whocurrz wrote:Rocketsbaby wrote:BallnIngram wrote:Are we sure hes coming off the bench?
Honestly I do not want Carmelo coming off the bench. I believe he is a much better fit with our starting lineup where Harden/Paul initiate all the offense. The bench mob allows Eric Gordon to go to work and he's coming off one of the most productive offensive seasons in league history so the last thing I want is Carmelo to upset the apple cart.
Agree with most of your points but that bolded part is not remotely true
LOL, i added a little flair for dramatic effect but with a 3.77 ORAPM, Eric Gordon was undoubtedly one of the best offensive players in the league last year. The guy has the talent to absolutely carry an offense for large stretches and really thrives in that 6th man role.
He also bulked up a lot last year to handle his switching assignments better. People love to hate on the Rockets defense but Harden/Gordon/Paul have all bulked up to the point you can't just force a switch and then back them down for an easy bucket. This enables us to switch every pick. Does it leave some mismatches from time to time? Sure. But it also enables us to conserve energy not fighting through screens. Essentially we are banking on the fact we can score more efficiently than you can IF we don't concede a bunch of bunnies in the paint.
The Rockets style sure has a lot of haters for a team who gave up two less points per 100 possessions than the Boston Celtics and Utah Jazz... and one less point than the 76ers....
Not everyone is Victor Oladipo or Jimmy Butler and excels on both ends. Trade offs have to be made.
For the most part Game Theory Optimal Strategy in the NBA right now is to create the absolute most efficient offense as possible without sacrificing greatly on defense.
Boston gets it. They've built a stable of wing defenders who combine to form an elite defense. Then they have the shooting to surround Kyrie's iso play. They've gone slightly the opposite way. Build a competent offense with an elite defense. That could work.
What can't work is mimicking the Miami Heat and throwing a bunch of mediocre players out there and hoping they win. What isn't likely to work is tanking for ten years like Sacramento hoping you find the next Lebron James.
People can laugh all they want about signing Chris Paul for $40 million. But do you think we would be half as likely to win the title if we spent $20 million on Tim Hardaway Jr instead? Do you think you win the title by forming a starting five of guys who make $8m apiece?
Newsflash, when they play the games no one cares what kind of "value" you're getting from your backup center. Either your backup center gets the rebound or he doesn't. Either he can defend the PNR or he can not. It doesn't matter if you paid him $1.8m per year less than what John Henson got. It doesn't matter if you got a team option on Year 4.
You guys are so obsessed with getting a good "value" that you forgot what wins games and what doesn't. You're all a bunch of social security collecting value shoppers lined up at 7 AM for double coupon day at Harris Teeter. No one is trying to win 46 games here. You win in the NBA with elite talent, period. These "value" contract guys are the worst in the league because you can't win games at a high level with them. There is no price where Alex Len is a good "value" because he can't be in your playoff rotation. There are literally 800 guys in the world I'd prefer to roster who could provide a skill we might actually covet during a single possession in Game 3 of the WCF.