Congratulations Backseat Player- 3 consecutive double doubles

Former 6th overall pick Kaman!

So that's what you mean by getting a star at 6.

 

Rookie player shuts up, works hard, and hustles.

People whine that he doesn't have a star mentality.

I can't think of many complaints more ridiculous.

 

WTF?????

 

1 yr rental, keeps the rockets in playoff hunt next year. Also gives patterson the playing time he needs and if Orlando is forced to trade howard, his 11m salary is already close to the 25% + 100k. So say Dwight becomes availible, Kaman+Thabeet and a combination of picks. If they have to wait till 2012, the payroll will only be at 30m of a 58m cap. The rockets could make a run at williams and howard with the lbj/bosh 14m per yr deal.

 

Sam, what does being picked 6th have any bearing on this. Basically, he's a top 10 prospect drated 14th. Most people will distinguish between the top 10 and the rest of the draft. Amare and pierce were downgraded in the draft despite their talent(amare) and production (pierce).

 

Because the overwhelming staistical evidence indicates that guys whose talent is assessed in the second tier of the lottery, the 6-10 range, like Patterson, have only a 25-30% chance of being Amare and Pierce (or even Brandon Roy or Tom Gugliotta or Hersey Hawkins) and a 70-75% chance of being a something way less, including a complete and total non-entity/bust.

That's not high powered nerd stats, that's 5th grade level arithmetic.

And it casts serious doubt on your assumption that the baseline expectation for a player in that range is "all star caliber" - the median productivity for a player in that range is about the level of an average starter-solid backup, like Trent Tucker.

It's not at or around all-star level.

 

How many all stars are expected out of any given (entire) draft class? Looking back there seems to be about 3-5 all stars or all star caliber players in each draft, so expecting one at 6 is kinda a stretch.

 

That was my point. Forget about players actually drafted 6th overall, even if you go back now and look at the past drafts now, I do not think you will find 6 multi-time All Stars coming out of most drafts. In other words, even with the help of perfect hindsight, you can't expect the 6th best player on the draft board of a hypothetically all-knowing and perfectly rational team to be an multi-time All Star.

Even the famous 2003 draft had only 5 multi-time All Stars as far as I can tell-- Lebron, Wade, Melo, Bosh and David West (and David West is not quite what one would think of as "elite"). There are a few of the single-time guys (Josh Howard, Kaman, Mo Williams) but they are even farther from the elite status.

More normal drafts, like 2004, 2002, 2005 or bad drafts (2000, 2001) don't even come close to that number.

 

Patterson is the truth. And the future. I love everything about that guy. His game. His hustle. His determination. He's exactly the kind of player I want on our team.

 

The average #6 pick plays less than 5 full seasons in the league and averages 10 pts and 4.5 rebs per game over their entire career.

Pat is already better than that lol...

 

The 6th best player in any draft is not going to be a multiple time all star, though. You can start at wikipedia 2009 NBA draft and work your way backwards. Each player with at least 1 all-star appearance is highlighted in orange or pink. There are are some guys that were one and done, so the # of multiple time all-stars would be lower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_NBA_Draft

2009 1
2008 3
2007 2
2006 2
2005 4
2004 3
2003 8 (only 5 players with multiple all-star appearances: LeBron, Bosh, Wade, Carmelo, David West)
2002 4
2001 7 (only 4 players with multiple all-star appearances: Gasol, Joe Johnson, Arenas, Tony Parker )
2000 3

Even if you found 1 draft that had 6 multiple all-stars, it would be a total fluke, not just "any draft".

Morey did a fantastic job with drafting Patterson, even if he doesn't become a multiple all-star. Even with hindsight, you can't pick a multiple all-star by drafting the 6th best player in every draft for the past decade. You think Morey's 6th best player sucks, because he may not be a multiple time all-star. That's unlikely and unrealistic. If you just don't think Patterson was a great draft pick, because he wasn't one of the 3 players in the draft, then you can say "Morey sucks because Patterson is one of 1-3 multiple time all-stars in any draft".

