Gater, You lookin' for a fight? Malone, Payton, Walker, Jamison, Brad Miller, Cassell, Sprewell, Olawokandi, Hedo, Mercer, Rasho Those are players that are not necessarily taking anything away from the Rockets chances because they are on the better teams. Really, out of the teams you list: Portland will be way worse, SA probably won't win 60 The Mavs won't win 60 The Lakers will win about the same Min will probably win more SAC will be about the same Phoenix and Utah are out really and not as good for various reasons. That leaves the Rox with a chance at a few more wins than last year. JJ for Posey? At this point? I don't know, it doesn't look all that bad to me. MoT is here and better. No PF log jam, problem or not. Do we miss EG or are we better off? No Mooch? Wilks? MJ? AG? Spoon? Role players but maybe a better overall fit line up wise. There are some reasons why we could do better: The schedule is favorable from what others have posted We seem to be improving offensively Yao is improving in my book Cato has been a big plus at 4 instead of 5 MoT is better CAT is actually playing better I don't think we will have the losing record of last year for a variety of reasons mainly related to the health of the players after KT was traded and not having to fit another big new player into the main mix like last year - Posey The Suns are not a factor this year - although Denver is No one is a lock BTW, see Lakers 2002-3 and this year (injuries)
Au contrare...the Rockets were 2-2 vs the Lakers and TWolves last season. If you are going to go from 43 wins to 50 wins you have to minimum hold serve against teams that have added Malone, Payton, Cassell and Sprewell. Any loss here means you have to go from +7 to + 8 or even +9. And you will also have to hold serve against every team you swept: 4-0 DEN with Melo 3-1 MEM with Hubie in control
Thanks for the fuzzy math.... Isn't that relative to them beating teams they were 1-4 against etc. ? Ijust have to go dust off my grad level statistics and Diff EQ books.... I'm surprised that you didn't have more out of how long a reply I made That seems to be what they are doing this year, beating some weaker teams and losing to better ones. Their record against the good teams isn't very good....
Au contrare...the Rockets were 2-2 vs the Lakers and TWolves last season. If you are going to go from 43 wins to 50 wins you have to minimum hold serve against teams that have added Malone, Payton, Cassell and Sprewell. Any loss here means you have to go from +7 to + 8 or even +9. And you will also have to hold serve against every team you swept because you can't gain from them: 4-0 DEN with Melo 2-0 PHI 2-0 TOR 2-0 ORL 2-0 BOS And you would have again win the season series from: 3-1 PHX 3-1 MEM with Hubie in control 3-1 LAC No after you've accomplished all of that, you have to pick up 7 wins from the following: 1-3 SAC w Brad Miller 0-4 DAL w Jamison and Walker 1-3 SAS w mercer, Rasho, Hedo and Horry I don't see it here. Now, you scan this and (assuming all of the above has been met) find 7 wins you were drop dead sure of. Or stated another way, if all of the above was accomplished, go mimimum 21-17...and no you were not planning on sweeping the Jazz or Blazers before the season started unless you were being totally unrealistic. 1-3 UTA 1-3 POR 1-3 GSW 2-2 SEA w Ray Allen 1-1 ATL 1-1 CHI 1-1 CLE w ROY candidate 1-1 IND w Bird and an angry Carlisle 0-2 DET w Brown and an unknown in Darko 1-1 MIA 1-1 NJN 1-1 MIL w TJ Ford 0-2 NYK 1-1 NO 1-1 WAS ------- 14-24 Show me where they are?
The no edit kills those of us who can think at 80 mph and type at 10 mph.... Rocket River and I hammered this out before the season and I wish I had the search function. I think he eventually admitted that 48 was probably base. Maybe I'll go look for the thread. I didn't have fumble fingers that time! +7 wins is alot in a dynamic enviroment.
Not my point at all. Regardless of the coach, it's not a 50 win team. But I should have figured you PRC extremists turned Van Gundy haters would look at it like that that!
