Who is going to replace Rice when he retires or is ineffective in a few years? Langhi? Are the Rockets planning on grooming someone that will provide the skills he does? One of the problems with taking on a talented player that is so close to the end of his career when you are rebuilding, is that you better have someone in mind to replace him when he leaves. I expect Rice to be pretty effective this coming year. But what happens when he's gone, and there's nobody out there to consistently stretch the defense? We'd either have to change our style of offense or get someone else. Are the Rockets counting on Langhi eventually being able to provide all that shooting and scoring (15-20 ppg from the outside)? If he can't, we could be looking at taking a big step back when Rice leaves. You have to look at it as Rice is not going to put the Rockets into the elite. He's going to win the Rockets some games, maybe even get them into the playoffs, but then what? Is having him now giving the young guys a false sense of security? He'll make the game easier for them for a little while, but then he'll be gone. Who's going to take his place? The only person I see on the roster with any potential to be a gunner from the outside is Langhi. What if he doesn't pan out?
You have an excellent point, Freak. I am of the opinion, by the time Rice retires, either Langhi or Morris will have developed into the kind of SF we want on this team. Langhi will likely turn into the kind of scorer (minus the post up game) that Rice is, and Morris will have more of a well-rounded game, providing defense and rebounding as well as a good outside shot. You are right, when Rice leaves, if we do not get someone new, we might have a small step back as a team, but I don't think it will be drastric enough to knock us out of the playoffs.
What if he DOES pan out? What if he makes the game easier for the players and they learn from that and improve their game? What if he helps them get to the playoffs and give them playoff experience, which makes them hungrier to improve and get to the playoffs and go further and further? Griffin is the SF of the future, he and Mo will likely take turns switching at SF and PF. What if having Rice helps improves Griffin's shooting so that he can man the SF spot? He could learn a lot from a pure shooter like Rice working with him in practice. This team needs a veteran, especially a veteran shooter who could teach the young players. The Rockets could easily go out and sign a shooter. They may have cap space when Rice's contract runs out, or they'll have exceptions, and they'll be an attractive team to join if Rice works out and they become an annual playoff team. To me, the potential good outweighs the potential bad.
A team evolves all the time. Just because we have a 3 point shooting SF right now (if the deal isn't nixed) doesn't mean that we can't replace him with someone different, like Griffin, who at that point should be a player who can play both inside and out on the perimeter (though he'll never have Rice's range) and blocks shots. IMO that we really didn't need Rice that badly anyway - Mo and Steve are both very good outside shooters, and Cuttino's capable if not always as accurate. We have plenty of shooters and scorers, although Rice will certainly help. To me the bigger question is post game. I have my doubts about the post-up abilities of every guy on our roster. If Rice is still our best post player in 2 or 3 years, we've got serious problems. There's not a playoff team out there who doesn't have someone capable of operating with his back to the basket when necessary.
Six or 7 years ago I never would've though the Rockets would win back-to-back championships. Well damn. Three or 4 years ago, I never would've guessed a player of Steve Francis' caliber that went as high as he did in the draft would be a Rocket. Two years ago, I never would have thought Hakeem would wear another jersey. Be retired perhaps, but wear another jersey? Never. Half-a-year ago, I never would have thought we could swing a deal for Eddie Griffin. I was just praying we would get something decent or package our picks to move up to #6 or #7 and get somebody who would turn out to be decent. Those expectations may be exceeded. The point of all this is that you can't tell with today's roster who Rice's replacement may be. Rice's replacement may be Morris for all we know. Then again, Rudy & Co. may engineer a trade 1 year from now where we trade for someone we aren't thinking of today.
I agree with DoD about the unpredictability issue. Langhly and Morris are 2nd rounders. If they stick on NBA rosters for 8-10 years that is success, but that odds are pretty against them becoming quality starting 3s in the league. You want to be hopeful, but realistic too. I think the odds are comparable that Griffin will be our future starting 3 as either of the other two mentioned, only because though Griffin is far more of a blue chipper he might play at the 3, 4 or maybe even 5--depending on both what he grows into and with what other players we have. So between Langhly, Morris and Griffin, I'd say we might have a 50/50 chance we have our future SF. But assuming Rice comes, we have 3-4 years to see if one of these guys will work out there or 3-4 years of potential trades, drafts or using our MC FA exemptions. In 2 of the last 3 years we have pulled plums from the draft who went far lower than we were in position to pick on our own, so you never know. However I also agree with SamC, because 1) we have more young guys with potential at SF than C, and 2) Cs typically are a lot harder to find and cost more to trade for than SFs, I am far more concerned about our future C or PF/C combo.
