i was talking about Physical talent. not which players or which team is better. i know battier is smarter and a better defender and than outlaw. I know is scola is tough as nails and aldridge is soft as tissue paper. i know yao is more skilled than oden and prybilla as of right now. but oden, oulaw and aldridge are more physical talented than their counterparts. being physically talented doesnt always means one is a better player. Eg: tmac and kobe. tmac is more physically talented but kobe plays a lot better.
How can a team that starts Przybilla, Batum, and Blake be "top to bottom" better than anyone? Some of you must be on crack today.
See now your being a ****ing idiot! ANd stupid too. You can disagree politely as you did at first or you can be an jackass as you are now. And what little respect I had for you is gone.
Athleticism does NOT = talent. otherwise,there will be whole lot team better than us,basketball isnt just running and jumping.
To the original poster and all that agree with him, I have one thing to say: Score. Board. Seriously, that's all that matters. And I think you forgot to think about defense when you were comparing the two teams.
Don't get upset because you got called out for being wrong. I've repeatedly pointed out statistically how you're wrong. How ridiculous your statement was. Yet, you steadfastly hold to your belief. Greg Oden can't even stay on the floor more then 5 minutes without picking up two quick fouls (and I'm not over-exaggerating, check out his game flows). It's not being rude, and it's certainly not being an idiot. It's pointing out the facts. Again, I don't know what games you're watching. If I had to guess, what's going on is that the series started and what little you've seen of Oden and from what you've heard made you think he has basically no talent...which isn't and has never been true. He is quite gifted athletically. And has a TON of potential. So he's likely outperformed your expectations...which somehow in your mind makes him a top 10 center. I understand it's your opinion...it's just not a very good one...sorry.
You also noted in that post that Fernandez is a better shooter than Wafer...is shooting part of physical talent? By your definition, in the Fernandez vs. Wafer comparison, Wafer is actually the one with much more "physical" talent. And does "physical" talent include height or strength - in which case Yao isn't really that much less "physically" talented (if at all) than Oden (who is clearly quicker and a better jumper, but also is shorter and weighs less), and Artest isn't at much of a disadvantage "physically" against Roy (Roy is quicker, more mobile, better jumper...Artest is taller, bigger and considerably stronger). And you ignored Brooks vs. Blake, as I pointed out. And you finished with: The only reason we are up 3-1 is we have won through smarts, hustle, and hard work while their losses can be atrributed due to inexprience. they could have easily won the last two game. but inexprience during key times cost them the game. so it's really not that clear what you're trying to say?? The Blazers have more "physical" talent, so since they're not winning the series the Rockets must just be trying harder and playing smarter..??? Um, where do the actual important talent categories fit into all this. You know, shooting, rebounding, ball-handling, passing, defense, etc. I kind of see what I think you think you're trying to argue...but I don't really think you even know what you're trying to argue. You certainly haven't thought it through. On a pure athletic ability alone stand-point - I'm thinking an NFL combine type thing - I'd probably agree that the Blazers players would have better results...though again, let's not forget height, weight, strength type measurements that are also important...
As if the perception around the nation wasn't enough, now we have our own fans blind to the talent on our team. While I certainly agree that the Blazers have a lot of young talent on their squad right now that COULD develop into a nasty scary team, right now that talent is NOT developed, and they are NOT scary. Roy is awesome, but the rest of his team ain't at his level yet. Even if they did manage to get past us, I've seen more than enough to be confident in knowing that there is no way in hell that they would make the Finals this year. And Aldridge is soft as hell.
Swift is more talented than scola so he must be better? Portland has 2 good players, after that a bunch of role player very similar to the rockets.
LMAO... nice work. People should just chillax and admit that we have been outplaying them since the first game of the year. So the OP is completely wrong. Future is future, in the future Memphis MIGHT beat us too coz of their talent pool. BUT WHO CARES ABOUT THE FUTURE.
Talent is not about scoreboard. And I was only talking about talent. Not how you utilize that talent. The scoreboard is a reflection of effort and coaching desire and much more. Talent doesn't always win. Look at the 2004 Olympic team. No one questions we had more talent but we lost. Look at Phi Slama Jama vs the tarheel and Jimmy Valvono. Look at T-Mac.Talent doesn't always show up on the w column So to restate my point in 2 parts, first I feel that the Blazers, who had 1 of the top 4 best records after the all star break and beat the lakers handily the last 2 times they faced and overtook us in the end of the season to win homecourt advantage are slightly more talented than us. I am not saying it is a big discrepancy but there is some. That is my opinion. Second in spite of their talent if we come out and play with the intensity we are capable of and we do not think we can take a break because we have 3 shots at these guys we can finish them off on tuesday. That is all. Nothing more
I think some of you guys are confused about athleticism and basketball talent. Being more athletic doesnt mean you are more talented. Is Greg Oden more athletic than Yao? Of course, but he may never develop the low post or shooting touch of Yao. There is more to the game of basketball than athleticism. Ever seen a game Bird or Magic played? They did not have the athleticism of many players but they had the fundamentals and high bball IQ. The NBA as a whole is not played at the same level as the 80s and 90s as people are caught up with athleticism instead of fundamentals.
At first I just thought you were equating physical ability with talent and i tended to agree with you. But to say their top players are better? No. The weak link in your arguement is Aldridge. He is good and may one day be all world, but right now he looks like the same guy I used to watch play for UT. A big man that would prefer to stay outside and shoot then bang. As far as Yao vs Roy goes, I think that Yao is the better player. I think this comparrison is open to depate, but I look at it this way. If Yao scores 30 against Portland the odds are we won. If Roy scores 30 against Houstons the odds are still 50/50 we won. Houston has not had to alter their basic defensive package to handle Roy and Aldredge. Porland has changed defenses three times by my count to neutralize Yao and have only impacted his scoring. In the meantime those adjustments have lead to open scoring for other Rockets and a loss of their defensive rebounding. I do understand what you mean though, so I don't think your crazy. I just think your pushing it a bit far. We do need to play, though. We let down for one minute and Portland will still take this series. I may not agree they're better than us, but they're good enough. Take them out in Portland guys. Im not that desparate to see the Blazers play in Houston again.
Hard players vs skilled players. The blazers might be skilled players than us but thank to Oden and Pryzbilla who get tank by Yao on the paint and hard nose players of the rockets, we out gun blazers!
it's about the team, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts........back in the spurs glory years, it was basically tim duncan, tony parker and ginobili were probably half the players back then......they were rarely the most talented team out of the west those years.
The Blazers - good jump shooting team The Rockets - scrappy team Yes to the Blazers: shooting athleticism length youth depth No to the Blazers: no post weak defense less hustles Yes to the Rockets: Yao hustle defense No to the Rockets: no length not as deep as the Blazers no athleticism average shooting
I think the potential of the Blazers is clouding the judgment of the reality of where they really are at this point. In reality, they are not better than the Rockets, right now, potentially, they are, but not yet.
You forget the most important part of a team:Coach. We have a better coach for sure. Portland's coach is very naive. He thought that he can defend Yao from behind and gave the first game to Rox.
