I read it with perspective because they are made with perspective. They are not made to please people on this bbs, but are definitely made to please someone. They may just be talking shop, but when what you say can affect what happens to you in the future, nobody, be it an NBA player, a dentist, a cable repair man, says my company sucks, the management sucks, it all sucks, in a public fashion. This is just a bad analogy from the get go. In the game of "life," multiple people win. There are probably many happily married men/women on this board. In the NBA, only 1 team wins the championship every year. Since the number and type of team, for the most part (an extended given period at least) is fixed, then it necessitates comparisons to other teams to fully understand how yours works. Why look at the top 4 teams in apg? Well, because those teams, despite having some of the same weaknesses as us (be it injuries, youth, poor shooting, or whatever else our losing has been attributed to in this thread), have actually put together successful teams and are winning. I, for one, am interested in seeing how they are doing it because I know when healthy we have better talent and should be able to do it more successfully. I love getting into the details of the sport just as much as anyone. Offensive and defensive schemes are great to understand and making watching the game easier. So, you ask Well. I think that is great. Its what Ive been saying for a while. Its the reason Steve is rarely noticeable in the games when he shifts over to anything other than point with Moochie also in the game. I used to forget he was almost playing at those times cause he'd go from the focal point of the offense to barely in the plays. And it sure is interesting that exploiting Mobley's strengths is a subtle art. The problem is, in the end, who cares. Cause as Nike said, the grand question is: And understanding the subtleties of an offense that has been failing on a number of levels thus far is NOT exciting to me. This is even moreso the case when it comes to understanding the stengths of such an offense. I'd be more interested if Walt or Boylen were asking..."Why is it that every time Steve is on the weakside he is completely forgotten?" Because a successful team should be able to exploiut a rotating man defense through the weakside. I still hope the gameplan will be proven right once this team becomes healthy. For that, I will wait and see.
Who cares about my stupid analogy about girlfriends then, like I'm really trying to win an argument with it. The point is trying to tell you about a different type of BBS fan. Some of us don't like to argue who sucks or not, who is to blame or not. Yet, that is all there is here sometimes. Now we get one article full of playbook exposing quotes, and you're here telling me those quotes mean nothing, because they aren't talking bad about the team, so we can't trust them Maybe those quotes actually have a huge amount of meaning to someone who likes to talk Xs and Os. They do for me, and it has nothing to do with being right or wrong about previous arguments...it has to do with understanding our system better. Whether it is the right system or not...Walt's quotes tell me a lot about our system. Boylen's do. The fact they said "red" and "blue" does. There is a refreshing amount of meaning in these quotes. I'll say it again...I do not believe Feigen likes this system, but he gave us quotes to give us added insight. Nothing more; nothing less. At least, that is the way I read it. Then, all I can say is it is clear to me that something about this article or this thread offends you. If these subtleties are "NOT exciting to you," then you are here to just deny the whole thing and not talk about the offense or the opponents defense. You know, that is the topic of the article... "<b>Finding What Works</b>" Your bottomline is the ast/TO ratio proves the system sucks...OK that's been said how many times? My bottomline is what is your point in this thread if you don't like to talk about Xs and Os...you know, "Finding What Works" I do. It is about talking Xs and Os...get it?!
The thread is titled "Adjustments to the Rockets' Offense" In my first post in the thread I was talking about their adjustments and how they are presently failing. I do find this stuff interesting, but only when it corresponds to wins and losses (hence the who cares argument - heck, even otherwise I am still interested in knowing stuff like "Red" or "Blue" because you can hear them scream stuff at games). I havent seen that connection made in your posts and am trying to get it out of you. Now that you know more about the X's and O's, why hasnt it translated to wins? Why isnt it successful? Is it a system you like/think they should be running? Is it too hard/too easy? I realize it may seem as if I am bashing, but Im not. I like Rudy, and have never bashed him in a thread (although I have questioned him). It just to fully talk about X's and O's, we need to understand why somethign does or doesnt work, and on a 9-23 team that is having obvious X and O problems, there is more that isnt working than is. I applaud youre effort to discuss what is working, but I dont see all that stuff as actually working, like you do and want to further understand, from and X and O standpoint, your opinions as to why it does/does not work? That, I think will help us both understand the details and how they relate to the big picture.
<B>The Rockets weaknesses have been discussed ad nauseum on this board, but leebigez takes it to an extreme. </B> The "you're not a real Rockets fan... go find another team" garbage has been posted ad nauseum as well, yet it hasn't stopped you from doing it again and again. <B>Major, it seems the only strength you know how to mention is Steve Francis, but never his weaknesses. </B> Interesting. I don't even remember the last time I talked about Steve Francis. While I have no doubt he's better and more valuable than Mobley, I don't think he's nearly as good (yet) as the majority of people here do. In terms of building a team, I'd actually prefer an Andre Miller / Jamal Tinsley type passing PG over a Francis type, but that's an entirely different subject. <B>Just because you find it safer to harp on the weaknesses doesn't mean you have to do it in every thread. </B> Coming from the guy who goes nuts everytime anyone mentions anything negative about Mobley, that means a lot. You're just as responsible for threads devolving into "view #1 vs. view #2" as anyone else here. <B>This thread is as positive as it comes, </B> No, it really wasn't. This thread was an article posted for discussion. Discussion can include agreement or disagreement. This particular article contained talk about adjustments which many of us disagree with. <B>Can't you just pass on this constructive Xs and Os thread then with your ad nauseum drivel summing up Feigen's article by saying that we must suck if we are just now making adjustments despite the fact that this is the first article that Feigen has written about it.</B> I don't rely on Feigan telling me whether adjustments have been made. I watch the games. I see the same mistakes with no substantive changes over the course of well over a month. I see an article saying how we are changing. I point out that we really aren't (or if we are, the same basic mistakes are still occurring. We can make all the "adjustments" we want, but until those basic problems are fixed, this team will not win consistently). Your reply is then "go to another thread", yet this thread is about that exact subject. <B>Ummm....the article says the adjustments were happening earlier. Rudy said that 2 weeks ago in another interview. Why do you have to say that it is "silly it took a month?"</B> And, if you read my post, you'll see that I don't care about the details of the individual X's/O's adjustments, but results. NO OTHER TEAM that we played during that streak (and we played some bad teams) has these kinds of basic problems consistently. None of them look anywhere near as lost as us. We have our second team, basically, out there on the floor right now. Other teams put their second teams out there and look better / smoother than us, and our guys have had much much more playing time. At some point, the coach takes a share of the responsibility for that. <B>But that is not enough, you have to keep repeating it...</B> And I'll keep repeating it until they do something about it, because IT IS STILL A PROBLEM. <B>Some of us aren't trying to discusses strengths or weaknesses like you say...some are just trying to talk about the games! </B> That's fine. Make a thread about X's and O's and go with it. Everyone who loves that kind of stuff will have a blast. Those of us who don't really look at it will leave you alone. This thread is about adjustments and their results. The results, thus far, are terrible. While these adjustments of repositioning Mobley are interesting and maybe beneficial, basic adjustments like reducing dribbling would, in my opinion, have a much larger effect. Offenses can work reasonably well just through ball movement and flow, but we have neither at present.
Other than the usual trolls who deserve such treatment, find me one example where I have said such things, other than ZRB or leebigez. Yeah, that's what I thought.
Behad- I used to be a pipefitter and in operations by now i'm fully independent of someone else company, but that's besides the point.
Enough said here, Rudy still SUCKS! Some people here seem to have all the time in the world having nothing better to do othere than typing almost-college-paper-long arguments here to insist that the Emperor "Rudy" has nice clothes on.
