The only good thing I'm seein is that there are a lot of pick-n-rolls, however, I feel they are not as effective as they could be. A lot of times the picker doesn't get the ball back, and even when they do, it results in another iso in the post.
But our coaches didn't help the players realize their "potential talent" into "realized talent" either. Winning games is important but developing talent is also part of the coaching job. Whether it's teaching in the practices (I really want to know what they teached Eddie Griffin in practices that he didn't improve at all as a player) or putting together a system benefitting players' talent (I think we all agree that some players like Yao would play way better in any other systems than the current Rockets one). And our coaches not only failed to win, he failed in developing players as well.
The Magic nearly made the playoffs with a bunch of role players a couple of years ago. The Nets are playing without any dominant player but they have a chance to reach the finals now. Both teams rely on team concept and playing fluent Bball. Yes they are playing in the east, but efficient team ball goes a long way, longer than just relying on individual talent.
May I also point out that Marbury, Marion, Amare, Joe Johnson are nothing more than "unrealized potential" before this season. But the Suns coach turned them into "realized talent" in your eyes now.
First of all, the Rockets have enough "realized" talent and to compete with the Suns for a playoff spot, even with a crippled offense the Rockets are playing. The Rockets just lost too many games that they shoudn't lose. The offense has to do with it, but also with a lack of leadership that makes up for the team. It was realistic to expect the Rockets to make the playoffs, had they improved or at least stayed as a team like the Suns, instead of regressing. Second, things have to change. Not only coaching and a system. The Rockets need a leader. Leadership isn't about system or experience. One just has it or doesn't have it. So the "youth" and "coaching" appeal are irrelevant. Francis hasn't prove and shown any signs that he has leadership qualities for the team to succed at a high level. Leadership has to be backed up by game and personal charisma. The latter being an intangible quality that one just has. Francis doesn't have both. Gamewise he isn't a guy that can single handedly carry a team. On defense he doesn't inspire other teammates to be hard workers. Personality wise Francis hasn't been a calm and stablizing force for the team. He couldn't stabilize the Rockets after Rudy is gone. He is more like an Energizer bunny than someone the other players looks up to and follow behind. Francis also didn't step up as a leader when the team mostly needed it, instead he shrank under pressure into a role player in the last ten games. The offense is holding the Rockets back, but still they have been very competitive in playoff race over the course of the season. They just fell apart as a team facing adversities, because there is no leadership. When Rudy went down, Francis didn't step up and guide the team. Instead they just folded. Like I said, team basketball goes a long way, and one of the ramification is leadership. The Rockets don't have it, Francis doesn't have what it takes. Things are bound to change.
I agree with everything except this passage. If we're talking about a leader who works to execute upon a system, then OK. But the whole point of having a system is that we don't have to rely AT ALL on any single player's ad hoc leadership. All too often I find leadership being equated to 4th quarter Kobesque heroics, when IMHO, it's NOT. Real leadership is Stocktonesque... system players who look to keep pummelling opponents by executing a very consistent system each and every time down the court... so by the 4th quarter, there won't be any need for heroics. Talent and leadership only go so far. IMHO, it's system play that takes a lot of the "player thinking" and thusly, "player decision making error" out of the game. The whole point is that the coaches should be the brains behind their team's play... much like playing EA NBA Live or some video game. College hoops is a prime example of how system play always wins out over talent. Look at Syracuse and Duke (in previous years). The same is true of the NBA too. Orlando back when had TREMENDOUS talent in Penny in his prime and Shaq. Yet they failed. Under Phil Jackson, and the triangle offense, and amplified by the talents of Kobe and Shaq, Shaq won his rings. Talent is only an amplifier of system success. It does not replace it. theSAGE
I agree with Panda on the leadership thing. Your floor leader is supposed to be the extention of the coach. If your supposed leader doesn't try on D, other players won't either. If your leader doesn't like to pass, other players won't either. Then your "team" will become one who don't play D and don't pass.
