Scar, I understand what you say. All projections are just that--projection. They are not predictions. Projections are based on past trends and in effect say, "If everything works just like the past, this is what will happen." We all know that everything doesn't work just like the past. So, I am not predicting that the Rockets will finish at 42-40. But the trends do point to something noteworthy. The most alarming, of course, is that we have yet beaten a winning team on the road. Another trend is that we played worse against bad team than against good teams at home. If we don't get away from these two trends, we are doomed.
Geez, that's convincing! Saying that Joe Smith being a #1 pick puts the Wolves on par talent wise with the Rockets is crazy. Joe Smith hasn't done anything in the NBA. But if you need convincing, the Wolves ALWAYS collapse at the end of the season, and this time there is actually more then 8 teams playing for the playoffs. In the past it was basically 8 teams in the West battling for seeding, this year the Wolves are actually going to have to finish strong, and Terrell Brandon is done for the season, even the players have said that, and his career is likely over. Good luck!
I think it's unfair to judge this Rockets team by the games they have won thus far. This is a very young team that is continuously learning and building chemistry. As matter of fact, I'm sure that most of you would agree that the Rockets team at the beginning of this season looks completely different than the Rockets of the last couple of weeks (good and bad). I bet the Rockets will improve not only their road record, but also the way they win games. I say Minnesota and Phoenix both trip and the Rockets take the sixth seed. That may just be wishful thinking, but we'll see. Most of this depends on how Yao feels. If he gets too tired, you can throw all of what I have said out the window.
<b>But the trends do point to something noteworthy. The most alarming, of course, is that we have yet beaten a winning team on the road. Another trend is that we played worse against bad team than against good teams at home. If we don't get away from these two trends, we are doomed.</b> People forget, the Suns and Wolves are as bad on the road as the Rockets. The Rockets have had games where they could have won on the road, Phoenix, San Antonio, even Minnesota. They also took New Orleans into overtime when New Orleans was undefeated at home. Also keep in mind the teams the Rockets are playing on the road, only a few are quality teams. They play Portland on the road once I believe, Utah twice, Phoenix once, LA once, Minnesota once, San Antonio once, Detroit once, New Jersey once, Sacramento once. That may seem like a lot, but that is 10 games out of the 36 games the Rockets have left. So if the Rockets can take care of business in the "should win" games while winning about 4 games on the road against the top teams they should be fine. Hopefully it starts tonight.
I don't agree with the talent argument. We are talking about the basketball talent, not the athletic talent. In that sense, I just don't see how the Rockets are more talent than the Spurs, or the Wolves. When talk talent for a team sports, you need to think about how a player functions within the whole system. Many Rockets fans consider Francis is more talent than Kidd because of his athletism, but every GM/Coach in the league think the other way around (see nba.com poll). Another example is Bird within the Celtics system. Talent is the whole package as a bball player, not just 1on1 scoring ability.
I DID pick the Wolves to finish 9th! I just think the Wolves are just as talent as the Rockets. Joe Smith was very good the few years he was with GS. He was screwed by that contract conspiracy, which I think still effects his play to this day. I can image the pressure on him when everyone is talking about the cost the Wolves suffered to get him. The Wolves must saw something you didn’t since they committed that much money to him.
I know what you are saying. I just remember about 2 years ago doing someone elaborate projections based on the probability of victory for each game. For instance going into this game tonight you might say we should win only 1 out of 3 or 4 (.33 or .25--given we are playing a roughly equal team on the road) and you could add all such probabilities the rest of the way to generated an expected W-L record. My approach failed miserably. The problem is each game is not independent, and the probabilities are conditional--in a sense conditional on how well we are playing. Now whether we are playing a good team, whether that team is hot or cold, healthy or injured, whether the game is on the road, whether it is a back-to-back for one of the teams, etc.--for the most part those average out across the teams we are competing with at this point (at the worst these factors could make a 2-3 game negative swing out of like 35 games) and you are left with the main factor of simply how well we are playing. On the former, we very easy could be 3-6 versus good teams on the road, which isn't bad. I guess I am saying here a trend based on fairly dispersed 9 games, even if 0-9, is not that solid given with just a few more heady plays in games we really should have won we could be 3-6. I agree it is a little troubling, all I am saying is if we played with a little more focus and with Yao being a solid contributer we could just as easily go 4-4 in our next road games versus good teams--the margin of W-L is that close. I am actually more troubled by the loses against bad teams at home. Because that should not happen but at most 10% of the time with a team as talented as the Rockets. We do need to fix that--if we are focused and healthy we will. I still stand that we are more talented than SA or Minnesotta. Without their two main players those teams are right with Denver and Cleveland--they really suck. The only starting Rocket that would not start for the Spurs is Griffin. Same is also true for the Wolves--though I am not sure about Posey (though I would suspect they had him they would start him with KG at PF and Wally at the other swing position with Smith out). IMO Cato, Mot, Tmo, Moochie and Hawkins also collectively make a better bench than either SA or Minn has. In sum I do think we are more talented than either team--we just havn't utilized our talent fully nor have Francis or Yao been as consistent of a leader or player to get us out of our ruts like Duncan (especially) and KG have been able to do. But we start getting the play of Yao to be consistent like KG or TD--we should be able to toast those teams.