 

People need to layoff on the leebigzz multiple-all-star remark. The guy has already said numerous times about not being a numbers guy, and hates Morey's method that incorporate number-crunching to find guys who don't fit his personal mold of NBA players.

Explaining to him the mathematical impossibility of 6th pick in every draft being a multiple all-star is like explaining to a 5 year old the concept of integrals. You won't get through.

leebigez, look, I actually like you despite arguing with you a lot, because no matter what we're all hard-core Rockets fans here. I've never played beyond pick-up basketball myself, so sometimes I can learn a bit from your observations on the intricacies of the game. But you need to check yourself with your arrogant predictions when they keep get proven wrong. Specifically, you really should just stop talking in absolutes. It makes you sound arrogant and dismissive of our players as well as the intelligence of other fans.

And believe it or not, numbers do help if you use them correctly. Fans may often misuse stats. But Daryl Morey and the people in the Rockets front office? Those people understand how to use numbers in context with scouting. Hence, they generally have a more complete understanding of incoming players than most even in the NBA. Hence, they can rate a player #6 even though the guy fell to #14... and be right about it.

 

I thought Patrick was a starter/role player draft night. I saw some potential but I thought he would be a solid in the mold of Battier type player but not a go to guy and never an all star. I watched him play in the summer league and one thing changed my mind. A saw the same player definitely a better prospect than hill and eventually a better player than Scola because of his D. But what separated him from the guy I thought we got draft night was his stroke. Which made me see someone who I thought could be a better player than Landry. Of course he didn't have the explosiveness then but he had that midrange shot and the potential to be a better defender/shotblocker/rebounder.

Nervous and new to everything he seemed to have a pure midrange stroke. You don't teach and you definitely don't learn that as a rookie in summer league. Nerves and all he had a nice stroke. I was then convinced the sooner this kid passes up Scola the better. Of course he had to earn it. But I thought almost immediately he was a better rebounder shotblocker and defender than Scola. And I always felt no matter how hard Scola played he was hurting the team if he was on the floor late in games.

I still feel that now and hope Adelman figures out a way to keep Patterson on the floor late. So much of the game is mental. Bud and Lee and Lowry have upped their games since their competition has dwindled. They feel it's on them to produce and they do it. Patterson stepped up when he knew he had to be the man at the 4. I hope getting Scola back and starting doesn't effect that. We have almost no room for error.

So Patrick is definitely not a backseat player and IMO hasn't ever been but he has made great strides that nobody here could've predicted. Yes not even team Morey. If you asked them to predict if Patrick would be a double double waiting to happen they would all be lying to you if they said yes. They may have hoped but that's it. Morey even said himself that they didn't expect Patrick to have a significant role this year. He was hoping for more along the lines of Hill or Budinger to have breakout seasons and was disappointed that didn't happen.

 

Morey said Patterson was top 10 lottery talent as a Freshman. And then he improved his game over the next two years at Kentucky. Let me repeat that. Morey said Patterson improved his game the past two years while possessing lottery talent in his first year. Why do you think they had him rated #6 in the first place?

Could Morey have accurately gauged exactly when PPat would breakout? Or for certainty? Of course not. There are no certainties in life. But to say he would be blindsided by Patterson's development is pure nonsense.

Morey said Patterson wasn't likely to have the opportunity to play a significant role this year. Please don't misquote him disingenuously. If Hill had played better and Scola/Miller had not been injured, Morey would be correct. We'd never really see Patterson on the court.

Opportunity =/= Capability. Morey thought Patterson had the capability to contribute. He didn't think Patterson would have the opportunity to do so.

 

I think Morey predicted that Patterson wouldn't see much PT this season mainly because of the depth we had at the 4 (Scola, Hayes, Hill, Jeffries), not because of his lack of talent or skills. I think even Morey was a bit surprised at how fast Patterson surpassed Hill.

Right from the beginning, I knew Patterson would continue to improve because of his attitude. Whenever he speaks, he always mentions about what the coaches or the teammates tell him to do. At one of the first interviews before the season started, when asked about his impression of Hayes at Kentucky, he said that Hayes kept slapping the ball out of his hands when he played against him in practice. You can see he noticed these kinds of little things when he did practice.