I think that too many people seem to assume that Rockets management has some sort of "master plan." Like, hmm... what will our starting 5 be in 4 years, plus our eight man rotation? They don't know. It's almost impossible to "craft" a team... just ask Jerry Krause. Draft picks don't pan out. Free agents decide they'd rather take less money elsewhere. The little ping pong balls don't behave. There's no telling what'll happen in the future. We might get lucky, we might screw up. But Rice was the best player we could get right now, and I hope that Rockets management always does what is best for the team. And if they do that, I'm confident that in 3 or 4 years, there will be another solution at the 3.
There are a couple of ways to look at it. One is, Rice makes us better right now. There's no disputing that. I'm excited about the team possibly making the playoffs. The other side to that, though, is that we will never become an elite team with Rice, so why waste the time? Why not just throw Griffin, Langhi, Morris, or whoever in there right now and get on with it? Rice could be seen as a "transition move", or he could be seen as a quick fix. So he was the best option available right now. The Rockets don't always sign the best option out there just because that person happens to be available. Marc Jackson was the best big man option available, and I think everyone would agree the Rockets need big men. Yet, the Rockets aren't signing him. I don't think Rice was signed just because he was the "best player available". You have to have a long-range plan, and I think the Rockets do. I just want to know how Rice fits into that. Just saying "teams evolve" and "you never know what will happen" isn't very good long-term planning. I used to laugh at rebuilding teams who would go for quick fixes, struggling to get a few wins to make people think they knew what they were doing and keep people in the seats, knowing all along that the Rockets were smarter than that. Is Rice a quick fix?
Well, I think Rice is a quick fix, to a certain degree. I don't think playing Griff would have been preferable for this season. It sounds like Rudy is not prepared to start Griffin there, and I would say there is likely a good reason for that. He is raw. I would have been surprised if he had developed into a high producing role player in 3 years even if he was starting. In 3 years, his role will likely have changed from SF/PF to PF/C, so I don't know if getting a full season at SF will help his development any more than playing behind Mo Taylor with Rice at SF. And I am sure Les wants those butts in the seats. Rice wins more games for us RIGHT NOW, and that is doubly important in Houston with our fair-weather fans. Rice can keep the attendance up until he leaves, and then we have a more developed Griffin to send out with our other young guys who have had 3 more years to improve and gel together. At that time, I think Rice leaving won't be that great of a loss, because he will be older, and likely MUCH less effective. Rice seems, to me at least, to be an excellent transition piece.
Rice is kind of a 3 year stop gap type of guy. I wouldn't be too worried, either Langhi or Morris should step up, or if Griffin ends up a 3, he could too. He makes us a good bet for the playoffs, and a big time spoiler when we get there. What sane team would want to really compete with a team that has 4 guys who have scored 18 ppg or more at some point in their career, and can run anyone out of the building? With the exception always ramping up, swing positions are the easiest to fill via MCE. If Langhi/Morris/Griffin don't become solid 3s, we'll pick one up when the time arises. The better question is, who will replace Rice if his physical fails?
Well, we would probably do another sign and trade with Anderson to another team because there was more than one team interested in him as it said in the Chronicle. I don't know if we are gonna get another SF though. Rudy would probably put in Walt at the start, notice how i said Rudy since he loves shooters and also The Wizard has a strong relationship with Francis and Mobley. He doesnt have any D, but he also used to avg around 15-17 ppg with the Kings and Raptors. In '99-'00, he avgd. 11ppg with the Rockets. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/walt_williams/career_statistics.html?nav=TextNavBar Last season, he just had a bad season. But hey, if a trade for JWhite comes up for Walt, i would go for it. I'm just tryin to show that Walt aint as bad as you guys say he is.
