I look at it both ways with La. Their best players,kobe,gasol,odom are right around 30 so adding another guy the same age kinda makes sense. The artest deal is kinda like what the Bulls did adding rodman and to a extent the Spurs adding jefferson. If it were me though, I wouldve kept Ariza because he can get better along with a guy like Bynum.Normally, west and La always had upside guys to blend with guys that are plateaud. In terms of the rockets, I think they made the right choice. Even with Yao and tracy healthy, the rockets need a guy like ariza. Just as I maintain the fact they needed Gay or Brewer, they needed ariza. The need guys that can make "athletic" plays. Those plays are plays only a guy with athletic ability can make. Whether its catching a ball of the rim, turning a rebound,blk, or missed shot into 2 points the other end, but they needed a guy like Ariza. I think both teams got what they wanted, but since I have never really been neautral about much, I will say I would take Ariza right now.
Exactly. Even if the Rockets did a sign and trade for Ariza in the summer, thus not using the mid-level or injury exceptions, what would they do with those exceptions anyhow? They don't want to overspend, because Les isn't going to spend a fortune on luxury tax for this team. I've yet to hear any trade ideas that were realistic at the deadline that puts us in a more favorable position right now than what actually happened. I was concerned, like many others, that Artest would only end up being a 1-year rental. But ultimately, I'm satisfied with how that worked out. If we didn't get a promising young wing player like Ariza to take his place, I'd be much more disappointed.
I very much agree with this. I'm not saying that athleticism is everything but you need some of it. Even the Spurs, who are typically described as unathletic, have Parker and Ginobili. Both of those guys make athletic plays on a regular basis when they're healthy. Now they've added Jefferson. People are so fascinated with intangibles and high IQ players that they underestimate the importance of athleticism at times. I'm not saying you want a bunch of bonehead thugs who can't do anything but run fast and jump high but just as much as you need intelligence on the court, you also need a certain degree of athleticism. This isn't chess after all.
Yes, and I'd argue the Rockets have steadily been getting more athletic since the current management took hold (albeit, perhaps not at the pace some here would like). Brooks, Lowry, Landry, and Ariza all bring athletic elements to our roster that were sorely missing under the JVG era. At the same time, we haven't sacrificed other types of players that exhibit mental toughness, leadership, and strong IQ like Battier, Scola, and Hayes. And these are all relatively low-paid "role players". If we just add a star or two to the team that can actually stay healthy for a full season, and combine that with the strong coaching, I believe this team can be really good.
My man! Durvasa, you know why I've had problems thinking a team like the rockets can beat the Lakers? Odom. As much as I like Sa this year, they will still have problems with La because of odom. That's what really makes La special to me. They never lose when he plays well. Never! When he plays well, there are only a team or so that has a answer for him and that's the problem. If Bynum improves or play like he did the year before prior to the injury, I think they can win 70 games and the title again. Boston with Rasheed and Cleveland when they play James at the 4 and maybe a team like portland are the threats tg La imo.
I fully agree. You want a nice mix of both. Ideally, your players are always pretty intelligent, regardless of their athleticism. I'd take a Battier over a complete bonehead no matter how athletic he is. I'd also put Hayes in the list of relatively athletic, although his lack of length obviously hurts him to some extent. I think few would argue that a 3 or 4 inch taller/longer Chuck Hayes, with a similar build and the same bball IQ/skillset, would be a defensive force practically unparalleled. Throw in average shooting touch and David Lee would have nothing on him.
I'm with you ... I'm a big Odom fan. He's their X-factor. And, he happens to rate very well by adjusted +/- too. Just saying.
Artest's performance overall was disappointing, but despite his horrific shooting I think he helped the team get as far as it did in the playoffs. So, yes, the one year "loaner" was worth it. I am glad he is gone, though.
We often talk about Battier's intangibles. I think Artest had his own unique set of intangibles. Some of those intangibles were negative but I think more were positive. Even when he was chucking up bricks and jacking up the offense, his intimidation factor was always there. Defensively, even when he's getting burned due to loss of foot speed, he's still muscling up on players and frustrating them. Our remaining tough guys are Lowry, Hayes and Landry.
I don't really think of Landry as a tough guy. Maybe Scola. Possibly Dorsey (if he learns how to defend without fouling or collecting dumb technicals).
Brooksball, I think you have to have a combo. Guys that are athletic have to be able to transition the ability into the flow of the game. I like production too and really like to see guys get better. That's part of my prroblem with Battier is that he hasn't gotten better since his rookie year. Just like billy owens didn't get better from his freshman year in college, Shane hasn't improved at all and that bothers me. I like artest and the toughness, non backdown attitude he brought to the team. 2 first rd picks was a good price and once tracy went down, it wouldve been nice to see if the rockets ccouldve gotten one back. Even with my b****ing, I still like the young player the rockets have especially brooks,ariza,landry,and lowry. I think this year will be the last forr either lowry or brooks because having 2 guys the same age and pretty much the same size playing the same position doesn't make sense.
