Lebron is wasting tons of energy trying to help out on d on Howard, it's not just his own man he has to guard. He's constantly flying in trying to block howard, sometimes even gets caught in one on one matchups with him going to the rim., Kobe didn't have that type of responsibility against houston. Lebron also is wasting too much energy facilitating the offense, only for his teammates to miss, and he has to then waste more energy trying to score 40 or 50 to stay in the game, Kobe also doesn't do that much for his team, but once again i'll repeat this..i was specifically talking about KOBE and SHANE. That's why i only wrote about those two, i never said or implied no one should attack Kobe and shane should never attack an opposing player. Just kobe and shane...just that matchup.
I agree there were expectations, but who's? Fans? I honestly think at the time the team expected it to be the Yao and Tmac show, as in they score near 60 a game and Shane, although expected to be the third best, wasn't expected to come in and be part of any scoring trio, which is what some fans assume now and act like shane was a bust or something because he wasn't averaging 15-18 a game or something....the team expected them to be the next kobe and shaq, and if you look back at that team that 3 peated, it was all about them two, their third scorer for the last 2 years was fisher, averaging a shane-like 10-11 pts a game. The first year it was Rice at 15ppg, but he's a legit scorer/shooter. So management has no reason to be disappointed by shane, they are disappointed more in Yao not breaking out and tmac and yao being injured. So years later, some fans look at the NBA NOW, where you pretty much need 3 good scorers and try to apply it to the team back then, and bash Battier for not being that third guy. They need to realize the letdown came mostly from Tmac and Yao, yeah shane didn't score as much as before, but by how much? 3 or 4 points?? If you think shane battier not scoring 3 or 4 more points cost you a ring, well then you got bigger problems, and we sure did and still do. I definitely agree he deserves some criticism when they lose, most players do, if you're constantly losing then it's likely most of the players aren't playing well, so that's understandable, but some fans like to put all the blame on him or blame him for not stepping up when the big names couldn't. Should role players step up at times? Yes, but i've read posts blaming him for two years worth of playoff exits, that's 13 games lost, and it's because of him? If you're counting on him to pull you through in the playoffs from game to game. then you got other problems. See the pattern? We had/have bigger problems than him, yet he gets the blame. And let me point out its a tough issue to argue because you have the fans who are pro-battier, then you have the fans who have legit reason to dislike his game or want better, BUT then there's the shane bashers who throw out as many reasons to possibly hate him and jump on which ever one is the flavor of the day. So a huge majority of my posts are directed at them, so i'm not just directing this at you... but back to your post, i agree it's about the team getting better...but its difficult to know what better is when you're often playing without your complete team. If this team were healthy, and the offense was still a problem, i promise you i'd be suggesting trades for Shane the next day, but i dont believe it would still be a problem. It's only a problem because of injuries. Tmac is out, let's trade shane. Ok we traded shane, oh no now Yao is out, who's next? Let's trade Lowry and chuck, maybe landry too...i dont think that's a good habit to get into, you're slowly chipping away at a championship roster to fill in holes that may not even be there soon. When that time comes you'll be screwed once again because now you have too much of one thing and not a balance. Maybe that time will never come, maybe tmac never plays another full season, maybe Yao resigns for 100 years and he has an injury every one of those years, but either you roll with it and hope they stay healthy and take your chances or you get rid of THEM. Injuries are a whole different story, if we were healthy then i'd agree we gotta ship guys out, get better, find the right roster, but we got it, we just have to get healthy......
See, once again blaming shane for something beyond his control...we didn't go after ron because shane didnt turn out like he should have, we went after ron because you can longer win in this league with a shaq and Kobe, you need a big 3. That's the same reason why we went after Brooks and traded rafer away. You could have won a ring with a rafer as your point back then, not now. We're still talking about a move made for how a team was built 3 years ago....it's time to move on...and shane was never a potential type of player, his scouting report straight out of college was as an NBA ready player who is what he is and wasn't expected to have the type of improvement some other players have, shane peaked as a ball player early, most college players dont. Blame him for not doing what he did his rookie year, fine, but not because he didn't have a big jump in improvement, he didnt have much room left to reach his ceiling in the first place.
