Adelman would be a fool to bring artest off the bench. Despite what artests says he won't be happy with coming off the bench. It wouldn't even be a bad idea to package battier in a trade to get a pg.
So what exactly does Scola do? He's not making teams pay for doubling off of him? How about Battier spotting up in the corners? The advantage of having a big 3 is so that you don't have to kill your best players by having them on the floor all the time out of fear of losing the lead. With a guy like Artest who is a good scorer but needs the ball in his hands to be at his best, I don't see how we get the most out of him by starting him with a couple of guys that are going to demand close to 20 shots a piece. The Spurs are a lot like the Rockets in that they have 3 guys who can score a ton of points, but there is a vast drop off in the supporting cast in terms of guys creating their own shot. That's why Ginobili is better suited to come off the bench, and why I think Artest is too.
yeah but it's not like were gonna start EVERY SINGLE GAME slowly. I doubt he would do that. Landry's gonna be the guy to provide a a spark
I've been thinking about this quite a bit. I agree with the two posts I quoted. I really, really do think that we should bring Artest off the bench. Put it this way: Battier has zero chance of being 6th man of the year. If Artest comes off the bench, you bet he WILL be 6th man of the year. If you have a starting five that produced 55 wins (and would have likely produced even more had everyone been healthy) and then you add a 6th man of the year...you're in good shape. Also, I think if we bring Artest off the bench, him being a ball stopper would be less of a problem - he could/would be the no. 1 or no. 2 option on offense then, instead of no. 3 or even no. 4 (don't underestimate Scola) option. Artest would still get more minutes than Battier and, against teams with guys like Kobe, you would see both on the court at the same time quite a bit, and you would likely see both of them finish together quite often. But I would bring him as 6th man. I think he would be fine with it if you sell it to him the right way.
Both T-Mac and Artest will start and finsih the game. The advantage to start Artest is that the Rockets can establish both defense and offense presence on the court. The trick after that is how to rotate T-Mac or Artest, so the Rockets will have at least one of them on the court. That wont be hard for Adelman to do.
I keep giving you the benefit of the doubt, but you keep letting me down. The whole 6th man idea is really bogus. Manu comes off the bench because he's reckless and pop doesnt think he can hold playing like that as a starter. Jamison was a bench guy because they had walker and dirk at that spot. Artetst doesnt have that quality of player in front of him. Gordon is a tweener. Artest is the starter along with Scola and vereything is cool. Shane can come off the bench like Posey and defensive set the tone and keep the lineup clicking,defending, and hustling. The 2nd unit is about maintaining or increasing the lead or cutiing into it. Alot of times it isnt always about scoring alot of points with that unit either.
Battier may start early in the season, while Artest gets used to his new teammates, but we'll see Shane moved to 6th man after a period of adjustment. Ron is very familier with Adelman's system, so no worries there. I like the idea of getting off to a hot start with Yao, Tracy, Ron, and Luis beginning the games. What's beautiful is the ability of Coach A being able to constantly bring in fresh players in waves to throw at our opponent. Battier comes in for McGrady, Artest and Shane switch between the 2 and the 3, depending on matchups, Artest sits and Barry plays the 2, with Battier at the 3. Tracy's still resting. The 4 is another strong spot for the Rocks. Scola starts and switches off with Landry (if he's signed). Artest can switch to the 4 for stretches of the game, if Adelman likes the matchup, and Scola can play the 5, resting Yao. If we're playing a relatively slow half-court team, Deke plays the 5 (if he's signed), while Yao rests (Yao needs to rest A LOT, so we'll have him aces late in the season and for the playoffs). I'm eager to see a "small' lineup during stretches of games of Scola, Landry, Artest/Battier, McGrady, and Alston/Brooks, assuming Alston and/or Brooks aren't moved for a new starting point. That's a heck of a nightmare for the other coach to deal with. Sure, my post is repeating a lot of the ideas of others around here, which I can't help, since I've been thinking the same thing. Novak and Head, if they are still here, get spot minutes, and Dorsey, of course, can get minutes at the 5 and 4, if he proves to be effective. The bench won't be chopped liver, giving the stars more time to stay fresh. What a nice change from what we've been seeing. Getting Artest and Barry, assuming they can stay out of trouble in one instance, and stay healthy in the other, is huge for the Rockets. Now, if we could just improve the point guard spot! We could use an improvement at the 2 to come off the bench, but I don't want to get greedy!
This is what our starting lineup should look like: PG - Alston SG - McGrady SF - Artest PF - Scola C - Yao Yao and McGrady are givens, and the pre-Artest core to this team. They are unquestioned leaders. Scola provides a natural PF who brings size and rebounding to the floor, along with someone who can score in sync with this unit. Artest goes to the SF spot because his size creates mis-matches with the defense, and he has proven more than capable of guarding the best SG or SF on the other team. Sure, he could be an effective defender at the 4 most likely, but he would be most effective at the SF spot. This lineup is all about the best players at the best positions. Alston starts because we have no other PG's, and no, McGrady is not a starting PG. He can rotate over and will sometimes control the ball up the court even with Alston in the game, but Alston is the PG and there is nothing we can do about that. Now, that leaves Shane Battier. I would like to draw your attention to the Lakers and Celtics of last year, most notably the Celtics. The sixth man of these two teams were Vujavich (spelling) and Posey. Both of those guys were considered "glue" guys. In other words, the 6th men of the two best teams in the NBA last year were high energy guys who could score when needed but weren't a true scoring threat on a different unit. Take for instance Posey: He brings good size to the table similar to Battier, and is a well respected defense SF, as is Battier. Both are best at hitting spot up jumpers and getting loose balls. Vujavich (spelling) wasn't quite as adept at defense, but he brought a high energy to the team and went after loose balls and was able to hit shots when needed for the most part. Shane Battier is a glue guy who would be best suited for a role similar to Posey, where he can be the energy guy off the bench. It's not as if Battier is only going to play with the second unit either. If Battier comes in as the sixth man, they aren't automatically going to sub in the rest of the second team guys. Battier provides the flexiblity to play multiple positions when someone on the first team gets into foul trouble. That is what Posey was able to do for Boston. Batteir can come off the bench and play the 2-4 with no glitches. When he comes off the bench, he knows his role and provides the needed energy and defense to keep the team playing at a high level. That is why Battier SHOULD come off the bench as our sixth man.
