Doc Rocket...feel free to join in with some hieroglyphics. Or can you not read either, aside from having this writing handicap. hehe jab! oeilpere...to elaborate on specifics of the generalities you always mention about how changes can come in many forms and aren't necessarily good: Getting SAR would drastically change the team, right? You know I always look for changes in team chemistry and team systems. I'm not a firm believer that a SEGA Dreamcaster line-up is the best way to go here, especially by adding a small forward who doesn't appear to pass, and while we are fixing to retire the best Center ever. I'm skeptical that any adding by SAR would subtract somewhere else, like defense. The Rockets will win by Francis leading a well-executed offense while still seriously improving our defense and rebounding in the process. Adding SAR might not achieve that, and if not, we are stuck forever with bad superstar chemistry, which is a recipe for disaster in this league. Tell us a little bit about how superstars are not necessarily instant success. But don't mention number 33 by name. And give me your take on SAR and whether Rudy/CD really like him and why. I just haven't watched him enough. But for some reason I just feel safer getting a Swift or Harvey vs a superstar SF. I don't care who that superstar is. Until we shore up the defense and frontline--just say no to SFs. Tell me I'm just being silly, that SAR *is* the pudding in Stevie's cake that Cat will lap up. give me some of those oeilpere parables. the hieroglyphics are for kids. Give me some sugar.
I don't think that we will have bad superstar chemistry because SAR will be happy just to get out of Vancouver. ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/houstonrockets2000
And #33 "just wanted to get outta" Chicago and used to party with Barkley. so what. SAR must fit on the court and do what he is told, just like everyone else. And he must play stellar defense until we get the Ratliff of my dreams. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
Hehehe. This sound like an Old West duel. Watch out oeilpere, hp is calling you out. Damsels beware, for the bloodshed is about to begin. Look hp, i'm by no means oeilpere or doc rocket, but here's my take on this: I just love adding a player who comes from a losing and frustrating environment like Mo came and where SAR is. You voice concerns about defense, I say that defense can be taught, if the desire is there. SAR has got to be one of the most underrated players on the league, and i'm sure he would give his heart on a platter for us if he got the chance. There are no concerns about his character, like there was with Mo and his endless complaining. For how long has SAR suffered in the cold wastes of Canada on a losing enviroment without any fan support without voicing his displeasure? So let it be known that the Rockets are a safe haven for all the talented players who are having their talents wasted on bad teams. You mentioned bad superstar chemistry, and that is a valid concern. But i have found that chemistry is a helluva lot more fragile when you have ALREADY estabilished superstars like Portland and LA than in a situation where everyone still has a lot to prove. Rudy's handling of the team so far has proven that he is the perfect coach when it comes to handling young players, and i'm sure he got to know Reef enough to make sure he is the right addition to the team if the rockets truly are pursuing him. Reef brings the rebounding numbers we need with him. If Hakeem sticks around til the end of the season, and we dump Walt, Los and Cato in this deal, we still would have the cap to go after hard nosed players like Mutombo, Antonio Davis and Jerome Williams next year. It's a win-win situation. We don't have to shoot for ALL this year, as a ring is out of our reach. But by adding Reef and making sure Mo and Shandon are taken care of, while keeping some cap to go after the right role players, we could be talking about a championship in the making. That would enable us to bring Cuttino once again off the bench, with Shandon splitting his time between the 3 and the 2, while Reef splits his time between the 4 and the 3. KT would actually become expendable in that scenario. And we could build the C spot through the draft if we failed to get anyone in next year's free agency sweepstakes. Thats a far better scenario than betting all coins that webber signs here, which to me, sounds unlikely at best. ------------------ "Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream..." - from the Van Halen song, "The Dream is Over" (Thank you, Freak). Fitting, isn´t it? [This message has been edited by Thanos (edited January 27, 2001).] [This message has been edited by Thanos (edited January 27, 2001).]
What's wrong with adding a good SF if the Rocks keep the same big men(minus Dream)? Rocks have been w/o a good SF for so long... but that doesn't mean they couldn't use one. And isn't Shareef kind of like a SF/PF? He plays so tall! And in Houston he doesn't have to take the big shots(one of the knocks on him), we got Mobes for that. Unless Shareef has a Pippen complex, I don't see how he would be a bad addition. ------------------ snap crackle pop
Damn, where did Oeilpere go to, anyway? I haven't heard from him in quite a while. ------------------ "I never did like that "Dr. Stupid""-Monty Burns
I don't view the game through box scores. I have to be convinced the players have skills that are complementary to various systems. A SF on this team must be a passer. We improve with better passing. What does Shareef do? I cannot see success from a SF (or PF for that matter), that isn't flexible in different systems, particularly a 4 out 1 or Motion. I'm not saying he can't fit. I'm asking for input and thanks for the input Thanos, CK. I would rather go after younger, awesome defenders, than shake things up with another superstar who isn't an eraser. We are already too small. Plus, Shandon seems like the odd man out in this scenario. Mobley won't be going back to the bench. Shareef strikes me as a box score rebounder...just showing the numbers. Like I say, I haven't seen him much. But I haven't seen Jamieson and Mario much either, and those boys left a huge impression on me. Jameison/Marion are monsters on the glass. Shareef doesn't seem to compare to that. Who thinks Shareef ranks up with Jameison and Marion as powerful Small Forwards? [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
hp, Jamison rebounds ONLY when placed at the 4. When he plays the 3, like in the beginning of the season, and last year, rebounds are nowhere to be seen. At least not the double digit sort of. I haven't seen much of Reef besides the olympics, but he looks solid as a rebounder. And what do you mean by lack size? Reef is 6'9! As far as mobley going back to the bench, see my other post. That's where i would put him, in charge of our second unit. ------------------ "Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream..." - from the Van Halen song, "The Dream is Over" (Thank you, Freak). Fitting, isn´t it? [This message has been edited by Thanos (edited January 27, 2001).]
