Thanks for that NIKEstrad. Do you and I have to agree on everything? Timing: <b>What I want to know is if in 2 years when Griffin is our star power forward (as some project he will be) and MoTaylor is sulking on the bench as a reserve power forward with his $48 million deal, will you then finally drop the MoTay goggles and acknowledge this was a big reach.</b> That door swings both ways. If in 2 years, Taylor and Griffin work well in tandem on the floor and Taylor is a solid player, will you finally drop the anti-MoTay goggles and acknowledge you were reaching? Like I said before, this board is filled with "he is horrible" or "he is excellent" sentiments when, in reality, those statements can only be applied the smallest percentage of the time. Most guys are somewhere in between. I think Mo is a good to very good offensive player. I think he has the skills to be a very good offensive player consistently. I think he is an average defender with the size and athletic ability to improve that to above average. I think he will always be a below-average to average rebounder. If he develops into a guy that goes 15 and 6 on most nights, sets good screens and provides good chemistry with the other players, that would be the best we could all probably hope for. I TOTALLY agree with NIKEstrad (shocker!) that offense is a valued commodity in the NBA. The offensive players tend to get more money and start while the defensive/rebounding specialists tend to get less and play back up. Antonio Davis wasn't worthy of the big bucks until he slid to center and started averaging solid double-digit scoring numbers. It is the nature of the beast - you wanna make the $$$, you gotta score. Taylor may never be close to what we all think of as the traditional power forward (ie Karl Malone) but he is a player that FITS THIS TEAM WELL. That is far more important in the grand scheme of things.
TheCat, My problem with your defense of Taylor is you always slight Kenny Thomas when you do it. Now, be fair to Kenny and match Taylor's minutes per game in each of those games versus the competition's mpg. Since Taylor is only 28.6 on the season and K9 is 24.6 mpg, I suspect you will see that Kenny should be mentioned when talking about defending the best. Don't be so biased against K9 in your defense of Mo. Run the minutes per game, please.
Timing: You are absolutely correct about the guards allowing pentration. That is one of the big keys to success or failure on defense. <b>Well I'm not going to argue that Rudy did or didn't double as much, that's hard to prove. However, the instant double teams are pretty much a staple of Rudy's teams in the last few years. Just like having his guards always go under the pick, these are things Rudy does pretty regularly on defense. Both of these strategies serve to protect the paint.</b> Actually, the "instant double team" WAS a staple of Rudy T's defensive strategy prior to the additions of these younger players. He used them because... 1. The team was a bit older and had a tendency to need help defensively (hello Sir Charles) 2. The team was full of veterans who picked up defensive schemes quickly. Ironically, Rudy is often criticized for his predictible offensive plays but his defenses can be fairly complex. You used the pick and roll as aan example. The Rockets want their guys to fight over picks if the can but they want communication so that, if they can't, the other defender can show. Older veteran Rockets squads did that well because they had better instincts and had played together for a while. This team is still learning how to communicate on the floor. Personally, I think this team has the chance to be a very good defensive team if they commit to it. They have quickness, good hands, they talk to one another and now they've added some shot blocking to back them up. If they learn to execute on defense well (which isn't practiced NEARLY as much as offense by any team), they could be very good at it.
I agree that Mo has had foul trouble, but some of you guys are exagerating, because the guy still, in 28 minutes of action, scored 13 ppg, and 5.5 rebounds. I guess roughly, if you push that up to 35 minutes per game that's about 15 ppg, 7 rebounds. Besides, people are complaining that they want a solid rebounding PF, and they want a PF who scores 20 ppg, and grabs 10 rpg, and you got it, because that is exactly what Mo and Kenny Thomas' numbers were combined last year, and they are both getting better!
Mo has had a solid career so far so he isn't going anywhere. And I don't know why people are so intent on Griffin being the main PF, the Rockets are obviously going to use a combo SF/PF attack in Mo and Griffin, and once Griffin fits in and matures that is going to be a dangerous lineup. They're going to blow away teams offensively, and they'll probably combine to get about 13 or 14 boards per game. Again, when Griffin matures he will, most likely, be a PF on offense, and SF on defense. Meanwhile Mo has the ball-handling ability, and all-around offensive skills to be a SF on offense, and once he works on his foot speed a solid defensive PF.
