Stats Corner

[bwgood77]

I'm REALLY hoping that at least 50% of our woes have been coaching, and that Igor will fix this. I know I've been fairly negative since the signing of Ariza, but it's not that I am in any way, shape, or form, a 'pessimist', but that move was such a 'ok-just-wait-ONE-more-year' move, that I've just lost interest.

I've said before, I'll happily eat my crow if we end up competitive this season, but nothing McD has done in FA has convinced me that we are heading in the right direction. Trading a young, talented PG, who is making but a few Million $ this year for a one-year, $15M rental of a 32YO has-been, is at best, a lateral move. we had an opportunity to really bring in a potential game changer this off-season, and instead, we bring in Ariza. Sorry, but that is just not inventive enough for my liking. Letting Elfrid go for a song, then overpaying for Ariza was a dumb move.

I don't care if we still have BK and Chandler and Dudley on the books this season; we likely could have flipped Chandler, as he's still productive, and BK may prove to be worthwhile, and someone we can trade before the deadline. If we did this, we'd potentially have a competitive group in place, but instead, we are obviously content to just 'exist' again, for another season; that gets really tiring for some fans.

We didn't trade a cheap PG. Payton was a free agent (if that is who you are talking about) and the team was clearly worse with him on the floor given his non shooting/non defensive game. I'm not that enamored with the Ariza signing but I like it better than most all of McD's past moves/signings, like trading a first for Knight and signing him for 5/70, signing Chandler for 4/52, signing Dudley for 3/30, and if he would have cash strapped us long term for another average or less than average player that would have been disappointing, and I didn't feel there were very good options out there. Given that 3pt shooting and defense have been our biggest problems he helps there (despite him not being the one of the best Houston defenders, in some ways he was more valuable due to being able to cover more positions than their guards and centers) and his 3 pt shooting is above avg on high volume.

AND, I think regardless of who we would have maybe ended up with this summer, the west is too tough to crack the playoffs, and it might be more clear who the best fit is when there is a much much much better group of free agents next summer when we have about $30 million in expiring contracts and can stretch Knight and/or decline options.

I've seen this logic before, which is why I alluded to it; we are blaming Elfrid for our team's efficiency/success, or lack there of? We were worse with him on the floor? We sucked pretty bad before we even brought him in--he wasn't the problem. Our coaching sucked, and most of our players sucked/are poorly developed--that was our problem, not Elfrid. And yes, he was a FA, but it was widely known we did not bother even trying to keep him; he signed for less than $3M somewhere else. He netted a positive number on that Carmelo ranking; not much lower than Ariza, but we pay Ariza 5x+ what Elfrid is making this year? It's these types of decisions that are killing this team.

And what, the West is too hard to even try?? What kind of reasoning is that? Seriously? It's too hard, so we shouldn't even try? Had we actually 'taken' a player from a team in the West that is actually a key component...not a number 3 or 4...or 6th man level player, MAYBE we would have a chance to be competitive; nothing wrong with being an 8th seed on our way up, so long as we don't stay there, but getting there would be a HUGE improvement, and signing Ariza is not going to get us there, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one; though I will agree that at least it was better than Knight, Dudley, and Chandler signings.

I'm not saying don't try but when your core is mostly 20-21 and the top tier's cores are late 20s with playoff experience, and the up n coming teams maybe more towards mid 20s, it's tough.

Payton has always been a terrible shooter and he is a terrible defender. He may grade ok on some scales due to being a decent rebounder and distributor but shooting and defense is what wins today. He got paid $3 million or less for a reason. Orlando traded him for a mid 2nd when they held RFA rights and went with DJ Augustin and Jerian Grant for a reason. He doesn't contribute to winning basketball.

[lilfishi22]

I'm REALLY hoping that at least 50% of our woes have been coaching, and that Igor will fix this. I know I've been fairly negative since the signing of Ariza, but it's not that I am in any way, shape, or form, a 'pessimist', but that move was such a 'ok-just-wait-ONE-more-year' move, that I've just lost interest.

I've said before, I'll happily eat my crow if we end up competitive this season, but nothing McD has done in FA has convinced me that we are heading in the right direction. Trading a young, talented PG, who is making but a few Million $ this year for a one-year, $15M rental of a 32YO has-been, is at best, a lateral move. we had an opportunity to really bring in a potential game changer this off-season, and instead, we bring in Ariza. Sorry, but that is just not inventive enough for my liking. Letting Elfrid go for a song, then overpaying for Ariza was a dumb move.

I don't care if we still have BK and Chandler and Dudley on the books this season; we likely could have flipped Chandler, as he's still productive, and BK may prove to be worthwhile, and someone we can trade before the deadline. If we did this, we'd potentially have a competitive group in place, but instead, we are obviously content to just 'exist' again, for another season; that gets really tiring for some fans.

