Adelman said he wanted to continue to start Battier. If the head coach, who knows more about his team than any of us, thinks that way -- shouldn't we at the very least admit its debatable?
People don't understand that its not about talent level, its about when your players are in the game. You would bench Artest to avoid the situation where you have to bench to two stars for 5-6 minutes per half. Artest is still going to get 34+ minutes a game. Under this scenario he would probably start each half on the bench for 5-6 minutes and play for the rest of the half. There are only 3 reasons why you WOULDN'T bench Artest: 1. The guy starting instead of him is a scrub (which Battier isn't) 2. You need more help with your starting unit than you do your bench unit (which we don't) 3. For some reason he wouldn't be as effective (we've seen him play well with the 2nd unit already)
I think Rick will let Shane come off the bench when he comes back. Take the rust out of his game and get him to game shape. After a few games, I think we can see Shane back in the starting line-up again and Ron come off the bench. Shane is the most effective when he starts with Yao and Tmac coz he can shoot that corner 3 better than Ron and this lets opposing team hesitant to double Yao or help on Tracy when he drives to the basket while still maintaining the perimeter defense that Ron gives to the starting line-up. Ron will come off the bench coz he can create his own shot and will have the ball most of the time while Yao and Tmac is resting. Ron has the most minutes of all the Rockets now coz Shane is not available. Right now, we can see Ron go to the bench 1st and come back in the 2nd quarter when both Yao and Tmac is out. But when Shane comes back, he will be the 1st to come off the bench at the middle of the 1st quarter to replace either Scola or Shane depending on matchups then When Yao and Tmac goes out, Ron will be the 1st option on offense. This rotation will decrease the key players' minutes to 30-35 minutes per game. At the end of games, I think we can see Yao, Tmac. Ron, and Shane on the floor. The 5th player will be either Scola, Landry, Alston, Brooks, or Barry depending on matchups or whose playing really well. If it's Scola or Landry, Tmac will run the point. If the backcourt guys, Ron will slide to the 4. Again, it really depends on matchups especially on the opposing teams' PG or PF.
Shane will definitely be coming off the bench to begin with. He'll need to work his way back into game shape and strengthen that foot just as T-Mac is with his knee. It's that same knee is why McGrady is allowing guys to get to the rim. He can't explode off it yet, has no lateral quickness, and is wisely choosing to avoid plays that could cause a set back. That being said, SHane truly is a one man fast break stopper, and having him back will not only greatly improve our transition D, but hopefully his play rubs off on both Ron and a then healthy T-Mac. I can definitely see all three of them being in the game come late 4th quarter. Posey killed the Lakers when they moved him to the 4, and I could see Ron having a similiar effect.
This debate is pointless. Everyone knows the real question at hand is whether or not to play Steve Francis at PG or SG.
You recall incorrectly. Battier started most of his games as a grizzly, including almost every game of his last two seasons there. His last year there he started over Mike Miller. Battier stood out with his hustle play, though. Much like today. With Tmac injured and Artest playing so well in the starting lineup, I think Shane should definitely come off the bench. It's not wise to ask Tmac to carry too much of the offensive load right now.
I'm inclined to agree w/ sweetbobl, durvasa, and hayesfan. But I think Artest will start for the first few minutes to get out to a quick start and get everyone going, primarily Tmac & Yao. Having 3 stars out there will make it easier.
Bring Ron off the bench and watch a guy try to make up for the time he spent on the bench by jacking shots up as fast as he can. I believe Ron wants to win first and foremost but you don't a 20ppg guy and expect him not to instinctively try to get his when he is given a diminished role (spin it anyway you want but coming off the bench is a diminished role). Not only that but he is just too talented not to be on the court early in games. You start your best players except in rare cases when the bench is pitifully thin. An example would be the Spurs bringing Ginobli off the bench because otherwise their "instant offense off the bench" guy is 49 year old Michael Finley.
Agentkirb87- Start in the division and work ur way out and tell me in your opionion if that team is better with shane or their present starter regardless of whomever else is on the team. I think people like shane because he's a good wholesome guy from duke. He's a good lockerroom guy and that cool, but the debate isn't even debatable. I mean in fairness sake this team won 52 games with hayes starting and 55 with scola. Does that mean we shoul have kept Hayes as the starter? U can't find 20 players better than Artest in the entire league regardless of position. I can find u 20 guys at the 2/3 better than shane. This is about crushing people physically and mentally. This is about the ring, not the niceness contest. Artest makes the game easier for Yao and Tracy anytime, anyday. Now when teams face the Rox to start, they have to account for 3 guys that can kill you. A classic example is the Dallas game early. If Shane is in there early, dallas is running away early and we're playing catch-up instead of being frontrunners. Then tracy got it going in the 3rd qt and brooks and Artest finished it off. I wonder how many people were screaming for Maxwell once clyde got here. To maxwell's defense, he was a world champ and big shot maker. Clyde was a great player who has led a team and was just a better player. Artest isn't a clyde type, but at their point in their career, you could say artest is equal at that point. Maxwell was better than battier at the same point, that's not even debatable. If rick decides to start shane, I'm going to roll and b**** about it because he's a hell of a coach. I just don't see it though. It did take him a minute to replace Corliss with Peja and Hayes with Scola, so we'll see. Basketball wise, you want your best players to start, play the most minutes and finish the game.
