Seriously, only Rockets fans say this now. T-Mac hardly earns his max salary now, and this is coming from a die hard T-Mac fan. McGrady just isn't that good. Period. I agree with the rest of your post though.
It is absolutely not clear that we are better with Tmac and Head, then with Battier and Tmac. I think that is completely opposite. Do you think Head is going to take the defensive assignments that Battier took every night. If not then Tmac is going to be guarding the Kobe, Dwade, and Lebrons and his offense will suffer. Also, do you realize basketball is about offense and defense. If all you have is scorers on the floor, that doesnt guarantee anything. Ask Phoenix how many championships their incredible offense has won. Last, why does Head deserve to be handed the starters job now that he is in his third year. What does that have to do with anything. Snyder is in his fourth year, why isnt he starting. And with your logic, Shane is in his 6 or 7th year, doesnt that earn a starting spot. As for your original question, no team is assured of a second round series. Ask an almost 70 win Dallas team if they were sure to advance. Hell, even this past year's Rox team was good enough to advance, but played a bad last few minutes of game 7. A couple rebounds, and we could be talking about a WC finals team and not a first round bust.
I think Head's numbers suffered after Yao went down and also after JVG tried to push him into playing the point which is not his natural position. As a shooter, Head is excellent. The two is the only position he can play. I'm not saying Head is not tradeable - I'd love an upgrade....and I'm not ripping on Battier either. But last year a lack of offense killed us. And I'd like to see those number pre-Yao injury vs. the time Head was forced to play the point (and his play diminished along side of that). With Yao at full strength, and a decent power forward in the mix, I'm not so sure that Shane is the best option. I don't think he's a great one on one defender. Getting charges is great, but not when you score 4 points a game. If Shane put up 10 points a game, I'd say, fine, start him. But his lack of offensive output is a liability. Even Robert Horry would average double digits. As does Luther Head. I do think that if Head is in the game, he needs to be in with Mike James, and not Rafer Alston.
I don't think Shane is all that great of a defender to be honest. I think he plays with a lot of heart, and that's great, and that's enough to have him in the rotation - but not as a starter. He'll get charges, he'll force some turnovers, he'll hit a few 3's, and he'll out-dive to the floor for a rebound. And we all love that and it makes us more loyal to Shane then Head who has not always been what we want him to be. But Shane's not game-changing, and he's not going to get any better - he's peaked, and his peak isn't all that great. Head has the ability to take over a game, he's getting better and better. Head is quicker and more explosive to the basket. He can shoot the 3 and will take the shot. And he's going to get better. To me, it makes more sense to give Head a chance to start and bring Shane off the bench. First of all, Shane can be effective off the bench, but for Luther, I think it would be better to start him and give him the confidence boost. It will be interesting to see what Adelman does. But I'd invest in Head.
Not saying you dispose of Battier, just move him to the bench and let him be a guy who comes in when our team needs a lift in energy. And this isn't about Shane being better then Head or Head being better then Shane completely - it's also about getting T-mac to the 3 which is where he should be playing.
If anyone is going to be the 6th man off the bench to provide instant scoring it has to be a combo of James and Wells. It would have to be both of them because I don't think either one could do it all by himself night in night out. No one else can do it. Period.
The problem is none of your "theories" jive with reality. 1. Yao's with Head: 809 minutes, Rockets outscored opponets by combined 32 points, or about +1.9 points per 48 minutes. Yao's without Head: 816 minutes, Rockets outscored opponetns by combined 264 points, or about +15.5 points per 48 minutes. Head without Yao was worse than Head with Yao. However, when Yao was in, the team was better without Luther Head. 2. Head with Rafer Alston, presumably not playing PG: 1399 minutes, Rockets outscore opponent by 103 points, or +3.5 points per 48 minutes. Better than Head was without Alston, but still less than normal team pace. Rafer Alston without Head: 1641 minutes, Rockets outscore opponetn by 357 points. or +10.44 points per 48 minutes. Oh look, the team was much better with Rafer on the floor and WITHOU LUTHER HEAD. 3. Rocket with Battier: 107.6 points on offense per 100 possession. Rockets without Battier: 107.1 points on offense per 100 possession. What offensive liability? 4. Contrast with: Rocket with Luther Head: 106.5 points per 100 possession. Rockets without Luther Head: 108.7 points per 100 possession. What offensive asset?
Do you do any research at all. You say if Shane scored 10 points a game, then start him. If you noticed last year, Shane did score 10 a game in both the regular season and the playoffs. Where are you getting this four points a game thing. Then you say that even Horry would average double digits. He averaged 3.9 points a game last year for the Spurs. Why not throw a stat out there that since Luther averaged 23 points a game last season he should be the starter. Look stuff up before making factless points.
Mike James wasn't particularly good last year, certainly not better than Battier, and Bonzi Wells isn't NBA-caliber anymore.