We didn't trade a cheap PG. Payton was a free agent (if that is who you are talking about) and the team was clearly worse with him on the floor given his non shooting/non defensive game. I'm not that enamored with the Ariza signing but I like it better than most all of McD's past moves/signings, like trading a first for Knight and signing him for 5/70, signing Chandler for 4/52, signing Dudley for 3/30, and if he would have cash strapped us long term for another average or less than average player that would have been disappointing, and I didn't feel there were very good options out there. Given that 3pt shooting and defense have been our biggest problems he helps there (despite him not being the one of the best Houston defenders, in some ways he was more valuable due to being able to cover more positions than their guards and centers) and his 3 pt shooting is above avg on high volume.

AND, I think regardless of who we would have maybe ended up with this summer, the west is too tough to crack the playoffs, and it might be more clear who the best fit is when there is a much much much better group of free agents next summer when we have about $30 million in expiring contracts and can stretch Knight and/or decline options.

I've seen this logic before, which is why I alluded to it; we are blaming Elfrid for our team's efficiency/success, or lack there of? We were worse with him on the floor? We sucked pretty bad before we even brought him in--he wasn't the problem. Our coaching sucked, and most of our players sucked/are poorly developed--that was our problem, not Elfrid. And yes, he was a FA, but it was widely known we did not bother even trying to keep him; he signed for less than $3M somewhere else. He netted a positive number on that Carmelo ranking; not much lower than Ariza, but we pay Ariza 5x+ what Elfrid is making this year? It's these types of decisions that are killing this team.

And what, the West is too hard to even try?? What kind of reasoning is that? Seriously? It's too hard, so we shouldn't even try? Had we actually 'taken' a player from a team in the West that is actually a key component...not a number 3 or 4...or 6th man level player, MAYBE we would have a chance to be competitive; nothing wrong with being an 8th seed on our way up, so long as we don't stay there, but getting there would be a HUGE improvement, and signing Ariza is not going to get us there, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one; though I will agree that at least it was better than Knight, Dudley, and Chandler signings.

I agree it doesn't make sense to blame our woes on Payton even with all his flaws because we were in a situation where none of the higher ups were wanting wins which I'm sure was handed down as an 'initiative' to coaching and that obviously affects how we play. Having Watson was the worst thing to happen to us because despite likely being told wins aren't what we're after, he artificially inflated egos, gifted PT to players who weren't ready/deserving and really taught the guys nothing with regards to actual basketball skill development. You could argue TJ and Booker got better but these are legit NBA players and they will improve despite the coaching.

JT tried to put in place some discipline and for the most part, stuck to the 'crazy' philosophy that PT should be rewarded based on merit but he's not a high level coach and no one really expected him to be. I'm not willing to crown Igor the get of the offseason and he will somehow single-handedly turn this ship around but he does have the acumen and has put in the work so on paper he's a solid candidate.

Signing Ariza might end up being a lateral move at best but at worst, he's an expiring contract with high level experience. The fact that he's in his early 30's means he's still able to play and be effective. He's NOT a token vet. Do we need him to be a Lebron/KD stopper which he may or may never have been? No, because those guys are unstoppable but if you can put him in the game and make things a bit harder for the opposing team's best players, that shows our guys how a savvy vet defends at a high level. He'll be able to hit 3's, he'll stretch the floor and he'll play D, that's what we're looking for. I think too much is put on the dollar figure of Ariza's deal but if you really think about it, what we wanted was a 1yr deal for a vet who could provide the aforementioned capabilities and that's the price you have to pay if you want that cap flexibility. The sticker shock is a short term thing. If you remember, everyone laughed at the Sixers for signing 32yo JJ Reddick (same age as Ariza), a player who does probably half the things Ariza does to that $23m deal. But he's been one of their best players this past year especially in the playoffs *because* he fit exactly what their young core needed from a vet. They kept their books clean for this offseason for Lebron/FA's and even though they didn't land the top dog, they had a very productive year of player development, growth and experience. They lost NOTHING from that signing.

[NavLDO]

We didn't trade a cheap PG. Payton was a free agent (if that is who you are talking about) and the team was clearly worse with him on the floor given his non shooting/non defensive game. I'm not that enamored with the Ariza signing but I like it better than most all of McD's past moves/signings, like trading a first for Knight and signing him for 5/70, signing Chandler for 4/52, signing Dudley for 3/30, and if he would have cash strapped us long term for another average or less than average player that would have been disappointing, and I didn't feel there were very good options out there. Given that 3pt shooting and defense have been our biggest problems he helps there (despite him not being the one of the best Houston defenders, in some ways he was more valuable due to being able to cover more positions than their guards and centers) and his 3 pt shooting is above avg on high volume.

AND, I think regardless of who we would have maybe ended up with this summer, the west is too tough to crack the playoffs, and it might be more clear who the best fit is when there is a much much much better group of free agents next summer when we have about $30 million in expiring contracts and can stretch Knight and/or decline options.

