Did anybody hear Les on the season ticket holder conference call?

I don't think Stro's heart is the problem, it's his brain, or to be more specific, his lack thereof.

 

So the logic is...

we'd have gone to war with 2 PG's who look to get and can make their own shot but we thought we'd be better off starting a career-long so-so shooting role player who can't easily get his own shot over one of them? IMHO, pure unadulterated spin for "we screwed up big time and in retrospect we well know it".


I don't care who the Rockets draft as long as they are...1) not under-sized or way under-athletic for the position they play...and 2) not a one-dimensional spot up shooter.

We got enough spot up shooters. We need some players who can get (and make) their own shots. Draft the best available who doesn't have both of the aforementioned flaws. If that "stock piles" a certain position, fields offers to trade down (ie, swap picks with an NBA vet attached) for a solid tall/athletic definite rotational player.

IMHO, a ~#9 pick should be a definite rotational player and easily more talented than Bogans, Hayes and even Luther Head. Luther was in a deep draft but not that deep that 24 is more valuable than 9.

 

Im still hoping for Redick to drop some threes next year once T-Mac and Yao get the double teams.

 

Totally agree GATER with your qualifications for what our pick should be. I dont want a one dimensional spot up shooter either. They have to bring MORE to the table.

My question is GATER, what if the draft doesnt fall the way we want, would you consider someone like Randy Foye at #9? He is not that one-dimensional spot up shooter, but can create his own shot. Much more dynamic than Luther. However Foye is ANOTHER combo guard at 6-3.

As much as the Rockets want a tall swingman, they shouldnt key in too much on that. If there is a good Big there than they should consider him too, and then look to deal Swift for that swingman.

The last thing I want to see the Rockets doing is "reach" for a long swingman instead of going for the best talent.

 

hopefully we can slip few more spots and pick someone who does the job

I had enough of Brunson and company

 

Deuce, I feel that the Rockets will miss out on a good player because they are looking for a need. Case in point was picking up Jason Collier and passing up on Desmond Mason,Mo Pete. It's true we had Mobley with us but Mo Pete could played at the 3 and the 2.
If Sheldon Williams slips to us I would rather pick him instead of a inconsistent but talented Carney.

 

docgundy,thanks for your input on Brewer. You have mentioned Gay and Carney as possibilities for us but haven't mentioned Roy. Is it because he might be gone by the time the Rockets pick or do you think he isn't the best choice for us as a 2 guard?

 

Gay's problem is he's only a sophmore but his upside is there. I say we take him if he's available. The guy that wrote this is in love with him comparing him to Tim Duncan and Scottie Pippen.

http://www.nbadraft.net/profiles/rudygay.asp

NBA Comparison: Scottie Pippen

Strengths: Run and jump athlete who finishes well above the rim ... High flyer ... Very versatile... Does everything well ... Complete offensive arsenal... Can hit the mid range jumper... Excellent at slashing to the hoop... Accurate passer who is very unselfish... Does the majority of his damage in the post ... Very strong and stays active throughout the game ... Very tough to defend... Doesn’t get pushed around down low ... Runs the floor well ... Tough on the boards... Has a passion for the game ... Works harder than everyone else on the court ... A coach’s dream player ... Will most likely play on the wing at the next level ... Has great potential.

Weaknesses: Ball handling could stand to improve ... Must gain maturity ... Develop physically ... His glaring weaknesses are his inexperience and his handle. His handle has improved dramatically but learning that phase late has slowed him moderately ... He will be star with some college seasoning ... He has only really been coached for a year and a half now so if UConn can get 2 years out of him he will be one of the baddest things to come out of college since Tim Duncan ...

 

This was my report I just put it here because this thread had been started by the time I got to my computer.

Thanks for the questions but it looks like JVG will still be here unless Mr. Alexander was flat out full of bs or he has a change of heart.

 

Agree wtih Gater and Deuce. Just get a starting quality player who is not one dimensional. Although a truly stud rebounding PF or a conscienceless scorer might be one dimensional players valuable enough.. No reaches due to a certain position he supposedly needs to play.

The team has been desperately short of talent for years. We never have squat to trade. If, for instance, we could get a quality center or SF, go for it as we could trade them eventually. A center could substitute for Yao and play some PF, a SF could substitute for Tracy and or allow Tracy to play some SG. Just get some damn talent.

Sadly I think JVG is real rigid in his thinking and will probably go for the best available larger SG, regardless- just like he had to have the classic pass
(unfortuantely only pass ) PG in Rafer.. Hopefully the taller SG will not be a reach that does not pan out.

I like Sheldon Williams. Stro might bring us a one dimensional scorer in a trade if we are lucky.

It might be extreme, but I would trade Howard and Stro both for Steve Franics, whose stock is way down and is not perfect, but would solve the thrid scorer problem. He also rebounds better than Howard and Stro on a nightly basis. Maybe Rafer and Stro for Marbury as his stock is down, too.
We just need talent. The KNicks might be willing to dump some talent for shorter contracts.

I am tired of the JVG trying to overachieve with inferior talent routine.

 

We are never going to be a team loaded with talent as long as JVG is here and makes the decisions.

He is too one-dimensional in terms of game-plan.

He has a bad rep among players in the league. Players dont exactly line up to play for JVG. What advantage we have in terms of attracting players to play for us because of Tmac/Yao charm, is offset by JVG.

 

Dont you think that Alston would become the back up as he has such difficulty in passing to Yao Ming?

 

I agree with you! Infact Les Alexander's chat can be considered a suttle introduction to the fact that the Rockets are going to not have a makeover but a slight tinkering!!
A slight tinkering next season means tinkering adjustment over three seasons, inorder to get to a Championship Team.

