I think Lowry probably made the best cuts of anybody in his half season with the Rockets. He has good court vision, too. I think he'd definitely be able to grasp and thrive in a dynamic, read and react Adelman offense. Brooks' bball IQ is still in doubt but w/out Artest ballstopping and no need to worry about feeding Yao and his small target, I expect some better decision-making out of him. He definitely has the speed and legs to move off the ball and he has the ability to finish in a variety of ways. It's all about decision-making with Brooks as far as the offensive end. I think Scola is probably a better passer than we've seen so far. Most of those Euro bigs have pretty decent court vision. I seem to remember hearing that Scola was a pretty good passer. I think Ariza can thrive in a Adelman's offense, esp. if he can develop some kind of midrange game. He should be excellent off the ball and I think he's got some passing ability. A younger Barry would've been a nice fit, too. He definitely knows how to move off the ball and pass. He's just too old now and has no chance on the defensive end.
The asset management stuff is getting pretty old. We all get that you don't like Artest. I'd assume DD would be a guy that would praise Battier's intangibles, but for the life of him will not acknowledge the intangible gain that Artest contributed to, whether you like to admit it or not. We had one of the best playoff runs in over a decade, not to mention some of the most exciting Rockets basketball I've seen in quite some time. For all this talk of assets gained and lost, to dismiss that experience as a non-gain is ridiculous. So was Donte Greene and a late 1st worth that? Yes. Yes it was.
Oh, and no, there really wasn't a Battier type out there. Christie was the closest thing but he was far more athletic and able to shoot off the dribble, even if he wasn't a great shooter. He kept his defender honest. His passing was solid, too. The thing with Battier is he seems so mechanical and deliberate. In a more Adelman-like system, everybody needs to make quick, dynamic decisions. Battier may overthink things in that kind of system. I'm not sure but it seems like he fits better in a static, halfcourt offense. Maybe he could figure it out. He's a willing passer. Unfortunately, he can't shoot off the dribble or really dribble worth a lick for that matter. He's also relatively unathletic. The whacked thing about Adelman being brought in is that the 3 faces of the franchise: Yao, McGrady and Battier... are all non-Adelman types in my mind. I know some will argue that McGrady is a good fit and I would agree that he's the best fit out of the three. The problem is that McGrady simply does not like to move off the ball at this point in his career and he needs to pound the ball and slow things down to feel comfortable. Adelman wants people that move off the ball and don't need to pound the ball. No matter how well McGrady recuperates, I just don't see Adelman ever running his type of offense with McGrady in uniform. I think a guy like Joe Johnson or Kevin Martin would be a much better fit for this offense.
wonder when the "was getting tmac worth it?" thread gonna come up or people gonna give him a free pass with him getting in shape or whatnot.
It is not old, it is how I look at the team and trades etc. I am a fan first, but I can't help looking at situations and vetting whether they were good moves. I can see where people would say that gettting past the first round was worth it...I contend we might have done that without Artest anyway....... And yes, I don't like him...... DD
I really want to hear someone try and make the case that we would have beaten Portland without Artest, but not without Battier, based on how those two players produced in that series.
The problem with that Bob is that there is no way to prove it one way or the other. Because it would be 100% conjecture.....say for instance someone says Battier's stats would go up without Artest as would Wafer's etc... Then someone would argue that because Artest was not there Portland's stats would have gone up... Someone would then argue, Artest stunk on D in the Portland series. It is a circular argument that is non winnable from either side. DD
Bob, beating portland or the goal of beating portland didn't blow wind up my skirt. I understand what DD is saying and maybe they were really shopping Ron,but maybe nothing came back. Looking at what Sa gave up for jefferson, you have to think artest,barry probably couldve gotten it done. Now you have a guy that has played in a version of this offense in jefferson,is the same age as ron,but has 2 yrs left on his deal.He's a good defender and a better scorer than ron. Those are the kinda deals that couldve still helped the rox win a playoff series and still yeild a player from those 2 picks.
Lol at people saying Artest made a difference in taking the Rockets to the 2nd Round. Where was Artest?? If Im not mistaken I could have sworn Scola and Brooks had something to do with the Rockets advancing than Artest. Yao's presence may have helped also but Artest basically didn't show up at all in the playoffs. Hmmmm history never fails to repeat itself. I guess we needed that 28ppg scoring. We know he shows up during the playoffs
I sometimes find myself wondering, in the refuge of my own thoughts, if Shane is such a basketball savant, why was he never smart enough to realize that it kinda might behoove him to learn how to dribble a basketball with his left hand? Of course I have never verbalized this publicly until now as there is surely some +/- stat I am overlooking which conclusively proves his ambidexterity.
So... Arguing Artest v. Battier = circular, non-winnable, 100% conjecture, complete waste of time Arguing Wafer v. Taylor = non-circular, utterly winnable, 0% conjecture, worthy of dozens of posts per day Yeah, you're right. I need to provide an algebraic proof that shows Artest>Battier, like the one you used to show Wafer>Taylor... Seriously, answer the questions, explain the reasoning behind your answers, and I'll explain why I agree or disagree. Surely you've been around long enough to know that's how forums work? Or am I just being a noob here? Clearly, you don't want to come out and say we'd have won against Portland without Battier, since you'd then have to defend the notion that Battier was better than Artest that series. But you also don't want to come out and say we'd have lost without Battier, since that's about as blasphemous a claim as you could possibly make around here.
I think you are misrepresenting, the argument with Taylor and Von was one had NBA experience the other did not....... As for the rest....whatever, if you want to make a case fine, it is just not one I am intersted in......I guess. DD
thecabbage, don't feel bad, that what I mean when I say he hasn't gotten better since his rookie year. He's a very likable guy and you will catch the storm for bringing up this fact, but go watch his rookie year and watch him now and you see 0 improvement. He doesn't work on situational plays when he trains or even if he does. Guys that live the game train pump fake dribble drives,ft line pull ups, curl screen, short in and out dribbles. Outlaw isn't the best ball handler either, but he can dribble enough to get in a comfort spot and get his shot up. Watch the Battier for President poster come out.
The simplest answer is probably that he just doesn't have the talent for it. He's playing in a league consisting of the top 99.9% of basketball players in the world. He'd probably look like George Gervin if he played against us mere mortals in the park. He just doesn't have the coordination to play that way effectively at the NBA level, like the vast majority of human beings on this planet.
I think Shane knows his athletic limitations and physically rests on offense and concentrates more on defense. DD
That's a cop DD. Coach Woolridge used to always say if you're not getting better, you're getting worse. Being able to dribble,triple threat, and move effectively has nothing to do with athletic ablity. That's called putting in work in the offseason and closing up holes to make yourself a better player.
I am not here to argue that Leeb, I am just saying observationally that is what it looks like he is doing. DD
Short response but here we go. Yes, I think Artest was worth it because late 1st round draft picks really aren't that valuable. The Lakers gave their away last year. You have been able to buy a 1st in every recent draft that I can recall if the owner is willing to pay the price. Not to mention, we just bought picks to acquire first round talents in the second round. In essence, we really didn't give up anything that we couldn't easily acquire this summer....unless you think Greene is going to turn into a stud.
Stop being a wuss before I come to austin and knock that cheap glass of merlot out of your hand. I kidd, I know what you're saying, I just think that you can watch who puts in the work in the summer with players in general. I watched Bowen go from just a corner spot guy to a guy that would put the ball on the floor for 2 dribbles and either shoot the short jimmy or get to the rack. In the finals against Cleveland, I think he avg 10ppg. For a guy that is no offense and to come up with 10 ppg is huge.
