I don't fully understand the point of this article. I guess he's just saying in a long unneccesary way that the Rockets need a strong big man, which I would agree with...but then again, who wouldn't? http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/1408447 <b>Rockets would be smart to heed big banger theory</b> By FRAN BLINEBURY Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Everyone learns something in a playoff series. The winners learn what they have is sufficient. They learn the plan is good enough, at least until the step up to the next rung on the ladder. They grow in confidence and poise. The losers learn what they lack. The vulnerable parts are first located, then exposed and ultimately torn wide-open easier than a hole in old pantyhose. They shrink and break down. It is the teams that have been sitting at home since the end of the regular season -- the ones experiencing the playoffs vicariously, through Bill Walton's "Love it Live Tour" -- that should learn the most. These teams' players are not caught up in the emotion, the daily ebb and flow, the subplots, the aches and the pains and the bumps and the bruises of the unending grind that wears you down mentally as much as physically. They are the teams that have a TNT or NBC camera's eye view and all of the replays and analysis to see what works and what doesn't work. In other words, the Rockets should be geniuses or, at a bare minimum, quite close to that Ph.D. in Envyology. That's assuming the boys haven't fallen asleep in the La-Z-Boys, all cozy under their usual blanket of excuses. Injuries, youth, homeland security, anything except being responsible for the bottom line. What we know about the Rockets, as they've been reconfigured in the new millennium, is they have the speed, the flash and the raw talent in the backcourt to give the new NBA darling Mavericks all they can handle on any given night. What this means is Steve Francis and Cuttino Mobley are better one-on-one players than Steve Nash and anybody who plays next to him in the Dallas backcourt. This is, of course, as much a statement about the Mavs' inability to play anything resembling real defense at the guard position. Or any other, for that matter. And when the standard for deciding who gets the shiny trophy and the victory parade comes down to who can best slash past mannequins for layups, these Rockets, as we know them, will be seated on the firetrucks for the triumphant ride. But what we have learned even in a series played at warp speed -- in which the main objective is to outscore the other guy -- what it takes to succeed and move on is some kind of frontcourt presence. Still up in the air is whether the Kings, once they have closed this one out, will thrive inside against Godzilla, aka Shaquille O'Neal. But they took two games in Dallas and have opened up a commanding 3-1 lead by getting the ball to the rim. Chris Webber is not the most conventional big man to lace up a pair of sneakers, yet he operated almost exclusively in and around the paint in Game 4 on Saturday to accumulate 30 points. Vlade Divac is hardly a dominating center, but he does have enough low-post moves and the passing skills to allow the offense to sometimes run through him and to let his teammates feed off him. Scot Pollard sometimes gets off the Sacramento bench for no more than 10 to 15 minutes, but he manages to slam into more bodies and make more unexpected things happen on sheer aggressiveness and a willingness to be physical than the entire Rockets roster in a month. With its third straight trip to the draft lottery looming in six days, the organization this time is sending Francis as its representative on the game-show set. Perhaps it is the Rockets' way of reinforcing the message that Stevie is the franchise player. Or maybe somebody wants to give him a little shock therapy with an up-close look at the weary, aging face of Clippers general manager Elgin Baylor, who is such a regular part of the affair that he is rumored to sleep in the studio the other 364 days of the year while waiting for the next lottery. If the Rockets move up in the draft from their current No. 5 position, it will be interesting to see if they are tempted by the prospect of taking 7-5 Chinese import Yao Ming or yet another teen phenom coming straight from high school. Caron Butler of Connecticut is a name to remember. But no matter where they pick and which direction they turn, the Rockets had better come away with somebody big, strong and bruising. Or at least willing to play that way. Somebody who isn't afraid to hit and get hit back. Somebody who can thrive down on the block, where the playoffs are won and lost, where the Rockets once ruled as champions. The Rockets need more than Kelvin Cato's eight points and seven rebounds a game and more than his reporting to camp overweight and getting into shape by the middle of January. This entire notion of trying to reinvent the wheel with a new-look offense that gives the center spot the back of a hand is an ineffective strategy in the playoffs, no matter how entertaining it might be in Dallas during the regular season. And no one has ever said Cato is entertaining. To have nothing in the middle is fine if you're baking doughnuts or bagels, not trying to cook up a contender. The Rockets need more than the return of Maurice Taylor and his jump shot to the power forward spot. They need more than the skinny, promising young body of Eddie Griffin if they are going to stop talking about the playoffs and rejoin them. What they need are more frontline players with the attitude and willingness to work of Kenny Thomas -- preferably with bodies that are bigger, even stronger -- and who can score and defend close to the hoop. The Kings have been to the class and learned the road to the top starts down low. The Mavericks, for all their charm, are getting a crash course in that lesson. The Rockets, one can only hope, are taking notes.
i don't like blinebury all that much....but i think a lot of us here are being pretty sensitive about him. everytime he posts an article that criticizes the Rockets we hear, "blinebury, you're just fat and stupid!" great.... i don't disagree with anything he said in this article. i too am tired of the excuses we've heard for 3 years now. when will youth stop being an excuse by the way???