Olay, take Yao & Francis away, you get a team better than Deven or Cleveland? The only two players can start for those two teams are Yao & Francis. If Parker plays for the Rockets, he will start as PG, Francis will play SG. Outside of Houston, not many people consider Mobley a starting SG on a good team. The Rockets do have a deep bench, but Yao can only provide 20+ good minutes, so Cato really is half a starter in that sense. We have a different definition for talent. If you don't know how to function in a team environment, I won't rank your talent that high in my book. You are talking about individual athletics ability, not bball talent. You need look no further than the Blazers history. Fans thought they were the best/most talented team as far as back in 1990, what have they won? Nothing! They are talented athletes, not talented bball players.
I don't agree on this point. People don't describe Houston as having one of the best back courts in the NBA just becuase of Francis. Mobley is starting for any team that doesn't have an all-star at SG.
There is not much doubt that Mobley would be an ungrade over Smith and Jackson in SA. Wally World/Mobley is highley debatable as to which one would start. Parker would play the Moochie Norris role on our team. Rudy would not bench Mobley and put Francis at SG in order to incorporate Parker into the starting lineup. Which backcourt is better: Francis/Parker or Francis/Mobley? Mobley would be an upgrade on all of the following "good" teams: New Jersey (Kittles) Indiana (Miller) Utah (Cheaney) Minnesota (Sczerbiak) - debatable Mobley is a top 15 SG and arguably, top 10. Yao has averaged 30+ minutes since the beginning of December (around 33 MPG). Cato is a max, 20 min per game player right now.
OkAY. I didn't read the thing about who could start on other teams and whatever. But I think Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley, James Posey, Eddie Griffin, and Yao Ming could all be starters on other teams. I'm not very clear. If Parker played for the Rockets?!? Golly! Mobley is much better than Parker. Parker may be a nice Frenchmen...I speak French, but NO. I would rather have Francis/Mobley, an already known good backcourt...one of the best backcourts...THEN TONY PARKER!!! But if we had all three of them, that would be great. Tony could replace Moochie. A MUCH IMPROVED REPLACEMENT. Outside of Houston, NOT MANY PEOPLE CONSIDER CUTTINO MOBLEY AS A GOOD SHOOTING GUARD?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? GOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY! That is hilarious. Mobley is better than Sczerbiak. Most people know Wally after seeing him in the playoffs. But I believe Mobley is better. Does anyone have stats? Also, The Rockets DO have a deep bench. I love our bench. They are somewhat inconsistent, but they have been doing very well. I think our bench is very good. Our team is very good overall. Our bench cannot be compared to teams like Dallas and Sacramento, though. Their bench would WHOOP our bench. But our bench is still pretty good compared to other teams. And Cato will still be playing a lot...I hope. Yao will also play more...hopefully. Maybe he and Cato can play more together!
You are taking 2 player away instead of 1. If you take either Francis or Yao off this team, we could still be competetive. It is actually the other way around. The only people bashing Cat like crazy are Houston fans, mostly because we watch him every game and pick on him like crazy. Most other teams realize that despite his ball-hogging tendencies, he is a legit scoring threat. tal·ent - A marked innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment. Whatever you think talent is, it is flat out wrong. They were talented b-ball players who had no chemistry. Often, if given another enviorment, they can still flourish. Clyde ended up winning a championship didn't he. Under you definition, Barkley must have must have been a very non-talented b-ball player, hell he played 17 years and won nothing.
Right now, the Blazers still have a VERY ATHLETIC AND TALENTED TEAM!!! For a while, they seemed to get it. They won 8 in a row...they seemed like the Mavericks. Now they have settled down. They are still ranked pretty high though. They will never win a championship. I hope not at least. SCOTTIE PIPPEN WINNING ANOTHER CHAMPIONSHIP?!? NO!!!!!!!!!!!! Betrayal. I guess you're right. We all pick on Moochie, but he's never going to leave. We just diss him because we see him screw up all the time. I would rather have Mobley than Parker.
