SF seems to be out MOST GLARING weakness The problem is their are not Super Free Agent SFs [unless you cound Allan Houston] Anyone know what Allan's contract looking like these days. Rocket River ------------------
according to who...your Sega Genesis game. I don't look at it from a position standpoint, since Rudy does not ever mind mismatches. Rudy demands shooters, the taller the better...hence his ability to get Walt, Bullard, Collier into the action, and his selection of Langhi and KT who was undersized, but who he chose for shooting relative to other PFs available. Rudy loves shooters like himself. He has also said recently that he wants to "attack the zone". This followed a quote where he said "I expect some teams to field 3 7'ers." Don't be suprised to see Collier, Dream, Langhi playing some minutes together next year. He also wants big bangers/shotblockers, hence the big, quick Cato contract. To me it is simple: Rudy will pass on anyone who can't shoot, (just like Bobby Knight would do). High post fundamentals and players who can drive a crease when the perimeter is over guarded work as well. But everyone must be able to shoot. As much as I want him to take almost any 6'10 or better intimidator/rebounder...I don't think he will. He wants shooters/passer/drivers. As much as he loves defense, I think maybe he realizes that with SF/CM/Mo'/KT as mainly perimeter/face-up creators and little defensive muscle on the bench that he must go offensive and get more shooters....the taller the better. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 17, 2001).]
I agree with Heypartner. We need big men. There is no guarantee that any of the draftees can start. So go for what we need. Go for rebounders and shotblockers. Take the best two or three. E.g. Johnson? from Ohio State, Heywood, or Alvin Jones from Georgia. There's a good chance that one of them can beat out Collier and probably Cato if he doesn't shape up. (Alone among the board I remain hopeful). Maybe the competition will light a fire under Cato. Last year we would have made the playoffs with some more shotblocking and rebounding. The perimeter is ok, with our existing palyers. Why fight the obvious, go with size. ------------------
Hey P I think that all changes with the zone. In previous years with the zone in effect, we would space the floor kick it in to Dream and he kicks it back out to the person they doubled off of. Now with the zone they can just sit in between and the only way to beat that is with speed and athleticism. The NBA doesn't want Shaq doing what he is doing. Thus the zone rule changes. I don't think a SF is more important than a center. A center will always be the best position to have strength in but the caliber of center out there in this draft unless we have pick #1-3 is not that high. This is a SF loaded draft and I think a SF is better adapt to give an impact right away vs. a C. ------------------ ``We need to FOCASS".... Akeem Olajuwon
Scarface, Sounds like you want to bet...hehe Speed and athleticism is already on this team! Including Shandon. Your solution is to get someone 1 or 2 inches taller than Shandon who does the same thing???? You think you are going to land a Shandon with Rick Fox 3-point shooting? Is that too hard to find in any draft? You say this draft is loaded with SFs. I read it as also loaded with some tall shooters, all better than Collier. I read Rudy as wanting more 6'10+ shooters since the speed and athleticism is already on this team. I read Rudy passing on Jefferson, because he wants to attack the zone with an NBA-best offense, knowing he realistically can't expect to turn this team into a great defense in one draft, but 6'10-7'0" shooters can help out of the gate. Leaving all personal preferences aside (e.g. I love defense), we just can't change ourselves into great defense with a SF. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 17, 2001).]
HP, It sounds to me like you think Shandon will resign. Do you? Or do you think the Rockets can convince him to not opt out of the last year of his contract? ------------------
double post ------------------ [This message has been edited by tacoma park legend (edited May 17, 2001).]
As I see it, This is the current roster Cato Collier KT Langhi Mobley Francis Moochie (hopefully resigns) The rockets will have either Mo or Webber. With KT as backup, the PF spot is set with good shooters. Murphy is a Rudy player in the draft, but I think the rockets will be fine at the 4. Collier's got good range for a center. The rocks are stuck with Cato, who may be decent in a zone like at Iowa State. I hope hakeem signs. I could see the rockets trying to add someone here, but i don't see it in the draft at #13 or in FA. I see Jason Collins at 22 if the rockets keep this pick. A shooter as centers go. At SF, there is battier. Another Rudy player. Can Shoot. Can play defense. Can Rebound. I would think he's at the top of Rudy's list, bar none. Jefferson is okay, but doesn't shoot well enough for my taste. Please move up and take Bat. Langhi is the only one I see in the long term plan of the rockets as a SF. Mobley will get some minutes here, but the rockets need another player here as Francis, Cat, and Moochie are the only players that will be in the rotation at the 1, 2, and 3 positions next season. So unless they play 48 min for 82 games-this is the biggest need. I can also see the rockets getting another SG. Rudy has no problem going to a three guard set if it offers an advantage to the Rockets. The zone can help cover up some height disadvantage on the perimeter since the inverted offense doesn't work well. The SG would be drafted to play the 3. ------------------
Joe Joe Why is Walt off your team? Bullard? Discounting Rogers....We currently have 5 people who have played significant SF minutes or are promised minutes (for 1 position)...Mobley, Shandon, Walt, Langhi, Bullard. We currently have 5 people to play PF/C minutes (2 positions)...Dream, Cato, Mo', KT, Collier.
