Positionless Basketball and Rockets 2022-23/beyond

I'd switch Tate with Tari

 

Y'all on that koolaid. I'm gonna be psyched if he's Kawhi 2.0 but come on. The chances he outplays Tate are slim.

 

The chance that he outplays Tate is slim, but not because of talent. He won’t get enough playing time to supplant Tate this year. He also won’t get to play with the A team very often. He is a longer, faster, better shooting version of Tate. He will struggle with fouls, because of the NBA’s silly unwritten rule that rookies have to earn the refs respect. He will probably blow a lot of coverages because he is a rookie. Unless Tate has really improved his 3 pter and can learn to not be a ball stopper, Eason should supplant him late this season unless Silas holds him back like he did with Sengun last year.

 

Koolaid.

The disrespect towards Tate is crazy. I think the criticisms of him are overblown and lacking context, with the praise being unfairly withheld to boot. He's a good player and if he improves he's a premium role player in the league on a team friendly deal in the prime of his career.

Y'all really think Tari Eason is already that guy. A premium role player. Zero career NBA minutes. Just on his way into being Kawhi 2.0 because he's got a similar frame. Outlandish.

 

and that was 25+ years ago... the boundaries have been pushed, the parameters have been explored... thats why people are now resorting to half baked hypotheticals and theoreticals to try to offset the differential in talent....

Which is why i've said all along... if yer a middle of the pack team and u wanna run some theoretical out to the nth degree and try to catch lightning in a bottle - more power to ya... i think you should try to build something more solid - but u take yer shot... but if ur a top level team - just play the game as intended and let the chips fall where they may.

and as always... stuff is situational... pulling Horry out to the perimeter wasn't an issue - when u had #34 patrolling the paint... that was a case of beautifully tapering our gameplan to optimize our players abilities - and maximizing our points of differential.... Which is the core of many of my b****es... folks pushing ideologies and theoretical analytics - over focusing on how to best utilize the actual pieces at your disposal...

and in most instances when folks are heading down the wrong path... u can smell the desperation... 'yeh we're leading the league in free throws - best % shot on the floor - that'll hold up in the playoffs...' 'its all about 3s - hoisting 50+ - even if we dont have top shooters to speak of...' 'uhhhh lets trade our center and figure out this small thing full time on the fly midseason...' lol....

 

Call me crazy but If Tate's improved his 3 ball, I'd move him to the 1 and put Tari in the 3 spot & KPJ as the 6th man.


During Tate's rookie year they ran him at the point quite a bit and the numbers were fantastic - the team scored on over 70% of their possessions for the season when he initiated the offense. (I forget the exact percentage, it's been a while).

This comes with the added benefit of reducing the turnovers too as Tate's numbers are considerably better (34% better) in that aspect than KPJ.

Defensively this lets you hide both Green & Sengun defensively with Tate taking the toughest guard matchup, Bari & Tari the bigs / wings.


My bench would be KPJ, Christopher & KMJ. The others only play in blowouts and injury replacements.

 

Tate gets a lot of love for a 6'4 forward that has basically no offensive game, can't rebound, and is at best a solid defender due to high effort more than anything else.

Basically take PJ Tucker, make him shorter, take away his 3, and make him worse defensively and you have Tate.

 

Tate is undersized for the position he needs to play, that’s not disrespect it’s just a fact. You choose to ignore the obvious gaps in his skill set. He was a poor 3 pt shooter, he was a ball stopper, he was a poor defensive rebounder. Eason is a rookie and I don’t expect him to start for a while, probably not until next year. I am not a Tate hater, but he should not be an NBA starter at the 3 or 4 with his physical limitations and the gaps in his game. There is a reason that the Rockets used their 2 top draft picks on forwards with length and good 3pt shots. It is not disrespectful to Tate to project him as good role player off the bench.

 

You’re crazy.

 

That is a lot of words when you could have just said " you are right".

Juking the system = innovation/creativity

Basketball was never intended to be a static sport. And thank GOD for its evolution.

Otherwise we would all still be shooting balls into peach baskets.

 

Evidently i needed more words - bc you have come to wrong conclusion... lol

There's a diff between 'innovation' and 'juking the system'... pulling defenders into u to get the foul call, bc that is the highest % shot is not innovation - thats a neidermeyer who has no respect for the game trying to 'juke the system'.... Running some idea out to the nth degree - while ignoring the negative aspects of your plan isnt innovative - its shortsighted and stupid. This is where you dont understand the stupidity of MDA... taking bold steps that provide temporary benefits - but are not sustainable and bring about negative repercussions is not innovation - its just creating a smokescreen for the lack of a solid long term plan - fool's gold...

yes, things evolve and change... and that can be attributed to 'innovation/creativity' but did MJ need the triangle - or was he the cream of the crop that was gonna rise to the top regardless?

