Why MoneyBall doesn't work & other lessons learned

That's definitely the closest. They got knocked out in the 2nd round, I think.
I wonder if Sweet Lou meant the 2nd round of the playoffs and meant 1 team instead of "teams".

 

ORLY?

 

By that criteria, the 2009 Rockets could also qualify.

 

about. jordan was better. but they were at least comparable.

 

It's much easier in the past, because teams play more team-oriented basketball, and they're allowed to play defense.

In today's NBA structure this no longer holds true, except maybe, maybe the Celtics. Iso basketball, lack of hand-checking, offensive flopping, and general star treatment makes it literally impossible without your star.

 

Haha. You are right. I supposed there are couple of teams that can fit the new weakened criteria.

 

who and when?

 

I don't think it is a disservice at all to say Adelman drove that pick when all the evidence points that direction.

This is a fansite, not a newspaper, there are credible people that post on it, but if you are looking for a verified source, a fansite is not the place to be, a newspaper is held to much higher standards in reporting.

I am not bothered in the least when fans say what they heard, or think, that is what this place is for....very bizzare your line of thinking here.

DD

 

I think it has been documented that Morey was "behind" the Battier trade. In what capacity is not clear. Incidentally, Battier also fits the profile of the perceived "JVG-type player" to the tee.

 

It is kinda weird since durvasa was arguing with me at the beginning of this thread that the Rockets saw the writing on the wall with Gortat and moved on, despite there being 0 evidence to that theory. So much for only believing things that are reported! At least your theory of how things happened actually has some credence to it. I mean what was Dean Cooper supposed to say? "We don't really know much about AB and don't really like him.. but Adelman wanted him!"

 

Very true. Morey was 100% behind the Battier acquisition. No question about it. If it was up to Dawson, he'd trade 3 first round picks to get a very talented gamble. e.g. Eddie Griffin. Dawson goes for Steve Francis, Eddie Griffin, over Shane Battier, Patrick Patterson.

 

Allow me to dissect the disconnect here.

Two different positions:

(1) Adelman was the guy behind pick and that was widely reported.

(2) In my opinion, the reporting suggests that Adelman was the key guy behind the pick.

Now, somewhere during the conversation you switched from (1) to (2). Maybe you think its splitting hairs or it is "semantics", but they are actually very different. (1) is an assertion of fact, while (2) is an inference based on partial information which reasonable people can disagree on.

What I am saying is that it was never reported, in anything I've come across, that Adelman was behind the pick.

Now, if you wish, you may extrapolate from what was reported and say, "I think its likely that Adelman was behind the pick." Some may agree with you, some may not. But it is flat out misleading for anyone to say "It was reported that Adelman was behind the pick" based on whatever sources you've referenced thus far.

That's about as clear as I can put it. I don't really care who was behind the pick, but its not helpful when opinion or speculation is made out to be reported fact. I don't think that's too lofty of a standard for this message board, which right or wrong is a major source for Rockets information for thousands of fans.

 

LTF, where did I write that we should only believe things that are explicitly reported? I never said that. What I'm saying is that we should not claim something was reported when it is actually extrapolation or speculation. Agree?

Please point out where I claimed something was reported that was in fact not reported, and I'll happily say "I was wrong." I have no problems with admitting I'm wrong ... I've done it many times in the past and I'll do it many times in the future.

 

My thoughts on DM:
1. Not the greatest GM of all (he has put together a group of avg great guys that you would love for your sister to marry)
2. I don't think he understands that chemistry is just as important as player stats (We traded Otis to get Clyde who had a chemistry with Dream). He has accumulated a plethora of similar players, which explains our frontline woes of not 1 truly big man and no one on the front line besides Jordan (bad hands) with athleticism. Brad Miller is performing daylight robbery!
3. No superstar wants to come here without a decent big man to block the paint and play D in the 4th Qtr. No Carmelo happening
4. He's being handcuffed by Les on the Yao thing, when it's quite obivious it's time to move on
5. Stop tweeting, radioing, etc... get to the business of improving this squad or tanking to enhance our draft position. We've done it before and got Dream and Ralph

 

durv, I was more just poking fun at you nitpicking DD on details.

I wasn't saying you reported any misinformation, just that you're giving DD a hard time for making a reasonable assumption. DD's not saying that Adelman overruled Morey and made him select Brooks. He's just saying that Adelman was really familiar with him and his quotes shortly thereafter lead one to believe that he had a strong input into selecting him. Rick being the coach, I'm sure his opinion is held in high regard. Would Brooks still have been the pick if JVG was coaching? I'm not so sure. I would call Aaron Brooks Adelman's draft pick as well. It's not based on a quote -- just the surrounding circumstances with the pick. It's unusual for a coach to know so much about a newly acquired player's game -- but Adelman seemed to already know how to develop Brooks.

But that doesn't mean Morey doesn't get credit for it either. It's pretty stupid to divide praise for a draft pick -- which I think is more of the point you were getting at as well. All involved should be credited with the success of Aaron Brooks -- but I think it's safe to say he was someone that Adelman had his eye on for quite some time.

 

Then you missed the point, because this is what I wrote:

I'm saying that its important to distinguish reported fact from speculation (which, though reasonable, may still be disputed).

 

I've seen a lot of speculation but no documentation.

I agree that Battier is a JVG type player, so is it a stretch to think that JVG was behind the deal?

Also, if Morey had enough power in the organization to drive a trade of a lottery pick then do you think that he'd neccessarily have to do whatever Adelman wanted the next season?

 

No, it is not important, it is an internet fansite, filled with passionate fans....who extrapolate on a daily basis.

You, are just picking knits.....

Adelman was the "KEY" to that selection as reported in the Chronicle.



Morey, was simply smart enough to listen to his new hire, who knows a lot more about basketball than he does.

That is what a good manager does....

DD

 

I think in the "No Stats All-star" piece, Les Alexander was quoted as saying that Morey was the guy who brought up Battier. It was never confirmed whether he was the guy negotiating on the terms of the trade, however.

 

Let's assume that your simple, easy, pat assessment of the team's philosophy, "moneyball," is spot-on. The fact that the Rockets have not succeeded under it isn't proof that it doesn't work. It simply shows that it hasn't worked for this team, so far. What if the team hadn't been beset by injuries? Yao's injury isn't a product of "moneyball." It's a separate thing unto itself. What if a Terrance Williams or a Jordan Hill turned out to be a great player, worthy of his draft position and physical gifts? What if Morey uses some of these assets he's been collecting to nab an elite player? The verdict is not in yet. The point is, there are many factors that figure into the Rockets' lack of success so far, and few of them are a direct result of "moneyball."