How does this turn into a Reef bashing? If anything, I am bashing the small forward position in general. I'm seriously asking what people think about Reef. I have like zero impression of this guy. He's got to be the quietest 20/10 you could ever imagine. It bothers me that I don't have an impression of him after my 4th game seeing him live. An eraser in the mold of Ratliff would make us a winner before any SF would, imo. My concerns are picking up a superstar like this never comes cheap, and can strap you chemistry-wise for quite a long time. You must be absolutely sure he will fit with Francis. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
Yes! So we finally got the point! Bashing the SF spot in general indeed! Now i see where you are coming from! He's got the quietest 20/10 anyone ever saw? Hehehe. You crack me up Hp, seriously. I wholeheartedely agree with you about the need we have of an eraser. But you'll HAVE to agree that it's far EASIER to find one of those than it is to find a 3 of Reef's caliber, a 3 that can also play the 4 for short periods of time, splitting the position with Mo. The one problem i have with the eraser theory, though is that the eraser would HAVE to be a 5. And there is only ONE of those available. What good would to us getting a 4 with a defensive mindset when he is going to spend most of his time on the bench while Mo plays? In my DREAM world, we somehow dump Walt,Los and Cato, plus our picks for SAR, KEEP Hakeem til the end of the year, resign Mo, mak sure Shandon waits for his third year, an with the remaining cap, try a real BOLD move: while every team is scrambling for webber, sign Mutombo. Tell me a team of: C: Mutombo/collier PF: Mo/Reef SF: Reef/Shandon/Langhi SG: Shandon/Mobley PG: Francis/Moochie doesn't send shivers down your spine! If Reef doesn't mesh with the rest of the team, we have one of the HOTTEST commodities on the league available for trade next year! it's a no brainer! ------------------ "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).]
Is it fair to say that Philly is the modern day rendition of the Championship Pistons teams and that is the likely model for the Rockets as well? Hill, Theo and Lynch are not considered in the same class as 'Reef, yet they contribute in their defined roles to a winning team. Scoring points is not the key issue for the Rockets; stopping the other team from scoring and rebounding is the goal that will propel the Rockets to the next level. Mango ------------------ Spring cleaning
This topic does intrigue me a lot. It's interesting to note how some players become such explosive scorers when they don't have to share with another superstar. Look at Stackhouse leading the entire league now that Hill's gone. Who would have guessed that? Or look at McGrady, also handling Orlando without Hill. Steve and Cat are both big time scoring playas. They will both be averaging over 20 points a game, and soon. Do we really need a star scorer? I think when any analyst looks at this team, including CD, they are thinking "put some muscle up front and they will be complete." Not necessarily scoring. Muscle. An intimidator, an enforcer. A scrapper. A hard-core defender. PJ Brown, Oakely, Ratliff. Guys who can score but don't have to. Shareef is so appealing, but let's face it; he's appealing in a dreamcast sense. We really have no idea how he would fit into this offense. Our offense is quite good, on it's way to becoming amazing. We need a 4 or 5 that gives us some sense of security when we have to deal with Dice/Duncan/Webber/Shaq/Wallace. SAR does not give that. I'm with Thanos- if Rudy envisions a way to fit him into our future system, perfect. If not, there's no need to just add great players. We've spent this entire half decade acquiring great players- to what end? In my opinion, Toronto's catapault into the playoffs was not the acquisition of Carter, although that was the beginning. It was the acquisiton of Willis and Oakley, and later Davis. You take back those trades, and instead give the Raptors back Camby, Bender, and our #12 and #14 picks for Willis, and you have the Grizz/Clippers. Lots of young studs and not a damn thing to show for it. Toronto has completely turned their franchise around in a matter of years, and make no mistake about it, it was the influx of ass-whoopin muscle-flexin veterans up front that did it. I think the Rockets are pretty much in the same boat. Shareef is an elite forward who brings fantastic scoring and rebounding. Frankly, it's intensity, rebounding, defense and shot blocking I want. And that can be bought cheaper.