I've seen this logic before, which is why I alluded to it; we are blaming Elfrid for our team's efficiency/success, or lack there of? We were worse with him on the floor? We sucked pretty bad before we even brought him in--he wasn't the problem. Our coaching sucked, and most of our players sucked/are poorly developed--that was our problem, not Elfrid. And yes, he was a FA, but it was widely known we did not bother even trying to keep him; he signed for less than $3M somewhere else. He netted a positive number on that Carmelo ranking; not much lower than Ariza, but we pay Ariza 5x+ what Elfrid is making this year? It's these types of decisions that are killing this team.

And what, the West is too hard to even try?? What kind of reasoning is that? Seriously? It's too hard, so we shouldn't even try? Had we actually 'taken' a player from a team in the West that is actually a key component...not a number 3 or 4...or 6th man level player, MAYBE we would have a chance to be competitive; nothing wrong with being an 8th seed on our way up, so long as we don't stay there, but getting there would be a HUGE improvement, and signing Ariza is not going to get us there, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one; though I will agree that at least it was better than Knight, Dudley, and Chandler signings.

I agree it doesn't make sense to blame our woes on Payton even with all his flaws because we were in a situation where none of the higher ups were wanting wins which I'm sure was handed down as an 'initiative' to coaching and that obviously affects how we play. Having Watson was the worst thing to happen to us because despite likely being told wins aren't what we're after, he artificially inflated egos, gifted PT to players who weren't ready/deserving and really taught the guys nothing with regards to actual basketball skill development. You could argue TJ and Booker got better but these are legit NBA players and they will improve despite the coaching.

JT tried to put in place some discipline and for the most part, stuck to the 'crazy' philosophy that PT should be rewarded based on merit but he's not a high level coach and no one really expected him to be. I'm not willing to crown Igor the get of the offseason and he will somehow single-handedly turn this ship around but he does have the acumen and has put in the work so on paper he's a solid candidate.

Signing Ariza might end up being a lateral move at best but at worst, he's an expiring contract with high level experience. The fact that he's in his early 30's means he's still able to play and be effective. He's NOT a token vet. Do we need him to be a Lebron/KD stopper which he may or may never have been? No, because those guys are unstoppable but if you can put him in the game and make things a bit harder for the opposing team's best players, that shows our guys how a savvy vet defends at a high level. He'll be able to hit 3's, he'll stretch the floor and he'll play D, that's what we're looking for. I think too much is put on the dollar figure of Ariza's deal but if you really think about it, what we wanted was a 1yr deal for a vet who could provide the aforementioned capabilities and that's the price you have to pay if you want that cap flexibility. The sticker shock is a short term thing. If you remember, everyone laughed at the Sixers for signing 32yo JJ Reddick (same age as Ariza), a player who does probably half the things Ariza does to that $23m deal. But he's been one of their best players this past year especially in the playoffs *because* he fit exactly what their young core needed from a vet. They kept their books clean for this offseason for Lebron/FA's and even though they didn't land the top dog, they had a very productive year of player development, growth and experience. They lost NOTHING from that signing.

Fair enough, but we've seen this 'sheet of music before', so I certainly hope that this time, it 'sounds different'. It's somewhat like your sig-line, except switch-out 'starting Chandler' for 'Signing Ariza'..., because honestly, to me, that's how I'm looking at this... as being--'The best Anti-Tank, Tank move'. It LOOKS like we are trying, but in reality, it did nothing but clog up our cap, and give us, at best, a #4 on a playoff team (Harden, Gordon, Capela...Ariza). Sadly, that likely equates to a #2 for us...

So, the 'Tankers' win again...we get another season full of 'try-hard' but ultimately end up in 'losses', so we can draft near the top...AGAIN...

[bwgood77]

I've seen this logic before, which is why I alluded to it; we are blaming Elfrid for our team's efficiency/success, or lack there of? We were worse with him on the floor? We sucked pretty bad before we even brought him in--he wasn't the problem. Our coaching sucked, and most of our players sucked/are poorly developed--that was our problem, not Elfrid. And yes, he was a FA, but it was widely known we did not bother even trying to keep him; he signed for less than $3M somewhere else. He netted a positive number on that Carmelo ranking; not much lower than Ariza, but we pay Ariza 5x+ what Elfrid is making this year? It's these types of decisions that are killing this team.

And what, the West is too hard to even try?? What kind of reasoning is that? Seriously? It's too hard, so we shouldn't even try? Had we actually 'taken' a player from a team in the West that is actually a key component...not a number 3 or 4...or 6th man level player, MAYBE we would have a chance to be competitive; nothing wrong with being an 8th seed on our way up, so long as we don't stay there, but getting there would be a HUGE improvement, and signing Ariza is not going to get us there, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one; though I will agree that at least it was better than Knight, Dudley, and Chandler signings.

