Yao Ming leads the league in shotting with a FG% .667

I was thinking the same thing. Are you just upset that Yao got tripped up by Marbury? Jeez, a LOT of guys get tripped up by him including guards. That was ONE PLAY. I haven't seen Yao switch out on a guard once before or since.

On defense, Yao still looks a bit lost out there. He reads plays incorrectly and gets caught out of position more often then not. That's a big reason for the zone.

In sports, the defender is always at a disadvantage because he is forced to react rather than be agressive. Yao is slow to react at the moment but he will improve with time.

 

DR,

I never expected a high post offense to be implemented by Day One. I'll be disappointed if we aren't seeing parts of it by this time next year. I think getting Yao to play like Divac (without completely eliminating his low post game...we don't want to take Yao's baseline move away from him), getting Yao to play like Divac will leverage his highly-tauted passing. I can't say that I've seen Divac instincts though, but I assume they are there to the level of how Jabbar could pass, at least. The beauty of positioning Yao at the high post is to allow Francis and Mobley to threaten on either wing from that entry. It just seems better suited for Francis to not have to initiate all his own offense.

as for the zones. The idea is to allow Yao a lot of freedom of movement without the 3-sec rule being called. Yao slides around a 15-18' perimeter and wing guards are used to slow up the swing passes for Yao to catch up. The soft spots in the zone seem to be the baseline. There's also a soft spot at the top of the key when the Yao reacts to helping down low and a guard doesn't pick up the slack out front. That seems to be a communication problems. Sometimes it looks like Yao slides down to help on the baseline too much and opening up the freethrow line.

If you have a tape, I recommend checking out the 4th quarter of the Lakers game. That seems to be the best Yao has done with the zone. I haven't watched the tape yet, but I intend to tonight.

I can tell you will near certainty, that "Yao on Kobe" last night was a zone. Yao does not necessarily need help on that. In a matchup zone situation like Garnett plays, the "help" would be wing guards cheating on perimeter defense to play the driving lanes forcing the swing pass. Kobe is supposed try to drive by him and the defense collapses with Yao's 7'6 reach nearby. Note that Yao is standing pretty far away from the guards at the top of the key.

 

HP, thanks I will look for that. It may explain the situation I describe as switching. I am going to go back also to the game with E. Strickland playing the point and even the Seattle game where I remember cringing on the frequency with which it happened and the adverse results.

Jeff, the Marbury incident by itself is no big deal; it is the fact that it seem like he was ending up in those situations too often.

 

I don't know what his bread and butter plays are, but I do recall him missing dunks. I don't know how much breadder you can be. The ball was stripped out of his hands regularly, rebounds went through his hands, and guards dunked over Yao, cumulating with Marbury publicly humiliating him.

I think we are all thrilled with the LA performance, but don't forget the shortcommings. They are there and they are obvious. And best of all, they are shrinking every game.

In the category if "you don't argue that the ump blew the call, you argue that he wasn't in position to see the play". Rudy has actuall seen all of the games at t close level, studied tape, spoken to Yao, knows his conditioning, and studies the competition. What are anybody here's qualifications to over rule Rudy? Clearly there are good coaches and poor ones. And certainly mistakes are made (just ask Kobe about that layup), but Rudy is well respected as a coach and the Rockets are very well respected for developing big men.

In spite of my whining about arm chair quarterbacks, I do enyoy reading everybodys opinions. Just don't go putting yourself above the professionals.

 

DearRock,

Don't just watch Yao, look for how we are defending any opposing cutters. Also, watch the opposing center. Remember, it cannot be a "switch" unless Yao's "man" was out there picking for Kobe. Even still, it can be a zone. Also note, by definition, defenders in a zone do not "cross" paths, so in that sense, everything could, I guess, look like a switch.

 

Yao's a pimp.

 

This argument reflects differences in philosophy. I believe to a player, the endpoint is the same.

Start with how Yao has been handled to this point. IMO, Rudy's approach has been a conservative one. Minutes-wise, he'll give Yao 6 with the possibility of 12 each half. Rudy evaluates whether Yao's impact on the floor outweighs his lack of familiarity with our schemes.
You always see Yao thinking out there "Hmm... WTF am I supposed to be?"
It's most obvious on D and when he's on the weakside in the halfcourt.
For instance, when KT gets the ball and does the stare-down, watch Yao aimlessly wander the weakside: "Hey Eddie, nice block back there." "Rice, no I don't add anything to my tea." "Cat... CAT? What are you doing over here?"
Happened in the 3rd Q of the Suns game... Yank.
However, when Yao has an impact beyond our schemes - Oboard/Putback, Runs the floor, Blocks a shot - Rudy sticks with him. This jives with Rudy's "Do what works until they stop it" approach. (2 Rings, 2 Rings)

The other school of thought is basically:
If Rudy played Ming 25-30 min/game, he would find his flow more quickly and 20/6 happens a few games ago. Paraphrasing The Jet: 'You can't do anything with 10-12 minutes a game.' Yao comes in cold after everyone else is warmed and running. He is far from the focus of the offense. He spends his 5 minutes 2 steps slow and the 1 post entry he gets he's been shoved to the 3 pt line. Why not give him 25-30 minutes or when he's in get him involved more quickly? 20/6 could be an average, not a blip.

Who's right?
I say, who cares now? If this game was truly a "breakthrough" (hopefully one of many), then the point is moot. The success Yao had represents an invaluable reference point. The climb back to that point is easier because he's been there before, but most importantly, instead of (everyone) scrambling to justify his potential, he raises that ceiling, continues to fill in blanks, and (gasp) may start to expand his game and play over his head (that's high!) on a consistent basis.

