Many of these things have probably been discussed before, but I'm bored and slightly tipsy and thought it might be cool to see what people could come up with all in one place. Here's what I got: - 3/5ths of our starting lineup is 2nd round picks (although that number is 2/5th before Lowry's injury). - Only two players in our entire regular rotation were lottery picks. - ZERO of the top seven players in our rotation (based on MPG up to this point in the season) were lottery picks. - Our entire current starting lineup combined is making about as much money as Rashard Lewis this season. Or if Camby is replaced by Dalembert, then it makes about as much as Gilbert Arenas. ... Pretty impressive for a few reasons. Anyone else got anything niftydoodle to add to the list?
did I hear Bill say we have the youngest team in the League today? or was he referring to the starters? playoff contenders?
Here is an interesting fact about our team. Only two teams have beaten the OKC Thunder twice this season. The Rockets are one of them. The other one is also from Texas.
Maybe playoff contenders. Still think that goes to OKC. Thunder added Fisher while we added Camby/Boykins.
I guess that is why we do not have superstar calls. C.Lee and P.Patterson should know something about this.
He was referring to overall in-game minutes. Which before the trade deadline was completely true. The Rockets had the youngest team as far as minutes played in the NBA before then.
Here's an interesting fact: the Rockets are 0-48 in OT games this year and never win them because they choked away the game in the 4th.
Ah yeah, I remember Bill mentioning that thing about experience. That's a good one, too. Also a good one. I was actually thinking of something along those lines the other day, although I was thinking in terms of the fact that we have given the Thunder 1/6 of their losses this season, heh. And we came damn close to giving them three losses. Incidentally, we beat the other team that beat the Thunder twice twice, too, heh. So, in theory, we could be in good shape against the top two seeds in the west.
You and I have different definitions of mediocrity... This is a good team, especially considering how it's been put together. Also one more I can't believe I forgot in the OP (although I guess maybe it's a bit too obvious?): Unless I am forgetting someone, this team has zero all-stars and zero players who have ever even been an all-star.
It's ironic that Morey screwed himself over. He could put together an above average team(record wise) with no capspace and no high picks. But in doing so screwed himself of the chance to obtain high lottery picks in order to get potential future stars. If Morey had started with a blank slate, I think he would've just tanked in early years for that foundation. But because his initial job was to complement Yao/T-Mac, he did his job so well that even without Yao/T-Mac, the team couldn't suck enough to get the next potential superstar.
Totally agree with this. This team as constructed (including Martin and Lowry) along with Yao should have been one of the elite teams in the west... which I hate to even think about because it depresses me but I always have to bring it up when people argue that Morey is a bad GM who only puts together mediocre teams.
I would have to disagree with this. Morey has done a better job than maybe even he expected. A team without it's premiere players beating both top teams in the East and the West. Go figure. Also, it pains me to hear people saying that the Rockets are over-achieving. Except for a few losses here and there, we pretty much have the same type of team we have had for the past 2-3 years. A team that has been getting better over that time. A team that still needs to draft a young serviceable big man. Not a superstar big man, necessarily. Not even a big man in the lotto(Meyers leonard, Ezeli, Melo). A team that should be better than it is. This is evident when they have bad nights against bad teams.