I know. And Rocket River was headed toward a deduction like "Van Gundy's not a good coach because the team only won 47 games with a 50 win team". The number of wins is going to be the mantra of all wanting to compare Tomjanovich and Van Gundy. If you want to play that game or use that logic, at least get the base wins right. It's not 50 in a WC with only 4 WC sub .500 teams. PHX is the only "cakewalk" and only because they've blown up the team.
Does anyone know if JVG was ever a head coach at a major college? His skills seem much more suited for college coaching than the NBA. That said he's still done pretty good in the pro-ranks.
With RUdy at the helm. I cannot say This is not possible. I don't think any of the team improved much EXCEPT Denver Again. I think it is possible. Esp picking up a win in Phx and maybe even the clippers Take into account injuries to Web and Peja Dallas losing Nick Spurs seem to have been Blown up and rebuild. I think we could have improved on 2-10 Utah I think we can do better that 1-3 this year golden state Should sweep ATL Sweep Chi Sweep Cle Sweep MIA Sweep Was I cannot guaranteeing this but the talent should take those teams My point is. . . JVG has to show improvement in the win column or as he states it .. . you are what ya record says you are and his record would say he is no better than rudy that he has not improved this team I think he has improve the team in certain ASPECTS but has regressed them in others Rocket River
Why does it have to be either/or? I don't even know what to say to this. It seems so out there to me that I guess I'll just leave it alone. Let's put it this way - with Stockton and Malone leaving Utah, and Phoenix falling off the face of the earth, and with Yao Ming a year stronger and more integrated into the country/league/team, the Rockets are now good enough to make the playoffs. It is now their time to break in. So you think there's a coach out there that could've taken the 28-win team from 2 years ago to the playoffs? Interesting. And the team that lost its two best players for most of the year in Barkley and Hakeem, being led by Francis as a rookie, you think it's possible that team could've made the playoffs too under a different coach? You've already stated that the 45-win team led by Francis in his second season actually UNDER-achieved (first time I've heard that one), so I know how you feel about them. The only season in my mind that you could make a case for would be last year. My position is that making the playoffs more than once over the last four years with those teams would have been darn near impossible. The stat is no more misleading than any other stat. Mo is not rebounding any better than he did in '00-'01. Is that a misleading stat? Cato was already a 'presence'. Cuttino's defense was already improving last year or prior. If Francis 'plays defense' now, thanks to Gundy, is it also thanks to Gundy that he's having the worst offensive season of his career? They did not play 4 years in the same 'system'. In '99-'00 they started out with Hakeem and Barkley, then switched to a guard-oriented attack. They played that way until midway through '00-'01, where they started featuring Hakeem more again. In '01-'02, they had massive injury, so there really wasn't a 'system'. In '02-'03 they had to try to incorporate Ming on the fly. You are over-simplifying when you say they played the same system for 4 years. On the 'energy' thing. What are you saying? That the team focuses too much on one side of the ball? I would have to agree with that. You win games on the offensive end, not defensively. Great players are going to get their points no matter what in the playoffs. All the defense in the world won't change that. I'd rather have a pretty good defense and be able to out-score teams than have a great defense and a terrible offense. Yeah, I thought Jackson was a good pickup. I was never huge on Posey - I think the KT trade was what killed the playoff chances last year. I don't think the addition of JJ this year requires anywhere close to the adjustment needed with adding a Ming into the mix last year. It's a matter of having to adjust. The team now has a year under their belt with Ming, as well as a training camp. Ming is unquestionably stronger this year. He's able to play more minutes. They don't even use the interpreter anymore. These are all barriers that have been overcome that the team had to deal with last year. Every team must go through losing before they can win. That's just the way it is, unless you pull like a Shaq or a Duncan. Once JVG reaches the playoffs?
