He likes rookie contracts - with good reason. They're the most valuable ones in the NBA, and when you can redistribute a soon-to-be non-rookie contract for a role player and replace that contribution with minimal dropoff from your other already-under contract rookie deals and/or whatever Robinson gives you on his, he made that deal. Since the loss of Patterson & Morris has been absorbed without a short-run meltdown, at worst the deal is now a wash, with a small chance of paying off big of Robinson ever amoutns to anything. It's really not that irrational, it's the opposite.
As of right now, Patterson is clearly better. That doesn't mean our guys can't surpass him in the future, but right now it's not close.
Until our rookies can consistently be in the right spot and make the correct rotations they will be no where near as effective as Patterson was on the court.
That's what is crazy. The rookies are out of position all the time. They are inconsistent. None of them can really shoot. Right now, they are just not very good. And the team is performing just as well as before. If not better. That doesn't change any of those things with the rookies. It just shows how irrelevant Patterson was to the team.
And until Patterson learns to rebound, he will be no where near as effective as Smith is on the court.
Missing U, Patrick Patterson? The Rockets don't miss Chuck Hayes. The Rockets don't miss Carl Landry. The Rockets don't miss Luis Scola. Those were real role players who played like men. Real role players who helped the team. Real role players who were fan favorites. If the Rockets can survive and move on from those guys, they sure as hell aren't going to miss Patrick freakin' Patterson.
Comparing PPat to any one of out PF's is like selecting electric chair or lethal injection. Personally, I take lethal injection. Hate to smell like a piece of burned chicken. :grin:
Incorrect. Rebounding has never been a problem for us, defense has. Smith snatching a couple rebounds away from Asik is not going to make up for giving up multiple open looks and layups.
Even if 2 of the rebounds Smith gets ever 36 min comes from Asik, that leaves nearly 2 that come from the other team. Smith's defense has been better even with the mistakes. Smith's offensive efficiency has been much better. Asik does not play 48 minutes. The Rockets have a huge problem with defense when Asik is out. While not a great defensive presence, Smith was the best option on the Rockets to hold down the fort when Asik was off the court. When Patterson was asked to hold the fort without Smith or Asik, the Rockets defense cratered. Patterson was not capable of being the "center" in small ball this year because he wasn't good enough defensively and on rebounds.
First of all you are using a very small sample size in your stats for Smith, which is a big no no in analysis. Second, again, rebounding has never been a problem for this team. Third, Smith fouls alot more than Patterson which completely limits his usefulness on the court. Fourth, Smith is not good from the free throw line which is a problem because one of his two offensive weapons is attacking the rim on the PnR which often gets him to the line. Fifth, his offensive efficiency is better because all of his shots are within two feet of the basket and doesn't have near the range that Patterson has. Furthermore, his passing is non existent. Patterson was a very savvy passer, Sixth, in my opinion, trying to hold the fact that Patterson can't play center in a small ball lineup is silly. Those lineups are rare and not needed. Patterson is a far more complete and effective player than Smith, all things considered.
Code: [b]Player MIN FGM-A FG% REB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS[/b] [b]J.Thom[/b] 32 6of11 0.55 15 1 1 2 0 4 17 [b]Ppat[/b] 16 1of4 0.25 3 1 0 0 1 1 2 [b]G.Smith[/b] 20 1of2 0.50 5 0 0 0 1 5 2 [b]TJones[/b] 29 6 of11 0.55 12 1 2 0 1 4 14 [b]Dmo[/b] 11 3 of7 0.43 2 0 0 0 1 2 7 Of the Power Forwards that played Wednesday night guess who was the least effective. But of course there has to be an excuse, right?
Rebounding is a problem for us the 18 minutes a game that Asik doesn't play. Also, we aren't very good on the offensive glass.
People can only use the sample size they have to work with. Of course, both sides are only bringing up sample size when they want to dismiss points that they can't otherwise refute. Linchpin of Team Patterson argument: rebounding doesn't matter. Conveniently. I'm sorry, but frontcourt players have been and always will be judged with an included emphasis on their rebounding, just like guards are expected to dole out a few assists. Brook Lopez is rarely included in top center talk, mainly because he's so pathetic on the boards (t-17 among centers this season). Patterson is tied for #27 among PFs this year, with only a single person below him on the list playing the same or more minutes (Jeff Green). When your backcourt HAS to crash the boards to compensate for a liability, you've got one less outlet for fastbreaks. Taking fouls as a simple measure of defensive effectiveness (less is better) is flat out dumb. There are clumsy foul prone dolts (Greg Stiemsma, Draymond Green)...and there are aggressive defenders that naturally pick up fouls over the course of the game (Howard, Hibbert). There are players that don't pick up fouls because they only play 4-feet-off matador defense (Jamal Crawford, Jose Calderon). Saying that Smith's fouls "completely limit his usefulness on the court" is an absurd declaration in itself. You know what's a bigger problem than not hitting a high FT%? Not getting to the line at all. Smith averages more FT made than Patterson has ever averaged in his career....because Patterson's all-jumper-all-the-time offense rarely puts him in position to draw fouls. Patterson gives you 1 FTM for every 36.5 min of play. Smith this season? 1 every 15 mins. I'll bet Smith can bump his FT% with an offseason of shooting more than Patterson can his FTA rate. Oh, and even if Smith misses a FT, he still drew a foul regardless, getting the team closer to the bonus and an opponent closer to foul trouble. (Other PFs: Donatas 1 ftm/20.5 min, Jones 1 per 14, Robinson 1 per 20)(for fun - Harden? 1 per 4.4) If his offensive efficiency is better...it's better. Is there supposed to be a bonus for degree of difficulty? There are simple reasons why you want your bigs operating around the basket if they're able. Jumpers may be safer, but they're less efficient. Morey and his advanced stats recognize and push for paint + 3 ball offense because of it. In the NBA, 1.3 points per shot is your mason dixon line for scoring efficiency. Patterson lives below the line. And missed shots from distance ignite fast breaks going the other way (long rebounds). Misses from under the basket, on the other hand, are the easiest opportunities for put backs. Patterson saw plenty of time at center, especially in the 4th. Unless you're hoping everyone just happened to forget. He's a far more complete player, so long as little things like rebounding and post play don't count. Just limit it to traditional power forward criteria like catch and shoot outside jump shots.
We would be a better team with any of those players. The only reason we would not want them is if they would adversely affect our financial situation.