This guy loves to learn. He took 3 years to graduate with a college degree at Kentucky while playing serious basketball.

It's kind of funny how when leebigez saw a humble, unselfish, and intelligent young player, he immediately concluded that the kid was a backseat kind of guy.

 

Why is it comical. You must know dozens of attorneys that are smart, ace the boards and can't litigate for ****. Why is it not possible that someone who has been involved with basketball for over 50 years could have more knowledge and insight about players potential than Morey.

I am not talking about myself, I am referring to Adelman. But once you accept that Adelman could have better experience at evaluating players (which by the way if you don't acknowledge that I think you are comical) than you also have to acknowledge that experience might mean something.

I understand the world is for the young. I have no problem with that I had my days. But there are still some things where experience matters. And some things were no amount of Ivy League degrees can substitute for experience. Of course you can disagree and say it is comical. But I have always felt I can watch a player and see if he helps a team. For example I like Battier. I like him a lot but I always thought losing him would be an improvement.

It's all about winning for me. Now Scola is coming back and I respect that Adelman will choose to give him back his starting position but I believe Patterson gives us a better chance at winning. His overall game enhances are team. I completely understand so much of the game is psychological. If you start Patterson over Scola it could disrupt the harmony of the team. And I would never question Adelman's coaching ability, I can't stand in his shoes and I know that. But from a player evaluation standpoint I feel this team will be better when Patrick is our starter and the team accepts it.

What other example do you want? How about T-Will there were a lot of Morey followers wanting this guy to play now. And I agree on film he looks like a great one on one talent. Most of this board loves that kind of guy. Personally I think T-Will doesn't have a clue. That frightens me about him. Yes the kid is spectacular and makes beautiful passes (I love watching those passes) but he doesn't make his team better overall. Has no clue how to play team ball. If you let him play like T-Mac he will give you big numbers and Be on ESPN most nights. But IMO we will lose more. I don't know enough about him to guess whether he can grow out of this or he wants to. Perhaps most of his current struggle is because Adelman demands he play teamball if he wants minutes and he is struggling with that right now. I sometimes get that gut feeling about him. But then the question is can he overcome that and my answer is I don't know. SO I will leave it at that.

Some players look great but don't help you win. I always thought Anthony was that type of player. Of course he is a major talent and gives you a fourth quarter go to guy which we so desperately need.

Yes I would take him under some circumstances because he is such a talent and you can always use him for trade bait later. But of the stars out there he was my least favorite. He was an individual star not like Roy before his injury and to a lesser degree even still makes his team better. Now Morey was dying for Anthonyand many on this board will argue Anthony deal would have been great But not at the risk of disrupting our team play. And that's what I felt Carmelo might do. I wasn't 100% of that mindset. But I certainly wasn't in love with him as much as Morey and if we had to give up Lee and Patterson I wouldn't have done it. I think Morey would have done that deal IMO.

So Morey and I differ in some ways but at the same time I love his money management which I would fail at. Perhaps you love that about him as well, considering you study coon so much. It makes sense why I disagree with much you say. You are more new school like Morey. You love to do all of those Capologists reports. Seem to be very proud of them. Good for you I respect that. And their is no question it is important, very important and I am glad we have probably the best GM at it.

But I'm old school and I would take the judgement of Adelman on a player over Morey any day of the week. And also as comical as it may seem to you I would take my own judgement over his straight up. Fortunately Morey doesn't have to make his decisions straight up and has other with better player evaluation skills to help. In the end we both want the best rocket team on the floor and it doesn't matter Morey helped get the best player or his staff.

By the way I think it's comical that you read Larry Coon and got a law degree and think you know it all on this board. Just joking mostly

 

Please use your brain. I didn't say he would be blindsided. I was not blindsided or need I remind you most of this thread is based on this post i made in late December and believed to be true in July.

There is a big difference between blindsided and predicting. What I said there and what I thought in july is closer to predicting then anything that came out of Morey's mouth.