I think the KT trade did as well I think it was a major blow the team was playing very well when it happened I think it regressed us I think Rudy getting ill was the nail in the coffin Rocket River
I think we disagree on one main term: Defense wins championships. Period. I couldn't disagree with you more about offense winning you the big ones. Two words: Dallas Mavericks. Offense is something that will come, and sporadically, go. If you rely on offense, you're bound to get killed when opposing teams lay down the defensive clamps or you have an off-night. Defense is and should be constant. No matter how good/bad offense you have, your defense should ALWAYS be the same. That's how you make up for your short-comings at the other end of the floor. I can't believe you actually think Offense wins championships That goes against every coaching philosophy/teachings in the last decade. But hey, atleast you're unique
Dallas hasn't been unstoppable. Duncan has. Shaq has. Hakeem - unstoppable. Jordan - unstoppable. That's why those teams won championships - teams just couldn't stop their best players. Sure, they played good defense, but that wasn't the main reason they won. Detroit was a little different, but when Isiah Thomas felt like turning it on, there was nothing you could do. Like I said, the Rockets can play all the defense in the world, but if they aren't unstoppable offensively (specifically - Yao Ming), it won't matter. Of course I'm not saying that defense isn't important - you absolutely need a good defense. But it's easier to become good defensively than it is to acquire an unstoppable player.
Heh. Duncan, jordan, Shaq, Hakeem. Guess what? They were also incredible on defense. Pretty mute point.
a few things: 1. the nyk were severely undertalented. uhh, no. they weren't world beaters, but they had some talent, especially in the east. which brings up: 2. jvg getting to the finals was the thing of legend. uhh, no. 1998 was the debut of the Leastern Conference and the sacrificial lamb NBA finals. the best team in the east won 33 (54 over 82 game schedule) while the 8th seed knicks won 27. essentially a big pile of mediocrity someone had to win before the spurs bent them over. and of course the 33 win team was the team the knicks matched up best with and who they beat on a buzzer beater in game 5. 3. jvg is a miracle worker to have our D where it is this year. uhh, no. jvg is good at D, there is no denying this. he was good for the knicks, and he's been good for us. but we were 5th in fg% last year and 6th (or 8th depending on what you read) in ppg and had virtually identical defensive rebounding and turnovers forced numbers. also, jj over half a year of rice and 30 minutes of cato versus 17 minutes of cato (wonder why the offense sucks?) helps. but still, jvg has been nice for the D. 4. LTF's assertion that the offense is good because we're in the playoffs. uhh, no (i bet haven has a latin phrase for this type of reasoning but i don't know it). we shoot worse, turn it over more, and score less. it's worse, deal it. would i rather score 93 and miss the playoffs or 87 and be in, well i'd score 40 if i could win the title, but that's not the point. if i could score 90 instead of 87, i'd take it. we're worse at offense, that's a fact. 5. missing the playoffs for years. if we obviously take out the hakeem/barkely injury year and the mo t/glen rice injured all year plus francis' migraine year, we're left with a possibly missed playoffs from last year and an overachieving 45 win season 3 years ago (when bill simmons said he thought rudy was the coach of the year) for a team rebuilding. hardly the worst 4 years imaginable. 6. Defense wins championships. Period. no, defense wins championships sometimes. the spurs are a defensive team. the lakers were an offensive team who played D sparingly. the second 3 peat bulls were more defensive than offensive, but then again mj makes any offense good. 95 rockets=offense, 94=more D than O. pistons=D. showtime lakers and 80's celtics (8 championships right there) were offense. i think haven said something has shown it's more often offense that wins it all than defense (don't know what the source was but i'd believe it). an unstoppable offensive threat is really what wins championships. using the mavericks as a counterexample would be like using the mid 90's heat as an example that D doesn't win it. 7. LTF, you make it out as if jvg is an improvement over rudy in every way. when the D is better, he's light years better than rudy. when the O is worse, it must be someone else's fault. the fact jvg is leading an improved team to the playoffs is apparently way different than what rudy would have done. and apparently jvg's 22-16 record is actually better than rudy's 23-15 record from last year simply becuase we're in the top 8 (which we were last year at this time) right now. as far as i can see, jvg is a good coach who like rudy did some things well and some things not so well. jvg's got 44 games to prove he was actually worth firing rudy for b/c right now he hasn't.