I agree it doesn't make sense to blame our woes on Payton even with all his flaws because we were in a situation where none of the higher ups were wanting wins which I'm sure was handed down as an 'initiative' to coaching and that obviously affects how we play. Having Watson was the worst thing to happen to us because despite likely being told wins aren't what we're after, he artificially inflated egos, gifted PT to players who weren't ready/deserving and really taught the guys nothing with regards to actual basketball skill development. You could argue TJ and Booker got better but these are legit NBA players and they will improve despite the coaching.

JT tried to put in place some discipline and for the most part, stuck to the 'crazy' philosophy that PT should be rewarded based on merit but he's not a high level coach and no one really expected him to be. I'm not willing to crown Igor the get of the offseason and he will somehow single-handedly turn this ship around but he does have the acumen and has put in the work so on paper he's a solid candidate.

Signing Ariza might end up being a lateral move at best but at worst, he's an expiring contract with high level experience. The fact that he's in his early 30's means he's still able to play and be effective. He's NOT a token vet. Do we need him to be a Lebron/KD stopper which he may or may never have been? No, because those guys are unstoppable but if you can put him in the game and make things a bit harder for the opposing team's best players, that shows our guys how a savvy vet defends at a high level. He'll be able to hit 3's, he'll stretch the floor and he'll play D, that's what we're looking for. I think too much is put on the dollar figure of Ariza's deal but if you really think about it, what we wanted was a 1yr deal for a vet who could provide the aforementioned capabilities and that's the price you have to pay if you want that cap flexibility. The sticker shock is a short term thing. If you remember, everyone laughed at the Sixers for signing 32yo JJ Reddick (same age as Ariza), a player who does probably half the things Ariza does to that $23m deal. But he's been one of their best players this past year especially in the playoffs *because* he fit exactly what their young core needed from a vet. They kept their books clean for this offseason for Lebron/FA's and even though they didn't land the top dog, they had a very productive year of player development, growth and experience. They lost NOTHING from that signing.

Fair enough, but we've seen this 'sheet of music before', so I certainly hope that this time, it 'sounds different'. It's somewhat like your sig-line, except switch-out 'starting Chandler' for 'Signing Ariza'..., because honestly, to me, that's how I'm looking at this... as being--'The best Anti-Tank, Tank move'. It LOOKS like we are trying, but in reality, it did nothing but clog up our cap, and give us, at best, a #4 on a playoff team (Harden, Gordon, Capela...Ariza). Sadly, that likely equates to a #2 for us...

So, the 'Tankers' win again...we get another season full of 'try-hard' but ultimately end up in 'losses', so we can draft near the top...AGAIN...

Ariza doesn't clog cap space...he preserves it unless you saw another worthy free agent out there. We were by far the worst defense and by far the worst 3 pt shooting team last year.

He is immediately our best defender no matter where you think he ranked on the Rockets last year and will likely be a good example for Jackson, Bridges, Warren and Booker in that regard. And he's another guy that can hit 3s. All we had were Booker and Bender last year....and Daniels who could knock them down. Ariza is still a very solid player. Chandler is barely playable at this point which was also the case last year. Now if we gave Ariza more than a year I'd be unhappy.

[lilfishi22]

I've seen this logic before, which is why I alluded to it; we are blaming Elfrid for our team's efficiency/success, or lack there of? We were worse with him on the floor? We sucked pretty bad before we even brought him in--he wasn't the problem. Our coaching sucked, and most of our players sucked/are poorly developed--that was our problem, not Elfrid. And yes, he was a FA, but it was widely known we did not bother even trying to keep him; he signed for less than $3M somewhere else. He netted a positive number on that Carmelo ranking; not much lower than Ariza, but we pay Ariza 5x+ what Elfrid is making this year? It's these types of decisions that are killing this team.

And what, the West is too hard to even try?? What kind of reasoning is that? Seriously? It's too hard, so we shouldn't even try? Had we actually 'taken' a player from a team in the West that is actually a key component...not a number 3 or 4...or 6th man level player, MAYBE we would have a chance to be competitive; nothing wrong with being an 8th seed on our way up, so long as we don't stay there, but getting there would be a HUGE improvement, and signing Ariza is not going to get us there, IMO.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one; though I will agree that at least it was better than Knight, Dudley, and Chandler signings.

I agree it doesn't make sense to blame our woes on Payton even with all his flaws because we were in a situation where none of the higher ups were wanting wins which I'm sure was handed down as an 'initiative' to coaching and that obviously affects how we play. Having Watson was the worst thing to happen to us because despite likely being told wins aren't what we're after, he artificially inflated egos, gifted PT to players who weren't ready/deserving and really taught the guys nothing with regards to actual basketball skill development. You could argue TJ and Booker got better but these are legit NBA players and they will improve despite the coaching.

JT tried to put in place some discipline and for the most part, stuck to the 'crazy' philosophy that PT should be rewarded based on merit but he's not a high level coach and no one really expected him to be. I'm not willing to crown Igor the get of the offseason and he will somehow single-handedly turn this ship around but he does have the acumen and has put in the work so on paper he's a solid candidate.

