In the '90s, the rap on the Rockets was that we were boring. We had the stoic Olajuwon in the middle and the seven dwarves playing off him. Dump it in, kick it out, Dream Shake, 3. We ran the same plays over and over, exploiting the same mismatches again and again. Why? Because they worked. We won routinely. We won the championship, and we bored people doing it. Hell, we bored ourselves. Now we have an exciting team. We have daring, highflying guards. We let them improvise and try to create mismatches at the perimeter. Why? Because we have no inside plays that work. We can try to blow by the defender at 20 feet, or we can shoot the J and hope we're hot that night. When we are, we win. When we're not, we have nothing to fall back on. Result: 20-36. Is Mo Taylor going to change that situation? Is Glen Rice? It's fun to watch this team. But the reason it's fun to watch them -- the improvisation, the risk-taking, the wild slashing and streaky shooting -- is the reason they rarely put together four quarters solid enough to win a game. And until we get a lot more boring and imposing in the middle -- please, Eddie, eat some steak -- we're going to be talking about how Steve did in the dunk contest this year and who might be available in the lottery.
Will, that's a good distinction between the two "eras". However,both offenses have one thing in common.....they lack imagination/purpose. Before it was dump it in to Dream/Chuckster and everyone else STAND AROUND and wait for a possible last second kick out for a desperation 3. Now it's hold the ball(or dribble,dribble if it's Mooch) on the perimeter waiting for a chance to drive your guy if he falls asleep. Meanwhile everyone else still STANDS AROUND waiting for a possible last second kickout for a desperation jumper. The only reason it seems more exciting now,IMO,is that when they do blow by someone it ends in a dunk,a mid air finger roll,or a dump off for a dunk. Hopefully we will acquire/develop a low post player to balance out the attack. But I still think alot of the blame falls squarely on Rudy's shoulders in both eras for lack of creativity/alternatives for when the offense isn't working. The Jazz managed to run a very efficient/effective/consistent offense for years without a true low post player. I know,I know what about Malone? Dream has correctly pointed out several times that Malone is not(or does not) play a real low post game despite his strength and reputation. He considers Malone more of a jump shooter who can bruise you along the way. The question is do we really have an offense with plays and purpose or is it just street ball?
The winning format had purpose, but no imagination. The current format has imagination but no purpose...
I don't think we're more exciting now than back then. Watching one guy walkup the court, dribble for a long time, then make a boneheaded play more often than not is frustrating as heck. At least when you dumped in to Hakeem in the good old days something good was bound to happen, and on defense, you might see something cool, too. The only thing cool happening on defense most days with the Rockets is the amazing shooting efficiency of our opponents.
I found the low-post offense to be very exciting. Rockets games were always exciting back then. That's because they always played hard on both ends of the floor. They just got better and better in every PLAYOFF game, and they won two titles. Winning two titles is VERY exciting!
I have to agree with ZRB. The low post offense was fun and exciting to me, because it featured Hakeem Olajuwon, who showcased some of the best low post moves anybody had ever and has ever seen. I suppose if Dream was like Shaq, and only backed it in, backed it in, plowed on through and slammed it, it might have gotten boring for me.
I don't know about anyone else, but I was far more excited when we were winning championships. Or at least winning. I would take that boring dump-it-to-the-low-post style any day over the every-play-is-a-highlight-reel-or-bust style we've got now. I would be just as happy to see it now with Eddie (or someone else) down there as I was seeing Hakeem do it.
The trouble with 'exciting' play is that it's often dangerous. For every spectacular play, how many turnovers are there? I would settle for simple and efficient.
The Rockets were exciting to watch back then because not only did we have a sweet outside game and good slashers, but we also had the ole reliable low post threat to keep defenses honest. Now we have to rely on athleticism to get us over and I think we can all agree that it's not. Give me the go-to guy that commands double teams and is willing to get his teammates involved to win games. This team can be exciting, but they have to learn to trust one another and want to be a team, rather than a bunch of individuals.
I find the current team pretty boring actually. If I weren't a fan I'd not be caught dead watching this team. The Mavs and Kings are where it's at as far as entertainment. They're a lot of fun to watch.
I don't know if I'm so damned competitive that my judgement is impaired, but I think that any time you're not winning it's boring. One of the reasons I say this is that no matter what style of team you have, the playoffs is the purpose for that style. However, my reasoning is flawed in cases where a team is building a future. Building for the future is exciting and I think we're just that. So I myself, am excited. Our three star players are young and we have no aging stars...there is a bright future ahead, let's just watch it unfold. Go Rockets!!!
It's only dangerous when you have no clue what you're doing. The most fun I've ever had watching basketball was watching Magic Johnson run a team, or more specifically, a fast break. The Lakers and Celtics of the 80's were exciting as hell, but they left the boneheaded play out of their offense. ... of course it helps having All-Stars and HOF'ers littered throughout your lineup.
Why do I get the feeling that winning always equates to exciting? The Rockets and Knicks were probably 2 of the most boring teams to watch for fans of other teams in the mid-90's. 1) Throw it in to Hakeem 2) Hakeem decides to shoot or pass out to the open man. 3A) Hakeem shoots, or 3B) Hakeem passes out 3B1) Open man shoots the jumper or we pass it around the 3 point line until someone open can jack one up. Someone usually translated to Kenny Smith, Robert Horry, or Vernon Maxwell. 4) Repeat as necessary. It won games. Winning games is exciting if you're a fan of the team. When you lose, there's nothing to really cheer about. If a Mavs fan comes to you, what are you going to do? Compare plays or compare records? It's not too exciting to compare the Rockets to anybody nowadays...