We got younger each of the apst 3 years, how's it NOT been an excuse? Only thing that bothers me, is when people make up whatever to support their argument/theory: "That's assuming the boys haven't fallen asleep in the La-Z-Boys, all cozy under their usual blanket of excuses. Injuries, youth, homeland security, anything except being responsible for the bottom line. " Tell me something. When was a team young and have as many injuries as we did, and still make a good season? Please. You have your Franchise player out for 25 games. You leading scorer playing injured while the franchise player is out. Your starting forwardS both out with injury, one for all games, one for around 62. Mooch was playing with plantar fasciitis all season apparently. Our SF was always a bad one. Grififn, KT, Morris, Torres. All of them had huge problems at SF. Then add on to that, the players that filled in and played a lot more than usual: Collier Langhi Morris Griffin (wasn't supposed to) Torres Tierre Mooch (played TOOOOOOO much) Our whole team was that, KT, Cato, and Cat basically. That's an awful team. Last year? What excuse? We had the best record ever to not make it to the playoffs. We would've made the playoffs this year with that record if i'm not mistaken. Add to ALL that, we have one of the worst average attendances in the whole league. Add to that, a lot of fans aren't that loud either, making them even less effective. You tell me. Excuses? or Good reasons?
how about this...the team simply isn't as talented as the other teams in the Western Conference that finished ahead of them?? or, like francis said at the end of the year, the team doesn't work hard enough, particularly on the defensive end?? or how about the fact that the #1 and #2 scoring options on this team both come from the backcourt in players with very similar styles providing absolutely zero diversity??? we hear it said all the time..."francis and mobley are just young...they just make the mistakes young guys make." all i'm asking is when does that stop being a valid excuse?
Do not shoot the messenger. We too often get involved in semantics. The message is clear: do what you have to do to get a bigger and stronger KT. I believe the timing of the article is great giving the fact that the draft is coming up and we can see before our very eyes how the CUBANs are falling apart. End of story.
No way. With a fully healthy team, we're better than lots of teams ahead of us. Mo and Rice would take lots of pressure off our guards. That automatically makes our bench stronger. This is a very good team: Cato/Willis MoT/Griff/KT Rice/Griff/KT Mobley/Torres Francis/Mooch Good enough to maybe BARELY miss the playoffs. Just like last year. They're better thana lot, and probably a 5th seed in the East. When you lose Francis, that's when u lose EVERYTHING. Motivation, intensity, scoring, rebounding, passing, decreased defensive pressure. It makes a big difference, and I think Fran is a bandwagoner. When there's reason to believe, then there's effort. But realistically, there's no WAY this team has a chance without Francis.
I would like to see the Rockets get really good for a lot of reasons. . . but one of the biggest would be just to see whether Fran could bring himself to write a single positive word about them.
I think his message is right on, but sometimes his criticism is of the "over the top" variety. The point about having no one in the post is one we have been saying all year. DaDakota
if they're good enough to BARELY miss the playoffs, then they're not "better than a lot." and who in their right mind cares what seed they'd be in the eastern conference? unless jeff is hard at work on Save Our Rockets from the West, it's a moot point. the rockets don't, and never will, play in the east. MM is dead-on.
Personally, I find this to be the mildest of his criticisms and I don't really disagree. We ARE soft in the post, so I have no problems with what he is saying. I don't know if any of you have read his last few columns covering the Spurs or Mavericks. In all but one of them, he takes at least one paragraph to blast the Rockets by way of the other teams. A few exerpts... May 11: <i>Or it could have been Bibby, who escaped the Devil's Island of the Grizzlies franchise this season and has been a steady hand as a quarterback and still a big-play maker. Are you listening, Steve Francis? </i> May 8: <i>Texas, you might say, is where the NBA will explode off the launch pad with drama this weekend. Except here in the city of Duds. But that's a different matter.</i> April 25: <i>But the truth is Dallas is really a throwback to the past, before the days of the mind-numbing isolation play and the stultifying look of spacing around the 3-point line simply to launch more bombs. In other words, they are not the Rockets... The Mavs are everything the Rockets claim they want to be but are not. They make flamboyant plays, but with a purpose. Unlike the Rockets, they don't just talk about getting out and into a full-court running game. They do it. How is it LaFrentz can get the ball off the glass, turn and make an outlet pass, but Kelvin Cato can't? How is it Nash or Van Exel can find the middle of the floor on a three-on-two break and make the proper decision that results in a dunk or a layup, but Steve Francis can't? Francis has more raw talent in a couple fingers than Nash in his whole body. But Nash is a point guard, a real point guard, who is constantly learning and improving at the position... The Mavs give you a laser light show. The Rockets give you excuses.</i> Funny, for a "borrrrrrrrring" team, he sure does seem to be fixated on them.
