I saw the link posted in another thread, but I thought there was some good stuff here and it was deserving of its own thread. Thanks to Tom Martin for the interview. I'll post some snippets below that caught my interest, but other topics (e.g. T-Mac) are also discussed. http://www.thedreamshake.com/2009/7/23/958916/the-dream-shake-interviews [rquoter] TM: Do you have a favorite team that you've covered, Rockets-wise? That's a good question. Covering this last team was something that I really enjoyed because it was such an interesting season. It was a really incredible team to work with. But it's hard to say. Any team with Charles Barkley on it might just do it. He was such a leader in the clubhouse for the first few years I was covering the team. I tend to think that covering the championship teams, even though I was part of the playoff coverage (...) I got to cover those teams, but I wasn't the beat guy so (...) I have fond memories of those early teams. They were a lot of fun. Hakeem was such an incredible gentleman. He would thank you for interviewing him. There was a time when I was in New Jersey and all the New York media wanted to talk to Hakeem that night, and one by one they asked me what his "policy" was - does he talk before games? I remember telling them all that not only would he talk before the game, but that he would thank you for interviewing him. He did, one after another. (...) Any of those teams were just great to cover. ... TM: I'm assuming you caught all the summer league action. We went 5-0, and it had to be a great week for us. Who do you think was the most impressive Rocket? Chase Budinger. I don't think there's any question that he was terrific. He shot close to 70 percent. He was under control, too. Yeah, he shot at a high percentage, but he was under control, and didn't take bad shots. He basically shot very well. In the first game, he looked kind of nervous, he missed that layup, and then he had one three that was just ugly. But even then, I thought the way he looks for options, and how he can see what the ball is doing very early, as soon as he touches it - it was things like that I was very impressed with, even in that first game, when he was losing confidence, when his shot was not going and it all looked bad. I saw some things in Jermaine Taylor that I thought looked really good. Now, he shot badly, especially from range, and as a 2-guard, as a shooter and scorer, if he shoots badly, he's not going to be playing well. I don't think he had other qualities that were so outstanding that he could shoot badly and be playing well. But I think if he shoots well, which he didn't there, I saw other things in him, such as his vision with the ball and his opportunities inside and underneath, that I didn't expect to see and I was impressed with that. But the ball has got to go in more often when he shoots. As for his shooting range, I don't know if it's suspect after a few games. But it wasn't good in Las Vegas. And then Joey Dorsey's attitude on the court was different in that he was looking for things to do to help. You could just see him looking for things to do to help *here*, to crash the boards *here* (...) He's got to do that, and then some more; he has to be the hardest working player on the court when he's playing, and he took a lot of important steps in that direction. ... TM: Do you think the Rockets will sign Von Wafer? The fact that he hasn't grabbed any deals yet...I mean that's basically saying, you know, he goes out, and he looks at the market. The problem with that is often somebody looks at the price on making an offer, and the buyer just takes it. You know, why should I come back and see you for the same offer I just got? He's not a restricted free agent; he's unrestricted. I think it's going to be tough. But [the Rockets] haven't closed the door; they've been very careful not to burn that bridge. Even though Wafer's agent, Mitchell Butler, was critical of the way they did things in signing Ariza (...) I just tend to think that he will get some sort of offer at some point. I think it's unlikely, but it wouldn't be shocking if they somehow signed him. They're going to let him play the field, and get a better idea of what kind of contract he can get. ... TM: We just signed David Andersen, of Australia. What are your impressions of him, and how great of a fit is he for Rick Adelman's offense? ... But now that I've got that out of the way, (...) Andersen looks like a guy who can be a pretty reliable 18-20 foot shooter, which can create openings and spread the floor a little bit. He can pick and pop with Aaron Brooks. It fits what they feel that they have to now, which is spread the floor and let Aaron beat people off the dribble. And then they've got to hope, and this is the biggest thing - they've go to hope that Aaron can improve and can develop in that when he beats people off the dribble, and someone slides over, that he can find the right open shooter. And David Andersen helps with that. He spreads the floor. If you want to pick and pop, you can bring the big man out, making Aaron tougher [to keep in check]. It all fits with the people he's got, with Ariza and Battier to both be catch-and-shoot guys, and they've demonstrated that they can do that. It all fits. And he looks like a guy (but until you do it, you're not going to know, as we've seen with Yao Ming) who could be a high post passer on back cuts and things that the Rockets like. The Rockets have never made as much off of back cuts as Sacramento did. Their best passer, by far, among the 4's and 5's in that situation is [Couldn't tell, but I think he said Hayes]. And that's kind of a stroke of irony, that your worst shooter is your best big man passer. So maybe this guy can do some of that. But until you do, and it looks like he might be able to...you know, Yao Ming never got that. He looks like he should be really good at that. But he's just not quick enough; he's too mechanical with that. It'll be interesting to see if David Andersen can do that, but he can shoot, and he can spread the floor, and he should be able to play well with Aaron Brooks. And, for what they've invested, for a replacement/backup center, that's a pretty good thing. It's not a lot, but it's something. ... [/rquoter]
Thanks for the nice read. I doubt we would cut Hayes to make room for the rookies though. Hayes is our best post defender right now, and with Yao out, he would be that much more important in the low post. And his passing ability is very underrated. If only he could develop any kind of offense...