you're saying that like i'm arguing shane is an all star or something.....my defending of shane revolves around the view that he's an important part of what is a championship roster, if healthy. You still dont get why he's more valuable here than on a lottery team. I have tried every way possible to get you to understand that although certain things can have what seems to be a fixed value, it can be seen as more valuable by someone who needs that thing specifically. what can we get for shane if we trade him to Minny? Just equal value, not a steal, not an all-star, just a role guy like shane, because he's not going to be the final piece to Minny's puzzle, but what can we get if we traded shane to a team who felt he was their final piece? We'd get more than he's worth. And dont ask me to name specific players because i know that's what you want me to do, but there's no way i can know what a team is willing to give up in this scenario, just like you can't predict Houston would give up Gay for Shane, because it's about what it's worth to THEM, not what it's worth to the average fan. Only the team knows how far they'd go, so i'd just be diggin myself into a hole by naming players, which you'd jump all over. and you must be a psychic now... Ariza, posey, AND pietrus were available back then for less?? AND they had similar production? Wow, play the lottery as much as you can then, because they were NOT similar players to shane BACK THEN, as in when the trade happened, as in when you claim there were players of the same talent, production, etc available for less.. Pietrus, at 60% Ft, 9 pts a game, 40% FG........ Posey, at 7 pts a game, 40% FG.... Ariza, at 4/7 pts a game and 13 mins a game... Those are the guys you wanted as the third best players BACK THEN?? Like i said before Kwame, you're using what you know now, how these guys turned out, to go back in time to and claim they were the same guys back when shane was traded for. THEY WERE NOT. that's why they were traded for crap back then. So if you knew back then all 3 of them were going to improve that much then buy yourself a ticket tonight... and why does being acquired via free agency matter?? that's terrible reasoning because the player holds the power, not the teams. Posey decided to go with Boston because he wanted to, not because boston negotiated some sweet deal for him. same thing for him going with NO. And he finally settled on a contract very similar to shane's, so what does that tell you? If shane's contributions are worth so much less, why did another team give a guy with similar contributions similar money? I guess they just aren't psychics like good 'ol Kwame.... oh and one more thing who's 09 stats are these? 8.9 ppg, 4.8 rebs 1.1 asst 41% FG, 36.9% 3pt 1.1 TO 0.8 Stl .3 blks and 2.9 fouls I'll give you a hint, he was sitting at home in the second round, because he shot 37.5 % FG and 26.3% pt, when, you know, he had to step up and rise to the challenge in the playoffs.....good thing he brough it on both ends huh...oh wait, well maybe he brough it on defense...if only we had him this year, if only...
Go ahead and take the lazy way out by pleading ignorance and refusing to name players. In addition to my critiques, I've at least offered up solutions and named names. You still don't get it. The whole point is that guys that perform similar roles and functions for their team as Battier does can be had through free agency and minor transactions. Also, none of the guys mentioned make as much as Shane, but they provide production on BOTH ends of the court. You have to guard Ariza, Posey, Pietrus etc.. Since you brought up Posey specifically, he's stepped up not once but twice for different teams on the highest stage to help them win championships by being a difference maker on BOTH ends of the court. It's also funny how you cherry pick and use certain stats when it's to your benefit when the guy you said you love is known as mr. intangibles or the no stats all star lol. How about this stat: why is it that Battier had more fta attempts in his 1st year with the Griz than his entire career as a Houston Rocket? If that's not a good indicator of being offensively impotent then I don't know what is. Now tell me since you have gone on record as saying that you love Battier, is it the type of player he is that has made you fall in love or is it him specifically? If it's the former and not the latter, do you love Bowen, Ariza, Posey, Pietrus, and all other guys who do the same thing he does just as much? The reason I ask is because I've never read anything where you criticize Battier. Is this a blind love just for him or is your love and passion universal for all similar type role players?
I dont criticize houston's players much, not just shane. I love the team too. I'm pretty content with the majority of this team and just want it to get healthy, so i'm not going to criticize them when the team is overachieving big time with these injuries. I actually defend Brooks a lot as well, but those that don't like brooks much never reply to my posts, definitely not as much as you do, so i don't drag it out as much. I defend Barry as well, just not a lot of threads about him. Of course i can say this guy's bad shooting tonight hurt us, or this guy had this many turnovers, including battier, but i dont nitpick, i talk about what i think truly lost us the game, so i pretty much bag on Yao and ron the most consistently, brooks when he's hesitant, and not much on the rest.
