game with Mo Taylor (who happens to be FOUR inches shorter) in the last 3 minutes of the game. What you're saying is exactly the point--the Spurs would post Robinson instead of Duncan! That's what we want! We've taken the ball out of the best player in the game's hands in the final minutes. Let Mr. Clutch Robinson win the game instead of Duncan--that's the entire point. Just like everyone rolled their eyes at Rudy for refusing to put Hakeem on the Mailman instead of Barkley in '98 (I guess he was afraid of Ostertag posting up Barkley?), or REFUSING to double Shaq in the '99 playoffs, or deciding to play inside-out ball with Pippen and 2 slashing rookies on the perimeter. Yeah, Rudy is the KING of X's and O's. LOL.
Did you ever think that they may have wanted to keep Hakeem out of foul trouble....which matchup was favorable to us, Hakeem against Ostertag, or Barkley against Malone? At best, the Barkley and Malone matchup could have gone either way. I think you take your chances there, and keep Hakeem in the middle where he has a clear and distinct advantage. Also, how effective do you think Hakeem would have been out on the perimeter guarding Malone as he is shooting those jump shots? He is long, and could get a hand in his face right? Well, how quickly could Hakeem have recovered as Malone flies by off the dribble? This is not Rocket science (pardon the pun). Height starts meaning a lot less after college for these players. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." [This message has been edited by HOOP-T (edited February 05, 2001).]
Can't say that I have ever discussed my feelings on Mo's minutes, but since you brought it up I don't think 40+ minutes a game is asking too much from a 25 year old man. And yes I do think that Carlos would be better subbing for Mo the other 6 or 7 minutes. You have not addressed my biggist complaint, why stick with Walt? He has been so consistantly bad on offense and defense. But these are just my oppinions. ------------------
Not necessary so much into the height much but to who plays better defense. C-Los without doubt and he is taller to at least make Duncan change his shot. See Shawn Bradley Please watch the game more closely and see how much better defense Carlos plays against the big men. I have watched him specifically in the last few games and he plays excellent defense and rebounds as well or better. Also has more blocked shots. He is also shooting 68%. Yeah I know he doesnt shoot as much, but if Rudy would give him more playing time, there is no telling how good he could help the team. Kenny Thomas does not spread the floor since he cant shoot. He is 31% from the 3ptr and when he does get to the rim he doesnt finish. If you would have said Mo Taylor brings him then I would agree because he is deadly from midrange. ------------------ Rockets Season Ticket Holder
Duncan is not 7'1. Can you add Freak? You are making an erroneous assumption if you think they still aren't attacking with Duncan in the high post. He loves it there, just like Webber. They still go to Duncan. He just moves to the high post. Dream can't handle Duncan in the high post to the degree of calling it a MAJOR Complaint. What's makes it not such a great idea is Robinson is now in the low post for rebounds and swings, rather than out front. Who says they go through Robinson. Major Complaint??! I don't see it. Just double Duncan in the closing minutes rather than use gimmicks, if you want someone else to shoot it. And what is with the Barkley/Malone tangent, Rudy did put Hakeem on him is a several key possessions, and do you want to maybe consider that we are in the 7th game of that series if Malone doesn't bear hug Drexler. How about explaining why Sloan is great by letting Drexler crush Hornachek during the '95 title run rather than putting Russell on him and leaving Horry. Or why Sloan is such a great Xs and Os coach when he only runs one play. Going ahead TheFreak, cut and paste my words to shpae them anyway you want...how lame. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited February 05, 2001).]
Gotta love heypartner's thinking. I question one Rudy move in 2 years and suddenly I'm a 'backseat coach'. I freaking preface my post by saying "I've rarely criticized Rudy since the '99 playoffs". In fact, all I usually ever have is praise for the guy. You can have this thread (or the board, for that matter) as your little platform, hp, it looks like you need it. I don't have time to trade insults. By the way, Duncan is 7'0", Robinson is 7'1". I can add. Hoop-T--my intent was not to go back and debate Rudy's questionable moves over the past few years, merely to show that he does some things X's and O's -wise that are questionable. Take his method of 'defending' the pick-and-roll, for example. He's admitted many times that he chooses to defend it differently than ANY team in the league. The Rockets have always been torched by this play. It's legitimate to question things like this without being labelled a 'backseat coach'.
