Wojnarowski: McHale is someone guys like to play for

Just being realistic kid. They could very well develop into more, but they aren't right now.

 

The team is NOT overacheiving because of McHale though. They were also winning when Sampson was coaching. It's not the coaches at all - it's the players. There is very good team chemistry going on and that is why thy are "overacheiving". The Lakers on the other hand have very poor chemistry and that is the reason they are losing despite having great players and stats.

 

Yes, anything good that happens is because of Lin, anything bad that happens is because of McHale. You win. I'm done.

 

I didn't mention Lin - I said there is good chemistry among "the players". You must have automatically connected Lin and chemistry in your mind for some reason.

 

That's because you are a Lin fan, it's obvious. McHale can do no right, Lin can do no wrong in your eyes. That's why I'm done with this.

 

Not that I agree or disagree with his statement, but outside of Harden who would you classify to be greater than just a role player?

Parsons?
Undeveloped, could be a star but is still a role player...

Pat^2?
Definitely a role player.

Asik?
Not quite a role player but not quite a star. Somewhere in between if you asked me...

Who else is worth noting? I think the roster has potential, but at the moment we have a team of role players, rooks, and Harden. Even Lin hasn't really shown to be a star player, he has a name to him but we aren't seeing the Linsanity we saw before. I love this team, but at the moment I really feel like we are in transition and Harden is our only really solid piece...

 

Well you're saying anything good is all Harden and McHale and everything bad is the whole rest of the team (role players).

 

No, I'm saying that the TEAM is overachieving, I'm not getting down on ANYONE. I'm not the one saying FIRE EVERYONE!!!!

 

What is your definition of a role player?

 

Rick Fox, Robert Horry, players like that. Key pieces you would need to win a championship but not a player who could carry you to one. Shane Battier is a great example of a no stats role player. Jason Terry could even be seen as a role player in some circles.

Essentially a role player helps a good team become an even better one, but he can't bridge the gap between a bad team and a good team. That's my working definition of a role player...

 

So why is a team with 1 star and all the rest role players overacheiving? The Lakers have Kobe, Dwight, Pau, Nash, WP - all better than role players. Are Harden and McHale really that good? You're really underrating the rest of the team Bobby.

 

This is dumb. In the 2008 / 2009 season, the rockets were a top 10 defensive squad. That comes with having guys like Battier and Artest in the tail-end of their prime, and Yao protecting the paint. The coach doesn't make the defense, the personnel does. The coach just tries to get the most out of that personnel, and right now we don't have big-time wing stoppers (Battier) or two-way players (Artest, Yao).

 

Agreed. But they're usually not starters either. Asik is top 5 in rebounds and good at defense, Lin is top 5 in steals and runs the offense well, Parsons is having an above average year. I think they're pretty solid starters. Are there better ones in the league at their position - of course - but that does not necessarily make them role players. Just my opinion.

 

McHale someone who like to play for? I would believe it when one of the rockets come out and say it.

 

I could see role players being starters. Shane was a starter when he was out here. Let me put it to you another way, let's trade away a Asik or a Lin and send him to a team like Minnesota or a Milwaukee, would either one have an immediate impact? Not really. They would continue to perform at an average level getting maybe 8-20 points and the team would have the same outlook. The only exception I could see to that statement would be Parsons. Parsons could grow into a great player. Parsons does show signs of when he tries to take over a game or at least make an impact. Look at the Clippers/Rockets game 3rd quarter as an example. Parsons came out and was really trying to change the outlook of the game, but obviously it failed. Everyone else just went out there and got their regular stats and assumed that was enough.

 

That means Kyrie Irving is a role player because that Cavs team just sucks.

 

Obviously, you only see the game of basketball as a game of HORSE - where players only go 1-on-1.

If Lin went to Minnesota or Milwaukee, he would get them more wins. His stats would be the same, but the teams would have more wins because he would be setting his teammates up a lot more than the PGs they currently have.

 

But they were traded to the Rockets this year and have had an immediate impact. We're not "overacheiving" and above .500 just because of Harden as good as he is. Look at the Lakers with Kobe putting up his best stats this year. BTW stats are HIGHLY overrated. Team chemistry is the key to winning and the new guys have brought it.

 

Seriously, if Lin and Asik weren't on this team, how bad would this team be? They would be just as bad as the Cleveland Cavs. Essentially, it would be one freak scorer who plays no defense (Harden for Rockets, Irving for Cavs) and a bunch of scrubs.