 

Deuce -
It is beyond my comprehension that the Rockets could screw up this draft even if they don't get any (numerically) lower than #9. IMHO, of the Top 20 or so college/international players on this planet who are eligible to be drafted, there is almost no one outside of JJ Redick and Rajon Rondo whom I would disqualify as an improvement over players in the Rockets' current rotation.

For example, if Josh McRoberts, Shelden Williams, Patrick O'Bryant and Cedric Simmons are among the Top 20 eligible players on this planet, I would whole heartedly expect any one of them to minimally be better than Chuck Hayes and optimally have more talent or upside than Stro.

Putting a perimeter "spin" on things...

If Rodney Carney, Brandon Roy, Ronnie Brewer and Mardy Collins are among the Top 20 or so players eligible players on this planet, I would whole heartedly expect them to have more talent and/or upside than Luther Head, DWes and Rafer Alston.

To nit-pick whether (after this draft) the Rockets are a 40, 50, or 60 win team greatly misses the point IMO. The point which I feel many are missing is that they are trying to see how players "fit" with Yao & TMac. To me, that's looking into the wrong end of the telescope.

By going after athletic players (either via draft or free agency), who can get their own shots the Rockets "shield" themselves from the possibility of recurring or nagging injuries to Yao and TMac. IOW, it makes no sense to draft a Redick-type player assuming he'll be open because Yao is doubled only to find out Yao (due to nagging injuries) can be handled 1on1...this negates a Redick-type player who now doesn't benefit from the double teams that evaporated. The 6-6+ SG's and 6-4+ PG's of the world can learn to finish better or become better shooters. But the Redick's and Rondo's of the world aren't getting any taller or faster.

One huge plus to the #9 pick is that (excluding the top tier Aldridge's, Morrison's, Gay's, etc.) we are going to be able to bring in a lot of talented players for workouts. And the 2nd rounders will be called in as well. Call me an optimist.

 

Great, great points. We need to get more athletic and better all-around perimeter players.

I don't agree with what you said about Chuck Hayes, though ...

 

I love Chuck's hustle, ability to finish off a putback and "nose" for a rebound, too. I'm hard pressed to see how an undrafted 2005 player is more valuable than what we may get from a 2006 #9 "big".

 

I just think his level of play is far beyond that of a typical undrafted rookie. His per-minute production has been better than any other Rockets this season other than Yao or McGrady. He has the third highest PER on the team, and the stats don't even cover a lot of the hustle plays he makes on defense. If he can maintain the same level of play while getting around 30 minutes per night (he'd have to cut down on the fouls, of course), he'd be a double-double waiting to happen. Yeah, the #9 pick could end up being better, but you made it sound like it's automatically the case Hayes wouldn't be as good as that pick. That's the part I don't agree with.

 

You make it sound as if there were no downsides to getting a tall athletic 2. Doesn't this year's experience with Stro suggest that we should be careful, because most of these athletic freaks have no brain? Someone else suggested that we trade for Josh Childress; I haven't seen him much, but I sense a red warning sign because he gets so little playing time even on a team as dismal as Atlanta. Clearly, Childress has no brain either.

Brandon Roy does have a brain, and I wouldn't mind getting him. But he's not all that quick, and the NBA is loaded with better athletes at his position.

I think it's better to draft someone who is really outstanding at something, even if that is the only thing he can do. A one-dimensional player is not necessarily a handicap for the team, not if the guy is truly excellent at his specialty (and is a good fit). For example, who would you prefer to have at Center, the one-dimensional Ben Wallace, or the much more well-rounded Juwan Howard? They are about the same size. To me, Brandon Roy compared to the other SGs in the NBA is like Juwan compared to the other PFs. In other words, not bad -- but after a year or two, you're itching to replace him.

So we come down to JJ Redick, who I think would be the best fit for us. I have talked about him in the March Madness forum, so I won't bore you by repeating my arguments. I just want to note that he may have a greater bust potential than Roy, but he also has a higher upside. If his shooting is as outstanding as it seems, he could be a major contributer to this team for a long time. I think he's worth the risk.

 

With shooting specialists, there just isn't much room for improvement. That's why I don't see how you can say Redick has higher upside. I can't think of many small SG shooting specialists who turned out to be great players. At best, he might turn out to be Steve Kerr. Does that count as great upside?

When drafting a guard, you should look for offensive versatility and defensive ability first and foremost. Such players have greater scope for improvement and they can usually help a team right away. Ball-handling, court-vision, individual defensive ability, size -- these are things that are difficult to teach at the professional level. Rarely will a player improve dramatically in these areas. Shooting, on the other hand, can be developed with repetitive shooting drills. It's not dependent on "God-given talent".

Both Jordan and Drexler, two big versatile guards, were knocked for their shooting ability entering the draft. Look how that turned out.

 

By "upside" I meant "longer productive career". As I said, If we drafted Roy, we may want to replace him after two years because, like Juwan, he is pretty good at everything but not really great at anything. (He is even pretty smart, just like Juwan.)

On the other hand, JJ may not improve his shooting much, but if he continues hitting 3's at a .421 clip for the next 10 years, he will be huge for us.

Well, if Brandon and JJ started at the same level, you would be right -- Brandon's improving play would soon overtake JJ's. But they don't start at the same level. JJ is light years ahead on offence, and Brandon may never catch up.

And Larry Bird was knocked for his lack of athleticism. Look how that turned out! Of course, JJ is not Bird, but Roy is not Jordan either, or even Clyde.