I don't know how to do the multiple quote thing, but you asked in another post "Oh man, when did I mention Mobley in this thread versus others?" See above. All this conjecture about why Rudy hasn't played Langhi before is simply that. You have no way of knowing if Langhi's comments about wanting to play made one iota of difference in his playing time. Rudy's latest quotes have him saying he is very happy for Langhi. As far as I know, you couldn't fall back on similiar quotes from last year for the reason he got no playing time last year. Rudy made no effort at all to get him even garbage minutes last year and most of this year. Go look at the stats for the last two years and see how many DNP's Langhi has had. Not even garbage minutes. How good would Kenny be right now if he never got decent minutes. He couldn't finish for squat in his first year. His first off-season, he didn't work hard and came back with all that baby fat. Only this last off season, did he really decide to work hard, and it really paid off this year. Of course, if he hadn't gotten any playing time, it wouldn't have mattered. Langhi certainly has some weaknesses in his game, but, if you want to decide playing time based on weaknesses, Bullard and Walt would have never got off the bench, because they are the absolute worst defenders. I have no idea why Rudy wouldn't try to bring Langhi along by at least giving him garbage minutes, and I don't think you do either. I would be willing to bet that if Walt, Eddie, TMO and Rice weren't all hurt at the same time, Langhi still would not be getting even garbage minutes. Oh, and on that drive to the basket, he was guarded. He beat the guy with his first step and took it all the way to be basket. Do you think you could at least give him credit for getting his uni on right?
I said, "versus others." The Mobley angle was not started by me. Be fair. As for that drive, Langhi gets stripped. Langhi gets stripped frequently and throws up airballs, that why so many of us on the BBS think is not very good. I suspect Bruce Bowen will shut down his dribble anytime he wants. Langhi needs to work on his 3 pointer, to free up his headfake and dribble-shoot. Langhi does not have a "first step" imo, until we see him do it when guarded. He's better off learning to nail his catch and shoots and then introduce a headfake. As I recall, the play you are talking about was a busted play. Something was strange on that play because Langhi was standing right next to another Rocket (Kenny, maybe). There was a hesitation of spacing confusion by both offense and defense, then Langhi darted. Well done. But that was a busted play.
You call it MOBLEY bashing to notice Langhi having a good shooting night wide open behind the arc, waving his arms up high to Cat.Cat decides to take the shot and completely misses the rim.Isn't that the reason you bash Langhi, because he misses the rim as well.I'll bash who I want if it means pointing out the lack of team ball or offense it takes to win a ring or too even get to the playoffs.When people are healthy and Langhi is gone and the Offense is still stagnant and Cat is still jacking up stupid shots, then I guess you may agree.Until then I like Cat too, I just think for the rockets to be successful, they need a big man as the 2nd option and not Cat.So my opinion allows me to bash the problems I notice may hurt us in the end.
Dave, thx for explaining to Moe that you were indeed blaming Mobley and the offense for Langhi's past production. This is too easy. Hey Sir Charles, I have a quick quiz concerning your stat line of 2 Threes. How many 3 pointers has Langhi made in his career? don't peek! take a guess! <font size="1">hehe</font>
Lamo, see if you can follow this. This thread is now 3 pages long. One poster made reference to Cat jacking up an airball in some defense of Langhi shooting an airball on his one miss out of 9 shots. Then, you characterize the whole thread as a blame Rudy and Cat thread! One poster out of 3 pages of posts! You do this consistently. You are the one who turned this into a blame/defend Mobley thread. You do this all the time. Give it a rest. I like Mobley. I think he plays his position better than Steve plays his. You have a kazillion posts and it seems like half of them are telling us about poor, poor little Cat getting picked on. Gee, everyone hates Mobley and you. You might as well go out and eat worms.
Hey, I know, but I had already typed the 7-13 and 5-5 fts and realized that that didn't make 21, so there had to be two threes.
