Yes, we just need best player since Jordan like Duncan is currently. Seems easy. Parker at 23: 18.9 PPG, 5.8 APG, .548% FG
Lin, Harden and Asik will be here for at least the next 3-4 years due to their contracts. But the rest of the roaster is just assets for Morey trigger happy fingers.
McHale overachieved as a coach his whole coaching career. Popovich got outcoached by Scott Brooks in last years WCF, who is the biggest reason Thunder doesn't have at least one chamionship. Coaching staff has been close to perfect this season.
It would be pretty dumb to trade Parsons or Smith in my opinion. Morris, on the other end, might end up being a solid player or a valuable asset.
Watch the last Rocketscast with Morey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugUePRi7eew&feature=plcp He basically states Parsons is completely untouchable!!!!
Gotta remember that the coaching staff is REALLY young too. McHale has only 4 years experience as a coach, which is practically nothing; he'll learn as well.
Makes sense, this paper presented at the Sports Analytics conference that Morey hosts basically says that a player like Parsons is one that you can form teams with good synergy around. If you read closer into the paper, all that the Rocket's current lineup is missing for MAX synergy is a PF who rebounds 8 times a game and either a) is a stretch 4 OR b) elite in defense I'm actually leaning more on the side of defense for this Rocket's team since they seem to have no issue whatsover with putting points on the board.
Harden and Lin take bad forced shots every game which Parker and Ginobili rarely do. For example, against the Grizzlies Delfino made a few nice plays in a row, then Harden took a bad shot from the free throw line that was flat and missed which killed the momentum the Rockets had at that point. He should have passed it to the hot player which was Delfino at that point. Same thing with Jeremy Lin. He made a good drive, then the next time shot an ill advised 3 point shot.
What the coaching staff has done this season wasn't the question, and if you think McHale "overachived" his whole career well overachiving doesn't get you rings. The question is can the Rockets be the next Spurs, without a coach like Pop no they can't. Pop is a big reason the Spurs were not just the winningest franchise in the NBA from 2000-2010, but the winningest (percentage wise) in all of the big 4 professional sports. Call me when Mchale wins a playoff series.
Look at this comment last week by Ric Bucher: Q: Any thoughts on Hollinger's move to Memphis? Another victory for the stat heads? by Kned Ryerson 12/18/2012 8:26:19 PM December 18 at 12:26 PM A: I wish Hollinger all the best of luck. Truly a nice, congenial guy. I believe being on the business side of a team will be eye-opening for him because he sometimes wrote and said things about the game and the league that came off as naive. His hire reflects the wave of analytics-driven, fantasy-league-raised owners that have entered the NBA. Hollinger speaks their language and these owners are convinced that they know basketball because they know numbers. I have yet to see an analytics-driven team win a title or even exceed expectations. by Ric Bucher 12/18/2012 8:28:51 PM December 18 at 12:28 PM It is pertinent to Morey.
It is a very interesting paper. I'm sure there is merit to it, but I think stats can be very misleading and even worthless or meaningless.
I'm curious which teams Bucher considers to be "analytics"-driven, besides the Rockets. Because its well known that the Mavs have invested heavily into analytics for some time (Cuban is a big believer in it) and they just won a championship a couple years ago.
Just get Asik on a nice cycle of AAS and get him a Dwight Howard body in the offseason, big man problem solved.
I think there's something of an inside joke that Morey can't trade Parsons because his daughter has a crush on him. I believe the Rockets organization only considers Harden truly untouchable. That said, I believe they like some of the other core players (Lin, Asik, Parsons) a lot, and would be less willing to give them up unless they can get an all-star caliber player in return.
Here is what he said about that: Q: I have yet to see an analytics-driven team win a title or even exceed expectations." -- You mean like the Mavs two years ago? by Jon 12/18/2012 8:38:33 PM December 18 at 12:38 PM A: Rick Carlisle turned that team around from a 2-0 by ignoring the analytics and going with his gut. Yet another misnomer. They had Roland Beech on the bench and he contributed, but he wasn't a difference maker. Cryotherapy -- google my story on it -- and Carlisle's instincts brought that title home. by Ric Bucher 12/18/2012 8:39:54 PM December 18 at 12:39 PM and OKC: Q: I have yet to see an analytics-driven team win a title or even exceed expectations" -- what about OKC? They have exceeded expectations and they are primed to win a title. by OKC 11 straight and seeming... 12/18/2012 8:34:07 PM December 18 at 12:34 PM A: They are into analytics, psychology, advanced training and everything else. It's a matter of degrees. Scott Brooks' relationship with KD and Russ and the overall character of the team are far more important to their success than a deeper understanding of numbers. The statheads have routinely killed Russ Westbrook. So either they're using different metrics or analytics don't capture the real measure of what makes OKC tick. by Ric Bucher 12/18/2012 8:37:02 PM December 18 at 12:37 PM http://www.csnbayarea.com/article/ric-buchers-nba-chat-transcript-121812?awid=7723913953581110325-766