Jeff, It is the team in his paper's town. I don't mind the jabs if anyone on the Rockets could read, maybe they would learn a thing or two. DaDakota
Blinebury's starting to sound like a broken record. 'New from the phenom that is Fran Blinebury, a 30-part series on the sky being blue. Details to come!' :yawn: :bored: :be original:
A very good team? That team is barely good enough to limp into the 8th playoff spot ahead of Seattle, Pheonix, and the Clipps. If that unlikey event occurs, they will get swept in the 1st round by the Kings just like they were destroyed 113-77 this season: http://www.nba.com/games/20011119/HOUSAC/boxscore.html Notice that Webber didn't even play. Fellow posters, you can choose to love or to hate Fran Blinebury but you are being severely delusional if you the think the current combined low post presences of Cato, MoT, KT, & EG can do anything beyond a quick first round playoff exit next season.
maybe, but i find it hard to disagree with any of his points. part of blinebury's problem is that he no longer has the oilers to kick around. i've looooooooong maintained the city as a whole lost a good chunk of it's buzz when they left town, and i think it's permeated the paper, no question. adding to the problem, neither the rockets or astros (ESPECIALLY the astros) have any real characters beyond moochie's hair, and he sucks, so who cares? the astros may be the blandest, most vanilla team in creation, a far cry from the oilers during glanville and pardee's eras. unfortunately, as much i'm looking forward to the texans... they seem well on their way to fielding as bland a team as possible, too.
Thing is, I don't really disagree either. It isn't the commentary that is at issue for me as much as the all-out ridiculousness of his writing and blasting. Remember that this is the guy whose only source with the Rockets got traded last summer (Hakeem). The guy used to drool all over Rudy T. and Les Alexander, now he's baking them for dinner. The ONLY reason he does it is to sell papers. I was talking to a gentleman the other day who worked for the Post for many years and is now a freelance journalist. He said that I'm not the only one lamenting the poor quality of stories and columns in the Chron. He said that nearly every journalist he knows thinks that the Chron is mostly a joke. Ever since the Post closed, they have gotten soft. They dodge the tough stories (ever notice how no Chron reporter did any of the investigative reporting of Enron - they just parroted AP stories) and only write popular opinion. He said the only honest and tell-it-like-it-is writing in there is usually in the Letters to the Editor section. Sad. When the Rockets were winning, Blinebury couldn't find enough ways to heap praise on them. When they are losing, he can't find enough ways to shred them. Way to sell those papers, Fran.
I just have a question, who in the Rockets organization went all whiny and blamed the whole season on injuries and the team's youth? I remember reading quotes from Steve and Rudy where they definitely mentioned the injuries as a factor (and yes, the injuries were the biggest factor contributing to the difference in records from the last two seasons), but I don't really remember anyone just blaming it all on injuries without mentioning other problems. In fact, I swear I could remember Rudy and Steve saying that their were problems with the system on the offensive and defensive end. What else does Fran want them to do? Should they come out and say WE SUCK? The way Fran continues to bash the Rockets for making excuses and at the same time completely downplaying the part that the injures DID play this season, makes me wonder if he's just out to get somebody.
DCkid Rudy was quoted on more than one occasion bemoaning the inability to practice properly due to the number of injuries.
oh, the chronicle is a joke; it amazes me houston's been a one-paper town for, what? 7, 8 years now? (iirc, the post ceased operations in 1995.) why has no one stepped in and made a run at them? the chonicle is so vulnerable.... having said all that... i'm not sure what other approach fran is supposed to take here...? the team sucks; would we prefer he write puff pieces about our rosey future or how great steve francis might one day be? if he lays it on a little thick, and sells an extra paper or 2... well, that's the columnists' job. they don't pay him to be vanilla. and look, here we are dedicating a thread to discussing it. seems he's doing something right.