Teams have long-range plans in terms of existing stars on their team. For example, I can guarantee that the Rockets' long-range plan is to have Francis, Mobley, Griffin, and Taylor as the nucleus of a future championship team. They then surround these guys with complementary talent. It's what they did to win a championship with Hakeem. They acquired Rice, in my opinion, to add to the scoring punch and outside shooting capabilities of the team and become a moving threat in the offense. Bullard was not that player and neither was Anderson. The only thing an NBA team can do for the long term, in my opinion, is to devise an offense and hypothesize that offense and the types of players that best fit that offense. They cannot dictate what players will land in their laps in 1 or 2 years. Just as the Rockets could not dictate Eddie Griffin being available until the time of the draft. If they had a long-range plan, I'm sure it was revised when Griffin became available. Just as it was probably revised when Francis became availabe. Just as it was probably revised when the NBA instituted new rulings on zone defenses. This goes back somewhat to the theory that at times you get players to execute an offense, but other times, gems fall into your lap that dictate you create an offense for the player(s). Outside of "Winning", I doubt there are too many teams that have long range plans that run 5 or 6 years into the future (if that's what you meant by long-range). As for the Rice acquisition, there's no telling what Rudy and/or CD is thinking. Maybe they just wanted a veteran influence. Maybe they just wanted more offensive output on the floor. Maybe they just wanted a team that could outscore most teams in the NBA as it stands. The Rockets are known for "quick fixes". Sometimes they work, sometimes they bomb. Throughout their history, we've seen acquisitions such as Mike Woodson, Sleepy Floyd, Clyde Drexler, Charles Barkley, Scottie Pippen, etc. We have a history of quick fixes. If Rice is a quick fix, then it's nothing new. But then I don't think many of us really know what Rudy and CD are thinking, so we'd just be sitting here guessing. I'll go back to my belief that Rudy and CD adjust to what's available and try to fit their offense around what they have or can obtain. If you believe that, as I do, then you can see why, based upon the trading history of this franchise, that looking even 3 or 4 years into the future is a moot point.
I think Rice was more about what they could get for Anderson than anything else. With Rice, you get fewer years and less money overall than you would've paid for Anderson. If it is a choice between Rice for three years and Anderson for 6, I'll take Rice for 3. Also, it is very difficult to project a long-term solution at three because we have so little information about Griffin, Langhi and Morris' abilities at that position. It is possible that the future 3 is already on the team and just needs a few years to develop.
I wouldn't consider Rice a quick fix because he still has three years under contract and should be effective for those years. I expect the rockets to go with either Morris or Griffin at the three after Rice's term is up. The rocket's traded a 1st rd pick for Morris because they think he'll be a valuble commodity. Langhi, in my opinion, will become a sam cassell type of player for Rudy....instant offense from the bench. Griffin will probably end up as the starting PF or center. Having a quality starting PF like Mo come off the bench would be great. Honestly, I think the rockets' long term strategy is to appease crispee by getting another big man. Can Rudy pull a bigger KT out of the late 1st rd?
Did anyone see Griffin throwing out the first pitch of the sundat Astros game? ...Man he looked really big. I know the proportion was relative on the average players, but he did not look skinny at all.
I agree. But to what degree is Rice "complimentary talent"? The guy has more skills than your average role player. What I'm saying is he should be a pretty significant, not so easily replaceable part of the team while he's here. Then he'll be gone, or not effective. You don't just replace one of the best outside shooters in the game. What do we do when he leaves? Are you saying it's easy to replace a Glen Rice? It seems like we'd have to alter our offensive approach. Again, agreed. But if our offense is "clear the lanes so Francis and Mobley can have their way", and Rice is a big part of that, what good does it do us to run that offense if we have no way of replacing Rice in a few years? Do the Rockets have someone in mind who can stretch the defense like Rice in a few years? If not, it would seem we would have to change our approach, no? I mean, if you're banking on Langhi to become one of the best outside shooters to ever play, then I suppose that's your plan for replacing Rice. Well, the first two don't count, since that was before CD was running things. As for the others, the Rockets were already an elite team. They made those moves to go for a title. When you're window is small, you've got to go for it. Can you say that the Rice move was made with a championship in mind? When you're a lottery team, like the Rockets, any move you make should have the big picture in mind, don't you agree? The Rockets obviously made the decision that trading Shandon for Rice increased their chances of winning a championship down the road. I'm just looking for a little reasoning behind that, that's all.
Can we be competitive one season at a time? Can we put the best offense for the team on the floor right now, w/o worrying about a role player's availability 4 seasons from now?
Achebe -- you're assuming that it's going to be easy to replace Rice. He's one of the best outside shooters ever...he's got defenses running out to guard him, flailing hopelessly, just on reputation alone. It's not like you can just sign a Stephen Jackson or Mario Elie and get what you had in Glen Rice -- the Rockets were willing to take a 9 mil a year cap hit for a reason. Once again, I like the move, because it could get us into the playoffs...but how does it help us win a championship down the line? Unless you're happy with just being in the playoffs every year, like Phoenix -- I have no problem with that.