Thanos...again, I'm not talking about box scores. Jameison can flat out rebound. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind about that. He is viscious. Same with Marion. I've seen their fire. In 4 games i've seen Shareef live, I just don't get this impression about him. Fundamentally sound, sure, but not a monster. Anyhow, it is the lack of passing that bothers me from Shareef. Most of his points are Mo' type ISO stuff. The last thing we need on this team is another guy who needs the two man game or clear-out. Those types of additions are overrated, imo. They don't make as big a difference in real life as they do in Dreamcaster. When did I say Shareef was small? I'm confused by your comment. Thanos, Mobley is not going to the bench. You can bank on that.
heypartner-Is it humanly possible to be a worse defender than Walt and Bullard? Your concern is a pretty good question, I ponder it myself. But then there's the other question-Will Cat be good enough to be #2 on a champion quality team? Will the Franchise become a primo #1? From what I've seen of SAR, he doesn't appear to be a great defender, but he won't hurt you on D. Rudy coached him in Sydney, so he knows his game. But look at the types who have consistently torched us, that usually don't torch people-Marshall has blown us up, and Lynch was able to rebound like crazy (I won't get into the big men that torch us every night, but we REALLY need a post defender). Both were the assignment of our best defender, Shanderson, but it can't really be called his fault, being forced to guard guys MUCH bigger than him, and much stronger. They were big SFs/PFs, he was an average sized SG. SAR matches those types well, and can hit the boards himself, thus keep them off some of those boards. Any move will have it's drawbacks..if you trade for Swift or Harvey (or a guy I really like for defense, Etan Thomas), what does that tell Mo? If he leaves, then we have a ton of cap, but an ENTIRE front line that needs filling, making our offseason very tough. Ah, forget it, this is all hypothetical. We don't even know what we're giving up, or what we're going to get. <a href="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000519.html">How many pix do y'all think we'll have?</a> Some might want to check that thread out, maybe take a hint ------------------ The Serious Police are watching. Follow the rules or be assimilated. Shandon is underrated. [This message has been edited by NIKEstrad (edited January 27, 2001).]
Reef gets 3 assists per game. So he knows how to pass. He is 6'9", so he can play power forward (albeit only 235/240 lbs, but quick and non-lumbering is our style of ball anyway). The question is not so much would he improve us (I think he would: 10 rebounds a game) as it is, What kind of deal would we have to put together to get him? Who winds up starting at what spot? ------------------
If we get SAR I will be partying in the streats. But I do have a concern. Like HP, I'm curious if SAR really helps us on D. Our 4th quarter losses to teams like Denver, Sacramento and Utah have been as much about not beeing able to get a stop more than not getting enough points. Remember Damon Stoudemire for the Blazers in a game earlier in the season? While SAR is a good rebounder during the normal course of a game, I am curious if he can provide the tough 4th quarter or overtime board that we so desperately need. If we do get SAR, can we do it in souch a was as to have enough room under the cap to still go after a stopper in the middle? If he takes up the rest of our cap will Cato be able to stay healthy and provide the interior D and rpgs that we need? Will we still be able to go after a difference maker in the draft? BTW if we did get SAR I would not be in favor of moving Shandon back to the 2. He has played so much better since going to the 3 and the offensive has florished with Steve and Cat in the backcourt. I personally think Shandon would be gone at the end of the season. ------------------
Heypartner, I'm starting to agree with your position (I know that puts your mind at ease ) on the acquisition of a superstar as opposed to getting young talent that can be molded to the team. If the Rockets would hold off making any major trades until after this year, they'll have the cap space & draft picks in a deep draft to solidify the team for years. If we trade for SAR or some other superstar that eats up our cap space, then we might have to settle for a lesser player at other positions. The Clippers, with all their faults as an organization, are in a position to be a force for years to come, assuming they can keep everyone around. If we could dump Cato/Walt & to a lesser degree LOS for expiring contracts, draft picks, or young promising talent, then we also would be in a similar position. I'm not saying don't make the trade, but if they do, make it a blockbuster deal for young talent that fills every need position we have, so that we wouldn't be in a position this off season to have to make any moves. Basically, I say it's all or just some tweaks. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Hottoddie (edited January 27, 2001).]