Old stuff already responded to, but along with the Dallas series comment being wrong, the Memphis defense actually was VERY good with Battier there. Then TANKED after he left. Battier also made a very good Rockets defense very very good (improved it a spot in the rankings). Though the thread's and your argument is to take 3 ranks down in defense to jump 5 ranks up in offense. Its a valid one Otis Thorpe traded from the 1st championship team during season for Clyde Drexler. Now you might counteract with Horry and Cassell for Barkley but you gotta at least consider the upgrade possibilities. Plus that Barkley team was the best since the championship... not quite this one
You're a good guy (or girl, can't be too careful nowadays) RV6... ...and I'm sure somebody's pointed out what I'm about to type here... ...but the best case anybody can make (in hindsight, yes I grant you that), is that because Yao and McGrady aren't healthy for long enough, and that neither one of them are Shaquille O'Neal or Kobe Bryant, then the whole foundation the team was built on was suspect from the very beginning... Personally, because I love basketball, I LOVE what Shane Battier does and what Shane Battier means to this team. I feel the same way about Chuck Hayes. And you're right about the roster finally starting to take some shape outside of just warm bodies filling uniforms... For me, again, it's easy to pick on any one player in a team sport and say he's not like this guys or he's not like that guy. And I don't find anything wrong with that, except when some of that criticism hits below the belt. But you have to look at the team concept. And that concept begins with the coach. I think that any coach that turns the reigns of his team over to any player is making a mistake. Coaches need their best players buying into what the coach's strategy is for winning. In the Rockets' case, that strategy centered around not only Yao or McGrady's scoring ability, but Yao and McGrady's ability to make the best decision with the ball. It's difficult to get individually talent players in this league to make good basketball plays (like passing and moving without the ball). When you get "star" players who are willing to do that, that's when it's time to make sure that the guys they're passing the ball to can make the play. I don't think anybody expected Battier to be a score like Manu Ginobili is (who'll get you 15-20 points regularly). But Battier is notorious for having a game where he scores 20 points, and figures he's filled his quota for the month. It's not Battier's fault that there were never any wing players for him to split minutes with before this season. It's not Battier's fault that the guys he was supposed to play with are hurt a lot of the time. And it's not Battier's fault that people don't value what he does because he's too often overexposed. But it IS Battier's fault for not being more reliable and consistent offensively. I'd trade those 20-points-a-month games of his for a steady 10-12 points a game in a heartbeat. Would it make much difference? No, probably not. Like you pointed out, RV6...there were a lot more holes here to fill than Battier (or Yao and McGrady, for that matter) was going to fill...
I think that what i or even kwame talks about. Poster's can cut and paste and the same was said about hayes. I love hoops, played at d-1 and like being a student of the game, but the team needs more consistent production from his spot. I remember when kenny smith said that in sacramento, its was the hardest 17 pts in his life, butin houston it was the easiest 13 ever. If battier just did small things offensively like he does defensively, he could get a easy 13 pts like scolae does. If he ran the break on offense, put the ball on the floor for 3 dribbles, or make good penetrating cuts, the offense would improve by leaps and bounds, but he takes the easy way out and people make it seem like he's doing his job or adelman has told him to stand in the corner. If anyone has ever watched the function of adelman's offense, its a curring slashing type no matter the personel.I'm not asking shane to try torelive his duke or his first yr of memphis days, i just want him to make the defense to play honest and be aggressive. Sound, simple stuff like ball fakes to get space and set up dribble drive, using the mid range game, using the post game when they play ben gordon or andre miller on you. Run the lane and get easy baskets which helps you get into the flow. A player doesn't have to be a high riser to run and finish on the break, but he has to be committed. Simple,tangible things can help him and the team alot.
Fixed. I'll agree you've talked more about him just being more consistent and looking for easy points, and some others too, but Kwame goes above and beyond that. When he does talk about it it's only to have more reasons to dislike Battier. It's like the bashing brooks gets sometimes. Yes when he's inconsistent and dribbles too much he deserves it, but then you have fans jumping on the "i hate brooks" bandwagon and say yeah he dribbles too much and he had like 5 turnovers let's trade him! But in reality he had 0 turnovers and they just wanted to keep throwing stuff out.......It would be so much easier to discuss it if fictional stats/reasoning wasn't mixed with the real stuff to try and prove a point.
My criticisms of Battier have all been based on his performance on the court. You and others are quick to attack the poster instead of dealing with the issues, but I've come to expect nothing less than these emotional responses from you and others like you. I've already proven that you're a liar with your whole "I've been saying Adelman is the wrong coach for this team for most of the season" comment when in actuality you've only been saying it (by your own tacit admission) for a few months at the most. Nobody is above criticism. People constantly criticize the President and entire countries, but the ultra sensitive nature of people on this board when Battier is criticized is ridiculous. I've criticized Shane when he's deserved it and I've praised him when he's deserved it as well. Unfortunately for the Rockets, his play this season warranted more criticism than it did praise. I'm sure you'll prepare and post some lame response that takes us in circles, but I'm not interested in your circular arguments.