Signing Ariza might end up being a lateral move at best but at worst, he's an expiring contract with high level experience. The fact that he's in his early 30's means he's still able to play and be effective. He's NOT a token vet. Do we need him to be a Lebron/KD stopper which he may or may never have been? No, because those guys are unstoppable but if you can put him in the game and make things a bit harder for the opposing team's best players, that shows our guys how a savvy vet defends at a high level. He'll be able to hit 3's, he'll stretch the floor and he'll play D, that's what we're looking for. I think too much is put on the dollar figure of Ariza's deal but if you really think about it, what we wanted was a 1yr deal for a vet who could provide the aforementioned capabilities and that's the price you have to pay if you want that cap flexibility. The sticker shock is a short term thing. If you remember, everyone laughed at the Sixers for signing 32yo JJ Reddick (same age as Ariza), a player who does probably half the things Ariza does to that $23m deal. But he's been one of their best players this past year especially in the playoffs *because* he fit exactly what their young core needed from a vet. They kept their books clean for this offseason for Lebron/FA's and even though they didn't land the top dog, they had a very productive year of player development, growth and experience. They lost NOTHING from that signing.

Fair enough, but we've seen this 'sheet of music before', so I certainly hope that this time, it 'sounds different'. It's somewhat like your sig-line, except switch-out 'starting Chandler' for 'Signing Ariza'..., because honestly, to me, that's how I'm looking at this... as being--'The best Anti-Tank, Tank move'. It LOOKS like we are trying, but in reality, it did nothing but clog up our cap, and give us, at best, a #4 on a playoff team (Harden, Gordon, Capela...Ariza). Sadly, that likely equates to a #2 for us...

So, the 'Tankers' win again...we get another season full of 'try-hard' but ultimately end up in 'losses', so we can draft near the top...AGAIN...

On the surface it's similar but the circumstances are different. It would be like if we had signed Chandler on a 1yr deal ($15m, $18m, $20m doesn't really matter) instead of the 4yr $52m we gave him. Chandler, by all measures was coming off his best season statically with the Mavs and although he was on the decline, he was still considered one of the better C's in the game and we needed veteran depth at the 5. The mistake we made was committing to him for the full 4yrs with full guarantees knowing fully he's already on the decline and the deal would take him into his mid 30's. That was a poor use of our cap space. Had we made the right move and signed him to a big 1yr deal, we wouldn't even be talking about Tyson Chandler right now.

Ariza on a one year deal is absolutely the right move. The market for wings with experience and the right skill set (3&D) was shallow and there just wasn't much opportunity cost. Like BW mentioned, it really doesn't matter where he ranked (subjective) because he was an absolutely integral part of an elite team that could've made the Finals. If the Rockets are a worse team this season, it will be because they lost Ariza.

[NavLDO]

I agree it doesn't make sense to blame our woes on Payton even with all his flaws because we were in a situation where none of the higher ups were wanting wins which I'm sure was handed down as an 'initiative' to coaching and that obviously affects how we play. Having Watson was the worst thing to happen to us because despite likely being told wins aren't what we're after, he artificially inflated egos, gifted PT to players who weren't ready/deserving and really taught the guys nothing with regards to actual basketball skill development. You could argue TJ and Booker got better but these are legit NBA players and they will improve despite the coaching.

JT tried to put in place some discipline and for the most part, stuck to the 'crazy' philosophy that PT should be rewarded based on merit but he's not a high level coach and no one really expected him to be. I'm not willing to crown Igor the get of the offseason and he will somehow single-handedly turn this ship around but he does have the acumen and has put in the work so on paper he's a solid candidate.

Signing Ariza might end up being a lateral move at best but at worst, he's an expiring contract with high level experience. The fact that he's in his early 30's means he's still able to play and be effective. He's NOT a token vet. Do we need him to be a Lebron/KD stopper which he may or may never have been? No, because those guys are unstoppable but if you can put him in the game and make things a bit harder for the opposing team's best players, that shows our guys how a savvy vet defends at a high level. He'll be able to hit 3's, he'll stretch the floor and he'll play D, that's what we're looking for. I think too much is put on the dollar figure of Ariza's deal but if you really think about it, what we wanted was a 1yr deal for a vet who could provide the aforementioned capabilities and that's the price you have to pay if you want that cap flexibility. The sticker shock is a short term thing. If you remember, everyone laughed at the Sixers for signing 32yo JJ Reddick (same age as Ariza), a player who does probably half the things Ariza does to that $23m deal. But he's been one of their best players this past year especially in the playoffs *because* he fit exactly what their young core needed from a vet. They kept their books clean for this offseason for Lebron/FA's and even though they didn't land the top dog, they had a very productive year of player development, growth and experience. They lost NOTHING from that signing.

