Les Alexander or Chris Webber

Is it possible that this is less about Webber's touches than it is about Les's wallet?

I don't see how money plays a factor here, unless we resign Mo exclusively and not anyone else. The way I see it, we can spend 12.6 million dollars on either Chris Webber or on resigning Mo Taylor and role players. You're spending the same money in both scenarios.

------------------
EDDIE, EDDIE, EDDIE!!!

Draftsource.net-- the premier source for draft info. Profiles, rankings, mock drafts, and more!

The Mo Taylor Fan Site

 

What do you think would increase ticket purchases more:

Signing Mo Taylor or Chris Webber?

------------------
This post contains no smilies, you must judge my seriousness on your own...

"I'm a Level 18 mage, wanna form a party?" -- Dr of Geekdom in search of a D&D buddy...

 

The sellout streak ended in 99-00.

------------------
Protrolls.com!

"I want to be like Olajon." -Sagana Diop has the right idea...

 

By getting Griffin at a rookie price scale, and someone who balances Taylor's weaknesses, it makes more financial sense to get more key players than you would if you obtained Webber as a free agent.

I think they figure Griffin will be as good or better than Webber in 5 years when the team reaches its peak. And this way, they have more players for depth.

... And with the Griffin and Morris acquisition, there is an excitement momentum to take advantage of, and not run the risk of alienating anyone by chasing after Webber, and ending up with less at the end.

It is clearly the lower risk to sign our existing players, including Dream, and even Anderson, if he's willing to come off the bench.

... now I would hope there's a trade or two in the works for Cato and Williams ... and Nasr or LaFrentz would look good in a Rockets uniform...

of course, maybe in all this excitement, perhaps Francis can kick Cato's butt to get his feet on the ground and develop good work habits and attitude. Cato has the talent to be the Rocket's center of the future, but someone needs to take him by their side and do some serious reprogramming and physical conditioning to cut down on injuries, fouls and insecurities ...

------------------
the more I know, the more I know I don't know...

 

I don't think it is because Les wants to save money, because somehow I have the feeling we will be maxed out either way. However, I agree with Achebe - Kobe and Shaq are not best friends, and they don't have to be. I don't care if Mo and Steve and Cat love each other - I'd rather have Steve and Cat and Chris, as long as they pass each other the ball and want to win together. When you win, the chemistry comes automatically.

------------------
Rockets' offseason tasks in order of priority:

• Get rid of Cato under any circumstances.
• Sign Chris Webber.
• Re-Sign Hakeem.
• Re-Sign Moochie and AirBullard.
• Pick up the Langhi option for another year.
• Trade for Bo Outlaw and Raef LaFrentz.

.....-'-.
../`.....|__
/`....--`-,-`
'-|`...o.'<-....[]
..\....._\__).\=`
...C_..`....,_/
.....|.;----'

come back with your original name...now that everyone is changing their screen names anyway

 

Now I know why we REALLY got Griffin - if Cato doesn't deliver, Griffin will punch him in the face immediately every single time .

 

There are alot of explanations for the low attendance.

For one, Houston has fickle fans.

Secondly, the Rockets didn't exactly win them over with their piss poor home games at the beginning of the season.

Third, some people don't like the brand of ball they play nowadays.

The WORST thing that could possibly happen for this team did last season in regards to boosting attendance. That first game against Minnesota on Haloween was a very, very painful game to watch in person and some fans were asking for their money back at halftime.

They need to show the kind of effort they do in comebacks and on the road at home on a more consistent basis. They had a false self confidence in themselves because they were playing at home, and it hurt them periodically throughout the season.

That Minnesota game, and other early poor performances at home, really turned off some people that could have been regular attendees to games.


------------------
The Smurfs were Communists

[This message has been edited by tacoma park legend (edited July 01, 2001).]

 

I think the tickets are sold when we got Griffin. Let me tell you something WINNING brings in fans, not just name brand players. Getting Webber SOUNDS good, but there are only so many basketballs in a game! Whose growth gets stunted with Webber? Is Griffin allowed to develop into a dominant low post scorer!? We're talking about FOUR go-to players! You can only have so much of a good thing! And I would take a team of 3 superstars and a boat load of talented roleplayers, then 4 superstars, and a few roleplayers because TEAMS win championships, not superstars. Superstars just push them over the top. Think about it, if it was just "who is the better player", then yes that would make sense. But Rasheed Wallace is a more talented player now then Horry was back in 1995, who would you have rather had in 1995 Horry or Rasheed? Better player doesn't alway = better fit. Pippen is a better player then Mario Elie, who would you have rather had on the '95 team against the Suns, Pippen or Elie?

------------------
"Win if you can, lose if you must but always cheat!" - Jesse Ventura

[This message has been edited by RocksMillenium (edited July 01, 2001).]

 

Look here: Webber may be better than Taylor, he may put up MVP type numbers and his teams get to the playoffs, but the Rockets would be better overall staying away from him. This is actually one of those rare times when u stay away from the superstars. I think that adding Webber to the lineup of Francis, Mobley and now EG would certainly look great on paper, but the play would certainly hinder our younger guys developement.

