Feel free to vote how you like, this is not a thread for arguing the merits of "IF" It would be great if you could stop people from posting that have not voted in a poll....... Get rid of those afraid to put their mark down on where they stand.... DD
pole fail. It dismisses the fact that TMAC could easily play in Adelman's offense and that Adelman's offense is not always working. If it was we would have wins over the Lakers and Suns.
Casey, that might indeed be true, but the inverse might also be true that integrating his style into the current team would cause them to lose more often. It is all just conjecture. My point is that with an expiring contract, and in a developing year, which direction should the organization choose? DD
Is tmac coaching now? I don't see why it was to be one or the other, this would be the first time adelman has coached tmac with several other scoring options, it could work out, may actually work out better than ever..
lol why does it always have to be divided? so its either let t-mac play or fire Rick ? i don't really think its fair because obviously you have to go with the coach over player 95% of the time. A player is one aspect of the team while the coach has to control many aspects of the team. I say let T-Mac play when he can and keep Rick. This isn't necessarily a rebuilding year. Morey has mentioned that our goal is to try to win as many games and make the playoffs. Of course, if we do end up a lottery team, that just happens. But I don't think we'll see the team sacrifice winning games to develop young players. That should be apparent by the way Rick plays the guys that can help the team more (Chase,Hayes) than developing Jermaine Taylor or even Pops when he was here.
Last time a healthy t-mac came back to a near .500 team we went on a 22 game winning streak. The team can grow and have T-mac - they are not mutually exclusive. This is why your poll is flawed. Where is the third option?
No need, this is a choice the organization is making now.......not one that has a player with 3 years left on his deal. DD
Are you asking if we should trade him? Of course we should. But if he can play and win more games right now and showcase, then play him.
I feel this is a biased poll. McGrady could possibly run Adelman's offense effectively. I think he has to give him a shot to perform. Also, he's not just an expiring contract. If things work out well, he could be back (though obviously for a much smaller contract). We had a 22 game win streak with him in the lineup, without Yao for part of it, and he was a help back then--he deserves a chance to do the same now.
While I generally agree with DD, I do believe that TMAC should be given the opportunity to play in Adelman's style. If he comes back, and the offense noticeably changes for the worse, then, he needs to be traded. However, having his offensive ability, as an option, I believe to be more of a positive than a negative. Although time will most likely be taken away from Budingher, I do hope that Budingher will benefit from watching Tracy in addition to facing him during practice.
Then why put up a poll? My choice is that the Rockets should try to integrate T-mac into Adelman's system before giving up on him. How do I vote in your poll then?
Let's look at this: 1. If the team plays him, and he does well, does it increase his trade value? Not really - because with his contract, there are not going to be any contending teams able to afford it, and rebuilding teams only want him for his contract anyway. 2. If he plays, and plays well does it increase his value for a new contract? Yes, of course but this hurts the Rockets it would be better organizationally if they drove his value through the basement if they intended on re-signing the guy, making him look good is bad for the team's future. 3. If he plays and sucks does it hurt his trade value? Possibly, he will still be only an expiring contract, BUT now that the insurance has kicked in, he is even more valuable to anyone that acquires him, so before now it made NO sense to play him at all. 4. Is the team better off playing him? Unknown - he might help them win a few more games but does anyone actually think the team will contend this year? Or more importantly will Tracy sign with Houston or move on to somewhere of his choosing? I think the team holds all the cards here, and they need to play them well, and while they play, Tracy will be twisting in the wind, and we will have moments of childish tantrums.... Let's just hope the team had enough last year and is tough enough to get through it and ignore it. To me, the only reasonable thing is to have him sit, and trade him whenever they can... DD
Did Rick Adelman pick the Lakers to win the championship while we were still alive last year? I didn't think so. I know that was just one little radio interview, but it's like the shot heard 'round the world to me.
McGrady has the ability to be a great passer in our system. He has the ability to be a humongous asset in it, too, with his shooting ability. But can he avoid being a ball-stopper and a prima donna? I'm not so sure. If he can, I could see us re-signing him but it would definitely take a huge attitude shift. Fortunately, the grit/attitude of all of our other players may actually rub off on him if he plays with them long enough, so I hold out hope.
He shouldn't have said that. Should have at least worded it better. Also one of our local radio stations polled listeners on who would win the series, Lakers or Rockets. I believe 70% said the Lakers would win that series. Let me remind you that this was in Houston. If it makes it any better, at least he didnt come right out and say the Lakers would beat the Rockets like actual Houstonians did.
This is the NBA. The 'star' player has the power. Period. The Rox biggest 'threat' is to ship him to Siberia i.e., Memphis or Minnesota or similar. McG does not need volume shooting to get his next (last?) big payday- he 'just' needs to evidence an ability to get to the rack, dunk, and 'accept his role' and meshing with the 'guys'. If/when he does these things then he gets paid. BUT if he and the Bird Rights acquiring team are smart and on the same page McG will sign a 'low' $ one-year deal with a wink-wink promise to make it up next summer after they have inked a stud or two to make the team a real contender. That is what should happen. What will happen (and when ???)?
