Should the Rockets start T-Will, Patterson, and Hill for the rest of the season?

LOL the title of this thread should be "To Tank or not to Tank" Baptism by fire and OJT did real well for the Texans cornerbacks this season too............ They are the future.

 

I wouldn't mind for RA to start experimenting with different combinations in the starting lineup, but I also don't want to see him start players just because they are young.

 

Rookies and young talent isn't developed by playing it alongside other young talent. You develop talent in practice, garbage time, and with other veterans on the floor at the same time. Not by rolling the ball out and telling them to "get developed".....

 

See sig...

 

Yes, but they also develop through experience and competition, and what better competition than playing against starter's .... It may not give us many wins right off the bat, but in the long hall our young guys will be a lot better for it..

 

If everyone seems to be to pro-tanking why is there so much whining after every loss?

 

Those results are disturbing!

 

against both options

 

We don't want it to appear as if we are tanking in the games or even on the boards, and thus anger the basketball gods who would use their powers on those all important lottery balls.

Also, while young players are by definition inconsistent and streaky, fans are by definition impatient.

 

The LA Clippers have been in the lottery the better part of the last decade, and their strategy was to let all of their young studs play together and "develop" through in game competition............... That worked out well. You need veteran presence, and I would advocate giving them more minutes but by no means relegating all of our veterans to the end of the bench or playing all of our developing players at the same time.

 

65% people on this board thinks that T-will is next Lebron James, Hill - next Dwight Howard and Patterson - next Amare.

These players are good and may be future superstars, but we can't pass torch this soon.

Look at all the struggling teams with top lottery picks last few years, do you see their young guys become superstars? No! and we already have expectations that these guys are future of Rockets.

Lowry plays two good games and we start comparing him to top 3 point guards.

Only real future players of this team is Brooks (May be Martin). Brooks is a great shooter, who can only improves. He can become a good passer with time like Nelson, Billups. He can put up some weight and he can be a decent defender especially if coaches force him to defend.

All 3 guys - Hill, Patterson, & T-Will has not showed anything that tells they can lead a franchise. They have shown, inconsistently, that they can be effective players.

 

No... I want to see my team at least try to make the playoffs regardless of us winning anything.

 

the question is, which is more important?

long term success or short term success.


i think its the smart choice to build for long term success. does that mean blow it up and tank? no. it means put developing young talent as priority #1. and winning games as 1a. the most successful development plans always include gaining experience. players learn more from playing, and being relied upon to win, than sitting on the bench and only playing in practice. these guys need to play and need to try to win.

can we win more with shane and scola playing more than pat and twill? if you are asking about this year, then the answer is yes. if you think about the next 5 years, then you start to see the benefits of developing these guys now.

 

Bud had great games off the bench last year, he got good minutes last season and he is getting good minutes this season. Is he future of this team?

All I am saying is until some young players prove in limited time that they are capable to be special in this league... how can we really rely on them? If they don't stop making mistakes in 10 minutes.. how can we expect them to give us good 30 minutes.

I am all for developing young players for future, but this is not the way to do it. Limited time is good for them. When they earn more time then they can get more time. So far, none of these guys have had impact games to deserve more time. Brooks showed us he was special. Good players show that very early and that's what impresses coaches to rely on them. Look at Rose, Jennings...

When one of these guys put up couple of solid nights and some decent nights consistently, then they should be given more time.

 

He looked really good last night with all the mid range jumpers. He has already got 2 nights with 10 rebounds each. He is definitely more deserving than Hill and T-Will right now. I really hope he can keep up with what he has done recently for few games. Consistency is going to be the key.

 

well, if u are gonna start T-will, Patterson, and Hill, we might as well trade all the vets and get a young coach.

 

NO

You earn your playing time by making mistake free basketball.

 

We have nothing to lose and a nice lottery pick to gain.