I think its time to realize that MoT's time as our starting 4 is over

I can see Mo excelling off the bench. He's one of the better offensive 4s in the league. Off the bench, rebounding and defense wouldn't be as big a concern, and he could be the go-to man on the 2nd unit. Look how Rebraca does in Detroit, as an offensive specialist off the bench. Very few teams can afford to have offensive talents at the 4/5 coming off the bench, because of the lack of supply.

 

I'm pretty sure we'll have the most expensive bench in the NBA next year

 

I have to admit that a lot of my support for Mo comes from the wuvfest (that includes Rudy T). I think he's a hard worker, who really fits with the team on and off the court, and has a great and suitable offensive game.

Having said that, I'm not as content as Rudy about Mo's lack of rebounding and relative softness inside, although I don't think he's nearly as bad a defender as we make him out to be.

I was really disappointed with his injury over the summer, because I thought he really might tear it up this year. I think Mo's 'softness' is mental, and I believe he can change that. I also believe Rudy and CD when they say Mo's and Eddie's games complement each other, not just in that Eddie compensates for Mo's lack of rebounding and shot-blocking, but that their offensive games complement each other. Don't forget a serious knock on Eddie is his size. Mo could compensate for that by guarding big guys who can push Eddie around. Also important is that both Mo and Eddie are offensive threats away from the basket. This really helps open things up inside. You want to beat the Lakers? Throw out a small-ball lineup where every player can hit from the perimeter or close, and force Shaq to come out or let Mo hit that money 20fter of his.

I believe the Rockets when they say both Mo and Eddie will be able to coexist. You know I want to see Eddie play 5, but I'd like to see Mo play center sometimes as well. We would probably still need a good center to do what they can't do, but that center needn't necessarily start most of the time. Or just have Eddie start the game out at SF and switch around from there. We don't know what Eddie will be exactly, but he won't be a one-position player. Not with Rudy coaching. I think and I hope that a starting lineup that allows Eddie to be most effective will be improved and not detracted by the inclusion of Mo in the frontcourt.

 

You guys are worrying about nothing. All we have to do, is pump lots of protein & creatine into EG & keep him in the gym during the off season & he'll easily put on 30-40 pounds of muscle. Even if he doesn't grow another inch taller (However, I believe he will grow another 2 inches), he'd still be 6'10" 250 lbs.

Here's the height & weight of some other undersized centers that've had some success in the NBA:

Nazr Mohammed: 6'10" 221 lbs.
Theo Ratliff: 6'10" 225 lbs.
Raef LaFrentz: 6'11" 245 lbs.
Erick Dampier: 6'11" 265 lbs.
Marc Jackson: 6'10" 270 lbs.
Kevin Willis: 7'0" 245 lbs.
Kelvin Cato: 6'11" 255 lbs. (not successful, but our current starting center)
Jermaine O'Neal: 6'11" 242 lbs.
Lorenzen Wright: 6'11" 240 lbs.
Alonzo Mourning: 6'10" 261 lbs.
Ervin Johnson: 6'11" 250 lbs.
Marcus Camby: 6'11" 235 lbs.
Patrick Ewing: 7'0" 255 lbs.
Dale Davis: 6'11" 252 lbs.
Keon Clark: 6'11" 221 lbs.
Hakeem Olajuwon: 7'0' 255 lbs. (maybe you've heard of this guy)

In case some of you have forgotten, EG is only 19 years old & will definitely grow taller. If he adds just one inch & puts on 30 lbs. of muscle (which for a 19 year old kid, is a piece of cake), that puts him right up there with all of the centers I just listed, at 6'11" 250 lbs.

So, we plug EG in at the center position & bring Taylor back at the PF position. KT will have to either accept the backup spot, beat Taylor out for the position, or be traded to another team for a suitable replacement. The problem with trading him, as Crispee has pointed out several times, is that his contract is so small that you won't get fair value for him, unless you trade him for another rookie scale contract. So, the bottom line is, just chill out.

 

I won't say too much other than what I've been saying. I think for a year its cool for Taylor to be a bench player, but after that, I don't know how much you want to pay a guy getting 20 minutes per. Is it me or was Francis hesitant to throw the ball to Eddie in the 1st half? Cat needs to chill and pass the ball too. He had all the 1st half turnovers playing with the ball. Good win team

 

leegibez, u're awesome

you bring back common sense and realism into threads instead of deceptive stats or singular observations... from a ball players view.

just had to say that

and yeah, i still think moT is not the best choice if the rockets are aiming for a championship.. while rice was a complete bust which people should have easily identified before the trade

 

MoT is not a bad player, but i agree, He isnt the player to take us all the way. BUt i must admit i do enjoy watching him play, i like MoT. Griffin has shown the best potential. i love the way he swats so many shots, and can include rebounds and well needed points.

 

Boy what a position to be in. There seem to be this haste to do things. Cut this, trade that, put this one on IR, bench that one, en fin, en fin. The Rockets have a collection of talent and that is a great thing and I do not see why that means the death of one of the talented guys.

EG is as good or better than advertised. He is also very versatile and can right now play 3 positions. MoT is not as good but he has the ability to be an above average PF in this league. He can play two positions. KT is a different player to both but also very capable and underrated and can play 2 positions. At the moment we have serviceable centers at best. Therefore what is the problem. It seems to me that EG can be aggressively brought along without the team having to give up on full time contributions from MoT and KT.