Fair enough, but we've seen this 'sheet of music before', so I certainly hope that this time, it 'sounds different'. It's somewhat like your sig-line, except switch-out 'starting Chandler' for 'Signing Ariza'..., because honestly, to me, that's how I'm looking at this... as being--'The best Anti-Tank, Tank move'. It LOOKS like we are trying, but in reality, it did nothing but clog up our cap, and give us, at best, a #4 on a playoff team (Harden, Gordon, Capela...Ariza). Sadly, that likely equates to a #2 for us...

So, the 'Tankers' win again...we get another season full of 'try-hard' but ultimately end up in 'losses', so we can draft near the top...AGAIN...

On the surface it's similar but the circumstances are different. It would be like if we had signed Chandler on a 1yr deal ($15m, $18m, $20m doesn't really matter) instead of the 4yr $52m we gave him. Chandler, by all measures was coming off his best season statically with the Mavs and although he was on the decline, he was still considered one of the better C's in the game and we needed veteran depth at the 5. The mistake we made was committing to him for the full 4yrs with full guarantees knowing fully he's already on the decline and the deal would take him into his mid 30's. That was a poor use of our cap space. Had we made the right move and signed him to a big 1yr deal, we wouldn't even be talking about Tyson Chandler right now.

Ariza on a one year deal is absolutely the right move. The market for wings with experience and the right skill set (3&D) was shallow and there just wasn't much opportunity cost. Like BW mentioned, it really doesn't matter where he ranked (subjective) because he was an absolutely integral part of an elite team that could've made the Finals. If the Rockets are a worse team this season, it will be because they lost Ariza.

OK, but how does he help us compete THIS YEAR. All I'm hearing is 'preserving Cap Space', 'Defensive Role Model', and 'Hurting another team'...Does this place us ABOVE the Rockets? Not even close. Was this a move that gets us into the playoffs this year? Not even close. So, again...the best, 'Anti-Tank, Tank move' we could've made; sucked up all our cap space THIS year, and still doesn't make us a playoff team.

And yes, I believe that McD could have been inventive enough to make us good enough to be a Playoff team this year; I've mentioned it a few times, but the bottom line, with pieces like JJ, Warren, Ayton, Bridges, and picks, they could've have traded one or two of them, with picks, and preferably, one of Bender or Chriss, to bring in a Star. And I get it, it's not that easy to just get the star your want, but I feel that the effort was not even made to try.

[lilfishi22]

Fair enough, but we've seen this 'sheet of music before', so I certainly hope that this time, it 'sounds different'. It's somewhat like your sig-line, except switch-out 'starting Chandler' for 'Signing Ariza'..., because honestly, to me, that's how I'm looking at this... as being--'The best Anti-Tank, Tank move'. It LOOKS like we are trying, but in reality, it did nothing but clog up our cap, and give us, at best, a #4 on a playoff team (Harden, Gordon, Capela...Ariza). Sadly, that likely equates to a #2 for us...

So, the 'Tankers' win again...we get another season full of 'try-hard' but ultimately end up in 'losses', so we can draft near the top...AGAIN...

On the surface it's similar but the circumstances are different. It would be like if we had signed Chandler on a 1yr deal ($15m, $18m, $20m doesn't really matter) instead of the 4yr $52m we gave him. Chandler, by all measures was coming off his best season statically with the Mavs and although he was on the decline, he was still considered one of the better C's in the game and we needed veteran depth at the 5. The mistake we made was committing to him for the full 4yrs with full guarantees knowing fully he's already on the decline and the deal would take him into his mid 30's. That was a poor use of our cap space. Had we made the right move and signed him to a big 1yr deal, we wouldn't even be talking about Tyson Chandler right now.

Ariza on a one year deal is absolutely the right move. The market for wings with experience and the right skill set (3&D) was shallow and there just wasn't much opportunity cost. Like BW mentioned, it really doesn't matter where he ranked (subjective) because he was an absolutely integral part of an elite team that could've made the Finals. If the Rockets are a worse team this season, it will be because they lost Ariza.

OK, but how does he help us compete THIS YEAR. All I'm hearing is 'preserving Cap Space', 'Defensive Role Model', and 'Hurting another team'...Does this place us ABOVE the Rockets? Not even close. Was this a move that gets us into the playoffs this year? Not even close. So, again...the best, 'Anti-Tank, Tank move' we could've made; sucked up all our cap space THIS year, and still doesn't make us a playoff team.

And yes, I believe that McD could have been inventive enough to make us good enough to be a Playoff team this year; I've mentioned it a few times, but the bottom line, with pieces like JJ, Warren, Ayton, Bridges, and picks, they could've have traded one or two of them, with picks, and preferably, one of Bender or Chriss, to bring in a Star. And I get it, it's not that easy to just get the star your want, but I feel that the effort was not even made to try.

You have the idea of the Ariza signing all wrong

It's not about competing this year nor was it EVER about hurting the Rockets. We don't care what the Rockets or Warriors are doing, they are so far ahead, anything short of Lebron and we're not sniffing a top 4 spot in the West. Maybe the plan is to be in contention of a playoff spot, that could certainly be the high end goal but any meaningful step you take towards a playoff spot, even if you don't make it, is the right direction for this young team.

