If you had asked me one week ago what the Rockets should do with the pick, I would have told you they should without a doubt, draft Ming. I didn't think it was possible to beat Shaquille O'neal. Regardless of tommorrow's outcome, the Kings have proven to me that a balanced attack featured around a plethora of highly skilled players can compete with the best tandem in league history. Look for the best deal and trade the pick. (BTW: Does anyone else think that a change of scenery could have the same type of impact for Rasheed Wallace as it did for Chris Webber?)
Yes. I'm still in the Ming corner, but if we could land Rasheed Wallace, I would be all over that deal. And, the Kings are winning tomorrow.
This is not the same Shaq as last year and the bench has scored almost no points. Heck if Fisher could make a third of his shots, than this wouldn't even be a series. Offensively, only Shaq and Kobe are doing anything, and defensively only Shaq, Kobe, Fox, and Horry are doing anything and they still might win the series. If the Lakers still had Grant and Lue, this would have been a sweep because Grant would take the assignment of Webber and Horry would cover the SF position and Lue would have kept Bibby in check. I'm not taking anything away from the Kings, but this is not the same Lakers team as last year. The problem for everyone in the league is it won't take them much this off season to get them back to their dominant self.
rockbox, You are assuming that Shaq's big toe heals and loses that fat tire around his middle. Shaq has an arthritic condition, it may never get better, we may be seeing all that he has left. DaDakota
Shaq will be gone in a few years, so drafting Ming should have nothing to do with him The Cat- I hope so, GO KINGS
I tend to agree with the exception of the quoted. If Fisher has problems containing Bibby then what gives you reason to believe Lue wouldn't. Kobe even has problems keeping up. To his credit Shaq is definately a better player this year. The man went 9 for 9 from the free throw line. This was unheard of in the previous seasons not to mention playoffs.
Horry is a much better defender than Horace Grant. As for Shaq, like Dakota said, his problem is arthritic. It's unlikely to ever be 100% again. Furthermore, so much of the dominance of last year was predicated on the great chemistry they built up going into the playoffs. That is hard to recapture. They're good, but beatable. The Lakers brought their A game last night. Shaq had a career night, over 40 points, almost 20 rebounds, and almost perfect from the line. Everyone stayed out of foul trouble, while Divac and Pollard both fouled out. Divac and Bibby both consistently missed wide open looks that they had made all series. The officiating was terribly biased towards the Lakers. The game was in LA. With all of that, the Lakers barely squeaked out a home win against a Kings team that played nowhere near their potential.
The reason I said that was that Lue contained Iverson pretty well last year and Iverson is a lot harder to contain than Bibby.
rockbox: I can't get the quote, cause the search function is disabled, but after one of the games last year, Lue admitted to consistently holding Iverson to defend him. (it was obvious to anyone watching too) He definitely could've gotten away with that against Bibby last night, but I doubt if he would in a game 7.
Basketball will always be a big mans game. Draft Ming. Things may go a little smaller for the next 2 years, especially if Shaq starts getting hurt alot. But with Ming we will have a head start on everybody before the big mans game come back strong again.
But Jordan and Isiah, and Dr J and even Larry Bird cleaned up on championships. I don't think it's a big man's game so much as a "who is dominating now" game. Through the 80s guards and SF dominated the game. Through the 90s Jordan dominated, and Hakeem dominated. In the late 90s early 2000s big men are dominating. Give me a team with dominant guards and good big men and I'll toe-to-toe with a team with a dominant big man and good guards.
The point I am trying to make is that Ming is not worth the risk, especially if you know that you can contend without a franchise caliber center. Obviously if Ming was a sure-thing, he'de be a no-brainer, but he is far from that. If you knew you couldn't beat the Lakers without a star center, I would have said to roll the dice on Ming because you had nothing to lose...you weren't going to win a championship anyways. But now that it has been demonstrated that beating the Lakers <i>is</i> possible, it'd be to the Rockets' best interests to trade the pick for an established player.
thecabbage - No disrespect intended, but Kelvin Cato probably doesn't play as well as Vlade did when Vlade was 16 years old. Vlade is easily one of the top 6 or 7 centers in the NBA. Look at the rosters of the 28 other teams and tell me you don't think Ming will be one of the top 7 in 2-3 years. If you don't, we will have to agree to disagree.
It's a good theory to copy the Kings but we already have a nucleus of players that play selfish, dumb basketball. The Kings are basically the anti-Rockets. They make the extra pass, they can make shots, and they play intelligent basketball.
It's also a tell of two paths. Another player in the line of brainless pituitary cases, or backing out of that cul de-sac and putting the ball in a post player's hands. By all accounts, Ming is humble, and Ming is 'basketball'. The prevalent rumor right now concerns Odom. Odom is immature. Odom is not basketball.
If we really WERE able to pull off something like getting Brand, Battier, Swift, and the #4, retaining our #15/23/38, and unloading Rice, Thomas, Collier, Taylor, and TMO, laying off Brown, Williams, Langhi and Willis, keeping Francis, Griffin, Mobely, Cato, Norris, and Torres, as the last concept by Relativist in the ROCKET!!! thread suggests... I'm not saying that is the correct translation of the ROCKET!!! thread, but to further re-inforce what <i>ThaCabbage</i> is saying, I have to admit, I'd prefer something like take that over just Ming. We'd have super starters at every position but center, AND future starters at every position. In one fell swoop, eliminate all the dead wood, and make us a lean, quality team to build strong for the future. If we picked up Butler, Dunleavy, or Wilcox at #4, Stoudamire or Hilario at #15, traded down for an extra pick on #23, taking someone like Sampson, picking up Dixon at #38, we'd have a hell of a team. Cato/Swift/Sampson Brand/Griffin/Stoudamire Battier/Butler Mobely/Torres/Dixon Francis/Norris What if Griffin or Stoudamire or Sampson grew another couple inches and one became an excellent center... I know Ming COULD be much better, but this team could go all the way to the championship after gelling a few years. With Ming, championships are probably 10 years off, and Francis would rather win sooner, rather than later...
"It's a good theory to copy the Kings but we already have a nucleus of players that play selfish, dumb basketball. The Kings are basically the anti-Rockets. They make the extra pass, they can make shots, and they play intelligent basketball." Well said.