"I don't have time to trade insults." I have NEVER seen tHEfREAK trading insults. NEVER. I have NEVER seen tHEfREAK cut-pasting each line out of others' post and respond to them out of context. NEVER NEVER NEVER
Understood Freak. I just prefer the analysis as opposed to blatant criticism and name calling. Rudy is there for a reason. He was the dream team coach for a reason, and he has two championships for a reason. It is really easy to say "he shoulda, woulda, coulda." I prefer to be the strategist and look at what other options we had, and try to formulate and project results based on different schematics....and considering all the criticism I have heard about Rudy in here, it is refreshing to see some of what I mentioned above from time to time. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
Thinks for explaining the rules to me. I can only play "what if" as long as I allow you or HP to assign me an oppinion. No Thanks. I have a brain of my own and I will make my own oppionions thanks. By the way I have addressed the Rudy is a Moron quote. If you don't beleive me then there is nothing I can do about that. If you do beleive me then get off of it and go back to playing "what if". BTW instead of beating a dead horse in the ground with the Rudy T statement why don't you address some of the questions I have asked about Walt, Langhi, Collier or Los. I think they are all valid concerns. ------------------
I wasn't explaining any rules to you, my friend. You have your own set, continue to play by those. Nor was I assigning you an opinion. I don't think that was a fair assessment of what I said at all. It is just my preference to have factual and situational analysis as opposed to saying Rudy should have done this or that. That's all I was saying. I will have to look back at your other questions and concers regarding Walt and Collier, et al. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
Hoop-T, come on we are both fans of the Rockets. We both watch the games. We both want the Rockets to win. We may have different oppionions on the best way for that to happen. You say my oppinions should be based more on factual and situational analysis. Well what facts am I leaving out. You critisize me but in almost all of my posts since the original Rudy comment I have mentioned Walt, in most I have mentioned Langhi, Los and Collier. You don't know enough about my posts to know what I have been talking about but you know that my oppinions are not based in fact? At least take time to read my posts if you are going to negitively comment on me and you might find that my posts are not laced with as much name calling as you think. ------------------
Maybe I am not explaining myself well enough here. My preference is to have analytical discussions as opposed to berating coaching decisions. That is as simple as I know how to say it. I read your posts in their entirety, but I became focused on a certain portion that I did not agree with, thus I didn't respond to the other points. Trust me, I read much more than I post around here. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
OK so if you want to discuss 24 hi or 24 low thats fine. But can you tell me that you think Walt should continue to get major minute off the bench? Do I have to stick to Pick N Rolls during discussions or can I question as to why Collier is not being worked into the rotation? ------------------
I like that approach better crash. Apparently, Walt is slumping terribly. He did this last year too. I think the major reason he gets minutes is, he has a tendency to get red hot at times, ie his game against Charlotte on Jan. 27 he had 18 points in 24 min. You just never know with Walt until you play him. The problem is, he has not made the most of his minutes of late. Do you bench him, or hope he will find his offense and play him? He definitely won't find it on the bench. Collier I think is too green and inexperienced to warrant major minutes. Houston has taken its time with Langhi and Collier, and I think with good reason. I don't think either was "NBA ready" when they came in. I can only speculate, but this is my view. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." [This message has been edited by HOOP-T (edited February 05, 2001).]
To Hoop-T and Heypartner, Please consider this post as me extending an olive branch twords you so to speak. I do not wish to continue arguing about what is perceived by you two as whinning or b****ing or constant complaining by Freak, ZRB and Myself on the subject of Rudy T. I appoligize for the 100th time for refering to Rudy T as a moron. I was just venting. Perhaps I should wait a couple of days before posting after a loss. I do have very legitimate concerns and oppinions about the playing time of Los, Walt, Langhi and Collier. If you would like to address those then fine I would love to here your oppinion. If you only want to discuss x's and o's then thats ok to...have fun. Last, we are all backseat coachs on this board. I reserve the right to continue to be a backseat coach, it is harmless and does not effect the Rockets in any negitive way. It is also part of what is fun about being a diehard fan. I hope you will except my little peace offering as I will not be responding to anymore Rudy T name calling posts. I have addressed it many times including the thread "crashes thoughts on Rudy T". ------------------
Never any ill will Crash....I am always up for a hearty debate around here. ------------------ There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
The game is NOT over; it still continues. Sounds like you don't like this game! Bring it crash...bring it. You can't take back saying "Rudy is a moron", after I've read it. You're right; I'm certainly not a front-seat coach. But, I never tell the frontseat coaches what to do. My fun is in analyzing why they are doing what they do. To know the Xs and Os of it. The game I like is to bash and laugh at backseat negative asses when they attempt to bash the coach. I'm a rabid fan; you are a rabid fan. You bash the coach; I don't. You are a backseat coach; I am an upper prom center, wannabe scout. You have stats to back you up, so does every other backseat coach and fantasy head. I have Xs and Os to back me up, where are yours. Oh, I guess you have none. Yet, you call the coach a moron. ...dime a dozen... backseat coaching is fun, but don't be a dime-a-dozen negative ass.
