People, please give JHill some credits for the past three games Despite his offensive struggle last game, dude has been extremely resilient on boards and defence. while he is on the court, he consistently pressures jefferson to take tough shot. people praise about hayes defence, but he allows a lot off reb. from jefferson and milsap, primarily because of his height. in fact, rocks lost that category by 8. JHill was a much superior rebounder last night.
When Hill puts his mind to it and maintains focus, he can do some nice glass work. (Kinda the theme of this thread, right, about the mental aspect) Patterson has a solemn assertiveness about him. His expression can look like a deer-in-headlights look or a stoic crazy man gaze. Being effervescent and demonstrative doesnt HAVE to be a requirement of being an all-around go-to player, if thats ALL it took then Terrence Williams should be beasting it up big. But it CAN help.
Really? You felt what held Shane back in the NBA is his mentality and not physical skills? I know you like to go against the grain, but Shane Battier with the physical tools to dominate the NBA? As for star mentality, I think Patterson just needs to learn more from TWill, who has more star mentality than the rest of our roster combined.
It's those intangible physical gifts, where you don't notice his explosiveness, speed, or leaping ability. Battier is what Durant and LeBron would be, if they had a roleplayer's mentality.
Twill=Star attitude + average skills (in two years or so) Patman = workhorse attitude + Above average skills
Meh, I never thought shane would dominate, but after seeing him improve every yr at duke and have a good rookie year, i thought he would be 17-18 ppg, 7 rebs,3 asst good defense. In memphis he was a complete player, but as the added talent, he kinda started going backwards. When the rockets traded for him, i thought he would become more assertive and feed off tracy and yao, but he didnt. So thats when we saw a guy like rafer take that role and he had no business trying to do what shane shouldve been doing. This is what I hope patterson dont do no matter who the rockets add talent wise. If the rockets get howard and williams, i would hope he's really pushing his game and mentality to all star level, not role player level.
The difference with Shane in his rookie year and Patrick is that Shane was not a particularly efficient player in his 1st season. He scored 14 ppg which looks nice, but his rookie year offensive efficiency was by far his worst of his career: The way Battier's career progressed, his usage went down (as more talented offensive players arrived as teammates), his efficiency went way up, and he became one of the best defenders in the game. I think Patterson has shown more upside as a rookie than Battier. I think its way too premature to project stardom for him (and I don't believe the Rockets view him that way either), but if he can be a consistent 15 ppg guy who's very efficient, strong defensively, good on the boards and has a team-first mindset, I'd take that. If that's what he ends up being, that would probably make him one of the top 6 or 7 players in the draft.
durvaa, thats because shane didnt work on his offensive game in the summer. He got better shooting the 3, but his short dribble didnt get better nor his space creation. A guy like granger is on par athletically as shane,but his curve went up every year. He's not the defender shane was, but he's a good defender.
Shane never had the physical talent PatricK has. He can't run as fast. He can't jump as high and he can't shoot a midrange shot with any kind of efficiency. Even his post up game is far inferior than Patricks. That's why I don't understand your comparison. The one thing I will say in your favor is I respect someone who has an opinion and voices it early and sticks with it more than the many on here who now have jumped on Patrick's bandwagon and are bashing you now. I also find it funny that they use that particular post to bash you when initially I wanted Sanders over Patrick. My first instinct was Patrick would be a good role player like Battier. So perhaps if you haven't already you should just admit that Patrick is much better than you thought. And let the naysayers b**** about a stupid point. If they weren't jumping up and down on draft night and then posting on here how great a pick we got then they are no different than you only they came around sooner.
Granger must not work on his offense in the summer either since his offensive efficiency has gone down the last three seasons. He needs to scrap that role-player mentality if he wants to become LeBron. It's ruined a lot of athletic freaks like Battier, I'd hate to see Granger meet the same fate.
I was jumping up and down as soon as I found out Morey and Co. were jumping up and down about the pick. I may not be the smartest guy in the world, but I am smart enough to realize who really knows their **** and latch on to the right ship. Forming your own opinion and sticking to it is perfectly fine. Forming your own opinion and sticking to it while completely ignoring those who know much more than you = ignorant.
l like Cxbby, and i'm sure he has a lot of money as a stock trader, but his ego is out of control. i was right about brooks, watch me post this stupid thread, i was right about patterson let me post this stupid thread. he needs to relax
Hey, stop ruining my fun! But seriously, read those threads. The difference between me and them is their egos were out of control when they acted so smug and condescending when arguing in the first place. Anyone who disagreed "didn't know basketball". I simply have the good sense to wait until I'm proven right before I let my ego loose and rub it in. :grin: Rub a dub dub. Rub a dub dub. Rub a dub dub. Ok. I'll stop now. You're right.