That door swings both ways. If in 2 years, Taylor and Griffin work well in tandem on the floor and Taylor is a solid player, will you finally drop the anti-MoTay goggles and acknowledge you were reaching? Yeah, like that's going to happen! LOL I hope they do play well together, but I think the odds are better that Griffin will be starting in 2 years and we'll again be looking to trade a bad contract. Taylor may never be close to what we all think of as the traditional power forward (ie Karl Malone) but he is a player that FITS THIS TEAM WELL. That is far more important in the grand scheme of things. How does Taylor fit this team well? Really, how? The biggest needs on this team are defense and rebounding, things he doesn't do well. We need a defensive thug who can rebound his ass off and get us easy buckets. Taylor is an outside shooter yet we have a perimeter dominant scoring team already. I mean if you have two guys who score mostly from outside, what's the point of adding a power forward who likes to do the same? How does that fit well? I don't think he fits well at all. I think they all like each other so they think they fit well. There's a difference in fitting well on the court and fitting in off the court. Those lines seem to get blurred in Rocketland.
Mo is not that bad a defender as I recall. Yeah, I remember him being schooled by Webber and Wallace in a few games. There's not shame in that, they're all-stars w/a height advantage. Usually he did a decent job on other players. Mo's defense was lot better than CBarkely when he was us. I remember mediocre players like Gary Trent and Danny Fortson among many others torching Charles. Of course it had to do w/Charles only being 6'4". And while Kenny hustles and tries, at 6'7" he gets posted up quite a bit. Basically just saying that it could be worse.
That's not much of a reply. Got any stock tips as well or is your prognosticating power limited to Mo Taylor? I think we all know your <i>opinion</i> but that wasn't the point of the question. What I wanted to know is whether or not you were as willing to admit when you are wrong as you are willing to show up someone else when they are. How many defensive thugs are starting power forwards in this league? Few! NIKE made that point earlier and it is worth bringing up again. Defensive-minded "thugs" are not hard to come by and usually end up in a back up role. Michael Smith is out of work at the moment. He's a defensive-minded thug. You want him instead of Taylor? Taylor is not an outside shooter. He is a face-up forward. There is a difference. Most of our guys are slashers who will shoot the three when it is there. Taylor is a face-up forward who works in the post. He is difficult to defend and can draw double teams. He is a terrific compliment to a player like Griffin because Griffin's offensive game is rough even though his defense isn't. In two years, that will change, but every team needs offensive specialists, defensive specialists, shot blockers, shooters, passers, etc. If Anderson signs, that's one defensive specialist and one offensive specialsit re-signed. Pretty balaced, eh? It's amazing how if a guy is a good offensive player, we need a thug at his position. If he is a tough defender, damnit, why doesn't he score more? If the team gets along, maybe they get along too well and it is interfering with their play on the court. If they argue, well they must not have very good team chemistry. It always surprises me that it is essential we have a star at every position or someone who fits the "that's right, I'm a point guard (or shooting guard or small forwar or power forward or center)" mold of years gone by. Is there EVER the possibility that things aren't as black and white as everyone thinks they are? Are we that much more knowledgable than the coaching staff and the rest of the NBA experts? Or, perhaps, do we give ourselves a little more credit than we deserve?
Just FYI, three guys who haven't been mentioned in this thread so far put up significantly higher-than-average numbers against the Rockets this year: Antawn Jamison -- 31.5 points, 10.8 rebounds Antonio McDyess -- 25 points, 16.7 rebounds Dirk Nowitzki -- 25.3 points, 10.5 rebounds BTW, you can find play-by-play info for last year's games at CBS.Sportsline.com/nba, and an especially anal Rockets fan -- not suggesting that there are any, of course -- could calculate how well any particular player did versus Taylor, or any other Rocket.
In the Rockets victory over SA, the philosophy of Rudy T was to put Cato on Duncan in single coverage and not provide any double team help, so as to shut down the SA 3 point shooters. He knew that Taylor was a liability defensively so he put Taylor on David Robinson. David "soft as Charmin Tissue" Robinson responded with a 22 point game on 9 of 12 shooting. Guess who was guarding him? That's right: Mediocre Taylor. Just watch Taylor's footwork defensively. Not only is he zero threat of blocking or altering shots, he moves very slowly laterally and is beaten to the basket quite often. I don't know if anyone has the stat, but I'd venture a guess that Kenny Thomas is better in the +- department than is Mediocre Taylor. He may score some points, but he gives up a lot more than he scores on balance. And spin it how you want, but his rebounding is a total joke, as is the size of his contract.
His rebounding might suck but he can flat out shoot for a power forward. The second half of the year he got aggressive and when he did he scored at will. If he gets it in his head to take the ball in and pound it , hit that right hook. That move works every time. I think Griffin can do the rebounding and blocking.