This was my favorite line, crispee calls everyone armchair coaches then goes on a tirade of how it "really is" since he probably is Rudy T posting. Seriously everyone here is an arm chair coach. . . that includes you crispee unless you are on that staff attend meetings and practice. If not you have as much validity as the next guy. Dont take yourself so seriously
OK, I think maybe I can get this back on topic. First off, there is no defending Mobley going on here. Secondly, there were two sidetrack references to Mobley before I used my HUGE SMILEY and said jokingly, "you gotta love it." Let's get off this mobley tangent. You're reading too much into it. <b>Now back to Langhi</b> I'm sorry I didn't reply directly to your first reply to me. Excuse me for not explaining my "endpoint of flow" earlier, I was having too much fun replying to like 3 or 4 other people...carrying 3 different tangents at once. Give me a fair shake here. Let's go back to your response to my "end of flow." You said, "who isn't the end of flow" in this offense. I have no disagreement with that. My point was always that Langhi is just like many other's on this team. This offense is designed for the Langhi's of the world. I was addressing the remarks that Langhi would excel in the Lakers or Kings offense. If someone says Langhi will benefit from a more complicated, well-executed, ball movement offense, and I say he is the style of player who hampers flow (doesn't understand it) . . . where am I saying he hampers OUR flow. My "endpoint of flow" has nothing to do with the Rockets. It is my assessment of Langhi's favorite shots and his off-ball game. It has to do with the thread's claim that Langhi would do better in a different system. I don't buy it. He's not the right player. He's perfect for this system. It is OK to admit that Langhi is a ballhog style shooter. The guy pretty much said it. He needs his spots and shots. Those type of guys can produce spacing and thus ball movement opportunities. But they have to produce. They aren't really players who necessarily understand ball movement and can fit into a Kings offense, given that Turkoglu and Pedja have a lot of picking and passing responsibilities. Saying he's more likely to hamper flow systems more than help has nothing to do with talking about Francis and Mobley. <b>Is Rudy and the Offense Holding Langhi Back...or</b> BTW: none of your further comments about me reading Rudy's mind means <b>you</b> can read Rudy's mind that he is holding back Langhi any more than Colson. imo, Langhi just hasn't produced offense better than TMo, and TMo is much (MUCH) better on defense. imo, the offensive system and Rudy are not valid excuses for why Colson and Langhi don't get many minutes. Rudy had TMo to fill in for Walt/Rice. Langhi got sent to IR for a month. He came back when Walt went down, but by then Rudy wanted to see Kenny Thomas play SF with Eddie as development exercise for next season when Mo comes back. imo, there is no conspiracy. I consider that much more important than giving Langhi minutes. This reasoning is right in line with Rudy's track record of development young guys--in this case, Kenny, Eddie and TMo. Langhi just wasn't important, I guess. Maybe Langhi just is not any good when guarded closely. I've seen that with my own eyes, so I figure Rudy has, too. Something just seems so laughable that Rudy is holding back Langhi anymore than Colson. I love this thread. Let's not ruin it with bothering to bash me . . . it is boring peace
Oh, quit making this about me. Just talk basketball, sheesh. Do you think Rudy holds back rookies and has a bad track record of developing new blood? If so, why? Where am I ever an armchair coach? That post was my assessment of history. Armchair coaching is about second-guessing the coach. There is nothing wrong with that, but I don't do it. btw: it is extraordinarily weird of you to call that a <b>tirade</b>. What? Please? What is your point?
To be honest my impression of Rudy has dropped off since I started coaching. but thats a totally different thread, My response to DL is people here are really overreacting, those that say he is the next best thing and those that say he sucks. No one here knows what goes on behind the scenes but most post like they are roomates with steve and cat. I think DL had a good game. If he continues this he should be commended, but he has not been given a chance to play, so I dont think a person here could give him a fair evaluation on his skills. I think he would be a decent 7th or 8th man but like DD said he would have to be in a totally different system. why do you think so few Duke stars really make it big in the NBA? Its a totally diffrent way of playing ball. Duke runs motion and trys to give each player a equal number of opportunitys to score, but stars still shine in motion. In the NBA its become more of a 2 man game and unless that Duke grad is a big man or has amazing skills he will struggle in the NBA game. I think there a few teams tha acctually run a good motion game, Utah and Sac. I think if DL was sent to the JAzz he could be a decent preformer along the lines of scott pagent. but this is not Utah and DL is not preforming near scott pagents current level. And the Triangle does have motion principles, it was created in the mid 80's not 30's but Tex derived it from an offense called the center option offense in his playing days at USC. I like to call it a contoled motion, its dictated where players will be but they still have to read and react to a defender, much like motion
heywittgenstein, Funny stuff, there. But if a smiley could talk, we wouldn't understand him? IVFL, that's cool IVFL. Here's how I approach it: I give the coaches the benefit of the doubt, by assuming they are either preaching/attempting or have considered/dismissed (if not tried) most all offensive/player strategies we discuss. Thus, I just talk about what I see, and largely dismiss what I don't see as having a good reason, then try to figure out that reason by injecting my personal scouting of player/team abilities that I witness. Thus, my conclusion that developing Langhi is just not very important... <font size="1">so Det, does that mean I'm bored.</font> that's the best we can do. just like scouting an opponent. <font size="1">as for the Triangle having motion princliples and being invented in the '80s. Check out Tex Winters book published in 1962 titled "The Triple Post Offense." Screens were interpreted differently in the days when he invented that. But boy, I think we are wearing out this topic, until after tonights Langhi vs Bowen challenge .</font>
As many as T-Mo has made in a single game 3 times! Ha!! TheFreak-in the cases you mentioned as far as Morris beating out Langhi, the difference is time in the league. Rice automatically got the job, because he is a former all-star, 20 ppg scorer, and thought not to be really over the hill. Taylor earned the job with his previous year of 18-7. Willis was brought in with the intention of being brought off the bench to help Cato, and if we were in any kind of playoff race, he'd be playing instead of Collier. Langhi was traded for 2 2nd rounders, which is not far from 1 1st with heavy restrictions. Langhi's trade in this league is shooting. He's not a good defender, a tenacious rebounder, or a point forward. Not even really good at getting his own shot. If he's not shooting well, he's worthless, because then he can't even draw a defense away. If he's in the game to shoot, he can't use the "not getting a chance" excuse for his misses. Shooters have to be ready. Morris meanwhile, is more of a defensive minded guy, who rebounds well doesn't need plays run for him, and passes well. That's why patience can be afforded for T-Mo's shot, but not Langhi's.