I think Mo Taylor would end up being a better signing for us. He's 3 years younger than Webber and has much more knowledge and improvement to gain. According to this link: http://www.nba.com/playerfile/maurice_taylor/index.html?nav=page it says Mo didn't play organized b-ball until he was a soph in hs. And b/c of his inexperience, that is probably y doesn't rebound very well. Apparently he is a hard worker and is very willing to improve and if that is the case, I bet he has been working on improving his rebounding this offseason. I think he is the right player to start for us at PF.

Some concerns I have is that he better not ask for too much money. He is not a premier PF in the NBA...yet anyways and his numbers aren't indicative of even near a max contract. If he wants to be a part of what the Rockets are building, he better not screw himself by being selfish. His role although an important one, can be done by someone else. Another concern is that if Griffin is destined to play PF in the future, what do we do w/ Taylor if we sign him to a long term deal? Either Griffin will always be a SF and we keep Taylor at PF or Taylor will eventually be moved to another team or to backup PF. Just some thoughts of mine.

------------------

 

Pippen. Is that even a fair question? If Pippen is holding down the starting 3 position instead of Elie, I would be inclined to feel that our championship run would have been much less suspenseful. Just a tremendous help defender and man-to-man defender back then. His 3 point shot might be a little suspect compared to Elie's, but he just had a vastly superior game back in 1995.

Everyone dogs Pippen because he disappointed in his one season stint with the Rockets. Dog him all you want, but don't undermine his entire career. Don't go back and try to rewrite history and claim that his effectiveness was solely dependent on MJ, and that he doesn't belong on the 50 greatest team. Because that's BULL****!

It was quite obvious that when he came to Houston, his physical capabilities had greatly declined. You could see the explosiveness wasn't there. For a great defensive player, your athletic ability is everything. Once you start losing it, it becomes quite noticeable on the defensive end. In 1999, you could painfully tell after the 1st preseason game against the Spurs that it just wasn't there for Pippen anymore.

But back in 1995, he was a BEAST. He was just a demon on the defensive end. He also relied so much on his athletic ability to be an effective scorer. It's no wonder that he is a mere shell of his former self during 1999.

Guys like Jordan and Malone can have long effective careers because they are elite middle distant shooters. So a drop in their athletic capabilities isn't as noticeable on the offensive end. But with players like Jordan and Payton, once your athleticism declines, your defense greatly suffers and is quite apparent.

That's why playing the Sonics these past few season isn't the same nightmare for Houston fans that it used to be. Payton is no longer that dominant defensive force we once knew.

This last part should belong in a separate thread, but I'll just spit it out here anyways. Stevie Francis is not going to have a very long and productive career. I fully expect his career to greatly decline somewhere in his early 30's, just like Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars, and every other not so tall, but damn good guard that came before Francis. Kevin and Isiah were such fantastic player that relied on their gifted athleticism. But once their physical abilities declined, their game abruptly suffered. Same the fate will befall on our beloved Stevie. Stockton never relied on his athleticism to make him special. For players like Francis, Johnson, and Thomas, their athleticism is what really differentiates themselves and makes them so special.



------------------

 

Achebe, I have specifically addressed both of your questions in other threads. You either didn't read my answers or didn't like them.

Taken from another thread on the issue of chemistry and players being "friends":

I sure wish people would stop bringing up the "but Webber and Francis are friends!" argument to try to refute chemistry concerns. We're talking about on-court chemistry here. I'm sure 80% of the NBA are "friends" with each other. That says nothing about on-court chemistry. Drexler and Barkley are very close friends -- on the court they had serious problems playing together. Mobley and Francis are perhaps too good of friends, if that's possible, and it shows on the court with favoritism at times. The fact that players may be friends is not relevant.

From this you can draw an answer to your silly question, no, it does not matter that Bryant and O'Neal aren't friends. That has nothing to do with their chemistry on the court.

Posted in another thread, regarding Rudy's history of acquiring stars (Drexler, Pippen, Barkley):

Those comparisons aren't relevant. Those teams had already maxed out their potential. Would you be willing to trade for Barkley, Drexler, or Pippen now in their mid-30s? This team is rebuilding, those teams needed one missing piece to get them to a championship in a 1-2 year window. The comparison doesn't work.

If Webber was in his mid-30s and past his prime, would you still want him? Then don't compare this situation to the others.

For other opinions on the matter, try Jeff's thread This is Not an All-Star Team. By the way, it's not an All-Star team, he's right.

And if Les is so worried about money, why would he want to keep a late first round pick, who would get guaranteed money in the future? Wouldn't he want to see us give away more first-rounders? Last I checked Morris isn't guaranteed one cent.

Oh, and of course I would've rather had Elie over Pippen. Pippen can't play the inside-out game, that became obvious when he was here.

 

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the Rockets honestly believe that Webber is a poor fit financially and as a player for this team?

The Rockets (Les included) never shrink from spending money on people. However, this may very well be a case of spend everything on one guy or smaller amounts on several guys. If signing Webber meant losing Hakeem, Moochie, Shandon and Taylor, is it worth it?

