I won't debate the latter, but I'm not a rookie. And let me get this straight (btw I already have it straight, I led it off with "let me get this straight" for a more disdainful tone) this entire thread is about you being vindicated in that you predicted that if a new player had a bad game people in the GARM would turn on him? Sir, you are a prophet.
Yeah he's not going to be going up against the A team guys with regularity I wouldn't think. Chuck will be getting heavy doses of time when you have them in or Scola. However when the other team goes small (which is something that happens for large blocks of time almost every single game) having a relatively agile 7 footer who can pass and hit outside shots consistently will be nice.
No, see, you missed my point. I got your point a long time ago. My point was that your point is....pointless.
I don't think informing people that Andersen will not be a big help to us is a useless point. There are many ways to view it, its like the Trinity, but there's truth in this parable.
Ok, then we have a benchmark for examination. IF Andersen can pass and hit a jumper consistently then he will not be considered a failure...as that's what we've brought him here to do.
As a center, he best be able to do more than pass and hit a jumper. I don't care what type of center you are, you need to be able to rebound and defend your position to some extent. There is nothing wrong with a 5 that is able to stretch a defense but that needs to be a compliment to standard center duties. I'm pretty sure Steve Novak could pass and hit jumpers consistently. I hope Andersen can do a little more than that. So far, he looks pretty gangly out there, as if his legs are about to give out on him. Maybe he's just fatigued or something but he looks like a physical weakling despite the improved game he had last night.
But that's not your point. You made that point previously. However people apparently contested you on that and then seeing knee-jerk reactions on Andersen vindicated you, and that is your point in this thread. We can talk in circles all night (for me), but it boils down to this. People coming in and rubbing his second game performance (though not great, but better) is just as baseless as you saying his first game was proof of him sucking. And no one expects him to be a huge difference maker. He's just a small piece.
This right here is why everyone is giving you a hard time.. You say that you're still right about him sucking, even though he played a good game. I just went over his stats and they are solid. His fg, ft and 3 pt percentages are nothing to sneeze at. Here are his stats and they indicate that he belongs in the NBA. Period. Another thing -- Why would you think that he will not have any effect on the Rockets season? He is going to get PT and I feel like he will contribute. At some point, he'll have a good game. For the sake of the Rockets, let's hope that it will be right off the bat this season.
Yeah I know, I was just trying to be a nuisance. He's not going to be a dominant low-post force. But I think it's too early to say he will have no utility for us.
Traditionally the center is the best rebounder and as you go down from spots 4 to 1 the rebounding gets weaker and weaker....this team isn't exactly traditional. We've done very well rebounding lately with Yao not even being an exceptional rebounder himself. We were # 4 last year and only .9 away from being first. We've got very good rebounding power forwards and our swingmen are pretty good at it too. And I'm not claiming DA can be our full time center this year, i don't think anyone is, but he's definitely capable of contributing significantly playing limited minutes. 2 or 3 rebounds in 30+ mins would be extremely BAD. But so what if he only gets 2 or 3 in about 12 mins? Starting centers usually HAVE to be good rebounders and defenders, not back ups in a limited role and Novak? Novak was a perimeter player. That's a big difference. Once a guy blows by you chances are you won't catch up to them since you're already slow, not to mention you'll force a teammate to guard two players at once. Closer to the rim most guys aren't trying to get around you, but instead shoot over you. DA may not defend those well, but at least he'll contest them. On offense DA is in a position where it's almost OK to be slow, Novak was not. If Novak wasn't open it was over for him. DA has the post up option, the option to face up and be able to get off the shot most of the time due to height, and it's easier for him to get a short kick out from AB or lowry than trying to find Novak 20 feet away. And Josh Smith is an exception, not the norm. That's why we got several versatile guys, to be able to match up with teams. Ariza would be able to defend him.
Fixed that a little. I can understand giving it to the OP but some people are now going overboard with praise for Andersen. I'm inclined to believe there is a lot of truth to what the OP was getting at based on what I've seen out of Andersen so far, including tonight. I have a feeling he will not bring enough offensively to compensate for his deficiencies at the other end (a la Novak). Maybe after a year of training here it will be a slightly different story but I'd be shocked to see this guy able to stay on the floor long enough to make any kind of real impact this season, and this is a team in dire straits at the center position. Basically, the OP may still be right that David Andersen sucks (as an NBA player). I don't know for sure but I would lean that way before believing he'll play a significant role this season, even after his 3 minutes of glory against the Celitc bench squad.
He made a little hook and a jumper in the first half against better competition. Anyways, my point in the earlier post was that his stats show that he is efficient. Morey had seen enough footage of him to conclude that he was worth the contract that we gave him. Yes he has missed on players like Francis, Wells, & Barry, but this guy was born in 1980
I think the Novak comparison is a little off. Mainly because the problem with Novak is that his OFFENSE isn't good enough to compensate for his defense. He's a good 3 point shooter, but he doesn't do anything else. As long as his man stays with him, Novak's useless on offense. Which makes him such a liability to the team in general. Anderson clearly is a more versatile and complete offensive player than the likes of Novak or any other tall white stiffs we've had(Pollard, Air Bull, etc.). And if his euro stats are to be believe, so is his rebounding. So IMO he definitely has enough game to overcome his defensive deficiencies.
Course you can - go ask Mark Blount about it. A useful center for us would be one that is tall, and can either score in the post, or shoot from the perimeter. Anderson has two post moves (maybe overly generous? but a step to the center jump hook from the left block, or a 'shake and fake' from the right that either becomes a turnaround, or an up and under layup - which will get blocked in the NBA I'm sure). And Anderson can shoot it all the way out to the 3 line. I think he'll be just fine - off the bench against the second unit guys, he'll give us a scoring option and will open the floor for our penetrators. 7 points and 4 boards isn't beyond him - and that's not total crap either.
It's a little early for burying Aussie Rocket, just like it's a little early for burying Andersen. Andersen's had one bad game, and one good-ish game... and both were preseason. After the long and torturous offseason we had, I can understand the impatience -- and believe me, I share it -- but there's still quite a bit of basketball to be played before a meaningful conclusion can be reached. (In my opinion, two weeks isn't really long enough to call it.) We shall see.
Thing with Anderson is that he is tougher than Novak or Bullard (or even Langhi!) They'll work hard with him on defense - no reaching, no jumping, keep position. He'll do that just fine, and it'll be all about Ariza and the help crew. Don't think he'll shut down Howard, but he might just be adequate against the guys who can't generate anything in the post (think Chandler, Oden, Oberto etc) I've seen him from the age of 18 - I think he'll be "ok".
whats more useful for us a center in the Mutombo mould or a center such as Anderson who is soft as tissue I know who I would pick. If only Chuck Hayes was a bit taller
