that figures, as Yao is the only one of the 3 that has not shown that he can either fight off or attack the double-team.
Sorry, I was referring to the Seattle game where he pretty much single-handedly got us the win in the fourth.
Disagree with this. 1.to trade T-Mac, we would have better players who would help us win 7 series game. 2. Yous aid yao certainly hasn't proven to be durable yet, well, Yao has just started to show his best season in NBA and still growing. Yesterday against Warriors is an example. He has done his job and he continues to show people what else he could do
He sure did, but one has to wonder what would have happened if the team was playing Team ball for the whole game, would they be as far behind? I think the team follows Tmac's lead far too often....if they would just run and get early offense then Tmac would get the message. Tmac really needs to get out and run...ala Grant Hill in Phoenix. DD
While I agree he really hasn't done a good job of running the break at a fast pace (he does still slow down at the top of the key), he has done a much better job of playing off the ball and not dominating while everyone stands around and watches. In fact, in a lot of recent first halves, he really doesn't handle the ball at all. Could he do a better job within the system? Of course. BUT, he is doing a better job post injury than pre-injury. Let's hope he continues to improve.
Wrong, Yao has beated double team or even triple teams in this season Like fouling out 2 centers of opponents and game against NY
Whenever A-Rod is mentioned, say Ewing theory and you need speak no further. I am still hoping that T-Mac can "get it" in the remaining time this year, because we'll never be as good without him as we could have been with him.
1. We would never get anywhere near what TMac gives us with his contract. There are about 10 g/f's that I would rather have, and no one would trade them for an injury-prone player making +$20MM 2. Yao's best season was last season...though he is playing great this year as well. Last night was phenominal. I don't think anyone doubts that Yao is the best NBA center today, but with the current NBA defensive rules, you will not beat a SA/Dallas/Phx/Utah/NOH with one superstar and a bunch of role players in a 7 game series like we did in 94.
The real question is not whether this team is better with or without Tmac. If Magic is right, it is whether we are better off in getting an upgrade in our pg position and a good sg in return.
1.You never know, CP3 was a rookie and no one knew he would be this big today. So as long as we could trade for some talent, we might make some "profit" for the long run. It is Morey's job. 2. we are only at the half of the season, Yao is progressing. I believe last season he had trouble with fronting and double team, he started to learn how to get around of this. Yes, we can't win with only one superstar, but who said we wouldn't have next superstar while we have guys shooting 20+ for some games. Scola has potential, and many guys in our team does have guts, we have hope.
I would like to see an upgrade of PG. Look at Suns and Hornets, they play wonderful offense because of their guards, and yes, we are 2nd best defensive team this year. Think about this combination......
1. Everyone knew that CP3 was gonna be a superstar. He was already an elite PG his rookie season. I don't think anyone thought he wouldn't be an elite NBA PG. 2. I agree Yao is progressing this season. No way we beat a top WC team in a 7 game series with Yao as our only superstar. Totally disagree with you
That's a ridiculous theory. NBA contenders are built on having at least 2, and sometimes 3, stars. One star and a bunch of role players is not "addition by subtraction", it is subtraction by subtraction. Of course, if you are aware of what the Mariners did, you'll realize that they did not get better by losing their superstar. They got better because they lost their superstar and replaced him with 2 other superstars! They brought in Ichiro and Bret Boone, who finished 1st and 3rd in the MVP voting that season. I'm all in favor of that theory, as applied to basketball. If we could trade away McGrady and end up with 2 other superstars, like Kobe and Duncan, then of course the team would improve. That's "addition by addition".
You're an idiot on so many different levels. Respond if you want me to actually make a counter-argument to this nonsense.
this doesn't make any sense. That's why you double team. To prevent the other player from consistently beating you...you know, like when you guard him one on one. You're argument is that teams have just said "screw it, no more doubling Amare or Howard....they're just going to beat us anyway. Let's play them one on one and see if that works any better!" - which, again, makes no sense. Amare and Howard don't get doubled because they don't really even get the ball in post-up, typically one on one situations that much in the first place. This thread has only confirmed 1 thing for me. Amare continues to be the most overrated of the bunch. Not only is he not better than Yao, there are more than a couple of other players I'd also choose ahead of him - Boozer, Al Jefferson, David West, etc. As for with Tracy vs. without him...I am in the trade him camp, but won't cry if we don't. We seem to generally win when he and Yao play together anyway.
I disagree completely. Some of the blame for the stagnant offense goes on McGrady, but I think more of it should be shared between Adelman and the rest of the players on the floor. The offensive sets they run when McGrady is on the floor are possibly even more predictable and deliberate than they were last season. There are about two people involved when McGrady has the ball in the half court: McGrady, and whoever comes out for the pick and roll. (Occasionally there is a third if there is a pass-out to a 3-pt shooter who has been standing behind the line for the past 10 seconds.) There is no creativity there. There is no movement. I don't know why people don't realize that McGrady WILL find you if you get open. They are too used to the sets from last year with JVG coaching or something. Occasionally, we manage to create a nice shot for McGrady off of a curl, and I agree that that's a play we should go to more often, but there's no reason that the offense should come to a stand still when McGrady has the ball. He doesn't need everyone else to stop moving in order to make his move. If anything, it will make things easier for him (and everyone else) if they run more elaborate offensive plays. Also, you have to keep in mind that these offensive statistics are GREATLY skewed by the fact that the games McGrady happened to miss were almost all against some of the worst defensive teams in the league. When we played the better ones (such as New Orleans), we were sputtering on offense. The difference is that when we played the better ones with McGrady (such as against San Antonio), our offense may not have looked that pretty still, but we got the win. That is all that matters. Also, the offensive stats are inflated by the fact that we run more without McGrady. Yes, inflated. As in misleading. This team does not need to force a fastbreak like the Warriors or Suns. We just need to execute better in the halfcourt. Ummm... the two bolded statements are in direct conflict with one another... So which is it? Also, how are T-Mac's injuries "chronic"? His chronic injury was his back problem, and he hasn't had that for ages. *Knock on wood* The knee is something entirely new, and there's no real evidence that it's "chronic".