The key to nearly every team in the league that has success is great talent manifested in a couple of players and less-than-great talent manifested in role players that sit on, hopefully, a pretty deep bench.

I would like to have Webber if it was possible to get him AND bring back our important role players AND acquire quality depth. But, that really isn't within the realm of possibility. If it comes down to Webber and some CBA scrubs to fill holes or Taylor and solid veteran talent to fill holes, I'll take Taylor.

------------------
How the hell should I know why God would allow the Holocaust. I don't even know how the electric can opener works. - from Hannah and Her Sisters

 

DaMan,

So I take it that you think Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, and others are going to have short and unproductive careers? When Iverson loses his quickness he's done for? Davis has no shot, so he's even in a bigger hole than the other two when his athleticism goes, right?

I don't buy that. Players, especially guards, change their games over time to deal with the inevitable loss of some of their athleticism.

Payton is still a damn good defensive player , and has great lateral quickness even into his 30's.


Take Terrell Brandon for example. One could argue that he's been playing the best ball of his career these past few seasons even though they weren't in the timeframe that's considered a player's "prime". Brandon also doesn't have any special Stockton attributes either, he just became wiser as his career went on and developed a killer midrange game.

Using your logic, it would seem you'd think that a guard like Andre Miller, who doesn't rely on his athleticism, is going to have a more productive career than Francis, Davis, etc. The players mentioned, Francis and Davis, won't play the same game in a few years that they do now. They'll play more like Miller, but their still present athleticism even in their latter years is what's going to make them special.

------------------
The Smurfs were Communists

[This message has been edited by tacoma park legend (edited July 01, 2001).]

 

Freak,

We always agree on everything. Must be our chemistry!

------------------
How the hell should I know why God would allow the Holocaust. I don't even know how the electric can opener works. - from Hannah and Her Sisters

 

I never said anything about short and unproductive careers. I just think 10-12 years in the league is when they'll be real good players. To me that is a long career, especially for a guard. I'm just saying that relatively short guards who rely on their athleticism shouldn't be expected to a career like Kareem, Barkley, Olajuwon, and so on and so one. How many top level guards around 6'3" and under are still All-Stars after 12 years in the league. You would be hard pressed to find one. Look at Isiah, I believe his last All-Star appearance was in 1992, 11 years after he was drafted. The very next season, you could see that Isiah was on his last legs. Kevin Johnson drafted in 1987. His injury plagued 1997 season when he put a scare in Seattle in the 1st round was the last time one could say he could dominate a game.

Players like Iverson, Franics, and Davis will be role players a lot faster than comparable talents who are taller and are playing other positions.

What makes Iverson different from all the other 6 foot, 100 and nothing pound guards in the world. His quickness and explosiveness virtually has no equal. Are you telling me that once his athleticism wanes, he is still going to be able to consistently have a vast impact on a game? I don't think so. Name me a short guard who was an All-Star after the age of 32 and I could probably name you 10 forwards who did the same feat.



------------------

 

The difference though DaMan that while Pippen would have manned down the defense 1.)He didn't fit on that Rockets team at the time, and 2.)The Suns still would have went bonkers on the Rockets. Elie's perimeter shooting helped relieve the pressure inside, Pippen couldn't have done that. Pippen is better suited to a running team and a team with motion offense.

------------------
"Win if you can, lose if you must but always cheat!" - Jesse Ventura

[This message has been edited by RocksMillenium (edited July 01, 2001).]

 

Sorry Daman,

I thought you were implying such by the "not going to have a very long and productive career" part.

Obviously big men are going to have longer, productive careers in most cases because you can't teach height.

I think the same applies to shooting guards in terms of having to change your game over time, not just the smallish Iverson type guards. Vince Carter has already realized this, which is why he's developed a killer shot. Bryant's developing a midrange game, because his quickness isn't out of this world like Iverson.

The thing with Iverson is that he HAS TO be that quick. When his quickness goes, I would think he'd struggle more than the Davis's and Francis's of the world. Sure, he'd still be a blur, but he'd have a tougher time getting off shots against the defense, which is already a problem for him now. If anyone's going to struggle, it's Iverson, because those other players games aren't completely predicated upon quickness, like Iverson's is. Every aspect of Iverson's game is dependent on his ability to create seperation, and at his height(5'10), even the smallest decrease in quickness is going to have an effect on him.

The other guards have a BIG height advantage on Iverson, probably about 5 inches, therefore a decrease in athleticism isn't going to effect their ability to get the shot off as much as it will to Iverson. Don't overestimate his quickness, because despite his freakish quickness, even now, when his quickness is at an alltime high, he has a hell of a time just getting his shot off.

------------------
The Smurfs were Communists

[This message has been edited by tacoma park legend (edited July 01, 2001).]

 

Two reasons I've heard proposed for the weak Rocket crowds....the 70s migration of thousands of family's to Houston (where it was booming) from the North (where it was not). These people brought their own alliegances with them from their former homes. Damn Yankees. Also, during the 90s the hardcore (loud) Rockets fans began do be displaced by Yuppie pseudo-Fans sipping champagne and eating cucumber sammiches, who bought tickets because the Rockets were winning and had superstars and were on national TV.

------------------