Its pretty worthless to say we need to trade Battier just to trade him. If you have a specific player in mind, so be it. Its fairly obvious most people are split on this issue, so debating it is not worth the effort because I highly doubt anyone is gonna change thier mind. For the most part, Battier is at worst, solid at the position and thier are other pressing issues that need to be addressed first imo.
LMAO! Wow, incredible. you accused me of making a knee jerk remark because i wrote in march we should get rid of adelman and get an athletic big (hello tyrus thomas? Yeah, i've been talking about him for the whole season)......i was only able to prove to you i have been saying it for 3 months because i'm not able to search this site.......so in your mind now i'm a liar? Even if we pretend it was only 3 months, how is that even considered a knee jerk thought when it's over MONTHS?? I never even "admitted" i've only been saying it for a few months, i just couldn't prove i've been saying it for longer because i didn't want to try and search a billion threads through google just to prove you wrong, excuse me for not wanting to waste hours to doing that. Last question Kwame. You keep repeating other guys were available instead of shane at the time we traded for and they were better than him and worth less. So name me just one guy. Just one. One guy, who was available back then, who made less back then, who had better production than shane back then . Who had established himself back then. Not someone who was a scrub then and surprisingly blossomed, not someone that had an equal chance of fading into obscurity as they did of becoming a solid role player. You'll probably just ramble about how shane hasn't improved since anyway, or how others have become available since, but that's what you do, you jump around all over the place to whatver argument works for you then, you'll go away from the "better similar players were avilable then for less" for now since there were none....then once this thread is forgotten and dead you'll recycle that argument and bring it back up in the next shane thread, repeating it over and over until someone calls you out on it again.....now THAT is a circular argument..
dudee...go get laid or something.....shane is the one who brings all the chemistry we have. Without him, we would have absolutely NO DEFENSE and would be just an offense team like the WARRIORS. STICK WITH HIM!!
Wow, you're trying to add so many conditions to your "last question" to try and make it as difficult as possible to answer, but unlike you I will not take the lazy way out by pleading ignorance and refusing to name players. You asked me to name one player and I will: Mickael Pietrus As leebigez has pointed out in the past, a lottery pick that became Jeff Green landed the Celtics Ray Allen. Pietrus was unhappy with his role in Golden State and could've been had for much less than a lottery pick. He made less than Shane back then and still makes less than Shane now. He was a proven solid role player back then as well. He provides tough defense and he averaged 9.3 ppg in 05-06 in 22.7 mpg while Shane averaged 10.1 ppg in 35 mpg. Also, in 06-07 he averaged 11.1 ppg in 26.9 mpg while Battier averaged 10.1 ppg in 36.4 mpg. Pietrus meets all the conditions that you laid out in your question and he was a proven commodity back then. If you believe any different, then you are delusional, which is quite possible. I'm sure you're going to prepare a confusing and convoluted response due to your defend Battier at all costs approach, but it would be refreshing for you to admit that you were wrong vis-a-vis the premise behind the question you asked. I doubt it though.
Pietrus?! Better than Battier? Thats a farse. His stats are bloated, he played on a team that really had no sense of defense. When teams matched up against Golden State they rarely played defense and ultimately made it a match up of shootouts. The stats of production are not equivelant enough for comparision. Comparing his stats then and Shane's would be like comparing McGrady's stats sans Yao to now. To say he would have had the same offensive production in that Golden State team to our Rocket team now would be a hasty conclusion. He wouldn't even make it off the bench on this team. Look, I have admitted it time and time again that I am a big big Battier supporter, but seriously, this thread is down right redonkulous. List of people to trade before Battier: Tmac Artest (sign and trade if necessary) Everyone buy Yao The only person I say is more untrade-able than Shane would be Yao. Why do you hate on the Battier so hard? It's kinda sad really.