You keep bashing statistics. No stats don't tell the whole story but they are a very good measuring stick for ones ability. Over the course of an 82 game season if a guy shoots 50% from the floor and avgs 20 pts a game then that gives you a lot about what his abilities are. No it does not tell you if he likes to drive post up or take a lot of jump shots. What it does tell you is that when he decides to put it in the hole is he knows what he is doing. Is he doing it with in the designs of the offense? At the expense of the other players on his team (Stackhouse)? You actually need to see him play and he needs to fit the offense I agree. Just don't keep knocking someone because they mention someones stats. Although they don't tell the whole story they are relevent. As far as the next quote, I completely agree with you. SF is not our biggest problem as some have suggested. It is interior defense and rebounding...perticularly during crunch time. SAR gives us none of that. I know he rebounds about 10 a game, but can he get the tough rebound when the game is on the line? I beleive there is a difference. I beleive SAR tends to let the game come to him. He seems to have about the same demeanor as Shandon Anderson. While SAR is unquestionable better than Shandon, how much do we really improve our team with him. And I don't see Cat coming out of the starting lineup. Would our money be better spent on someone capable of dominating the boards and playing D, a Charles Oakley type (I can't beleive I used his name...I hate the guy). ------------------
I would love to get a good defender/rebounder in the post. That would be absolutely fantastic. Unfortunately, there ain't many out there right now in that mold, esp. younger players who are on the block. Ideally, I want an addition player who will grow with Francis and Mobes. Camby? Swift? Ben Wallace? Jerome Williams? Lorenzen Wright? Alan Henderson? Kurt Thomas? These are guys that are capable of what defense/rebound cravers want. But how to get one? Also, if you want a rebounding, defensive frontcourt, then Mo needs to go or come off the bench. His forte is mainly scoring. ------------------ snap crackle pop [This message has been edited by CriscoKidd (edited January 27, 2001).]
Thanos and CK, I'm not entirely against small forwards, although it is the most unneeded position out of the 5 positions in basketball, imo. What I really mean is that I'm against a small forward superstar for THIS team. It is less needed on our team, borderline not needed at all. Also, I don't buy the argument about defense is easy to find and can be taught. You can't teach what Ratliff does anymore than you can teach what Reef does. And when we talk about stoppers, why do we only mention the proven ones. Why not include the young ones like Swift and Harvey? I guarantee your list will expand greatly if you had scouting reports of all the young men in the league. Investing in defense and front court youth is safer in my opinion, because it clearly needs to be done anyhow. Thanos, you make a good point about Reef is safe because of his ongoing trade value. I can agree with that. CK...yeah I cannot really say how we fit Mo' into this. But, he does look to be worth it to me. His offensive production is going to get better and even more important, imo. I don't just look at starters. We can use as many frontliners as possible. We just don't need another SF. MManal, Can you describe what Reef does on offense that Mo' doesn't or can't. Nolen, "It's interesting to note how some players become such explosive scorers when they don't have to share with another superstar." I think the best example of all time is Larry Johnson. How does that awesome 20/10 player turn into average? No defense has something to do with it. Mango, If you give the Rockets Philly's frontline, we would indeed be better than them. I'm just such a huge proponent that going with defense is necessary and, thus, the safest way to make trades with our team as it is now. Crash, I'm bashing stats, because in my original post and the title of the thread, I asked for a scouting report on Reef. Scouting reports don't rely on stats. You don't scout players through box scores. Can anyone give me a scouting report without regurgitating things I can look up at nba.com? [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
All good points. I'm glad I am not Rudy T and CD. The team is at such a criticle part of its developement that this decision...what ever it is, could effect the direction and succes of the team for years to come. ------------------
For the sake of discussion in this dreamcasting scenario: 1. Where would the Rockets be right now if they had SAR for the entire 2000-2001 season? 2. Where would the Rockets be right now if they had Ratliff for the entire 2000-2001 season? The question refers to their place in the standings. I already know that the team is physically in Charlotte tonight for the game. Mango ------------------ Spring cleaning [This message has been edited by Mango (edited January 27, 2001).]
LOL. to answer your question: With Ratliff: We are a serious threat to have the best record in our division over the 2nd half of the season. And no one would want to play us in the playoffs. With SAR: We are a serious threat to unseat the Lakers for most games broadcast by NBC. We rarely lose to lesser talent, but have trouble searching for the intangibles to get you over the hump against the best teams. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited January 27, 2001).]
