Yes, the old timers on this site know I was one of Francis' biggest critics during his first tenure. You want a motive: Rafer. After two years of watching him, it is just too much to take. He is flat out awful, perhaps the worst PG in the league. Yes, he handles the ball well, but 171 games supply ample evidence of the fact that Rafer is a huge liability. Teams are purposely leaving him wide open. He can't shoot. And when you need someone to make a wide open horse shot, and James is in slump, sub someone in and give them a chance. What is so illogical about that?! Good grief people!
The problem is that Francis is a worse career 3 point shooter than Rafer. You think they won't leave him wide open too? There is a reason that Francis couldn't earn the starting role on the last two EASTERN conference LOTTERY teams, was paid 30 million not to play for lottery bound Portland, and can't even earn ANY minutes on a team where the PG position is an obvious weakness. It isn't because he is an all star or because the coaches unfairly "dislike" him.
well, that's just the way it is solid. you suggest a reasonable move by playing Franchise instead of Alston, and everybody jumps on you and labels you a "scrub homer" and an "FOF", they sarcastically ask you "so do you know more than the coach?", then you have all the comparisons of Francis to Langhi, Vspan, and Boki, and, if you're really having a bad day, one dude will jump up and say: "hey, shut up, we are winning! we are 6-1! we don't need to win games easily! we have to let Mac and Yao play 48 minutes and risk injuries! who knows? they might both get injured and then we will tank the season for an inknown commdity!, attaboy Alston! keep shooting them threes, oooh, was that an AND1 move?? ooooh, he faked the crap out of the other guard! he missed the layup, but hey, who cares? as long as he is doing c00lz AND1 stuff.. attaboy Alston! Lolz lolz!" it's not like a fat-azz Steve would do worse than Alston, at least he might hit a couple of 3's and actually HIT a layup instead of airballing it. heck, even my little brother can probably hit the rim every time he shoots a teardrop..
I forget what game it was, but I actually saw Rafer make one of his patented "teardrops." It was a rare sight indeed. After seeing him attempt a hundred or so, he actually made one. Maybe someone has a photo of it going through the net. That would be special.
Do that and you'll have people complaining that we're not "developing Scola" or whatever. It's a lose-lose situation. (Mind you, I rather have Scola in there. Of all the players the Rockets could theoretically develop, he's the most important, since he'll be matching up against the top Western Conference bigs.)
Wells didn't play last year. When you swap in Wells, James, and Scola as 3 of 8 in your rotation, nearly 40% churn is not nearly identical. And you don't reach point of underperformance 7 games into the season, especially when you're 6-1.
The core rotation players are still learning the new system and you want to the non rotation players to get minutes? Right now Adelman has enough worries of the rotational players getting the new system down, last thing he wants to do is worry about when is a good time to stick a non rotation player in games.
Yes, Rafer stinks. But that's more of an argument against Rafer in general than an argument in favor of some sort of "hot/cold" subbing issue with the back end of the bench.
I think Adelman's doing right by sticking with his core rotation players early in the season. They need the playing time they need to get used to one another, and he seems more intent on giving enough minutes to these guys to build needed chemistry. As the season progresses, I can see him adjusting the minutes and letting the rest of the reserves get some minutes here and there to spell the core guys. I'm hoping he'll find ways to rest Yao and T-Mac enough so that they don't wear down by season's end. And I can see Mutombo gradually getting more playing time in the second half of the season as we get closer to the playoffs. Francis, on the other hand, is a mystery to me as to what will happen.
exactly. 6-1 start and people wan't the rotation to change. we could be undefeted and people would still say "bench rafer, play steve."
WTF are u talking about... We have a 8-10 man rotation..... We don't need a 73 man rotation.... I don't understand where this is coming from. If Tmac shoots 20% and Mike James shoots 20% and all the rest of our guards shoot 20%... likelyhood is the Defense is playing GREAT not that if we stick our 15th man off the bench he is gonna shoot 60% and save our game... this thread is r****ded
This kind of rudeness is completely uncalled for. I am going to ask Clutch and/or the moderators to take a look at this thread. To disagree is one thing, but this kind of response is ridiculous. I think an apology is order.
I understand where you're coming from but to say such things and you're sig is advertising your new site...... good marketing tecnique.
Cry Cry Cry. This thread is a rehash of a hundred more that have played out the past two years (and more).
You have to hit "Submit Reply" before anyone can respond to your messege. The spurs (current champs) have player 11 in their last 4 games and in the one before that they played 12.
When the Obvious is not Obvious, there is usually a reason. Bullard in the post game analysis said that if Rafer continues to shoot 30%, "it might be time to give somebody on the bench a chance." Hmmmm. That has a familiar ring about it. Oh my, that is the subject of this "r****ded" thread.
clutch should take a look at this, send you back to rookie status so there aren't threads as "great" as this one to be started but since this is somehow not rated a 1, there will always be people to come up and take your place, sigh
I don't get the animosity in this thread, but anyway... Scola, Rafer, and James need to step up, or sit down. It's that simple. This team is too deep for guys to get serious minutes while playing like garbage, which was the premise of this thread. I couldn't agree more.
I don't either. Some of the most off the wall hateful responses I have ever seen in a thread. I never thought of this topic as controversial. Why do you have bench players (non-rotational) players? If the rotational players are injured or get in a slump, you have options. Not a revelation. Bullard said the same thing tonight. Thanks.