I'm going back again to the Sixers and Reddick but it's the same thing. His signing was never about competing or hurting the Clippers, it was about a year of developing and having a vet that fit the team and to show them the right way. Guys like Dudley and Chandler are past their prime and they can't play a high level anymore whereas Ariza can.

The year before Reddick joined the Sixers were a 28 win team. They saw a 24 game jump between the season before and last year when they won 52 games. I highly highly doubt a top 3 playoff spot was their plan. Their plan centered on getting the most out of Simmons 'rookie' year and they added JJ Reddick to fill a role and bring some veteran experience. Were they thinking about contending when they made the signing? Of course not, it wasn't what they were aiming for. It was about maximizing the talent of the team and Reddick helped them by being both a productive player and also by being an experienced player. They got to the top 3 playoff spot, won 52 games (more than a Lebron-led Cavs team) and got a 'rookie' of the year player in Simmons. They weren't planning on contending and they were competitive in their first playoff spot in about 8 yrs, that's a WIN. Even if they didn't make playoffs but were in contention of a playoff spot, that is still a win and the Reddick signing was a good move.

Ultimately for us, it's about getting the most out of this core just like the Sixers. There *will* be players who come and go between now and when we finally get back into the playoff picture like Ariza, like Canaan and like Knight and we we hope these non-core players who join this team even for a short time, we hope that they teach our young guys the right way to play.

[NavLDO]

On the surface it's similar but the circumstances are different. It would be like if we had signed Chandler on a 1yr deal ($15m, $18m, $20m doesn't really matter) instead of the 4yr $52m we gave him. Chandler, by all measures was coming off his best season statically with the Mavs and although he was on the decline, he was still considered one of the better C's in the game and we needed veteran depth at the 5. The mistake we made was committing to him for the full 4yrs with full guarantees knowing fully he's already on the decline and the deal would take him into his mid 30's. That was a poor use of our cap space. Had we made the right move and signed him to a big 1yr deal, we wouldn't even be talking about Tyson Chandler right now.

Ariza on a one year deal is absolutely the right move. The market for wings with experience and the right skill set (3&D) was shallow and there just wasn't much opportunity cost. Like BW mentioned, it really doesn't matter where he ranked (subjective) because he was an absolutely integral part of an elite team that could've made the Finals. If the Rockets are a worse team this season, it will be because they lost Ariza.

OK, but how does he help us compete THIS YEAR. All I'm hearing is 'preserving Cap Space', 'Defensive Role Model', and 'Hurting another team'...Does this place us ABOVE the Rockets? Not even close. Was this a move that gets us into the playoffs this year? Not even close. So, again...the best, 'Anti-Tank, Tank move' we could've made; sucked up all our cap space THIS year, and still doesn't make us a playoff team.

And yes, I believe that McD could have been inventive enough to make us good enough to be a Playoff team this year; I've mentioned it a few times, but the bottom line, with pieces like JJ, Warren, Ayton, Bridges, and picks, they could've have traded one or two of them, with picks, and preferably, one of Bender or Chriss, to bring in a Star. And I get it, it's not that easy to just get the star your want, but I feel that the effort was not even made to try.

You have the idea of the Ariza signing all wrong

It's not about competing this year nor was it EVER about hurting the Rockets. We don't care what the Rockets or Warriors are doing, they are so far ahead, anything short of Lebron and we're not sniffing a top 4 spot in the West. Maybe the plan is to be in contention of a playoff spot, that could certainly be the high end goal but any meaningful step you take towards a playoff spot, even if you don't make it, is the right direction for this young team.

I'm going back again to the Sixers and Reddick but it's the same thing. His signing was never about competing or hurting the Clippers, it was about a year of developing and having a vet that fit the team and to show them the right way. Guys like Dudley and Chandler are past their prime and they can't play a high level anymore whereas Ariza can.

The year before Reddick joined the Sixers were a 28 win team. They saw a 24 game jump between the season before and last year when they won 52 games. I highly highly doubt a top 3 playoff spot was their plan. Their plan centered on getting the most out of Simmons 'rookie' year and they added JJ Reddick to fill a role and bring some veteran experience. Were they thinking about contending when they made the signing? Of course not, it wasn't what they were aiming for. It was about maximizing the talent of the team and Reddick helped them by being both a productive player and also by being an experienced player. They got to the top 3 playoff spot, won 52 games (more than a Lebron-led Cavs team) and got a 'rookie' of the year player in Simmons. They weren't planning on contending and they were competitive in their first playoff spot in about 8 yrs, that's a WIN. Even if they didn't make playoffs but were in contention of a playoff spot, that is still a win and the Reddick signing was a good move.