They cheered in the draft room when Kentucky forward Patrick Patterson was available when they selected with the 14th pick. They declared him to be the sixth player on their draft board.

I thought he had a chance to be a very solid starter but I thought Sanders had a chance to be more. And look at what the other Rockets staff had to say about Patterson when asked what was so special about him. Nothing. They just said he could do alot and be a good tem guy in the locker room. But they missed the same thing that I missed that made him special in my book and that was his stroke. One of them should this guy is a legitimate big with a stroke. That's what made him special. That's what made me jump on his bandwagon. The thing I truly coveted for this team was a Lamarcus ALdridge (who I said three years ago is an elite PF by the way and I got laughed off the board) a Bosh or David West type PF. Because West and Aldridge can play tough, not as much Bosh but he was available I thought, and really hit the outside jumper. And we got somebody who looks like he will do that. I watched him shoot and fell in love with it. I could see he will be physical and play hard and smart but it was the shot that made him special. Take that away and he he is another decent first rounder.

Watching Patrick lately makes me think he is just a level downr from Griffin in talent. Yeah sure Griffin is a highlight reel but Patterson is the better defender and better shooter. ANd Patterson can make some monster slams too. Okay the level make be a big step but who would put PPat in the conversation. Anyway my point is the level he is playing at now is not predictable. You can hope for it but no one not even Morey would have bet on it amd mmost didn't see it. Not the stroke.

I am repeating what I read Morey say. Is it disengenious to repeat what someone says? Really, are you serious. Now if you wish to say he didn't go ahead but you would be a liar and in my book really disin gen%#@%$&*crap.

 

Wow, can't believe you're so anal about using similar words in the English language. Fine. I'll use the words you used, "predicted". My point still remains the same.

I'm honestly astonished that you're trying to put yourself on the same level as Morey, who has an army of scouts, statisticians, and other brilliant basketball minds at his disposal. Thinking that if you can't predict a player's career path, they can't possibly either. Unless you're secretly Gregg Popovich or Sam Presti or someone high up in the Rockets organization, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you have no clue what the Rockets know and not know.

And just to let you know, the Rockets brass don't actually give fans their entire scouting reports on players. They just give tidbits they feel is safe to divulge to the public.

You should relearn the concept of "context" in the English language, maybe from an old high school English book or something. It not only help you understand what Morey's saying in this situation, but also helpful for you in general.

Here, let me help you out here to get you started on the learning process. The "context" from which Morey spoke was that at the beginning of the season, Patterson on the Rockets depth chart was behind Yao/Hayes/Scola/Hill/Miller. He was our SIXTH big. Adelman plays 3 bigs in his rotation. You do the math.

 

And I am astonished you don’t think words matter. They do and BLINDSIDED is much different then predicted.

What I have posted of your quote above is what I read. I stopped there because you have the reading comprehension of a sixth grader. I never said I am better than the army of scouts, statisticians, and other brilliant basketball minds that Morey has at his disposal. Nor that I would be better as a GM or anything close to that. Never and I do not believe that in any way shape or form! Got it! So do not accuse me of that which I do not believe. What I believe and I admit I could be wrong but based on the picks that I have seen Morey make, I believe Morey while being brilliant in many areas he is lacking in player evaluation. I believe I am a better player evaluator. That is of course all things being equal. Meaning I go to the games and watch film. This is just my personal opinion of which of course you can and will disagree with, but based on the players Morey has drafted it has lead me to believe he is slightly deficient in this area.

I also believe that maybe and it is just a hunch, his enormous amount of stats and data might interfere. I’ll give some history for the basis of my hunch which will probably mean nothing to you but I'll say it anyway. I use to bet the horses in my younger days. Before the real internet when BBS's were the thing I used to play the horses. I was a bit of a geek. I actually wrote a program that would analyze every variable that I thought important. I weighed the trainers, the jockeys, the track conditions, the distance, how many frontrunners there were, whether it was grass or dirt etc. Except for the horse itself. I had it down to a science and kept tweaking and adjusting things like days off, practice times. Everything, every piece of data that I thought was relevant in picking a winner I tried to quantify it.