I proposed a possible alternative to your viewpoint that might be reasonable and maybe draw a little reflection before you judge these people so harshly. My bad it didn't work. Only if Morey would follow your philosophy more. Just for the record Morey is batting 50/50. And that's if you give him credit for Brooks, Budinger and Landry who were recommended by others. Budinger and Brooks were Adelman's picks in fact Adelman said he went directly to Les and asked if they could spend the money to get bud. Gersan Rosan said it himself that they were fortunate to have a head coach who has a good eye for talent and they definitely listen to his input. I will acknowledge that I was wrong about Patrick. If iI was there on draft night I would have picked Sanders over Patrick. Patrick would have been my next pick. And the reason is because in what little film I saw of PP he did not show the explosiveness or the shotblocking ability he does now. Nor was I aware his stroke was so good. Whereas Sanders brought something to the table that we were definitely in need of (shotblocking) and is hard to come by in this league. After the summer league I clearly saw Patrick was better than the film of him. He had a stroke which was the most surprise for me and he was more athletic than I thought. But let's be clear Patrick then was not the athlete Patrick now is. Hats off to the trainers who have been able to increase the vertical on PPat. They also did the same for Landry and to a lesser degree SHane. So while you can trust the stuff a little luck was involved. I bet if you ask Morey he would even admit PPat has exceeded his hopes in his rookie year. or maybe not. My point is while I believe Morey is much smarter than me and a much better stats cruncher I still think his player evaluation is lacking. And if go to a game I will be able to pick the better player before. Because heart doesn't always show up on the stats. ANd make no mistake about it heart does show up in championships. So before you start calling people ignorant remember there is more to it than numbers. Or haven't we learned our lesson with TMac.
Not to drag out a needless debate, but I think you're missing the pivotal point that before certain people were guilty of what you're now denouncing--namely 'judging others so harshly' for their seemingly 'radical' viewpoints. Not that it makes it ok now with the tables turned, but just kind of explaining the rationale behind this reaction. Anyways...about that 50/50 thing. Can you elaborate more on who you think were busts, demonstrating that his player evaluation is 'lacking.' I'll give you Dorsey, but are we also including trades, i.e. Lowry, Lee (he had been on Morey's radar since he was drafted, no?), Williams (Jury is still out I suppose), etc. 50/50 just seems a bit of a hyperbole to me. Also, I would be interested in comparing Morey's player evaluation to other GMs in the league who weren't fortunate to have the Durants and Lebrons falling into their laps. I think one could argue that Morey is one of the more superior player evaluators in this league when you look beyond the clearly established superstars (maybe too simplistic of a viewpoint but did it really take a genius to know Dwight was going to be huge?) given his plethora of solid role players that you hope to draft beyond the lottery.
It sounds like you are trying to drag out a needless debate and I am not interested in debating you. But if you really want my opinion why I think Adelman and others are better player evaluators I'll PM it to you. By the way I do agree that Morey is one of the top GM's in the league. Never thought otherwise. But that is because of everything he brings to the table including listening to people who have a better understanding of how to evaluate players skills on the court. If you ask Morey he will admit as much. Mix that in with his great stat stuff and you get a good GM maybe the best.
THIS. It is rare that an NBA front office simultaneously erupts into jubilant celebration upon learning that the #13 pick is NOT the guy you wanted to draft and that, hence, you were going to get the guy you wanted. Unless every single war room participant showed up early to rehearse how and when to break into their previously correographed celebration, I'll go out on a limb and say that the Rockets thought REALLY highly of Patrick Patterson, moreso than a usual "we got great value with this pick" situation. And if Morey, Rosas, Hinkie and the rest of those guys are getting that excited about the #14 pick in the draft, I think it is entirely reasonable to "jump on the bandwagon" at that point. Still, Cxbby, I think the post you are responding to is in reference to those who did not like the pick AFTER it was made but who have now done a 180 and act like they've liked Patterson all along. Big difference, if that's the case.
First off my post responding to yours wasn't actually directed at you. From my recollection you are not someone I could call "ignorant". Spontaneously belligerent? Grumpy? Sure. But as far as basketball talk you are solid whether you are "right" or "wrong". So Morey is exactly following my philosophy then. He is smart enough to surround himself with people who know more basketball than himself. And more importantly smart enough to listen to them. For the record Morey is not batting 50/50 by a long shot. Considering the position he has picked at and what he had to work with, his results are nothing short of remarkable. Low first rounders on average barely stick in the NBA, let alone become starters or major contributors on playoff teams their rookie year. It is true that many of those picks came from Adelman and Landry was from a scout I believe. But at the end of the day all the credit in the world goes to Morey IMO. It is his job to work and listen to the right people. It is his job to sign on the dotted line. And when everything goes to **** and his picks bust it will be his ass on the line. Not Adelman or whoever he listened to. Just like the CEO of a corporation or the captain of a ship, he might not be versed in the everyday operations like the back of his hand, but he is solely responsible for the major direction. There is nothing wrong with being wrong. That is what makes you not ignorant. I think Morey evaluates players based on much more than stat crunching, and surrounds himself with experienced talent evaluators much better than me or you.