crispee by motion principals I mean read and reacting to the D, much like motion. However the triangle is mostly a set play where the players will read and react to the D. Sorry for the confusion, we run motion so everything revolves around that, I should say, motion and the triangle are similar because they both read and react to the D. but because I run motion it came first in basketball, if you ask the right person it was invented before basketball was
Okay, I'm going to be fair if you will. Just a few of your quotes I want to address, then ask your assessment of something. I have never said I could read Rudy's mind. Just the opposite. I couldn't figure Rudy out if my life depended on it. The comment about Langhi being closely guarded.. I have seen him stripped when he tried to come across the lane. The thing that doesn't make any sense is that when he played at Vandy, he was basically that team's only offensive threat. You say this offense is the best for him. Do you really think when he played at Vandy, that he just stood out at the arc and waited for his point guard to drive and dish to him, at which point he would be un-guarded. I never saw him play a single game in college, but I would bet my life that Vandy's offense didn't resemble the Rockets in any way, shape or form. Granted, we are talking college versus NBA defenders, but zones have always been legal in college, and how easy would it be to come up with a defensive scheme in college to stop only one guy? You do remember he led his conference in scoring. The thing about bashing you? Hey, that's anything but boring, but I'll refrain if you'll comment on all points of the following. You say you like to give the coaches the benefit of the doubt. (actually it seems more like a sacred cow for you than benefit of the doubt.) But you know what, coaches are employees of the team just like the players, and can do their job well or poorly or somewhere in between. It is ridiculous to think that Rudy doesn't share in the successes or failures of the team, regardless of whatever difficulties are involved. There was a comment reported recently by Rudy (in a meeting much earlier) where he told Les that they (the Rockets) would find a way to win with the players they had. That sounds great. Don't make the players fit your system, make your system fit the players. However, I don't think it is working. I think Rudy tried to implement a system specifically for Steve and to a lesser extent Cat. The problem lies in the fact Steve wants to play the point. It was supposedly the reason he pitched a fit about going to Vancouver. This wouldn't be so bad, except that Steve is not a point guard. I think Rudy has to know this. There were about 4 or 5 trips down the floor last night in a row where Steve brought the ball down and never passed it. He had three assists last night. One third of those were on that lob to Cat on the break. The point has to get everyone involved on offense. Langhi, after going 8-9 was 2-3 last night. The only one Steve helps offensively is Cat, who doesn't need much help, only the ball and occasionally, Cato. Langhi does look awkward out there. He doesn't know whether to try to set a pick for Steve,( which he is likely to ignore) or stand at the arc with his thumb up his butt, waiting for an occasional pass. Same thing for Collier, although Mooch is better about using the pnr. I don't think there is any conspiricy against Langhi, just trying to run an offense where Steve can play point. So who's fault is it we run such a crappy offense? Steve's for being such an ego-maniac and demanding to play point guard when he purely sucks at it? Hell, Steve couldn't even win the point guard position on his college team. Or is it Rudy' fault for indulging Steve's ego and implementing an offense that is the best for Steve to play point, but to the detriment of the team?
5-12 41% shooting, 8 boards, 1 ass Another decent outing for Langhi... what impresses me the most is the rebounds as some of the rebounds he got were tough and in traffic. He also had a few shots ( I think at least 2 or 3) totally rim out on him... they were right on target but just rolled out, thereby lowering his fg%.
