Yeah, that atrocious defense, sub 40% shooting percentage, and outside bricks he throws up are truly beneficial to his teams. Clearly, no superstar could win without a well below average NBA role player I forgot, these facts probably mean nothing to you as you do not value logic....
You could say the same thing about Robert Horry and his atrocious 3 point percentage but when the playoffs came he was clutch. Is there a formula for clutch players? Fisher sucks but when it's time for the Finals he's nails. Sometimes logic (FU) doesn't apply in being "That" missing piece to win it all.
I am having trouble following you. Are you saying Ariza is clutch or that he helps superstars win? He didn't do anything with the Lakers that wasn't easily replaced by Artest once he left.
Hmmm, clearly your logic is flawed (not surprising of course) Define "atrocious" please... Robert Horry was a consistent 3 point shooter throughout his career and a consistent player no matter when or where he was. Fisher has also been a consistently good outside shooter for the majority of his career. So your points make little sense. The players you listed are capable of contributing with aspects of their game on a nightly basis. Ariza on the other hand does not excel at a single thing on the basketball court. Ariza has to have a bonafide superstar with plenty of other talent around him to even see playing time. A single decent playoff run TWO YEARS AGO makes him a clutch player? I think not
Ariza is like Robert Horry. He is a great piece around players that take up a defenses attention. He does all the dirty work and plays defense. He hits the clutch shots when needed. Did it this year against Miami too. He's not needed here though because this team doesn't have any players that require a double team. Artest is the same type of player. He was also not needed here.
may it's cause he sucks??? You must have pretty low standards if you think 7 points per game on a measly 42% FG is solid offensively...oh and he has just as many turn overs a game as assists.. Defensively we just suck as a team.. every single guard lights us up..
his 3 pt % was definitely atrocious in the regular season http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/horryro01.html
From what I've seen from Courtney Lee to this point, yes I do. But I think the move was 80% financially motivated.
i miss certain aspects of ariza's game, ala his length, height, and superior athelticisim compared to battier. i do not however, miss his poor shot selection and attitude. i wish i could have courtney lee's demeanor in ariza's body.
To me Ariza was overpaid for what he did. He was a decent player if you were going to use him as a 6th man maybe or as the 5th best starter on a great team, like the Lakers used him. He's not a bad player and I would not mind having him back on the Rockets, but the way he was used here was not fitting. He's not good enough to be used as a third option and that seemed to be basically how the Rockets viewed him. Still, at this point in time it would have probably been better to move Battier instead of him.
The reason I posted that quote from John Holliger was b/c it was in ESPN Daily Dime and a lot of people read those. I thought it was a perfect summation of how Rockets fans felt last year. I think in the long-run, that trade will be good for the Rockets. We just don't have the pieces to make highlight his strengths and cover up his weaknesses. He is able to have a better season in NO b/c CP3's passing and penetration allows Ariza to do what he does best: spot-up and slash. But I have a feeling that this is going to be Battier-Gay Lite and this debate will never end.
I dont think that's accurate. The Rockets werent that good last year overrall. Ariza was told from the coach's to work out his offensive game, so he did. I think he did "mesh" quite well, especially after Martin got here and took away some of that pressure off. Overrall, trading him was a MISTAKE thus far. If you look at the Rockets main problem, it's the small foward position we lack the most. We traded our starting SF for a back up two guard who doesnt even play that much. We have virtually no athelticism at small foward. I wonder why
Bud has plenty of athleticism. Our problem at the SF position, and elsewhere, is that we don't have any players that demand double teams, any players that can create their own shots, or any players the can hit jumpers (outside of Kevin Martin and Luis Scola). If you watch our offense, these things are clearly evident. The rockets just pass the ball at the top of the key while the opponent just slacks off of them. The only player the can penetrate is Lowry, but because of the lack of a jumpshot, his defender usually just stays by the free throw line. What ends up happening, is the ball is passed around and Brad Miller is forced to take a horrible three or Kevin Martin is forced to take a contested shot. Ariza wouldn't help us with any of the above mentioned problems. One defense, our guards are getting eaten up. And Ariza defense is built for passing lanes, not help defense. So if our guards are getting posted up and giving up open late-ups, Ariza's presence won't really help out with that. What we need is a healthy Yao back there. Battier has been coming alive of late, but he is slowing down so it is tougher for him to get there in time. So at the end, I think it was a good move to dump his salary because that contract wasn't worth what we were getting.
I seriously doubt that Ariza would help us have a winning record right now. Bottom line is that Brooks and Yao are still out, and they are the core pieces of this team.
WOW, I have never before read a post that I agreed with everything. it was like I was reading my own thoughts. That may not be a compliment to you but everything you said is dead on. I wish everyone would read this and understand why the Ariza deal is not a bad one. The only thing I would add is I also see the opportunity to upgrade the sf spot and with Ariza that would be more difficult.
