I vote to keep Rafer, I think with all the compettition for the PG spot and the limited minutes available...we're gonna see these guys bringing their "A" game more often, since there won't be any room for error. There's nothing wrong with a little friendly competition...
Thanks for telling us. Now that your vote is in we can wrap up all this silly "TRADE RAFER" talk. Since we have about forty people on the roster, who would you "vote" that we trade or waive?
Trading with the Celtics is easiest right now, they are in need of a bunch of cheap players (2nd team) and the ROX has all of those i.e. JLIII, Novac, Alston, Reed, Snyder, JTsak, Newley, Harris, Butler. The main problem is that they do not have anything that the ROX would want any time soon.
I like Sean and am happy to see stuff he writes, even if it's 2 years old. Way to dig for that article. That said, taking an opinion column that is focused on refuting the notion that A/T is not a good enough defense for a single player (Jason Williams) in no way, shape, or form, serves as proof that ATR is "the big statistical lie" No stat, on it's own, serves as a good way to rank every player, not even PER. You need to take everything into account, then boil it down with some sense and actual observation to come up with a knowledgeable, but still not clear-cut, idea of who's better than who. In my post, I ran down several different aspects of Rafer's game. If I had simply put out the ATR for him, Steve, and Mike, and stated "case closed," you'd be on target to argue that I was on shaky ground, just like Deveney's semi-sloppy piece. Some big problems with his article: If ATR is a bad yardstick, why couldn't he give more examples of good PGs with bad ATR or bad players with good ATR? Maybe Jason is an exception to the rule? He mentions Billups, who last year had a 3.6 ATR and a career 2.7; Baron Davis: career 2.7 atr. That's damn good. An ATR above 1 is good for non-guards, above 2 is good for points. Parker is a career 2.2 ATR. Jason Williams is a career 2.7 atr after riding his Memphis years with an atr in the mid-3s. He tosses in Iverson because of his high FTA, but any NBA fan that knows his stuff should be able to tell you that AI, great scorer that he is, is not someone you want running the team at the 1 spot (ATR of 1.7). To suggest that the FTAs serve as a better marker is asinine - and only fits his argument in that he was down on Williams as an interior threat and listed 3 points that are major scoring options as his ulterior examples. He seems to feel that FTAs above 4 are what you need, but what about Kirk Hinrich's 3.1 (atr of 2.7)? Is he a not an above average point? Does it do justice to Jason Kidd (3.6 FTA vs 2.7 atr)? Again, I do like Sean. But his argument only works well within his own select examples and criteria. It falls apart badly if you look to see if it works with a larger selection of good vs bad points. I can guarantee that you'll see that ATR is a better yardstick for PGs far more often that FTAs. All stats have exceptions, and no one stat is ever good as a all-deciding determinant. That's all Sean needed to say in his piece about Jason Williams. Evan
Either that, or we're going to have a chemistry problem - guys will start complaining about minutes. Sometimes it's not the more the better.
Um, you might try re-reading. All those moves have us sending out more money than we get back, in the 1.1-1.3 million savingsrange (probably doubled savings consider lux tax). Further, there is usually even more savings long term because Rafer's contract is longer than most of the key principals I discussed taking back. What I am proposing is basically taking on a slightly inferior assets for Rafer to save some money, thin out our roster, and yet hopefully get a vet PF who could be usefull on the bench. Heck, the Foster deal would also allow us to not-resign Deke because he is also a back-up C--not that I wholeheartly in favor of this route. But if another 1-2 mil has to go ON TOP of taking Foster for a package of Rockets worth 1.1-1.3 million more, well, I could understand. Alston + Snyder (6.9 mil) for Foster (5.7 mil) and then not resigning Deke (save about 1.5 mil). This move would save us about 2.7 mil form where we currently stand if we resign Deke, over 5 mil considering lux tax.
Maybe we could deal him to Denver for Najera. The salaries match and Najera is an expiring and clearly Denver could use him. Of course the problem is Denver doesn't want $15 million over 3 years for an expiring. But that would be a good deal for us.
News from the USA Men's National Team Practice Scrimmage regarding our very own Aaron Brooks...Courtesy of Slamonline...http://slamonline.com/online/2007/08/live-from-the-team-usa-saturday-scrimmage/ "The Seniors even tried to put a full-court press on, perhaps to rattle the young Aaron Brooks. However, Brooks, the quickest player on the floor, handled it with ease. He had a few nice drive-and-dishes, and knocked down a J. If he can do this against the best of the best, Houston should be happy with what he brings them." Doesn't sound like a JL3 Redux to me...Even though you are right in one aspect. Rafer is better than what we have seen...and if he is, Rick Adelman is definitely the right coach to bring his potential to the forefront.