Murphy is 6'10'' or 6'11 and can shoot and has an inside game but is too slow for the PF spot.Loren Woods has decent range and is tall and also is a good free thrower,but is too fragile both physically and mentally to play center. Jefferson is a streaky shooter who needs to keep on working on his outside shot but is a solid all round player and might be available with our lottery pick because Battier will be gone long before we are on the board.Joe Johnson and Rodney White both can shoot and are fairly tall,but I think Jefferson would be the first choice for SF for the Rockets in the absence of Battier.I also think Bradley and Haywood are the dark horses for the 13th pick,but Murphy is more likely to be picked before Bradley.The Rockets in my opinion are much more likely to draft a PF or a C in the draft rather than a small forward.Jason Collins and Ken Johnson are much better fits with the 22nd pick as centers than Alvin Jones. ------------------
Please Rudy, just this once, draft a banger rather than a shooter. The Rockets need toughness. ------------------ The Protrolls.com message boards! Protrolls.com! Don't visit my site.
Murphy is as close to a banger who might be available at the 13th pick,but will considerably slow down the Rockets offense.We should go for a SF with the 13th pick and either Ken Johnson or Jason Collins with the 22nd pick. ------------------
How about if, just for "what if" fun, Rudy traded the two second rounders back to Chicago for 290-lb Dalibor Bagaric, the 7'1" 20-year-old project center they never got to use because they picked up Brad Miller. ------------------
Someone needs to explain to me why a PF or SF is more of a priority than a 5. 1) Dream is a FA with a posturing agent. 2) Cato is full of potential but brings his A-game with every full moon. 3) Collier was a trade down and never intended to be Dreams' succesor. 4) Although we regurlarly "trade" Cato here at CC.net his REAL market value is very small. Right now, Cato & Collier are the only C's under contract. 5) Drafting a PF creates a glut with or without Webber. Having Langhi (or Collier) ride the pines is one thing, but having #13 in a deep draft trying to get minutes behind C-Webb/MoT and KT is another story. 6) Having another PF does not improve an S&T with the Kings as the draftees can't be traded until after the season starts. 7) If you draft a PF because he is "best available" and has future trade value how do you get him minutes to display his talents? Plus the trade value is in the EC as the West is loaded at that posistion. Taking a PF at 13 is a luxury and a risk (with the possible exception of Michael Bradley who may be able to play some 5 and has range ala LaFrentz). The case against a SF: 8) There are proven SF's (or swingmen) available - Eddie Robinson, Adrian Griffin, Chris Herren, Doug Christie, Corliss Williamson, Anthony Mason, Aaron MvKie. Most are cost prohibitive, but we have not signed Webber (or Mo, or Dream) yet. 9) Rashard Lewis is available after the 2001 season. He is agruably better than any SF in the 2001 draft at #13. 10) The teams still playing BBall have Shaq, D-Robb, Mutombo, A. Davis, E. Campbell, and Earvin Johnson at the 5. We need someone at LEAST as good as E. Johnson. If we truly want to be a player for Chris Webber and/or we want to make a serious run at the Finals, we need a SOLID Center. Then again, if the Rockets have a pre-arranged deal with the Nuggets to get LaFrentz I don't care who they draft!!! ------------------ That's my story and I'm stickin' to it! [This message has been edited by GATER (edited May 18, 2001).]
HP I don't see Walt as a rocket in two years. He got dropped out of the SL last year and will be phased out of the rotation this year, IMO. I think he is the guy that can be most easily upgraded. My gut tells me Shandon will opt out and leave-I would in his position. Rogers will be a salary cap cut. Bull will pick up most of his minutes next year at the PF spot, and in my opinion is only used at the SF when the matchup falls in his favor. Langhi still hasn't shown me he's ready, but could be a contributer this season, more likely next. I have a very pessimistic view of the abilities of Walt (too inconsistent) and Shandon. Those being Walt sux and Shandon doesn't fitas a third guard/SF. ------------------
HP has made some excellent points but ... The Rocks highest priority has got to be drafting a 4/5 who can rebound. Low post players don't need 3 point range, but HP is right when he wrote that Rudy wants shooters. Thus, I will also say that besides being a dominant rebounder this low post player must have a reliable 10-15' shot. Having better low post rebounding will allow our guards to run the fast break, which will be more important next year with the zone. The Rock's second priority will be to draft a starting quality 3, since Shandon is likely to be leaving for greener pastures. ------------------
My problem with drafting a C is simple - they all suck. HP: what C that will be available in the draft past 10 is more valuable than Richard Jefferson? I really can't imagine any of them being very productive. I agree: C is the biggest problem on the team. I think that "need" drafting ususally ends in disappoinment down the road, however. ------------------ I would believe only in a God who could dance. - Friedrich Nietzsche Boston College - NCAA Hockey National Champions 2001
I agree with Haven and Saleem. The rockets may need a center more than Sf, but the rockets need a good SF more than a stiff. Unless a center falls to #13, I see them taking a SF. I like Jason Collins, but there is little reason to take him 13th as he won't upgrade the center spot that much whereas a horse like Jefferson, johnson could turn the SF spot into a strong point. ------------------
Come on Haven, bet me....Joe Joe is putting his moniker where his mouth is. No way Rudy takes a 6'6" defensive stud who is slightly more athletic than Shandon (ie can jump higher) with even less proven offense. ------------------ Heypee's Bet Your Moniker Game, <a href="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/Forum3/HTML/012870-2.html">(bet me here gurus)</a>: <font size="1">SF is not top priority...A 3rd String PG will make the team over even Langhi being replaced. 1. If a 3rd PG is not on the roster, I lose my moniker, or 2. If we upgrade the SF for the longterm, I lose my moniker. 3. But, if a 3rd PG makes the roster, and no major addition at SF, you lose your moniker. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 18, 2001).]