In the Rockets victory over SA, the philosophy of Rudy T was to put Cato on Duncan in single coverage and not provide any double team help, so as to shut down the SA 3 point shooters. He knew that Taylor was a liability defensively so he put Taylor on David Robinson. David "soft as Charmin Tissue" Robinson responded with a 22 point game on 9 of 12 shooting. Guess who was guarding him? That's right: Flutie *cough* I mean RaptorsDynasty: This proves nothing. Wow so a 7'0 natural center scored 22 points while being guarded by a 6'9 power forward in 1 game... Mediocre Taylor. What happened to "fat jerk" Just watch Taylor's footwork defensively. Not only is he zero threat of blocking or altering shots, he moves very slowly laterally and is beaten to the basket quite often. That's what Eddie Griffin and centers are for I don't know if anyone has the stat, but I'd venture a guess that Kenny Thomas is better in the +- department than is Mediocre Taylor. He may score some points, but he gives up a lot more than he scores on balance. And spin it how you want, but his rebounding is a total joke, as is the size of his contract. This coming from a fan of the team that signed Antonio Davis for $60 million for 5 years...heh
As was suggested in previous posts, I'll include minutes/game for KT and Mo Taylor vs the PF's provided by Cat... Duncan-- 24.5 pts, 13 reb MO - 31.0 minutes/game KT - 23.8 minutes/game I'll also add that in the final game against Duncan when he was held to a very poor FG%, it was Cato that was stuck on Duncan during crunchtime while Mo was guarding Robinson on the outside... Garnett-- 20.7 pts, 10.2 reb MO - 32.3 minutes/game (in only 3 games) KT - 30.5 minutes/game (in only 2 games) They both missed the final game against the T-wolves in which KG provided a massive 11 points and 6 boards. Take out that game and his averages climb up to 23.9 points and 11.6 boards a game. The re-calculated stats are both higher than KG's season averages... Wallace-- 19.5 pts, 5.7 reb MO - 27.7 minutes/game (in only 3 games) KT - 21.3 minutes/game (in only 3 games) Wallace only scored 8 points in a game back in November, and according to 2 different boxscores that I've looked up, he was marked as the starting C in that game with Dale Davis at PF. Hey Cat! You know what that means? Jason Collier helped hold Wallace to 8 points in a game, you could add that to your massive Jason Collier post! Anyway, when you take out this game, Wallace averages 23.3 points a game. (4 points above his regular season average) Webber-- 29.2 pts, 13.2 reb MO - 27.0 minutes/game KT - 30.8 minutes/game I don't really have much to add to the Webber matchup since he destroyed us. KT did play more minutes than Taylor so draw whatever you want from that. Brand-- 18.5 pts, 7 reb MO - 19.5 minutes/game KT - 28.5 minutes/game Once again, KT plays more minutes than Taylor. In the February game, Mo only played 9 minutes while KT went for 33 minutes. I guess that means you should blame KT for giving up 21 points to Brand in 33 minutes. In the 2nd game, Taylor played 30 minutes while Brand played for 28 minutes and scored 16 points. Personally I think Mo plays decent D, but there's no way you can provide stats to prove something like that. Blocks and Steals are the only easily accessible stats that could really show how good someone is on the defensive side, but those stats can't really indicate if someone is poor on the defensive side.
PRM....my hero for a day. Thx for the stats. The Cat gives Kenny Thomas no respect. I cannot believe Collier gets so much defense from The Cat and K9 gets no respect. None. mfgarza, imo, the info on K9 being 6-7 is wrong. There are many cites that have him at 6-8. But the main reason I believe this is when I see Bullard, Mo' and Kenny standing next to each other. There is no persceptible drop-off from Mo to K9 anymore than there is from Bullard to Mo'. imo, if K9 is 6-7 then Bullard must be 6-11. Tossing all the subjectivity aside. Kenny plays big, because he jumps fast and has long arms. Plus, he is always on this toes. Really, he is.
Kenny shoots too many 3s, he misses almost all his 3s and they look really ugly. He has nice footwork when he goes inside but we dont need a backup forward doing that. We need a player that can provide defense and rebounding. Kenny doesnt have the defense that we want and he is small. Plus he is quiet and doesnt look like he has fun.