What games have you been watching that make you think Head has the ability to take over games. His one skill is hitting outside shots which he needs others to set up for him. Dont get me wrong, that skill is a big asset to the Rockets, but Head will never take over games on a team with Tmac and Yao. Also being a starter doesnt mean the player responds with a confidence boost. Rafer started all season, that didnt do wonders for his game. Starting Head doesnt make him a better player because suddenly he thinks, wow Im starting, that means Im good.
This "Battier makes TMAC play SG" **** is tiresome. Battier took on the best opposing wing most of the game, no matter it's SG or SF, just like David Wesley did for the last 2 years. It makes ZERO difference whether TMac is nominally a SG or SF. ZERO. The only difference with Head in is he gets OWNED on defense, no matter whether he guards SF or SG. TMac also will ALWAYS take on the primary creator role with Battier OR with Head. TMac will also ALWAYS be guarded by the best perimeter defender. The Spurs will not decide to sic Bruce Bowen on Luther Head when he gets in but leave Bowen on TMac when Battier is in. Again, ZERO difference.
I've never he said he wasn't a defensive player, I'm just pointing out he isn't as great of a defender as a lot of people here make him out to be. As for Carl Herrera, having to go into that much detail is pointless as my post was reply to people constantly saying "Battier takes the majority of the defensive assignment of guarding the opposite team's best player." Do you argue with that statement? If not, then my post is completely valid, because it would essentially lay most of the blame on Battier. I didn't even go into all the games where the bench (Like Michael Finley of the Spurs) comes out and tacks on to more points that should technically be accredited to Battier-allowed points. Or when Battier switches over on players like Dirk Nowitski. If anything, my post was generous. Naturally EVERY single one of Kobe's 53 against Houston wasn't on Battier, however, if the general consensus is that Battier takes the role of guarding the best player on the other team, then you must place the not only the accolades but the blame as well. Yes, Kobe took half of the team's shots, but he still scored 53 on us. On Battier. They beat us the first time he did it, and we beat them the second time they did it. So as far as we can see, it's a 50% chance of victory when it happens. Not that good for us. And I calculated some of the TS% in those games, and the ones I did were pretty good, but that information alone took too much time from my hands to get, so I am not about to go through and do them all. As for the percentage of time Battier was playing the opposing layer I once again direct you to the popular belief that Battier guards the best opposing player for the majority of the time. Unless you'd like to retract that statement, then my analysis holds ground. Look, I think Battier is a good defender, but he isn't as great as everyone says he is. Kobe's 1st 53 Pt Game - 58.8% TS Kobe's 2nd 53 Pt Game - 52.8% TS Artest's 34 Pt Game - 74.4% TS Artest's 39 Pt Game - 70.04% TS LeBron's 21 Pt Game - 41.8% TS LeBron's 32 Pt Game - 57.2% TS
Majority of the time doesn't mean the opposing players did the majority of his scoring during this time. Bid difference, which renders your post pointless. You are saying Battier is not an elite defender because SOME of the good scorers had SOME good games against the Rockets when Battier played a big PART of the minutes. Such logic is asinine. This is the NBA, good scorers score, even when they get guarded by good defenders.
And I see Ashes has conveniently ignored the "Ricky Davis had great games against Battier" claim which he pulled out of his ass. I don't expect him to address this post, either. Just wanted to make a note.
Oh, and sorry for the triple post, but I have one last to say. Before any of you get the wrong idea, I'm not a Battier hater, I like the guy a lot. A point I've tried to bring to this board is that defense can be taught, it can be worked on. You can create a good defensive player, that's all we need. We can make Snyder into that. You can make Rashard Lewis into that. The point is, you want offense, you need it, because team defense wins games, not individual defense. With gifted athleticism and length you can ALWAYS have a a good defender. Look at T-Mac, Kobe, LeBron, etc. they are all good defenders. Do the same thing I just did with Battier (Go through all the games he faced a prolific scorer) with Bruce Bowen. It looks roughly the same, I tried it, but I am too lazy to post it. Offensive prowess can't be worked on like defense can be. Battier will never be able to score like LeBron, but if LeBron wwanted to, I bet he could play defense the same if not better than Battier.
How about you conveniently stop being an ass and just have an intellectual debate without being a dick? Too hard? You're right, I must've misthought. I remember being at a friend's house and hearing about Ricky Davis scoring big one night. For some reason it clicked into my mind that it was against us. I was wrong. Sorry. How about that for your note? *******.
You really can't. Players can develop both ways -- Artest and Pippen are examples of guys who were great defenders first, and then developed their offensive prowess. Certain things about defense are more exogenous to a player based on physical abilities compared to a jumpshot or ball handling, but defense is a lot like rebounding instincts -- some people are just better. If it were that simple, the variation between defenders of similar sizes would be negligible. And Snyder was burnt to a crisp on way too many occasions last year -- and that was with great defensive coaching.
You cant make a statement like as far as we can see, it is a 50/50 chance of victory, when you base it on a two game sample. With that logic, I could say that using the two game sample against the Heat, as long as Battier guards the other teams superstar perimeter player (Wade), the Rockets have a 100 percent chance of winning since we went 2-0 against the Heat this year.