 

To be honest, I still cannot decide whether Yao Ming should have been given more minutes earlier on--whether it would have been good for him, for the team, both, or neither.

But I do want to address the "defensive liability" issue from a different angle. Let's look at the endings of the last two games. Both are very close, nailbiting kind of game at the end. The end results were, of course, very different, with the Rockets losing one and winning the other. In fact, both games could have turned out either way (if Mobley made those 2 fts. . . if Kobe made the layup. . .).

They had two completely different frontcout lineup. In Phoenix, we had Griffin, Thomas, and Rice. In LA, we had Yao, Taylor and Hawkins. It is clear that what won us the game during crunch time last night was (at least a big part) the offensive skills of Taylor and Yao. Griffin and Thomas are supposed to be better defenders than Yao and Taylor. But they are not as lethal on offense as Yao and Taylor.

Now, for the sake of simplicity, let's quantify it to a scale of 5 (5 being the best, 0 being the worst):

Rice O=5, D=0
Thomas O=3, D=3
Griffin O=3, D=4
Hawkins O=1, D=5
Taylor O=5, D=1
Yao O=5, D=1

So, we are trading away <5+3+3 O and 0+3+4 D> for <1+5+5 O and 5+1+1 D>, which is about the same.

My point is that, because of Yao and Taylor's offense, Rudy can afford to put in Hawkins (a defensive player) in place of Rice. The so-called "defensive liability" should be considered in the context of whether his offense is good enough to warrant a defensive specialist (Hawk) in place of an offensive specialist (Rice).

Does that make any sense?

 

Wow, this is a long thread. I have not read all of the posts. But I want to bring up a report of Yang Yi, who is following Rockets and Ming. He said that Rockets have a straight rule that each center must get one rebound in every four minutes. He said Ming only reached this standard three times out of his first seven NBA games. Rudy thinks Ming's defence still cannot reach his requirement about a center.

 

Reading this thread was very interesting because it debates the way to "raise a superstar". Everyone on this board believes that Yao will be a star if not super- and this is the foundation for which all the arguments are based. What is the best way to nurture, develop, and unleash a player's potential is very difficult to answer. The truth is, if you are gifted or talented, which Yao is, then it is only a matter of time before you get it. I agree with DearRock in that Rudy should not take credit it Yao's "breakout" performance. It is also true that no set plays were run for Yao. Yao received great assists and made his own shots, a matter of knowing where to be and what to do. The only argument for Rudy T. is that he wanted to protect Yao from mentally psyching out and physically burning out, so he played Yao conservatively. This in itself deserves credit for showing that the coach cares deeply for his player. It is noted that they work on Yao's game in practice. Question is why are the influences from practice absent on court? Despite Yao's recent performance, remember he had zero set plays run for him and he did not employ any new offensive moves. Makes the point that Yao is truly gifted. That is why I agree with DearRock that Rudy gets a B- for developing Yao. But I also agree with HP and OMR that Rudy did the right thing by bringing him in slowly.

 

Absolutely. That's what a team sport is all about. "Match" is a word not only for against an opposing team, but also for the team composition. A great coach mixes up his players to produce a win against a given opponent. It's true to my basketball pick-up game, also true to my soccer competitions.

 

HoRockets,

<i>"Despite Yao's recent performance, remember he had zero set plays run for him and he did not employ any new offensive moves. "</i>

I don't agree with that, as I've argued with DearRock.

Yao had entry passes for shots at least 4 times. The baseline baby hook on the right side. The 12'er over his man. And the reverse layup. And a pick n roll that finally was completed. I'm willing to bet there was another.

Yao hasn't just been an opportunist. The reason us Rockets fans are so jazzed about him is not that he can catch and finish down low with more reliance than Cato....we are all excited because he has made some very impressive low post moves. The inside out game is a set offense.

 

I must have missed the pick and roll, but if so, then there was maybe one set play for Yao. My memory is not good enough to recall all his shots, but I do remember a rebound and putback slam, following Steve on a fast break where he got the bucket plus 1, a nice penetration by Steve to assist Yao under the bucket and twice he made baseline moves for a layup and shot off the glass. That accounts for 5 out of his 9 attempts. None were set plays. I can't debate the remaining 4 since I can't remember, but I don't think any of them were set plays neither. Any one that knows is invited to fill them in.

 

HoRockets,

You are reinventing a well-established basketball term when you say Yao's low post plays are not "set plays." Let's not get into a semantics argument, because semantics arguments require there to be different ways of looking at words and context. There isn't in the case of proper use of this bball term. Yao was getting Set Plays called for him. Yao was the set offense entry point, making him the playmaker, just like Maurice was on his low post calls. The team wasn't just freelancing, nor was Yao just collecting garbage baskets.

 

I agree that you would call them set plays. Set plays involve all 5 players, even if it's an ISO where 4 guys stand around. My point was that I don't recall any plays where Yao was the focal point of the offense. What I saw was ball movement down to Yao since he was the open man, and he created his own shot. Maybe just a matter of perspective or like you said, a semantic argument. Just know that I agree with you, OMR, and DearRock on the principle of the points made earlier.

 

Hey, I found a typo. I think you meant to say Rice O=0, D=0

 

Interesting report if indeed true...

 

There's been some good discussion in this thread by some good posters. I'd like to echo the comments by CB4ever and HoRockets that regardless of how good a job one feels Rudy is doing bringing along Yao, Yao's performance gives fans reason to be very, very positive about the future. It's a great time to be a Rockets fan.

Windandsea's tidbit about the rebounding requirement is interesting. Given reports that Rudy has no problems with Mo's reboudning, I'm inclined to think there is no such rebounding requirement for PFs. What do you think this says about the team's philosophy on player roles? What are power forwards' jobs for the Rockets compared to centers'?