Teams loaded with good and pretty good players and no elite players are not contenders unless almost every man in the rotation is a excellent defender. The Rockets probably have 3 excellent defenders, two good defenders and 3-4 poor defenders. We are not contending with this squad as it is currently assembled.
It's more like teams with LEGENDARY players win titles, and teams with what people refer to today as "superstars" have as good a chance as teams without superstars, which is not a very good chance.
Not a good chance but a good chance we should get deep into the playoffs. No reason we couldnt get far or past the second round into the Western Conference Finals even. The only question is how deep can we get? Then from there? It gets kind of sketchy whether we can beat the likes of the Lakers, Magic, Miami, and Boston. Other than that? I dont see anyone head and shoulders above us we couldnt beat among the other teams.
I think if you get to a conference title you are a contender. That means you're one of the 4 best teams in the NBA (pretty much), and if you say its the only 2 left in the Finals then thats a very narrow definition in a league with some great teams. In fact, the only reason I have them only reaching the conference finals at best is because theyre a team that hasnt built up year-to-year chemistry behind them by only having minor injuries. This team has been building its roster for years and years to get to this point behind Yao... and now there is really a team to back him up and not just a bunch of scrubs like back in the day forcing he and Tmac to play 45min a friggin game. Back 5 years ago it seemed like Battier and Alston were our 4th and 5th best players or something. The East crop drops off quick after Boston, Orlando, and Miami (not necessarily in that order), but the West drops off (thoeretically) behind LA and then everything is a much more even playing ground. I think Houston has a realistic and valid shot at the west's #2 spot, and as good a chance as any to challenge for the West. It just depends on playing as hard as last year, with a healthy Yao in the mix, and Martin here for the entire season instead of just 2 months. If I'm wrong, I don't care. Thats sports. I don't feel like anything in my thoughts are pessimistic, I'm a realist with idealistic hopes. I can see things for how they really are, but if Yao is healthy all season then I think a little luck is going to also work its way in along with our role players' potentials, and then the season will be even better. It may be time for fate to give a few shoves in the Rockets direction this season, and its been a long time coming. GO ROCKETS!!!!
Anytime you're in the top ten teams in a sport, you're a contender. Anything can happen. We certainly aren't the most likely team to win it all, but we're going to be in the mix, and there's a chance.
That's a pretty liberal definition of contender. So 10 teams in every pro sports league are legit championship contenders every season?
Not sure why you bring up other sports. I'd say in baseball and football, this statement is actually correct. Playoffs are relatively short, so becoming hot at the right time is much more important than simple overall talent. Whereas the NBA is one league where it's almost always the the top 2-3 seeds(top 5 teams overall) who win the championship, due to having to win 4 7-game series.
Not sure the meaning here. I pointed out that baseball and football playoffs are different beasts from basketball here. Given that this is a discussion about the Rockets, and that I feel your argument is correct about the NBA but OremLK's correct about "sports with playoffs in general", I wanted to make the distinction. And although I just used MLB/NFL as examples, I would actually extend this to hockey and college basketball too. Not sure of any other team sport with playoffs that anyone cares in the US. But thanks for your reading lessons anyway.
I love how some of people around overrate the Rockets and underrate other teams in the West. It's really funny.
You said: "not sure why you bring up other sports" I quoted Orem's post...the one I responded to...to show I DIDN'T bring up other sports...I was responding to his post which brought them up. I responded directly to his post...which I quoted in my post to be clear that's what I was responding to.
We aren't contenders because we don't have awesome defense and we don't have a clutch superstar to make the plays in crunch time. You need someone like that.
This discussion hinges on what "being a contender" means. If you believe the best we could possibly do if every thing breaks perfect is make the Western Conference Finals and then lose, then I don't consider that a contender. The teams nationally regarded as preseason contenders would consider a loss in the conference finals a disappointing year, not a best case scenario. That doesn't mean there is zero chance we could win it all, as trades, injuries and unforseen developements could change things. It just means the odds going into the season are not in our favor.
Errr... yeah, I dunno about that. But yeah, this team is certainly NOT old. They have quite a future.
Another thing is? Since when did being a 8th seed make you contenders in Oklahoma? Yes I know Durant is great we are talking about a team below us in the standings if we are healthy and has always been even with Durant on their team. So yes if you say Oklahoma Thunder are contenders off of giving the Lakers a scare? Guess who actually almost won the series against the Lakers the year before even closer in more games? Thats right. The Rockets.
Hard to say, it depends on what someone's definiton of contender is. I personally think we are a threat and can beat all top teams in the league, thats my definition of contender. I think the popular meaning of contention is a team that year in and year out is, a series or two away from winning it all, which we have not done since 96-97 or more recently 2008-09. So in that case were are not contenders. All about what side of the coin you see it from.
