I never said you insulted my intelligence or offended me. Again just like earlier you choose what you want to address. You ignored the part where Harden was held back by not starting and you still havent answered why we need Mathews to start and what purpose that serves. They completely undervalued Harden and didnt know what they had. You also just liked a comment by Reeko stating why jalen should start so excuse me for being confused by your posts that dont address my original post at all and skip over my entire point.
Green needs to earn it, right now, he would have to beat out Gordon and Mathews - and he is not doing that when defense and shooting are concerned. Let him work off the bench and PROVE himself as an NBA player - nothing wrong with development off the bench, most players that are not NBA ready right away have to start there. I know a bunch of Green Only Fans want to see him play all game long because he can jump high and is fast, and they think development is a starting job given because of his status as a pick. Most of us however prefer that he earn his way into the lineup. Green can start when he can play both ends...just like all the other players that learned off the bench.........the ones that started right away were much further along than he is. RE: Harden argument is a red herring, he was in year 3 and 4 when he came here.....he should not have started year 1 either. DD
difference between Harden and Green is that OKC was a 50 win playoff team his rookie year, so it’s understandable that u could have a rookie selected with a top pick coming off the bench the Rockets are a bottom feeder
some of you lames need to stop posting until we see Jalen Green play in the 1 big lineup... Stop trying to demote this dude before he sees the same spacing everyone else has benefited from.. stop being weird. JC had 10pts and 5rebs last game for goodness sake. everybody is eating. I want Green coming off the same screens Brooks and Mathews are coming off of too. I want movement for Green when he comes back.
Right and I say that about Kobe too but it wasnt just Hardens rookie year they had him for three years not starting and from day 1 here he was a boss he was ready and they held him back but you are right they had more of a reason to sit him but I wouldnt have.
I'd qualify it a bit. Theis-Wood really sucks. Theis-Tate without Wood was fantastic last night. It's probably more about fit. Theis is an okay rotation player off the bench. Just don't play him with Wood, Green, and Porter (guys who attack the basket from the perimeter).
somehow Green needs to earn his spot, but everyone was begging for KPJr to be a starter immediately after we got him for a top 55 protected pick for throwing soup What had he done to earn a starting spot? Rockets still started him when he was leading the league in turnovers and hanging his head refusing to run back on D after every turnover and missed layup even now, he currently has 36/32/62 shooting splits for the year What has he earned? He wouldn’t start on any other team except for maybe Detroit, yet he gets to be a starter no question and get all the minutes he can handle. So why not Jalen Green?
there’s also this from Scott Brooks Brooks: The thing I love about James is, he loved his role. He loved coming off the bench. He loved working with that second unit. Him and Nick had a great bond on the court and off the court. And when James made the USA Basketball, he knew that he belonged. That following year, before he was traded, he was one of our best players. And he did not want to start. We tried to start him a few times. Because Thabo Sefolosha got hurt, I think I started him like 2 games. And he came to me after each game like 'Coach coach coach. Please please. Get me back to my role. I like the second unit.' And that says a lot about him. He was a great player. He is a great player.
I'm still not processing how Harden was held back in rookie year. I'm focusing on his rookie year because, if we're going to compare him and Green, that's the only thing we should be using for comparison's sake right? If you agree on that then tell me how Harden was being held back in his rookie season? Statistically his rookie numbers didn't justify start minutes at all. His offensive production was pretty much similar to the guy he was back up (Thabo) but was no where near the defender that Sefolosha was. As for the organization undervaluing Harden AFTER his rookie season, yes that's pretty obvious. My contention with this argument is that it doesn't really help validate your stance that Green needs to start or, otherwise, the team is holding him back from developing. Could there be better examples out there? Absolutely but since you brought up Harden then we'll just speak on harden. Why do we need to start Mathews? I think I answered that when I said: Is it subjective? Probably but from a statistical standpoint, one shooting guard is shooting 47.5% from the floor, 42% from the three, and has an eFG of 65% while the other shooting guard couldn't hit 30% of his threes on the season. It's not as if Green is a veteran who, by seniority, should get his starting job back after an injury. Mathews has clearly produced more and offered more to the team as a starter than Green did. Now to bring up your next point, yea I did like @Reeko 's post. Most likely because 1. I like the guy and 2. he brought up stats and a point that's valid--that maybe we should put Green back into the starting lineup because, by all accounts, the whole Theis as a starter experiment was bad for all parties involved. But what kind of team building or chemistry building experiment are we trying to accomplish if the team is ready to yank out the hottest player in the starting lineup right now?