I would like to address this point. Are Mo and Rice going to change this situation? Probably a little, yes. The main thing that would change the situation, however, is Francis not missing 21 games. If he doesn't, the Rockets are around .500. Add Mo and Rice to that (mainly Mo), and the Rockets are at least a few games over .500. That's not bad. That's playoffs, something that wasn't expected of this team this year. Something tells me that would make the team a little less boring.
Let's not corrupt our terms. Satisfaction and excitement are two different things. Winning may equal satisfying, but it doesn't necessarily equal exciting. An exciting girlfriend is almost by definition one who seems just as likely to dump you tomorrow as to marry you or at least keep you happy over the longer term. That's just a sick fact of human nature. The question is whether you'd rather maximize your excitement or your long-term happiness. Same way with teams. Satisfaction is knowing that Hakeem is going to get the ball inside and take one of his three usual extremely high-percentage shots. Excitement is watching Steve or Mobley jack one up from 25 feet or try to blow by somebody and then figure out what to do with the ball when they run into traffic. When it works -- the bomb goes in, or Cato catches the alley-oop, or Steve lays it in and gets fouled -- it's very exciting. The Wizards game was very exciting. The trouble is, usually it doesn't work, at least not for four straight quarters. Give me Steve, Mo, and Rice, and it still doesn't work. Maybe it gets us to .500, but .500 won't cut it. The problem could be as simple as restoring the in-out dimension of our offense, a.k.a. Dump It In. Without that dimension, we're just stretching the zone a little here or there and hoping that having an extra six inches of space will allow Steve or Cuttino to make the 3. In the old days, we weren't talking about six inches. We were talking about Sam or Mario being flat-stinking wide open. And if Sam hit a 3 on the last possession, our threat wasn't that Mario would shoot the next one. Our threat was that if you kept your guards on Sam and Mario, Hakeem would shake you out of your shorts and lay it off the glass. That's the difference between a 35% likelihood of burning you and an 80% likelihood of burning you. We can't get back the old Hakeem. I don't expect an 80% shot any more. Just give me 55% or 60% from inside. Rice can't do it. Willis can't do it. Cato can't do it. Kenny can't do it. Mo can't do it. If we're lucky, in a year or two, Griffin can.
Even understanding your terms of 'exciting' and 'satisfying,' Will, I still think the championship teams were exciting. What about the dreamshake wasn't exciting? Hakeem's nimbleness and grace was every bit as exciting as Francis' acrobatics. But, besides that, if all it takes for a team to be 'exciting' is players doing crazy stuff and it working, then I'll do without the excitement. What made the championship Rockets a joy to watch was they played some great, fundamentally-sound basketball. And, on both ends of the court. Finally, I think critics of the Dump-it-in offense (I think someone abbreviated it DIT -- never figured out why) are straw-manning what we had. It was not just Dream and 3-point shooters. There were slashers; there were cutters. There was movement in the offense. That added to the 'excitement' of those seasons. A lot of that dried up the following year and especially with the trade for Barkley (when we lost a number of guys who knew how the offense worked). Obviously, the focus was on Olajuwon because he shot 20 times a game. But to say there was no movement ignores an important part of the offense.
I remember people from Dallas telling me how boring my Rockets championship teams were to watch...I always said I'd take boring and championships every year!!! Of course, when you win championships, there is nothing boring about it...not when it's YOUR team! The Mavs of that era were fairly exciting with Mashburn, Jackson and Kidd....but that made about zero difference in the standings! Someone said they "blame" Rudy for not being creative?!! are you serious!!!??? who the hell cares!!! that "uncreative" offense carried us to back-to-back championships!! you know how many other franchises would trade all that crappy flash for that??
No matter what, there'll be some people who complain that the rockets are too something no matter what they're doing. The grass is greener, and all that. I'd say, however, that some of this team's potential for excitement is limited by the fact that at times, and especially at the beginnings of games, it seems as though there is no clear idea about what to do. The combination of potential talent and lack of direction equals frustration. The championship teams' 'satisfaction' came for me from seeing a group of players that maybe wern't the most talented, always know what they were going to do. They knew where the doubleteam was comming from and what to do about it. This team seems to react more on instinct, and with less conviction. That having been said, they are in no way as pathetic as the early Hakeem Rockets, circa '88 when Hakeem would try to dreamshake his way into the triple team. Watching those games was positively painfull. For all of the 52 point nites, there were 10 foul-outs, and half a dozen 8 for 24 nights. Given time, however, the Rockets managed to come together as a team, and develop their skills individualy. After a few final personel tweaks, the team managed to become the teams we are all so fond of. Given that as a comparison, I'd imagine that the core group of players here simply needs time to mature and develop chemistry. As long as I see improvements, or at least tangable, uncontrolable reasons for lack of improvements (like Mo's freak injury), I'll keep watching, and supporting the team.
I loved the dump it down low to Hakeem and wait to see what happen days. Dream was freakin exciting to watch. Everytime he took that fadeaway I said "what the hell is he thinking", but it went in almost every time. That was exciting! Today its just freakin boring. Yeah its because of injuries, but also because we are a stupid team. I dont know why I'm a season ticket holder. I love the Rockets, but I hate the way they play.
What TheFreak said. With Francis... we're at .500. Now add Mo, an improved Griffin, perhaps Rice, and a lottery pick. What is that team? I think it's a #5 or #6 seed. Add Rashard Lewis, if we luck out... and that team would be capable of anything.