When word was the rox were shopping the pick, the first name I threw out was josh childress. He's a do it all wing, can handle, decent shooter, good rebounder and defender, and can transition and finish in traffic. At the time, the rox were looking for a guy like him, plus he wasw young on a crowded team. Now people will say he can't shoot the 3, but he shoots it at a high clip when he shoots. He was also a guy that can run point forward for theteam. That was the kind of guy I wanted for the 8th pick.
what's so difficult about my question? You've always made a big deal about Houston overpaying for shane when supposedly there were all these others guys who A) were all around better, B) made less money, and C)had alower value....so I have to make sure you follow that criteria if that's what you're arguing, right? The part about them being all that back then should be obvious since this happend years ago. So Pietrus? It's weird how as much as you talk about shane's poor shooting %, you failed to make that one of your points when talking up pietrus, surely his would have had to be decent at least? Nothing confusing about this: 40% FG 31% 3pt 60% FT Of course you posted the other stats already, the ones that are very similar to shane's, so that you could make Pietrus somewhat credible. shane's: 48% FG 39% 3pt 70% FT I'm also pretty sure Pietrus wasn't considered a better defender than shane back then, and shane also averaged 1.4 blocks that year, to Pietrus' 0.2....i realize shane played a lot more minutes, but i think it said somethign about shane's abilities for him to average that much over a season.. Anyway. I'm not sure how that makes Pietrus all around better than shane at all. Shane had better numbers, better reputation, better credentials, better track record, etc. If you want to argue that shane has declined and done worse since, fine, there's definitely some proof for that. If you want to argue shane shot a bad % this year, fine , proof for that as well.....if you stuck to criticism like that then there would be no need to question your statements...but you go beyond that and throw out statements you're not even sure of. Im not even going to go into your comment about allen and green, was that in 2006? Was that avilable for them then? Don't think so. If Pietrus was unhappy with his role and he could be had for a low pick, why did he stay there until 08? Why did no one try to steal him away? As for Pietrus being unhappy, he was unhappy his last season there, which was 07-08, he requested trades at the deadline and the warriors didn't grant it since they were in no rush to trade him and still had hopes of keeping him. Doesn't sound like a low draft pick would have got the deal done even then. He was also unhappy that summer because the Warriors weren't showing interest in re-signing him even though he had a change of heart by then and wanted to stay afterall. All that was in 07, a year after the Rockets acquire shane. at the deadline: "Pietrus' agent, Bill McCandless, says that Golden State remains unreceptive to potential deals despite interest in his client from around the league." "Problem is, Golden State has little incentive to make a deal it doesn't like, and its executives still view Pietrus as an important part of the team, if he can return to last season's level of play" "The Suns and Mavericks are among the teams said to be looking for help at the wing positions, and the Heat tried unsuccessfully to trade for Pietrus in the offseason. " (sounds to me like the warriors didn't even want to trade him the summer of 06 either, wouldn't have the heat offered a non lottery pick for him at least? Wouldn't have GS agreed if he "surely" could have been had for that? Hmmmm.. during the summer: "They've been talking to my agent ... but the thing is, they haven't discussed if they want me, if I'm a part of the future. I like coach Don Nelson, I like Chris Mullin, but right now, their decision seems to be holding me back." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/12/SP46V0BGK.DTL&feed=rss.warriors I will admit though that Pietrus specifically says he doesn't want to be a spot up shooter in that article. He wanted to have plays ran for him, so he could have eventually brought houston what they needed and possibly been a better compliment to yao/tracy than shane. I'll definitely agree to that, i'm not blindly going to support shane at all costs as you assume. However, the point here remains Pietrus wasn't available in the summer of 06, and he wasn't being shopped, he wasnt avilable for "much less thna a lottery pick" and he hadn't clearly established himself as being a better asset than Shane at that point. The Rockets had no reason to go after someone like that when they were trying to win now, they need someone who was at their peak in that role, not still trying to get there, not someon who showed flashes, and not someone who'd only done it for a year or so, and that wasn't as easy to acquire back then as you'd like to think. Yes, now you're going to ask "well why didn't they win then if that's why they made the move". You've written that many times, but obviously they had injuries and they also misjudged how much help they needed around the big two. They expected them to blossom close to a shaq and Kobe, can't really blame them, but that was what threw everything off, not that they "overpaid" for shane. Now that you know we had injuries an needed scoring and shane ias passing his peak, now it's easy to say we gave up too much, we gav eup what we needed, or we needed something else. I can agree with all that NOW, but no one could have guessed we'd have 2 injury prone stars this consistently back then. they stay healthy, we win rings, and No one ever sees the shane deal as being one-sided.
I dont remember if he was available back then, weren't the hawks pretty high on him then? I'm not sure who they would have wanted at the 8th pick, they already had Joe Johnson, marvin williams, josh smit, and al harrington, so they had the 2/3 stacked. to still want another swingman in Gay.
