What's a more important trend? 20 years? 4 years? Or 1 month?

And...as usual...you've given us all a post worthy of your morning dump.

Eveyone has an opinion. I've laid down the gauntlet. Put up or shut up.

 

He never said that, and there is no moneyball equation. This notion that the Rockets use some magic spreadsheet from which all their decisions derive is a caricature, not reality. The Rockets believed that teams tended to overvalue height rather than other skills like being able to guard multiple positions and intelligence . So they put higher priority on getting those kind of players, believing it would give them an advantage.

And who's to say it didn't? Before this season, injuries decimated the team year after year. They overachieved, given the circumstances. This year, they have more height and athleticism on the roster than before. I've yet to see the benefits. Hill has shown some promise now and then, but he's also defended horribly often enough to make the coach wary of having him on the floor. Maybe Jeffries/Patterson should be given a chance.

 

$Ball = Quantitative Analysis

QA is not performed with equations? Seriously?

I poke fun of it by using "spreadsheet" in a derrogatory sense. Put QA is absolutely formula driven. If there's a formula, there's a height component.

Further, they over-achieved without Yao and went to the Lottery but were a success.

This season, they are w/o Yao, start Hayes, marginally play Hill, have Budinger in a slump, traded-off the taller Ariza who could play 2/3 for the shorter Lee, added a 34 yo Brad Miller and have a Lottery pick in the D-League.

And this season is not a success because "they have more height and athleticism"? 100 disagree. The minutes on the court are as just as void of height and athleticism in both seasons. The results will be fairly similar as well.

 

well, when we went to the second round and took the eventual champions to a game 7. I would qualify that as winning.

and let the battier trade go man. it was a smart move at the time. we had two superstar level talents and needed that balance you so sorely miss. it was a shot at a championship let down by injuries to the key players.

no, he stated that height is only one of a myriad of factors in evaluating a player and is often over-valued. this was in response to us drafting landry who was undersized for the pf position but turned out to be a steal.

they also have players that other teams covet and if need be, can free up additional cap space by sending out to one of the many teams with trade exceptions. If need be, they can work there way to max space. morey is providing flexibility. something i desire because i hated the way dawson always backed us up with ridiculous contracts. something that we don't have the worry of now. all of our contracts are moveable or are expiring. sorry buddy. i like that.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. There are two ways to acquire a superstar talent; the draft and trades. Moreover, there are only a few superstars in the league and they usually don't get dealt. Morey has tried to acquire one through trade and has so far failed. he has also positioned us to be able to have a high lotto pick so that we could acquire one through the draft. again, flexibility.

way to take that out of context. i was merely pointing to teams stuck in mediocrity with poor decisions on contracts, something we are not forced to deal with.

[/QUOTE]
By any chance, you also a Cubs fan? Maybe you don't work with any Spurs fans. I'm tired of listening to their dreck. Almost as tired as I am of Morey apologists and re-writers of history.

I doubt you appreciate Richard Jefferson. Know what he cost the Spurs? Bruce Bowen, Kurt Thomas and Fabricio Oberto.

Now I bring this up not becasue I particuarly wanted Jefferson as a Rocket. But to make a point. The competiton for talent isn't just teams with cap space or picks. Competition is everywhere. And it requires a certain level of risk. Risk that I have yet to see from Daryl Morey.[/QUOTE]

yeah, jefferson worked out real well last year. how far did the spurs go again? was that somehow success by your lofty expectations? now somehow the spurs weasled him into a better contract by either his shear stupidity or by working around the cba.

and risks? what about ron artest, was that not a risk? what about kevin martin? was that not a risk?

your bet sucks, as does your logic. Yao is done in my eyes. while the rockets may resign him, it will be a cap friendly deal and he will no longer be the focal point of the team. Aaron brooks is francis part two and i don't think morey wants to resign him.

all in all, i think morey leveraged the hell out of the yao ming and tracy mcgrady era. were the results stunning? no. we had one playoff series win. would dawson have done better? no and we would have been stuck with horrible contracts for brooks and probably already for hill by now and staring in the face of mediocrity for another 5 years.

Instead, we have the ability to wipe it clean and begin anew. i fully anticipate a few trades during the year to improve the cap situation and bring back picks. I wouldn't be surprised to see lowry, brooks and even possibly scola dealt.

 

QA is part of the decision making process, its not the decision making process. You seem to be under the impression that everything the Rockets do is a result of a formula, which is not the case. Case in point: Kevin Martin. You said he was acquired because of some formula. Really? It had nothing to do with input from scouts? Years of watching him play in Sacramento? Input from Rick Adelman? The fact they were struggling immensely last season to score the ball? The desire to be a more up-tempo team? There are so many factors that go into it, some more quantifiable than others, but to try to make your point you simplify it down to a "$Ball formula".

There's nothing wrong with having more height/athleticism. But to gain in one area you lose in another, and we are where we are because of what we've lost. Miller gives you height and is a very good offensive player. He's not a good defender (*shock*, being tall is not the same thing as being good on defense!). Hill is the prototype PF you've been asking for. Patterson is a decent athlete with all-around physical skills who can get up and down the floor. Lee maybe a downgrade compared to Ariza (not the same impact defensive player), but he's arguably a more balanced player and he's a good athlete who also runs the floor and can dribble the ball. Looking at the roster, the team has moved in the direction you've been asking for. If you want to put the blame for the losses on the minutes allocated, that's a coaching decision. And the coach is a guy with a reputation for having balanced offensive and defensive teams. Has Adelman been brainwashed by $Ball Morey -- is that the contention here?