If You Guys Wouldnt Take Back A Semi Healthy Tmac You're Crazy

A 2nd round exit is too exciting for a 2nd round virgin

 

As much I hate to admit, the OP is right, assuming the reports about him coming back are true. I would like to sit him out until playoffs, but he has got to learn to play with Artest. A hobbling T-Mac was still averaging 27,8,7 a game against the Jazz in the playoffs last year and it was pretty much 1 on 5 everytime the Rockets were on offense. Artest has played great whenever T-Mac is out, but maybe it has nothing to do with T-Mac, maybe he's right and isn't good coming off the bench.

 

1 on 5 is NOT basketball, and 27/8/7 does not guarantee win, don't you understand that? And THAT basically is the reason WHY the Rockets lost to the Utah Jazz, cos we're playing 1 vs 5 on offense, and 4 vs 5 in defense.

 

We should all learn from Bill Russell

 

He will not be healthy or 'semi healthy'. End of discussion.

 

I am pretty sure OP made it up.

 

In this case it is that simple. Swapping one instant offense guy for another instant offense guy isn't the huge ordeal you make it out to be. Would swapping Brandon Bass for Leon Powe destroy the Celtics? Would swapping Jason Kapono for Wally World kill the Cavs? And as I have mentioned before this scenario isn't all just about offense. It's about having a second option on the floor to draw double teams, a guy that can create shots for others, rebounds, etc. These are all glaring advantages even a gimpy McGrady has over Wafer. If he buys into this new role and 'Adelman Ball' the difference is night-and-day between he and Wafer.

Again, you're either underestimating the importance of the back up two's role or you're just unfamiliar with our rotation. Wafer's role is not "filler". I think it's safe to say if you're getting 20 minutes a game or better you're in the 8-man rotation. Wafer will be getting significant minutes in the playoffs and I pray he proves me wrong on the one-trick-pony suggestions. I like Wafer and it's hard to pick apart a guy's game when he makes $800K a year, just saying i'm questioning whether he's consistent or versatile enough to make a steady impact over the course of a series. Have we all forgotten Luther Head in the playoffs the past two years? Ugghhh....I pray he's nothing like that.

In the playoffs it's not always wise to deviate from the rotation that got you there in the first place to try to play all your starters 40 minutes a night. Especially against a deep team like Portland, who we may end up facing. Point being: Wafer and Barry are likely to get big minutes. I hope they're up to it. Offensive droughts are bound to happen. Let's hope conventional wisdom is right in this situation that we can win without McGrady. I doubt it but I totally understand your viewpoint and management's likelihood to tell him to "stay away".

10 minutes? I give up trying to explain my point on this rather than going over it again. At least we can agree on one thing: this is very unlikely to happen. So unlikely to happen that this thread probably didn't need to be created in the first place. Well, then again it was reported on ESPN. I just don't expect anything to come of it.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oleKfixy-7A

 

Sigh. It looks like I'll need to update the stats again.

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=162444

Some of you guys want TSlack. I'd rather have the Ws ... pure and simple.

 

I guess we'll know Monday, him announcing that he'll go under the knife will probably be a good thing, we can move on and play with this group. If he decides to rehab and come back we're in the boat of juggling the lineup again to fit him in.

 

It was a news flash on ESPN.

It said he is going to Chicago to discuss option still, but I'm still sold that he will opt of the surgery.

 

McGrady has demonstrated already that he's not willing to take a smaller role despite being 75%. He wants to start, he wants to play 35 minutes, and he wants 15+ shots. He can't accept being anything other than a primary option.

I pushed for this scenario at the being of the year, got plenty of gripe about it, but McGrady has made it clear he won't adjust his game to help the team. He's got to dominate the ball, hes got to jack up his shots.

I don't want to see him on the court again - not with the way he acts as an anchor around the neck of the team demeanor.

Evan

 

Prove it!
He makes the team maybe 3 ~ 4 regular season games better
but in the playoffs

Honestly. . . . TMac imo have ANTI-HEART
Not only does he not have heart. . . HE ABSORBS THE REST OF THE TEAMS HEART

Rocket River
when I get some time. . . i will try a break down of people's game with him versus with out
I suspect people play better and harder when he not there
and
this is not just this year

 

We may not beat the lakers w/o tmac, but with tmac we will not make playoffs.

 

Tmac is a cancer - DO NOT WANT at any cost.

DD

 

First, I've always liked T-Mac and in the past I think he's been very good for the team. And we can't really know what's been happening in the locker room this year.

But using our common sense, and based on what we can actually see on the court, Tracy has become a huge problem for the team. Anyone who's played competitive team sports knows what it feels like when there is one person on the team who does not put forth the effort. The effect goes way beyond their own poor play, it saps the will and energy of the whole team. And that's what we've seen with the Rockets this year.

I can't believe what a night and day difference there is when Tracy is in or out for a game. When he's in, the team is lethargic and disorganized. When he's out their play is crisp and energetic. When the whole team is involved in the offense because the ball is moving around, they play much much better defense. It's so obvious.

And they are a hell of lot of fun to watch.

Bringing Tracy back, even if he agreed to accept a limited role, is not worth the risk.

 

THANK YOU for this common sense post....clearly you are a TRUE Rocket's fan.



DD

 

in a off-game day, tracy makes 60% of the thread topics. not bad, at least he is still entertaining...

 

we dont need a cancer....

 

Okay ... let's suppose he's semi-healthy. Which would you rather have ... physically healthy or mentally healthy (but not both)?