Far deeper is a stretch. Harden is good but the Rockets are comparable at every other position and Dragic > whatever PG they have without Maynor.
I agree, we go really deep compared to others. Then we have the question: how deep is deep enough? I mean, we don't want to go deeper than what's necessary for a huge success right?
we are not the deepest team in the league. We are one of the deepest, but I question the quality of our depth. While teams like OKC have Harden (until recently) and Ebaka coming off the bench, we've got guys like Lee, Dragic, and Patterson. We've got solid depth, but the quality of players we have is not up to par with some other teams; we don't have anyone even close to 6th man of the year for example. To be honest, i think we are playing over our head. I look at our team on paper, and i see a 500 team. Got to give McHale some credit.
Our bench is right up there with the best of them. I hope IF trades do happen it will be clear space for more cap space or create a spot to bring back Jeff Ardien or get Kaman as a rental.
What's a good way to rate depth? I took all NBA players that have accumulated at least 1.0 win share so far according to basketball-reference.com (roughly what I'll consider "significant" contributors). There are 161 of them. The following table shows how many such players each team has. The Rockets are tied with Chicago for most players with at least 1.0 win share (9). Win shares penalizes players for being on bad defensive teams, which is why the really bad defensive teams don't have as many such players that their talent may otherwise suggest (the Bobcats, for instance, have none). I also included the sum total of win shares for players having more than 1.0 win share. Code: [B]Tm Count TOT (WS>=1.0)[/B] CHI 9 21.4 HOU 9 15.2 PHI 8 19.2 ATL 8 15.7 SAS 8 15.1 DAL 8 13.6 POR 7 16 IND 7 14.9 DEN 7 13 MIL 7 9.5 MIA 6 17.2 OKC 6 15.5 LAC 6 12.8 MEM 6 12.2 ORL 5 13 BOS 5 12.1 CLE 5 8.4 NJN 5 7.5 GSW 5 7.4 LAL 4 12.3 MIN 4 10.3 NYK 4 10.1 TOR 4 6 PHO 3 7.7 UTA 3 6.4 DET 3 5.6 NOH 3 4.6 SAC 3 4.3 WAS 3 3.9 CHA 0 0
Our bench is playing better as a unit than both OKC and Dallas. From a pure basketball perspective, I like our bench as currently constructed. With that being said, I'd trade all of them and half of our starters for James Harden. James Harden + chandler parsons + random pg means we'd have ball handlers and playmakers at all 3 positions. that's my kind of basketball. Larry Bird Celtics light without the amazing front court. lol
2 thoughts: 1) I find it mind blowing that last night, ALL five of our starters had a double-digit negative +/-....and ALL five of our subs had a double digit positive +/-. I can't believe that's happened often in the NBA. 2) I'm beating a dead horse, but in this atypical season with a compact schedule wearing out players, depth should be a powerful weapon to employ. The most grueling pro sport schedule (MLB) sees teams regularly sitting (position playing) starters for a game off break. I say, take a cue from them this year. If you see Scola can't hang in the 5 game/7 day stretches (like we just had, and he can't)...either give him a game off or a token 10 minute appearance. I'd rather he play 95% 4 games than 70% in 5. Goes for everyone on the roster. Don't burn out your guys in this grinder of a season. I think McHale is slowly coming around to that notion, after his "short rotation" talk a couple weeks ago. Short rotations are important long term for contenders....but this season? If you can rotate 10 guys, do it. If you can rotate 9 guys each night with 1 guy getting a game off, do it. Also, if you can eat $1M to dump a worthless player in order to keep a training camp gem.....DO IT
When the first unit was stinking up the joint in the first quarter and McHale made the move early to bring in the second unit, Matt Bullard said: "Here comes McHale's navy!" First of all, it is a little unusual to see an entire 5-man second unit come in basically together and play together the way these guys do for the Rockets. Second, they are playing great and are tons of fun to watch. I think McHale's navy is a great nickname for this bunch.
chicago when everyone is healthy is easily the deepest team in the league. rose/watson/jlIII hamilton/brewer deng/korber boozer/gibson noah/asik
What's interesting is how big a contrast this year was compared to last year. Last year's starting 5 had an amazing +/- and outscored their opponents by a ton. While Adelman rode his starters quite hard with a short rotation. Last year's bench was an absolute mess that often got killed by opposing 2nd stringers. And only a select few got consistent minutes. Dragic often only played just often enough to give lowry a breather. Lee got consistent minutes. Hill was in there but sucked horribly. This year McHale seems to play his players in a much more fluid manner. Whoever plays well stays. Whoever sucks sits on the bench. Starters have lost some of their consistency and chemistry as a result. But bench players have become more active knowing that they get rewarded for hustling and playing well. It's obvious that McHale is trying to develop players as well as trying to win. Which IMO is better for this current team that's so young. Adelman's system is more geared towards making sure everyone is comfortable with another and playing with the best chemistry. While it's great, it also means many players are left out of the loop.
Cmon, they had big Ben, Sheed, Rip, Tayshaun, Chauncey, all potential stars in their prime if they would've played as the main guys on a team. Please don't tell me you think our guys have the same potential
We may have the most repetitive/duplicative team in league history. So much so, that if any number of guys aren't playing good, they can all be benched and their reserves give us the same qualities that they give us at any given time. For instance, Martin struggles, Mchale can plop him on the bench and get scoring/shooting/driving from Budinger. Lowry struggles with turnovers and bad shooting? Well plop him on the bench and Dragic can fire up some shots, run like hell, play pestering D, and throw some passes. Parsons not able to hit any shots and getting lit up by a smaller quicker guy defensively, well bring on CLee. Dally sucking? Here comes Hill who can't really score either but if he isn't zoned out over his family or moping out about something, he can use his athleticism and length to defend and board and vice versa. Scola's jumper rimming out? Plug in PPat's jumper. Every starters' skill set is replicated by their backup. You could take that bench 5, sub them for the starting 5, and end wind up with the same record after 66 games. McHale has the perfect roster to do what he is doing, just plop players on the bench when they suck even a little bit. And they have outperformed. But nary a superstar among them and as a consequence, they will wind up in the lottery without a serious trade cleaning out the duplicates and garnering us a serious two-way start-superstar player.
Yea, the media loved to play them as the superstar less team, but I completely disagree. Rip had an amazing 3-4 year stretch. He was Kmart 2.0, and the 2.0 part was him wearing down every single defender that he had on it (it was VERY valuable considering wing players losing their legs, kill them on offense). Billups was playing very well also. I don't believe his whole career he was "Mr. Bigshot" at the beginning and end he would shoot a lot late in the game, but not necessarily make it. But during those ECF stretches, he was making huge shots. Sheed was one of the most underrated players in the league. The guy when he cared was a bonafide STAR. Wallace and Prince were just role players 2.0. Their defense was really good. You can't ignore the fact that every player had a huge chip on their shoulder. It made them play even better.