Ultimately for us, it's about getting the most out of this core just like the Sixers. There *will* be players who come and go between now and when we finally get back into the playoff picture like Ariza, like Canaan and like Knight and we we hope these non-core players who join this team even for a short time, we hope that they teach our young guys the right way to play.

I'm just quoting what I've heard others on this forum say, so it's not ME who has it wrong; those are almost literal, direct quotes I have read, from other posters.

And as far as 'it's never been about competing this year'...that's my whole problem. We had cap space and a ton of trade equity we could have used to make out team competitive this year, which would have helped us moving forward, in obtaining FA, next year.

We had 4-5 1st Rd picks to trade...OR...we have Ayton/Bridges...plus JJ, Warren, Bender, and Chriss. I'm not advocating trading them all, of course, but honestly, how many of them do we need? I just listed 6 players, and did not include Booker. GOOD playoff contending teams have 3 star players, yeah? That's all we really need, and I contend we could have brought in one with out trade equity, we already have Booker, and the 3rd being whoever holds the most promise out of who we already own...

I'm saying, I believe, big picture, that signing Ariza was a cop-out, and a 'hey, let's wait til next year...AGAIN' approach to our development.

[bwgood77]

I will merge this with the other one if search comes back or when I have some more time...but I wanted to post the link to RAPM. Now this isn't supposed to be a ranking of best players, but is supposed to show which players are on the floor most when teams have the best +/-. It is supposed to be better than RPM by accounting a little less for teammates and who you play with and focus a bit more on individual impact, but I am not at all an expert of how the formulas work.

So just another tool to use. You will see many of the top players are probably from the best units of the best teams blistering opponents and outscoring them by a lot like the Raptors and Bucks.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=0&single=true

[bigfoot]

I will merge this with the other one if search comes back or when I have some more time...but I wanted to post the link to RAPM. Now this isn't supposed to be a ranking of best players, but is supposed to show which players are on the floor most when teams have the best +/-. It is supposed to be better than RPM by accounting a little less for teammates and who you play with and focus a bit more on individual impact, but I am not at all an expert of how the formulas work.

So just another tool to use. You will see many of the top players are probably from the best units of the best teams blistering opponents and outscoring them by a lot like the Raptors and Bucks.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=0&single=true

I expected to see Canaan and Jackson down at the bottom and that where they are. Ariza being even closer to the bottom is a bit surprising. Bender middle of the pack?? Bridges our top guy.

[bigfoot]

Out of 447 players worst to best

Ariza 444
Crawford 430
* Shaq Harrison 428
Jackson 423
Canaan 421
* Tyson Chandler 390
Ellie Okobo 369
Richaun Holmes 367
Ryan Anderson 367
TJ Warren 351
D'Anthony Melton 338
Ayton 284
Bender 261
*Ulis 205
Daniels 186
Booker 179
* Devon Reed 173
* Terry Rozier 161
* Dudley 155
* Doncic 145
* Alex Len 116
Mikal Bridges 29

[bwgood77]

Out of 447 players worst to best

Ariza 444
Crawford 430
* Shaq Harrison 428
Jackson 423
Canaan 421
* Tyson Chandler 390
Ellie Okobo 369
Richaun Holmes 367
Ryan Anderson 367
TJ Warren 351
D'Anthony Melton 338
Ayton 284
Bender 261
*Ulis 205
Daniels 186
Booker 179
* Devon Reed 173
* Terry Rozier 161
* Dudley 155
* Doncic 145
* Alex Len 116
Mikal Bridges 29

The super small sample size guys should be eliminated. It still has a lot to do with the lineups you played in. TJ started rising once he played with starters as opposed to bench. Same with Bridges, and he had played less overall and with bench to start so he got less of the bad play with bench stats. Kind of weird...Anderson way high on the regular RPM, at least defensively for whatever reason.

These lists will be way more normalized as the season goes on....and if you play on a better team you are likely to be much higher...

So our guys should also rise as we continue to improve and the schedule eases up.

[bwgood77]

Pascal Siakam pretty good:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[lilfishi22]

Pascal Siakam pretty good:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Would you take Siakam or Tatum? Siakam is about 4 years older than Tatum

[bwgood77]

Would you take Siakam or Tatum? Siakam is about 4 years older than Tatum

On the Suns right now or in general? It really depends on what I needed. For the Suns right now definitely Siakam. But probably Siakam anyway.

[lilfishi22]

Would you take Siakam or Tatum? Siakam is about 4 years older than Tatum

On the Suns right now or in general? It really depends on what I needed. For the Suns right now definitely Siakam. But probably Siakam anyway.

Just in general.

Not sure if it's recency bias but with how well Siakam is playing, his all-round game especially defensively, I think I'll have to go with him too.

[bwgood77]

Booker makes the leader list..cuts off before it gets to him though so need to enlarge.

Read on Twitter

[lilfishi22]

At least our boy is putting up the same stats as the guy we drafted late in the 1st round haha

[Crives]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Nothing we don’t know