Okay I am confused by this statement. If you cut Chuck to make room for one of the rookies, how can you bring him back? That roster spot is still taken. Thanks for posting this thread durvasa, I didn't have time to read it until now.
No, he was just referring to when Chuck got cut and we brought him back. That its possible for the Rockets to do something similar with a current player. I doubt the Rockets would even consider just cutting Chuck Hayes. Don't worry.
It just sounds odd the way it was worded. Originally he was brought in as a non-guarantee for training camp right? Then he spent a few months in the d-league and got his first ten day. But the Rockets never had his "rights". So I didn't think he was using him as an example. I think part of what Jon meant is that they (the rookies) will either be on the opening day roster or they won't get signed this year at all so we retain their rights. heck, I'm still confused.
The most likely guy to get "Chuck Hayesed" this season would be James White (non-guaranteed). He can get cut, spend some time in D-League (or overseas... I heard the Shanghai Sharks are looking for talent to boost records and attendance), and coming back at a later time after the team creates some roster space by, for example, finding a home for Brian Cook. Of course, you risk White, if you think he's really that good, being snapped up by another NBA team. But at his current level of play, I think it's a risk the front office would be willing to take.
I didn't notice at first, but you're right it is worded funny ... it seems like this was a transcription from a recorded interview. I think he meant "Chuck Hayes was one of those guys we were able to cut and then bring back. So its possible to cut one of these players, relinquish our rights, and then bring them back midseason." But there's always the possibility that another team takes them, the risk we were running when we did the same with Chuck back in 2005.
I liked the first part of Feigen's response to the Andersen question that durvasa cut out. People really need to understand that Adleman is about winning and building a great team with the pieces he has. It gets tiresome reading through all the comments on how a certain player is an "Adleman guy" or would fit his "style". The only thing that I can say Adleman seems to really want on his team is versatile players, he likes to be able to mix and match for different situations.
Thanks for the read. It's nice to have some decent content in the GARM during a tired offseason. I'd rep you if I could. I'm patiently waiting for my paypal "donation" to be noticed. I have a good feeling about David Anderson. I think 12 points and 7 or so rebounds a game would be complementary to Scola. I do worry about a backup. Chris Wilcox is gone, and it doesn't seem like we have the height to do enough damage.
The one question not asked which is the 23,000,000 + question, is, 'What is the plan going forward with Tracy McGrady??? ' Is he to be traded, and if so, now...or February? Or is he to be 'rehabilitated' and let to expire...or be re-signed at a manageable rate going into the future? When the McG question is answered then we can get a handle on the Rox thinking. I sure wish I knew... don't you?
From Feigen's description of TMac's rehab progress, I'm fairly confident to say the pics that posted in another thread are not new, or at least some of them aren't.
I only agree partially. My impression, from his emphasis in past training camps and offseasons, is he'd really like to run a faster-paced, more motion-based offense that relies on players making good reads as opposed to a lot of one-on-one stuff. When he first got here, that's what he said he wants to do, and its what he's said he wants to do before each season. But as the season wears on and his players prove incapable of playing that style effectively, he kind of goes back to what works. That doesn't mean he wouldn't rather play another way, but he's smart enough to adapt to what his players are able to do effectively.