Exactly. I know people are saying that Rafer gives us depth at the PG spot, etc., etc., but the Rockets have to clear a roster spot. That's the bottom line. And trading Rafer for something very little in return would help that a ton.
Per ATR (Assit/TO), PGs are worse than Rafer (ranks #30) last season: T.J. Ford Jamaal Tinsley Earl Boykins Speedy Claxton Luke Ridnour Stephon Marbury Mike James Leandro Barbosa Jarrett Jack Tony Parker Derek Fisher Carlos Arroyo Devin Harris Mo Williams Mike Bibby Gilbert Arenas Jameer Nelson Bobby Jackson Steve Francis Marcus Banks Per FTA(Free throw attempts) : PGs worse than Rafer (#29): Per FTA Luke Ridnour Mike James Jason Williams Eric Snow Speedy Claxton Chris Duhon Jason Hart Marcus Banks Steve Blake Gary Payton I'd prefer FTA to ATR.
I haven't seen any points that actually said why Rafer should stay and get minutes at the expense of Wells, Francis, James, Head, Brooks, Battier, Snyder (ALL of whom would get less PT because of this) - I've seen a lot of plus and minus posts about good and bad of such players, but does anyone have any reason why Rafer should stay and play and thusly ALL these other players should all have their minutes cut? Not just an explanation that certain people think Francis "sucks" or James "sucks" or whatever and therefore should be benched for Alston, but actually as to why ALL those players should get less PT just to keep Alston? Why a player who plays a spot that isn't even needed on the team, that's highly debatable as to whether he's as good or better as two others at his same spot......should be kept just to lower PT of so many other players like Wells, Head, Battier, Snyder all who do something DIFFERENT than him? An argument more well constructed than "well Francis is just like Head." An argument more convincing than "Rafer is looking to dribble without turnovers." If so, and if more creative than just "Francis turns it over" which is so far about the most insightful argument, then I will be really impressed.
Prepare to be impressed. Here are my reasons why Rafer has to stay: 1.) Les loves to pay luxary tax to keep as many players as possible; 2.) SF, Mike James, Brooks will get injuries during the season. 3.) Adelman could be fired and JVG could be back. you don't want to use Battier or Scola to get Rafer back. 4.) Rafer led Rockets to 52 wins last season. 5.) Dumbs teams like Knicks and Minni are done their moves.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/stati...plit=0&season=2007&seasontype=2&avg=pg&pos=pg So in your mind, Steve Nash is a below average starting PG? Seriously, assists and Assist/Turnover ratio have been the defining stats for point guards for a long time for a good reason.
Was there something in that post that you actually disagree with? Obviously the comment about 8 assists was heavy with sarcasm, but there is a certain amount of truth to it. Rafer may have a good assist to turnover ratio, but that is a product of two primary reasons: 1) He is EXTREMELY conservative in his passing. Rafer does not drive & dish, he does not run the pick & roll, he does not pass to cutters, and he does not pass to the interior (excluding lobs). 75% of his passes are after he has stopped his dribble and passes it to someone who is standing still. That includes lobs to Yao, and passes outside the 3-point line to players outside the 3-point line (AKA - a waste of time). Possibly 5% of his passes are to players who are actually in shooting position or are moving to shooting position and open. 2) McGrady was the point guard when it counted. Rafer rarely handled the ball in serious pressure situations. The most he would do is take the ball across the court and hand it to McGrady to run a half court set. When his responsibilities were increased (McGrady out of game), the Rocket's offense plummeted in efficiency. ------------ The absolute best defense of Rafer's play would be that he was shackled by the offensive style of the team. Other than that, his A/T ratio was insignificant. At his best, he didn't lose games. At his worst, he single handedly shot us out of wins. You could count the wins that Rafer made a significant contribution to on one hand.... and none were in the playoffs. The remainder of that post is dead on. With Rafer on the court, the offense played 4 on 5. He couldn't shoot and couldn't make a layup.
Actually, that's not true at all. Alot of Rafer's passes come early in the clock when the defense isn't set. He's also very good at outlet passing. But his lack of shotmaking ability reduces his effectiveness at passing in a half-court set, so you rarely see him do any drive-and-dish. Basically he was the "Ryan Bowen" on offense, so once the defense keyed in and he had the ball it was basically shoot or ... swing the ball around. Unfortunately, yes.