Unfortunately for that entire organization Brooks was just being Brooks. At least we can agree that OKC screwed themselves when they thought Harden was expendable.
I know the recent emphasis has been on the one big lineup. Wood/Theis/Sengun, It's certainly good to know. That said, it's also because in the starting unit there are two other guys that aren't reliable on 3's (Tate and KPJ). So we make the accommodation in the bigs department. If the lineups subbing in for Tate or KPJ are 3pt shooters, then you can still run pairings with the likes of Sengun and Wood. Sengun point center shooter shooter shooter Wood. Wood can also space the floor on some plays since he can knock down 3's. ----------------------------------------------------- Basically; you can't have 3 of the 5 starters be a non 3pt threat. While Green was inefficient, the defender mostly still stayed with him. In Silas' line up; KPJ and Tate are starters, so then a 2nd big had to go. KPJ (non 3pt) Tate (non 3pt) <filler> <filler> <- If Theis or Sengun non 3pt then BAD) Wood (can shoot some 3's). I'm OK with this arrangement; since we are winning games. And when KPJ was injured, Tate became are drive and kick guy with EGO / Garrison / Armoni being floor spreaders. Just saying down the road, if KPJ isn't in our long term plan or if Tate never develops his 3pt shot, or if Wood/Gordon leaves the team, we need the replacements to have some average % 3pt threat. If the guards and wings can actually shoot, then we can have more flexibility with our bigs; which may help the defense against good teams.
You realize that we are NOT OKC right? Sitting rookies on midling teams will hold us back. There's nothing anyone can say to me that will convince me that starting G Mathews ON THIS TEAM over Jalen Green is what we should be doing. Your answer is that Mathews who is 26 is playing better in his limited games in an offense without Theis that we havent seen Jalen in yet. So your suggestion is to not even give Jalen a chance with this spacing? We are supposed to be rebuilding not focusing on competeing with players that likely wont be in here in the future. I still dont get it.
Me and you tend to agree more than we disagree. My frustation isnt just about your post its about the entire board that seems to hate rookies and our younger players and Im looking for justification for that. How far exactly are we gonna get with our vets and how is that better than where we will get with an early start from all of a our rookies getting more playing time. What exactly is the direction and aim here. Everyone wants to keep Wood but that means that he has someone else's spot. Are we thinking we will eventually be able to win a ring with Wood as our center?
Quite honestly, I was never trying to convince you that starting Mathews over Green is what we should be doing. You asked me a couple of times why do I personally want Mathews starting over Green and I responded in kind both times. I never took your questions to be "Sted, you idiot; convince me why Mathews starting over Green is the best option". But I'll respect and concede to your points.
Maybe it's a "shiny new toy" syndrome with Mathews for me. It's been quite some time where we actually have a knock down 3 point shooter (I'm holding off on calling him a specialist) and it's nice to see how having a guy that like on the floor can open up everything for the rest of the team. And if it IS the shiny new toy syndrome, I'll probably have to eat crow if/when Mathews comes back down to earth. But to your point, I've always wanted the rookies to get more minutes on this team...Green, Sengun, JC, Garuba...I just don't have an affinity on whether it's as a starter or as a reserve unless the rookie is hands down better than his starting counterpart (e.g. Sengun vs Theis).
It's the same with girls, women too. You are looking over the fence to the one that is taken. Pretty normal. You take yours for granted, even if they are being efficient. The difference is that the organization took the rookies, many among the fans wanted Mobley or another player. We do not get a say in whom we are picking.
Im not taking Wood for granted Im saying does he get us to our ultimate goal and will he still be here in 2 years. This isnt about emotion its a purely technical observation. We know what Wood brings is that what we want to build around?
DAMN that Theis impact really hurts. But I also don't think anyone here would ever correctly guess the "best 3 man lineup", Wood Tate Gordon.
