Kind of how I feel too....... No one would dare say Scola is BETTER than Tmac, but arguably, Scola is more important in the team concept that Tmac. And actually we are VERY lucky to have them both....building a championship team takes more than a year, and with a healthy Yao we are already there, but next year I expect a top seed...and to be the favorite to win it all. DD
Agreed. And I am more excited about this team this year, actually. Probably because they are an underdog, and I know how exited the media frenzy will get if they exceed expectations. And I think we can do it. I really do.
i agree with much of what you said. there are certainly times where tmac stops the ball, and he's no rip hamilton when it comes to moving without the ball. he does seem to wait for the assisting pass rather than make the quick and simple pass. for all these reasons i can understand why the team arguably runs adelman's system more purely when tmac is out of the game. the only problem is that for whatever reason, when tmac igoes to the bench, that excuse doesn't exist anymore. and how many times have we seen the offense go completely AWOL the moment tmac sits down? he isn't out there stopping the ball; he's sitting from the bench watching his team struggle to score. i don't think we should overlook the level of competition we beat when tmac missed seattle's game. it is very easy to say the offense looked nice, and then pin it on the lack of mcgrady's ball-stopping. but realize that it was seattle, a poor defensive team that doesn't grasp the concept of taking away a team's first and second option in a play, and that is a big reason the offense worked so well. think back to all the times we've played a quality opponent. those backdoor cuts for layups get taken away and we're left with a struggling offense. i would be ecstatic if tmac played with scola's aggression and energy. he'd probably be one of the greatest players of all time. id also be ecstatic if yao were healthy and about 50% quicker than he is, but he isnt. they are what they are, and even a lazy tmac is vital to the success of this team. as much as i love scola, we've seen what good defenses can do to our offense, and there's only one guy on our team capable of bailing us out in that situation, and we all know his name.
DD said no one would say TMac is better than Scola rather than no one would say Scola is better than Tmac.
I think DD, myself, and Scola would agree with that statement. Well said. And the question of the thread, I think, is which technique is superior (1) having someone bail out your team by their independent actions, or (2) having the whole team rise up. TMac himself has often said of late, that he isn't playing tennis out there, that he is out there with his team, seemingly downplaying the "its on me" quotes from years previous. And so, the question then becomes who brings out the most in their team. Hands down, TMac creates the most offense, thats indisputable. Love the magic johnson analogies that have been thrown around of late. TMac deserves them.
im not really sure what you're getting at here. are you saying scola only thrives on a good team, whereas tmac thrives on any team? or are you saying that if scola is thriving, that team must be good, whereas is tmac is thriving, it only means that team has given him the ball? whether the former or the latter is true or false, what relevance does that have to their importance to this team? what do i care whether or not a player thrives? if scola and tmac averaged 2 points a game each but the rockets win a championship then i'll be happy.
certainly number 2 is the way to go. and i agree wholeheartedly that if tmac were able to work seamlessly and efficiently in this offense we'd be on another level. as is, however, i dont think he's preventing the team from achieving number 2. well, maybe a little bit, but he makes up for it by performing plenty of number 1.
tmac is so good he sometimes overpowers the team concept. scola not so much. and agreed, i too don't care where the scoring comes from if we win a championship, and further, im a big fan of tmac and scola.
i think he was pointing out the fallacy of the logic used. in other words, he agrees with your sentiment about it being D.U.M.B.
I must agree with you, because it took me three reads to catch the typo. The quote goes something like this, "Seeing is believing, and I wouldn't have seen it, if I didn't believe it."
Yeah, I think we are on the same page now. I said earlier, "TMac is so good, he sometimes overpowers the team concept", but I'm somewhat undecided about whether TMac is culpable for that. Can you really blame someone for being that good? and further isn't it his teammates responsibility to not 'stand around and watch' as Worrel sometimes gets on the rest of the team for doing when TMac gets hot. Whether TMac is culpable or not, its definitely something that happens when TMac plays well. And again, Scola, not being as dominant an offensive force, doesn't have that particular difficulty, which is part of his allure.
Here's what I think of Scola: He's certainly a significant cog of our machine, but he's definitely not the most important. To me, he's the like one of the missing links to our team, relative to years past (during the Tmac-Yao era). Everyone can agree that our team has always lacked depth in the point guard position and power forward position.... until now. Landry and Scola have filled that hole with their finishing ability and toughness and scrappiness, respectively. We still lack a true point guard behind Rafer (which is really sad when Rafer is your starting point guard), but atleast this year we have shored up some concerns at that position with a potent mix of young and veteran backups (Aaron Brooks and BJ) that actually have the quickness to atleast matchup with some of the quicker point guards that have always killed us in the past (Steve Nash-not great quickness, but best ballhandler in the game; Chris Paul, etc.) Hell, if only Stevie wasn't injured and hadn't turned into a shadow of himself, god knows how much better this team could've (would) be. And of course, Shane is same old Shane as always.....He's the anchor of our defense, and who I think should be the DPY. He's what Kevin Garnett is to the Celtics revitalized interest in defense, if not more. He's like the brainchild of JVG + every coach in the world So my conclusion: Scola can't be considered the most important piece, but he is certainly a vital, and necessary, piece of this team that, even without Yao (atleast in a 7 game series) I think can atleast advance past the first round.