In the end after all of that effort I would go to OTB in New york and place my bets and mostly I broke even. So I thought maybe I needed to look at the horses but since the closes track was in the Meadowlands an hour and a half away I couldn't do it as often. But when I took all of my data and put it in with the looking at the horses I found that would make me a winner on most nights. The problem was my system took a lot of work and driving to the Meadowlands and calculating all of that data was taxing on me and my family and even though I mostly won I still had nights I lost and I couldn't predict when those nights would be.

I also found there was a human element of sitting at the track alone I would invariably have a few beers which caused me to want to take my winnings and want to make them bigger. THat seemed to rarely work. (I did this same thing counting cards before those MIT guys in the movie were doing it but that's another story) As much energy and study of stats I put into it I couldn't predict with enough accuracy to guarantee a winning night. That's predicting.

Now I go to the track for fun. I take my grandchildren with me and they love watching the horses race. My brother is good friends with the track GM and gets suites at the track a few times a year but I don't like to stay up there. I like to get down with the horses and watch them sweat. I don't even read the racing form. I play exacta's and trifecta's mostly and I don't win as often but when I do win it's bigger and I have more fun.

I pay attention to three things when I bet. The odds, the jockeys, and the horses. I find that if the horse has good odds and has a good jockey and looks good chances are he is going to win. I will take that winning horse and mix him in with some longshots that may have bad odds but the horse looks good and it has a decent jockey. My reasoning is simple. People study forms so the odds will give you a pretty good idea who statistically could win, but it is not enough, trainers mostly know when there horses are ready to run and they will pay for a better jockey or a jockey who has won with that horse before if they think there horse is ready and finally no matter what anyone thinks the horse will do if he doesn't look interested or excited in most cases he doesn't run well. And my years of experience watching horses has made it easier for me to pick winners.

Last time I went to the track was Feb 26. I hit the trifecta in the last race. I can't even tell you the names of the horses but I had my favorites mixed in with a 24-1 longshot that looked really good. He was the number 10 horse. I think it came in 10-6-2 and I had all of the horses. It paid out $1376. You can check the sam houston track if you don't believe plus I have my winning ticket somewhere around. Never underestimate the heart of a longshot. My point is my years of experience of watching horses has made me much better at picking winners than when I was calculating all that data and coming out short. And that took experience.

Data is great but don’t let it interfere with evaluating the actual flesh and blood breathing on the court. I have admitted that Patrick was an oversight on my part. But that was because I couldn’t see two things about him on the limited film I had and that was his shooting stroke and his heart. His shooting stroke I saw in the summer league. And his heart I’ve seen since he came back up from the D-league. The other stuff was always there accept for his increased strength and leaping ability. But the Rockets seems to manage to increase those things with all of it’s bigs so I kind of expected that even though it is still amazing to see his improvement. I love Patrick and they definitely were right on him. And If I were drafting today would pick him number 5 maybe above turner. Maybe. And definitely above Sanders.

I will say one thing about Sanders. He didn’t start playing basket seriously until his junior year in high school. Even later than Hill. I firmly believe there iss something to putting in the time. Players that have played organized competitive basketball since they were 12 or 13 just seem to adapt better to the pros. It seems it takes about 8-10 years to really gel and if you don’t have that basketball as automatic as those pros that do. I am not talking about 8-10 years in the NBA but 8-10 years of taking the game seriously. And yes for some kids that starts at 12 and even younger.

When that guy gets to the pros it is easier for him to transition. Basketball is second nature to him. Sanders doesn’t have that experience which is why I am still high on his upside and I haven’t given up on Hill. Patrick has that experience or close to it which is why I don’t major improvement from him But the thing is Patrick has it now. He will develop some low post moves and his shooting range and maybe even his touch will improve but his got it now. He plays on such a high level consistently that Hill is lacking. Some on this board say Hill is dumb but I think it is more about it not being second nature for him. But he shows glimpses of what he can be and I think in time it all will become second nature for him and he will surprise us. Anyway that is my answer to the beginning of your post. You can flame away.