What's crazy too is Posey started in front of shane but ron shouldn't? The Manu experiment one playoff lasted one series one yr and then Pop decided to start him. Not to mention, Finley has bones in this league. Even in his older age, he's still a better offensive player than shane who is a 6'8 version of Luther on offense.
Why is that crazy? I don't understand your thought processes on that one. The question "who starts?" isn't solely answered by who's the "better" player. It depends on the team's rotation, and how certain combinations play with eachother. I don't see the relevance in bringing up Posey starting over Shane on a totally different team many years ago. You're apparently forgetting the 06/07 playoffs, in which Ginobili came off the bench the entire postseason and the Spurs won a championship. Is Finley a better offensive player than Battier? Sure. But the Rockets also have more ball-handling and offensive options in their other four positions than the Spurs do in their starting 5. They can more easily afford a strictly spot up shooter next to Rafer and T-Mac, than the Spurs can afford one next to Parker and Bowen/Udoka.
Okay, regarding my idea to have T-Mac play the point for us, maybe it's farfetched to have him officially start in that position. That being said, I am under the believe that Adelman should use that lineup in some circumstances (especially at clutch time). ie. the lineup of Yao, Scola, Ron, Shane and Tmac. I would rather see batman rather than ron ron on the bench. At the start of a game, however throughout the match, the lineups can change drastically. For instance, Ron's condition is much better than Yao and TMac's, so when our two superstars are of the court, Ron can pick up the slack along with our bench, and then T-Mac and Yao can come back in with Battier. This way, we still start of strong with a big three, but this can change throughout a game and we would see Battier play more with Mac and Ming in the 2nd and 3rd quarters.
durvasa- If Ron and Shane were close, I would say stick with shane. If the rox have a starting 5 of legit scorers, I might say start shane. The Rox don't have that element.They have a limping tracy and a bricking rafer and scola has olympic lag. These 3 need to get used to playing with each other. When the playoffs come and the game is tight, those 3 need to work off each other. Against the celts, people will see the early impact of ron because he's too strong for both pierce and allen. So now they will have to double him and thus leaving someone open. Tracy normally kills pierce, but he's still hurt. Artest will be the difference maker tommorrow.
Good point. If Battier comes off the bench, I'm interested in hour our second unit backcourt of PG Brooks SG Barry SF Battier and probably Landry at PF, will do together.
On second thought, as Hayesfan pointed out, Artest has been very effective with the second unit so far. So, my guess is that Artest will still be in the starting lineup to avoid sluggish starts, but as the game progresses, he'll get more minutes with Brooks and Barry, while Battier will be put in with McGrady and Artest. The best of both worlds.
They have a limping Tracy, bricking Rafer, and lagging Scola right now. The hope, of course, is things improve over the course of the season. I think we need all three of those guys playing at a higher level if we watch to be successful in the playoffs. I agree our Big Three needs to get used to playing with eachother. But they don't need to start for that to happen. The way the rotation is right now, without Battier, they're playing maybe 25 minutes together (mostly in the 1st and 3rd quarters). When Shane gets back into the rotation, that could drop to around 20, even if Ron is starting. And if you flip Shane for Ron, our Big Three could still see 18-20 minutes a night on the floor together, easy. You don't need all of them to start for them to play significant minutes together. You say that in the playoffs, when the game is tight, the need to work off eachother. I agree -- in the crucial moments in the 4th quarter, in a close game, you probably want all three on the floor. But if Ron is starting, that will only ensure they are playing more minutes together to start each half. It doesn't necessarily mean they're playing less with eachother in the 4th quarter. Again, I'm not really trying to take a side here. I think it makes sense either way. I see pros/cons on each. But here's some more fuel for the start-Battier people: [rquoter] “If Tracy was healthy it would be a lot different because he can do so many things out on the floor. He can put it on the floor and make things happen for us. Now, we’re just trying to fit Ron in. The strengths of all three guys are post-ups. With three of them on the court at the same time, it’s hard to get any kind of rhythm going.” [/rquoter]
That's cool durvasa. I think when healthy, tracy is a really good catch and shoot guy. The deal is when you double screen down backside, the pg on frontside has to be a threat. Rafer on the court, running a pnr with scola, artest and yao double down screen with tracy getting loose from 17 ft is money, but rafer kills the play because he's no threat in pnr. I think the 3 compliment each other well.
