[Houston Chronicle] McGrady to sit out next two Rockets games

I agree good point. But here is an even better question....

How many guys you know making the kind of $$$ he is making only gets 8 mins a game.. Yeah i understand the whole injury thing and surgery thing but the organization is handling the situation poorly imo

 

Marbury last year
Iverson last year
Raef La Frenz
Alan Houston
Steve Francis

Tons of guys just are not able to be what they once were and teams had to eat their contracts.

DD

 

Can you please answer this for me..... How do you expect a guy to get in the flow of the game when HE KNOWS HE IS ONLY GOING TO PLAY 8 MINS???

Also your a guy thats always preaching ball movement so why on earth do you or did you want Corey Maggette on this team???

 

Yeah, it did...I mentioned that earlier, but you make it sound like the ball never stops moving when he's not in the game. It happens all the time.

We go flat...offense gets stagnant...Brooks/Ariza/Lowry can't get anything going so they go 1 on 1...

Tracy doing it is no more a sin than the rest of the guys, he just happens to be under the microscope so you notice it more. I don't have a problem with benching Tracy if he can't play as a team just like I don't have a problem lessening Ariza's minutes if he does stupid stuff and giving some of those minutes to Chase.

 

Brooks and Landry will never be all-stars. I love those guys, but you are smoking something really great if you think they will be.

Their height (or lack of) is a limiting factor. You can't teach height. And Brooks is not a Chris Paul / Steve Nash type of guy, and Landry is not Charles Barkeley.

 

Well oook I can't get mad at you. You did answer the question. :grin:

I should have made myself clearer...

All I can say to that list is that NONE of them besides Iverson has a game like McGrady. None of them were capable of leading horrible teams and making the playoffs.

 

Actually I don't but I do expect him to play HARD for all 8 minutes and try his darnedest.

I do expect him to bust his butt on offense and defense....

And, he just didn't do that.

That was last year's team, this is a new team....but why I wanted him was because he is a very efficient scorer, something this team needed....and sometimes still needs.

McGrady can't anymore either...that is the entire point.

DD

 

Maybe so, maybe no....but they are pretty darned good right now....and they are both only in their 3rd seasons...and Brooks has only started like 55 games....so there is a lot of room for improvement.

We shall see.

DD

 

I agree it does stop sometimes, especially with Ariza.....

But, the difference is that they are playing hard on defense AND will be here next year.

So, who do you play, the aging former superstar who will walk at the end of the season or the young up and comers that work well with each other and fight every single possession?

DD

 

Actually you're right about Jordan. I took a look at his stats as a Washington Wizard and he still took the most shots on the team, just not as efficiently as before. Not really a sign of a role player.

But I think Juwan Howard is a good example. IIRC as a Rocket, he grumbled sometimes about making the adjustment from a starter to a bench. He often said his low FG% was attributable to not getting enough touches or enough playing time to "warm up" in games. He never made it a problem but he wasn't completely happy either.

Looking at his performance since then, it looks like he's made the adjustments necessary to become an effective bench guy, even when he doesn't get the minutes.

Of course, I'm not saying McGrady's career should follow the trajectory of Howard's.

 

To add to that, aren't all-stars voted on? I don't think that Brooks and Landry have the "star" quality or marketability that typical all-stars do, even if they put up some darn good numbers this season or in the future. So, I don't know if they ever will make the all-star game.

 

hello, i dont post here and hope much to make a post without getting butchered by hardcore clutchfans. anyways... ive been looking on this sight pretty frequently and have noticed every 2 minutes their is a post regarding tmac. im kinda tired of it (im sure im not the only one) but is this a valid assumption...? that this whole tmac fiasco breaks down to two basic choices... keep tmac and take a chance on him performing or trade him and play the safe route. IMO of loosing a **** load of money through gambling; its always better to took take your losses and move on. although i do like tmac(not a tmacoholic) i have a strange suspisicion that we should keep the man. alot of people are saying "trade him the man has lost his game" i still think their is still hope. in this day of age you can stay healthy for long periods of time, and tmac is only 30. i think he is experience and clutch ability is what this team needs... i know i have kinda mixed feelings in this post.... but if we can keep tmac for significantly cheaper(around 8 million which is what he deserves IMO) i think we should.

 

Actually his jerry stackhouse comparison is probably better than grant hill.
Jerry dominated the ball in detroit and washington. He averaged 29.8 ppg in 2001.
then he become a great sixth man for dallas

 

I wonder who has the most replies in this thread?

 

It's so pointless to type out insightful, lengthy responses in a thread like this. If you do they'll just get smothered by all the one-liners, T-Mac hate and a certain somebody regurgitating the same points 1,500 times.

 

I promise...if you type out an insightful, lengthy response...I will read it...I need one of those right about now...

 

For the most part you get a sense of a players' trajectory after about 3 years. While I admit Brooks has more room for improvement - I think that improvement will occur more in decision making rather than any kind of physical improvement. He's not going to be dunking, or shooting the 3 ball at a dramatically higher percentage. But he'll be smarter - he will make the right decision more often. He reminds me a lot of Sam Cassell in a way. A very good point guard, but just short of a super star.

Landry has already torn his ACL. It's amazing that he has made a great comeback, but that just goes to show how hard it is to maintain his level of athleticism in the NBA.

Very few Athletically gifted big man last long. I am amazed Amare is still at the level he is to be frank. There's a long list of guys who peter out - Kemp, LJ, Coleman...many many others. There are a few who transition as they age...guys like Mcdyess. But the thing is, Landry has never been on the trajectory of any of these players. It's hard to imagine that after 3 years in the NBA they will suddenly blossom.

It's not impossible, but it would be a surprise.

 

Post #502 was one I was hoping to get some input on. Agree/Disagree?

 

I just think it all comes down to how bad Tracy really wants it.

I'll start off by saying I do like Tracy, but he's got to prove to this team that he'll do everything he possibly can for them. This means no taking plays off on defense. No being lazy and yelling for others to pick up his man as he jogs down the court. Our defense thrives on making outstanding rotations. If one person decides to be lazy on a rotation, the defense breaks down. We can't have that because Tracy believes he's a superstar and can take a few plays off.

Now comes the offense. Can he fit with this offense? Sure. No one said he can't go iso a few times. Heck, we've seen Ariza do it 3-4 times a game, even more in others. However, he has to do the little things as well. Make the solid picks instead of just going through the motion. Make the quick cuts to the basket. Swing the ball quickly rather than receiving the pass and holding it for a few seconds. He has to play within the team.

Can Tracy fit with this team, yes. Will he? That's up to how hard he wants to work.

 

Grasshopper! The question is, if a bear ****s in the woods, does anybody hear it?