Oh, I think Aaron Williams and Jamal Magloire might also fit into those defense/rebounding roles. I would like to pry Magloire from Charlotte ... that would be nice. ------------------ snap crackle pop
Mango made a joke! At least his idea of one that is! Don't keep this up or it might ruin your image, though! Looks like Rattlif's stock has reached an all time high around here. I'm not sure he would be of much use against Shaq though... Now what is the record with Mutombo in the middle, might i ask...? ------------------ "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, Lynch and Hill are journeyman and TK is a role player scorer. MacCulloch is a good solid backup center. Geiger, Nazi, Snow and McKie are more journeyman and Ollie was picked up this season for nothing. The team feeds off the attention that defenses pay to Iverson. Ratliff is not known for creating his own shot, yet Philly is a solid team and Vancouver is a dog with SAR, Bibby and Dickerson. Tell me why Philly with one true star in Iverson, a defensive stud in Theo and a bunch of role players is a winner? Mango ------------------ Spring cleaning
How would Ratliff fair if he had to go against Malone, McDyess, Duncan, CWebb, Wallace and Garnett on a nightly basis. As it is he only gets them 10 times a year. The rest of the year he has to go against guys like Antoine Walker, Glenn Robinson and Jermain O'Neal. Not exactly the same class. And in the lowley east he only gets about 10 boards a game. Kind of makes me go hmmmm. Don't get me wrong I think he would improve our team with his high energy and his shot blocking ability. But how much better would our record be? In our current state 4 or 5 games maybe that I can point at. If Dream, Cato and Collier stay healthy, maybe not a game. As far as SAR...I just don't know. ------------------
As fas as saying "Shareef gets 3 assists a game," I'm just trying to say he's not a black hole, as the "can't-pass" remark seems to indicate. You make him sound like Yinka Dare. Hell, remember Othella? Try him as a no-passing forward. As far as "boxscore analytics," who actually sees Reef play much? Vancouver residents don't see him play much. What else do we have besides Rockets-Grizz games?. As far as chemistry? You don't know until you get him. We've had to play Kenny T at starting power forward, even starting center once. It doesn't get much worse than that. I'll take Reef if we can get him (w/o Reeves). Maybe the 3 on this team is less important, as you say. So start him at the 4. ------------------
They are 10-7 against the West: Victories: @Twolves @Portland @Vancouver @Utah @Warriors @Kings Seattle Spurs @Dallas @Houston Losses: @Spurs @Denver @Lakers Twolves Mavericks Utah Portland If the Rockets had the type of winning percentage against the West as Philly does, what would their record be? Also, Philly seems to have played more Western teams on the road than at home and they still are better than .500? One word: Research Mango ------------------ Spring cleaning [This message has been edited by Mango (edited January 27, 2001).]
"MManal, Can you describe what Reef does on offense that Mo' doesn't or can't." Skills wise there is none or very little difference on the offensive end. Shareef just does his thing more consistently w/o getting into continuous foul trouble. This is why Im not as gung-ho about acquiring this guy as others are and intrigued about getting a player like Swift who can do what Mo cant. However, if you can get Reef for spare parts and not compromise your cap room, I think you have to go for that and let Mo go on in free agency. I dont like the prospect of playing Reef and Mo together. Taking on Rahim and Reeves is out of the question also imho. ------------------ Check out the Best Source for Draft Info Draftsource.net
This is an interesting thread. But instead of saying "..why we love SAR", it should read "...why we live SAR enough to effectively trade away our cap space for the next 5 years". Reef, in a nutshell, is your classic inside-outside scorer who's capable of big rebounding games. He's a great ballhandler and open-court player, and could be a solid playmaker on a team with good finishers and open-court players. He's capable of playing the 3 or 4, though he may be better suited as a 4. He's a better low post player at this point than slasher, with good turnaround and face-up jumpers complimented by a solid jump hook coming to the middle, and his signature move is to dribble 2 to 3 times to the middle then dropstep baseline (sound familiar). He has a good middle distance game, is a solid free-throw shooter, and though slight of build is great at establishing position on the block. He's not quite a go-to man yet, but on a better team he can certainly grow into the role. The one main weakness in his game is his D. He gives decent effort and isn't a matador, but he has trouble with penetrators due to a lack of foot speed. What he probably should do is back off his man and make his shoot over the top, but with players like Hill and Finley manning the SF position, that's easier said than done. On a team with a solid defensive philosophy, he can be an AWESOME weakside defender, shot-blocker, and rebounder due to his athleticism, intellect, and size. Vs. Mo- Advantages: Better offensive player with more complete game. Natural low post player, one of the best pure low post games in NBA. Better shot-blocking instincts. Better rebounding skills. Disadvantages: Lacks Mo's size and strength. Mo's strength makes him a slightly better defender. He's more of a natural scorer, so there may be some shot distribution problems. Been in bad situation/team, so may take some time to fit in on winner (Mo had same problem earlier in season). Conclusion: Why do we love SAR? He's a better offensive player and rebounder with comparable defensive skills, and would give the Rockets a good low post option in the post-Dream era. Do we love SAR to effectively give away cap space for the next 5 years? Well, let me ask this; if you were the Rockets, and this was 4 years ago and you didn't know what we know now, would you have traded for CWebber? Now true, there is no guarantee that Reef will blow up as CWebb has, but he was described as having some of the same weaknesses (not a good passer, doesn't play with passion, just a stats player), and in a better situation with better talent he thrived. If there was an opportunity to trade for Webber and a cap albatross, with Barkley already in tow and the possibility to have cap space in the summer to pursue free agents, would you have made the deal? I say make the deal for Reef. He's a great talent with a load of talent and potential who would fit in beautifully with the current group of Rockets. He would give the team a solid low post option, and compliment the high-post game of Mo. If the Rockets obtain a defensive-minded C (Mutumbo, Woods), the Rockets would have one of the better frontlines in the league within 3 years. ------------------ "ON-BEE-TAH-BULL!!", Hakeem Abdul Olajuwon, alumnus, University of Houston