There is pecking order for the full involvement of EG; not just that he is our best PF so play him at the 4. He is also our best 5 and our best 3. So there are options. The pecking order: EG displaces the SF, our weakess link at the moment and it fits his offensive game, then he displaces the center if we get a SF, like TMo or rejuvenated Rice, where the contribution to the team is great that what is being delivered by the center. The starting SF and C have to be contributing more than MoT before EG takes the 4 spot and MoT goes to the bench. Put it simple, MoT starting at 4 is the least of your worries. There are lots of other problems to solve still.

MoT does not have to be a player who can take us all the way. He is one of them who will be a major contributor along the way just like Mr. R. Horry or Mr. H. Grant, en fin, en fin.

I think this season, Rudy T will start EG and KT at the same time; and next year he could start both with MoT. How wise that would be would depend on the bench which would include Cato, Collier, Willis(possibly), Rice and Tmo.

 

Give EG an off season or so to bulk up. I can remember when guys like Garnett, Jermaine O Neal, Rasheed Wallace and Mcdyess were young lanky guys who got pushed around and seemed out of position.

Im curious to know (and too lazy to find out for myself) what the aforementioned players 1st year averages year per game started and how they compare to EG's stats in his starts. I don't think O Neal started until last year because he played on a decent team (Portland).

Anybody have that info?

 

I did not look this up yet, but I recall Garnett started a large majority of games in his first season and averaged in the neighborhood of 17/7. Bbased on Eddie's starts he is in the same neighborhood. The thing that makes Eddie so damn intriqueing from a "where should we play him" standpoint is his shot blocking and overall defense. I do not believe Garnett had these advanced defense skills like EG his first year. Defensively speaking, he may be one of the top 20% in the league. He not only can block, but you will notice that he makes players change their shots a lot.

 

I just don't understand some people continuing to refer to Eddie as a 3. He has logged about 95% of his minutes at the 4 this year and the rest at the 5.

If there is a weakness to Eddies defense other than his strength inside it appears to be his lateral quickness.

If there is a weakness in his offensive game other than his youth it appears to be his lack of an explosive first step or his lack of ability to take his defender off of the dribble.

Both of his weaknesses are qualities that you don't want in a 3.

MoT has a very good first step on offense and appears to have better lateral quickness than Eddie. MoT would make (IMO) a better 3 than Eddie.

Would any of you prefer to have Mo in the low post to try and provide help defense on the players that drive past Eddie or would you prefer to have Eddie in the low post providing help defense on the players that drive past MoT? I don't think that there is any question that everyone would prefer to have Eddie providing the help defense with his shot blocking abilities. If Eddie is out on the perimeter trying to guard what will probably be a smaller and quicker 3 (in most cases) then you should be prepared to loose a lot of Eddies shot blocking and rebounding.

It is probably a non issue anyway since Rudy T has already indicated that he sees Eddie and MoT starting together with out the traditional small forward and power forward rolls. I would think that on D he would tend to play Eddie close to the basket for his shot blocking and rebounding but on offense he will just play match ups with Eddie posting up close to the basket sometimes or with Mo posting up close to the basket sometimes or maybe both posting up on the perimeter.

 

The problem with bringing MoT off the bench is that he's always had his strongest efforts in the 1st quarter. Lord knows we need to bolster our 1st quarter performance.

So if MoT isn't in the game in the 1st, then my fear is he'll quickly become useless. That would be a shame.

This is a good problem to have. Time will tell how it works out.

 

What's wrong with starting two power forwards? We don't have a good center anyway.... Very few teams have "legit" centers that you actually worry about defensively. The rest are just bulky guys that eat up space, and putting Taylor on those actually minimizes him as a defensive liability anyway. Plus, doing this helps pull the opposing center away from the basket on defense, which is something Rudy wants to do anyway.

 

I'm 18.. can anyone predict how much taller i'll grow lol.. sorry i just find it funny for people to predict how much taller he will end up.. for all we know he is done growing.. and then a lot of times people base it on other players growing after they enter the nba.. they are totaly differnt people. i wouuldn't base how much taller i will grow based on the fact that some college kids grew an inch after getting to college..

 

Good point...as a matter of fact if you look at the T Wolves, they start 2 4's (KG and Smith). In fact, KG actually is the 3 on that team anyway.

That being said, I still don't want Mo starting

 

I definitely agree with some of the other posts, most notably Dear Rock's post.

I think having Mo Taylor back later on with EG and hopefully KT is a good problem to have. I would like to keep Mo tay in the starting lineup when he is healthy along with EG also in the lineup. What Mo tay lacks in rebounding and defense can be more than made up by EG and another good front line player.

I wouldn't like to trade any of those players but I also believe that KT has shown he has more than enough ability to start. One of these guys will probably be traded, not EG. If Mo tay has sufficient trade value after the injury then he should be the one.

My solution, though it seems unlikely that Rudy would go this way, is to have a Detroit type lineup with more flexibility on the bench. This should be our starting lineup when Mo tay comes back:
G Franchise
G Mobley
SF KT
PF Mo tay
C EG
Bench: Torres, Norris, Morris, Collier, potential starting center(Not Willis/Cato), etc.

If detroit can go with a starting frontcourt of Cliff Robinson, Wallace, and Williamson then why can't the rockets go with 3 big forwards?
And as far as Mo tay's willingness to come off the bench. He showed alot of heart and team spirit to me during the offseason so I think he would do whatever it took to help the team, even if it means he loses his starting spot.

 

You will loose 1/2 an inch and gain 30 lbs. Enjoy your future!