Well, Bill is really the Rockets' only commentator. This is how it generally goes: Bill: *makes an observation* Bull: I agree, Bill. *repeats what Bill just said* Clyde: That's right, Bill. *repeats what Bill just said* I shudder to think what a Bull + Clyde team would be like: Bull: *crickets* Clyde: *crickets*
amare shot 52% from the field even with chuck on him, i recall a few times amare stepping out and knocking down the jumper. Did chuck make it difficult for amare to score in the paint? yes thats what hayes does.. Hayes stepped up during crunch time but the idea of him shutting down amare is ridiculous. Amare still put 25 on him which is a good night by anyones standards, on 52% shooting, maybe the knicks just suck.
Really, the thing I hear most is that the Rockets are a good/well-run team, and have been. Unfortunately, they have had the worst luck with injuries out of any team in the NBA, and most of their payroll has been locked up in injury prone stars. Pretty accurate assessment.
Go through, possession by possession, and count how many times Amare tried to score on Chuck and how many times he was successful. Here's the breakdown for the game in Houston that I posted in January: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=5896498&highlight=Amare#post5896498 [rquoter] People might look at Amare's stats and think he had a pretty good offensive game. 25 points, 11-21 from the field. What's the big deal about the job Chuck Hayes did on him? I just watched the game again, and took note of each play where Amare went up against Chuck Hayes. I counted 29 of them, and he only scored 23 points. That is extremely inefficient. Chuck had 5 strips that results in turnovers (2 of them were counted as blocked shots officially), he drew a charge on him, and a travel as well. He also had numerous deflections that went out of bounds. To use Bill Worrell's words, he totally befuddled Amare -- particularly in that 4th quarter. Amare did have relatively decent success against Chuck in the first half -- 13 points on 14 plays. [/rquoter]
Some of you guys are talking about announcers. Here are the ones I love most: ESPN Combo: Breen, JVG, Jackson. I like NY local announcers in Breen and Walt Next Portland ones: Mike and Mike (They are very fair, though keep praising team because of how they have played through with injuries)
Amare's shooting percentage dropped in both those games. Points scored on the break and on switches don't count against Hayse. 1 on 1 Hayse clamped down Amare.
You are right about the 52% shooting, but the possesions where Chuck slapps the ball away from him don't count as shot attemps. I think they just count as turnovers.
Hate to say it but its true. We are just terrible on Defense and it shows. Chuck while is a good defender, is not an elite defender. He has good one on one defense but lacks in other areas. Lee is a good defender also but thats pretty much it.
calvin murphy was a bad sports commentator, but at least he was funny bad. clyde drexler is annoying bad when it comes to sports commentary.
Wow, these idiots talking about "Amare still scored 25" sound like DI'Antoni. And to the guy who said it's about how many shots or possessions Amare' needed to get 25... That is part of it, but the real truth is, "shutting your man down" is just a term used that really has NOTHING to do with actually shutting someone down. Being a great defender is really about forcing your man to take the shots you want. Even if he makes them, it was still part of your strategy. There is a reason why superstars "Average" a certain amount of points. Much like you saw with Kobe Bryant 3-4 years ago when The Lakers were struggling to make the playoffs. You can't just go out and get points and ALWAYS win. So, when Chuck did what he did with Amare', he totally changed the complexion of the game. Sure, Amare' score 25, but psychologically he was not in the game and knew he had to change his offensive strategy to score on Hayes. That is the kind of thing you rarely see against a Superstar and it carries over to the rest of the team. This is why The Rockets beat The Knicks that night. Had Amare' gotten off early and often, it boosts the rest of the team and puts The Rockets on their heels.
Dude, I don't think you watched both of those game? Example, in the first game Miller started, not Chuck. Amare shot 6-8 in the 1st Q when Hayes was not on the floor. He destroyed Brad Miller, not Hayes. Amare shot 1 for 6 against Hayes (the one shot he made was a meaningless FG with 21 seconds left in the game). In the 2nd quarter, Hill spent some time on Amare, and scored all but 1 point on Hill, 0-1 with Hayes on him (and a FT) and 1-1 for two trips to the FT line with Hill was on him. In the 3rd quarter, Miller started again and Amare scored all his point on Brad. 2-3 and 4 FTs. Hayes stopped him. 0-2. Hayes played entire 4th Q and Amare was 1-3. So, Amare shot 1 for 6 against Hayes, and 9-13 against Miller and Hill. Amare scored 3 pts on Hayes if you discount the meaningless basket with 21 seconds left. THREE POINTS! on 0-5 shooting. The 2nd game was just as impressive. You didn't see the game, did you.
Right, he was found innocent of the sexual abuse charges. I don't see why they couldn't bring him back.
Yes i agree rockets does have some decent defenders, which is what the original post wrongly said otherwise. But the issue is, as a team our defense is horrible. Chuck Hayes/Battier/whoever all up, no one plays defense and pretty much all team scores at will on us. So the statement about Rockets not having good defenders, is wrong, but the observations that Rocket generally cannot defend to save itself, is true. That's my 0.02.