You can call something like smallball 'innovative' or 'creative' - but if its just shifting your focus to ignore interior defense and rebounding - thats just stupid... 'Innovative' usually carries with it an expectation of the change being beneficial...

Coincidence or causation?
and of course, people wanna constantly point out GSW success as showing u dont need a true center - but they are arguably the greatest distance shooting team of all time... sure if u have the greatest shooters ever assembled - then u can downplay your center position... and again, just as if you have MJ is it really about the triangle?

People like to point out what successful teams do and call that the road map for the 'evolution' of the league... but those are overwhelmingly the teams with the best players - so is it the talent or the game plan? Show me a mediocre team that has success doing something 'innovative' and thats an adjustment to consider... but bc MJ was the goat and was successful, or bc Bron's Superteam Heat was successful or bc the GSW shoot lights out to championship after championship... doesnt mean ANY of their gameplans should automatically be adopted - bc you DONT HAVE THE SAME PLAYERS!

Wow look at the Bulls success - it must be about PJ and that triangle.... PJ goes to Lakers and more championships - couldnt be about Kobe and Shaq - it must be the greatness of PJ and the triangle... PJ goes to NY and doesnt have the best player in the league = total dumpster fire despite his implementing his vaunted triangle... so all along was it the system - or the players?

Whether your best player is prime Shaq or is Steph Curry - you shouldnt have the same game plan regardless...

There are 2 frames of mind...
1) Mold your gameplan to maximize your players positives - and to mitigate their deficiencies...
or
2) u can decide your gameplan - and then try to shove your players into roles they or may not be suited for... while spending the next year or 2 trying to acquire talent that better suits your game plan...

but hey, u supported a guy that wanted to shoot 50+ 3s a game - despite having overall mediocre shooters... so while I believe the first way is the way to go - you, i assume, believe the latter...

 

Not sure if Wiggins fit on the Rockets roster. He was in the right place at the right time on a stacked Warrior team that didn’t require him to handle the ball or play one on one or even make plays. His job was to shoot from the wings and corners and drive when he has the lane or when necessary. In Minnesota he was the go to main playmaker handling the ball and playing iso much of the time. On a weak and young Rockets team devoid of great scoring what will his role be? Unless the Rockets add a big dog or 2 they would be best to leave Wiggins alone.

 

Tate and Sengun don't mesh even if Silas thinks they do. I couldn't agree more. I'd flip Tate for a 1st ASAP and that should be doable. Play Martin/Eason there.

 

It's got nothing to do with Sengun, Tate just isn't a good player. He's too short to be a big and he can't shoot well enough to not be a big... and it's not like there's anything he really does well.

He's a good example of a "positionless" player, in that there's no position he's fit to play.

 

Yeah I don’t quite get the the term. Spoelstra or whoever created it probably was referring to the offensive side of the ball and spoke in hyperbole. There really is no such thing and if you look at the last few championship teams, they all had well defined positions especially at point guard (Jrue, Steph/Draymond, Van Fleet, bron).

Teams are looking for dynamic guys who can dribble and score. And Players aren’t relegated to traditional roles or skillsets at their position and size as players have become leaner and more athletic, but the team still needs a well balanced confluence of these skills to win. Fundamentally the skills required haven’t changed. Passing, rebounding, shooting, defense, playmaking etc. are still at a premium. It’s more about who can fulfill a role rather than those roles or positions going away. Draymond and Bron playing point etc. And you still need a big as Robert Williams and Looney showed us in the finals.

 

Wood holding the ball isn’t on Wood? I don’t get it. No matter the coaching bad players have bad habits. As a coach you have to give and take and accept these things sometimes especially when the guy was one of your best players. All you can do is teach, yell, drill but ultimately the players execute.

 

Why would a rookie be better than a guy who has proven he belongs in this league. Don’t get such hatred for Tate when he has winning habits and puts in extra effort to try to get his team a win—something highly desired by teams.

 

Yes but as a coach it’s on you because the team is yours. Responsibility goes up the chain of command. If there no accountability on the coach what’s his purpose?

 

Do you really not understand "positionless basketball" or are you just being willfully ignorant?