That's not much of a reply. Got any stock tips as well or is your prognosticating power limited to Mo Taylor? I think we all know your <i>opinion</i> but that wasn't the point of the question. What I wanted to know is whether or not you were as willing to admit when you are wrong as you are willing to show up someone else when they are. Maybe in the future you could at the bottom post the point of your questions. My "prognostication" isn't much of a reach, it's simply in line with what he's done to this point in his career. If Mo Taylor suddenly turns into a rebounding, defense playing, playmaking scoring forward with "guard like skills", then I'll be the first to have a cardiac and admit I was wrong. Don't hold your breath though. How many defensive thugs are starting power forwards in this league? Few! NIKE made that point earlier and it is worth bringing up again. Defensive-minded "thugs" are not hard to come by and usually end up in a back up role. Michael Smith is out of work at the moment. He's a defensive-minded thug. You want him instead of Taylor? If defenisve-minded thugs are not hard to find then why don't we have any? Not one? I'm not in favor of replacing an overpaid player like Mo with an inferior player just because he's a defensive-minded thug. I would settle for the defensive, rebounding talent equivalent of Mo Taylor but obviously at this point in free agency there is no one like that avaliable. A Bo Outlaw style player would fit mighty fine. Tyrone Hill would look pretty good down low in place of Taylor. Think we could get Hill for less than $48 million? I guess first we would have to check him for the "chemistry" stamp of approval that is so necessary when signing a future Rocket player. Maybe Steve and Cat can go shoe shopping or play nintendo with him for a few hours and get back with Rudy to see if he's "okay". Taylor is not an outside shooter. He is a face-up forward. There is a difference. Most of our guys are slashers who will shoot the three when it is there. Taylor is a face-up forward who works in the post. He is difficult to defend and can draw double teams. He is a terrific compliment to a player like Griffin because Griffin's offensive game is rough even though his defense isn't. In two years, that will change, but every team needs offensive specialists, defensive specialists, shot blockers, shooters, passers, etc. If Anderson signs, that's one defensive specialist and one offensive specialsit re-signed. Pretty balaced, eh? Mo Taylor's shots come from outside the paint. That qualifies as an outside shooter. I rarely see the guy post someone up down low to shoot a hook or turnaround, or post up, turn and face, and drive to the bucket. Taylor gets his shots on wide open jumpers from guard penetration and iso face ups that result in jumpers. Sorry, he's an outside shooter, not a post up threat. Does every team need a $48 million "offensive specialist" that may be on the bench in two years and another overpaid out of position at the small forward defensive specialist off the bench? It's amazing how if a guy is a good offensive player, we need a thug at his position. If he is a tough defender, damnit, why doesn't he score more? If the team gets along, maybe they get along too well and it is interfering with their play on the court. If they argue, well they must not have very good team chemistry. It always surprises me that it is essential we have a star at every position or someone who fits the "that's right, I'm a point guard (or shooting guard or small forwar or power forward or center)" mold of years gone by. Is there EVER the possibility that things aren't as black and white as everyone thinks they are? Are we that much more knowledgable than the coaching staff and the rest of the NBA experts? Or, perhaps, do we give ourselves a little more credit than we deserve? Lighten up man. Do you want to just shut this whole board down so all of the passionate Rockets fans of the world can't express their obviously ignorant opinions on their favorite team. Then we could all sit around and listen to Marty Blake and our knowledgeable coaching staff tell us who the greats will be and how things "really" go down out on the court. We all know how honest and forthright NBA coaches are when discussing their own players.
Cat- Numbers often don't tell the whole truth. Did you ever consider that all of our guys play bad defense so maybe it wasn't the best matchup at the PF position for the opposition. I know you will argue but Stevie, Cat, Mo-T are all below average defenders. Cat played good D his rookie year when he didn't have to extend any energy on offense but since then he has gotten worse. Walt is also terrible when he plays. The bottom line is as of last year the only consistentently good defender we had was Shandon when he played the SG or when he played agains a smaller SF. Dream is good when he is healthy. I also like KT defensively just because he tries, but he really isn't big enough to be a great defensive PF. I know their are exceptions to this rule, like D-Rodman who was a great defensive player without being real big. I don't put KT in his class yet. Remember the matchup with the Lakers when Shaq had a bad game? Does that mean Cato & Collier are now both great defenders? It could just mean they both had a great game or more than likely that Shaq just had a bad night.
Cat, You're a very knowledgable basketball fan. However, you are mistaken about Mo's defense. I watch all 82 games of the Rockets on DirecTV from Orlando. Defense is more than just stopping your man, it's about helping out when guards penetrate, blocking or altering shots, and hustling for loose balls or rebounds. MoTaylor rarely does any of the above, unless his shot is going and he is apart of the offense, which usually last one quarter (the 1st to be exact). Clutch City Fan's don't be fooled by Cat's, numbers for one-on-one defense. MoTaylor has a long way to go before he can walk in Robert Horry's shoes.