"I would rather go after younger, awesome defenders, than shake things up with another superstar who isn't an eraser. We are already too small." This is where you mentioned size, hp. And i do realize you are a big cuttino fan, but i fear rudy LIKES to bring him off the bench and is not doing so currently, only because he wants our best players on the floor. God knows Walt is a complete liability. Rudy always liked to have that scorer off the bench, like he used to with cassell. I'm not talking about box scores, hp. What i said about Jamison is that he is a good rebounder when placed at the 4. If he is playing the 3, he usually gets 4/5 reb a game, and that's where he would fit with us, unless you don't want Mo around here. So, we are discussing what kind of player we want at the 3. Imagine how many rebounds Reef could get if he played the 4, if he averages nearly 10 a game playing the 3 with Othella and Reeves with him? My formula is set: PF Mo/Reef SF Reef/Shandon SG Shandon/Mobley PG Francis/Norris Leaving only the C spot to be filled through either free agency or the draft after Hakeem's contract is up. I don't see where you are getting so many bad expectations out of Reef. I don't remember you bashing Mo this hard, and he certainly was a far greater longshot than Reef. Rudy has coached the kid. If he thinks he could be worked into the system he envisions, i say have faith in him! ------------------ "Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream, this dream is over... Dream another dream..." - from the Van Halen song, "The Dream is Over" (Thank you, Freak). Fitting, isn´t it?
HeyP ... I know, it's dreaming, but what else do we have to offer Vancouver? No, I don't want BC. If they are desperate to get rid of Reef(doubt it) Maybe they would consider Hakeem + draft picks.(doubt it) I know I don't want to give up Mo or KT. Well, maybe one of them, maybe. If the Rocks don't have to give up too much, then yah Reef would be a great addition I don't know why you are so opposed to getting a decent 3 Heyp. You don't want one in trades, and you don't want one from the draft. Why? I say go for the best players available. If there is a stud SF on the board and a decent big man, I'll sign up for the SF any day. oh, I haven't seen him play all that much, but I rank SAR as better than Jamison and Marion. ------------------ snap crackle pop
In a case like this, if we are able to get one of the premier young players in the league that can play the 3 or 4, then I say go for it, especially if we don't have to give up much. If the chemistry isn't there, I'm sure we could find some takers for SAR. ------------------ visit www.swirve.com, coming January 20th, the top 10 films of 2000! http://www.geocities.com/clutch34_2000 for great Rocket insight by some of your fellow BBS posters!
This is the main reason why I am against picking up Bryant Reeves in the deal. Lets even suppose hypothetically that the Rockets get Reef w/o taking on Rahim.... This team still would have a soft frontline and would need to maintain enough flexibility in some form to add some rough and rugged defenders. I am very against breaking up the Francis-Mobley-Anderson trio as I feel that it is really meshing well chemistry wise and unlocking what this team is really capable of doing. Thus, Rahim needs to be able to play a majority of his minutes at the 4 position which I am not sure about. Offensively, he is exactly the 4 man Rudy is looking for, but defensively is another question. If he can hold his own defensively against the huge frontcourts of the Western Conference then its a possibility but not sure if he can. The thing with a player like Stromile Swift is that he costs a fraction of the salary of Rahim and fits the exact mold this team is looking for. A PF that is a strong defender, rebounder and shot blocker. Its obvious he needs a team that will work with him and help him develop, but Vancouver does not seem to be that kind of place. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
I like Stromile Swift. We could get him, I think. Chicago gets Cato (Tim Floyd's Iowa State boy). Combined with Drew, would we get Chicago's #1 pick? (Maybe some 2nd round picks thrown in to "sweeten" the deal?) That #1 pick to Vancouver (probable top 5.) Stromile Swift to Houston. Does this work? ------------------
ugh! more boxscore analytics. Hakeem got 3 assists by just passing back to Kenny Smith. Does that make him a good passer, or someone you can add to a Motion offense. No! This team is Francis's team. Mobley is learning to fit in with it. He is running a nice pnr. Mo' is learning. He is slowly adding some high post pivot plays (slowly). Shandon and KT are great offensive role players for the system, and KT has shown the ability to be a pivot man, as well. This squad can develop Phoenix-type Motion. I really believe they can. After last night, I again am left questioning what Shareef does other than get his number called a lot. What does he do? Should we just start calling each player's number. Here Shareef gets it 20 times, Mobley gets it 15, Mo' 10, and Francis shoots whenever the D forgets about him. I fear adding a SF superstar at the expense of not rebuilding the front court and defense is a very tough call, and you should look at it very closely. My dream is motion offense, not Dreamcasting clear-outs. Dreamcasting clear-outs and 2 man games allow you to stop losing to weaker talent. Doesn't mean you can go deep in the playoffs, though. Defense and deep front-lines will get you there as well. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