I really don't know how tough this team is anyway. I think they play hard and is gritty, but when was the last time they gave a hard foul? I mean, I highly doubt Kobe wouldve been as animated as he was vs shane in that 40 pt game vs against a team like boston or even Sa when they had bowen. Hayes and dorsey should always give hard fouls when they foul.Scola did show something game 7 when he kinda tied up with odom though. A team like La you have to turn it into a street fight. You will never win in a game of skill against them. That's kinda how posey and the crew did the year prior, but now with Artest, I think he gives them that tough guy image that they haven't had since shaq was traded.
That makes some sense. Trade Artest at the deadline for an expiring and a 1st round pick from a team desperate for Artest's services. It would have hurt our chances of advancing in the playoffs, but we do maybe get a late 1st round pick with it. So, where would we be right now? The Rockets were able to buy a couple 2nd round picks without giving up assets, and as you said before there isn't much of a difference in the talent available early in the 2nd round and late in the first round. So as far as improving ourselves via the draft, not sure we'd have been much better off with that first rounder anyway. Furthermore, are we still able to get Ariza with the injury exception? Actually, things change by trading Artest, and its possible that Ariza wouldn't be attainable. Two reasons: (1) We probably don't get out of the first round, which means Yao doesn't break his foot. So, he never tries to fix his foot in the offseason (which was probably necessary, regardless) and we don't get the injury exception. (2) Our ability to sign Ariza was based on the Lakers pursuit of Artest. With Artest changing scenery, its unclear whether the Lakers still go after him. Maybe Artest chooses to resign with the team we trade him to, for instance.
I was honestly contemplating that as I was making the list. The reason I included him is his ferociousness on the offensive end under the basket. Lowry is tough at both ends. Hayes is mostly defense but he'll battle for offensive boards as well. I do consider Landry tough even though he is usually anything but that on the defensive end.
I see what you mean. He can be tenacious on the offensive boards. I just wish he was more consistent with it.
Yeah, there were some variables involved in the process. I do agree that from say 20-36, the talent is pretty even, but the lure of a 1st rd pick is very enticing for teams. I know for a fact, dumars was trying to get rid of that 1st rd pick this year.I knew and said that prior to the draft. I won't lie and say morey did or didn't contact dumars, but I do knoww dumars was desperate. Maybe a package of Johnson,Affalo,and that 1st rd pick for Artest wouldve been enough. That mid first was close enough to a very unique guy like Earl Clarke. Jumping 1 spot (phoenix) vs trying to get all the way up into the 1st rd is different. In that case, you probably don't have the urgency to sign Ariza. I'm sure we can paint scenerios, but they didn't happen.
My concern is something that you've pointed out a number of times. As much as we think of Yao's offensive abilities, it's the lack of him clogging up the paint on the defensive end that may show up the most. Neither Scola or Landry are good defenders. I have a feeling Andersen will get taken to school. Basically, what we've got is Hayes. To my knowledge, Pops is nothing special, defensively. Dorsey is still an unknown. I know we're not shooting for the moon this season but I still don't want to see us getting schooled too bad out there. There is a chance the offense looks better despite losing Yao but I wouldn't even bank on that because of the lack of a star to draw doubles and what not. I don't have faith in McGrady despite leebigez's claims and the hopes some people seem to be getting. I think despite being a good passer, he's the antithesis of an Adelman type player, as is Yao, to be honest. He doesn't cut and he needs the ball in his hands to feel comfortable. I don't think that is going to change at this point in his career. I happened to catch LeBron's first game on NBA TV the other day. It was against the Kings. Man, Adelman had that crew running a beautiful offense. Nobody pounded the ball. Everybody was making good reads, cuts, passes, etc... Really a thing of beauty. I do believe Adelman is to offense roughly what JVG is to defense, although one achieves his goal with more of a hands off approach and the other is much more hands on. You could argue that Adelman needs the right players for his offense to work but I think the same could be said about JVG's defenses. I also think the hardest thing for a coach to do at times is not tinker with things and let the players figure things out. Basically, I'm a believer in Adelman's coaching philosophy even if he's yet to win a ring.
I guess we can only speculate on what was possible, and what the missed opportunities were. I do think the Rockets were shopping Artest and trying to see what the best offers were out there. But when I go back and think about what the Rockets should have done, I can't ignore where we'd be right now with Yao Ming. In a way, us getting to the 2nd round was a blessing for us beyond simply getting out of the first round for the first time in over a decade. Without advancing, Yao doesn't get injured. Consequentially, he delays getting his foot fixed, and (IMO) that would be a big problem.
Durvasa, that makes sense. Brooks ball, adelman really is a great offensive minded coach. His stuff works just as the triangle and he does need the right players. On a side note from watching that game, did you see a player that resembles battier on offense either? In all honesty, the only guys that fit are brooks and probably ariza. Scola moves well without the ball but doesn't pass.So, just like the triangle, coach has to adjust.
