PDA

View Full Version : ESPN Power Rankings - Week 1


Rockets34Life
10-04-2004, 05:16 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking?season=2005&week=-1

7 (12) Rockets 45-37 - As with Denver, some will say this is too steep a climb, especially since Rockets have PG issues. But we like the T-Mac move (and the throw-in Juwan Howard bonus) that much.

10 (7) Mavericks 52-30 - There's still too much there to drop Dallas out of the top 10 just because Nash left. On the other hand, it looks like Mavs still have too many scorers and not enough passers, even if they do improve on D.

Rockets34Life
10-04-2004, 05:16 PM
delete

Evilmav2
10-04-2004, 07:44 PM
Preseason rankings only count in horseshoes and handgrenades...

In my opinion, y'alls Yao-TMac combo is surrounded by crap, and your team will stink accordingly. This years viciously deep Mavs squad should easily finish somewhere in the top 5 seeds in the West, whereas Van Gundy's heroes will be lucky if they are good enough to end up in a sickly dogfight with the decrepid Kobe-era Lakers for the #8 seed next March...

fin4life
10-04-2004, 08:28 PM
i wouldnt go that far, but i do think that the mavs will be better than the rockets. I think the rockets will also have an easy path to the playoffs

NYCdog
10-04-2004, 09:05 PM
In my opinion, y'alls Yao-TMac combo is surrounded by crap, and your team will stink accordingly. This years viciously deep Mavs squad should easily finish somewhere in the top 5 seeds in the West, whereas Van Gundy's heroes will be lucky if they are good enough to end up in a sickly dogfight with the decrepid Kobe-era Lakers for the #8 seed next March...

Ohh this post reeks so much "bias" I just had to answer.

First off, did the Kobe/Shaq experiment not teach you anything. During there championship run, the Laker teams from all three years had one thing in common. The so-called "supporting cast" that surrounded Kobe and Shaq stunk. Its was the weak link and everyone in LaLa land always complained about it. But did the team's stink themselves? Ohh yeah, they stunk so bad, they became the next Laker dynasty winning 3 NBA titles.

Now I'm not saying the Rockets T-Mac/Yao duo will be the next dynasty in the NBA. But to say they will stink is downright stupid. T-Mac, like Kobe, is instant offense that cant be stopped nor matched by anyone in this league, except for "the rapist" himself. Yao, is currently the second best center in basketball. Sure the T-Mac/Yao combo might not be as potent as the Kobe/Shaq tandem. But they will be very comparable. And the one component that will make the Yao/T-Mac combo comparable or even better then Shaq/Kobe combo is that Yao and T-Mac wont have near as much drama between them as Shaq and Kobe did. Yao is too respectfull of a person and T-Mac has too much to lose, so dont expect chemistry porblems to happen between the two. This cohesion between the two superstars will give this Rocket team much better chemistry then any of the Laker dynasty teams ever had.

Imagine what those Laker Dynasty team's offenses would have been like had Shaq and Kobe actually had some chemistry between them and been on the same page instead of arguing for who should have the ball. That would have been fun to watch and scary, all at the same time. This is what you can probably expect the Rockets offense to be like, even with the fact that JVG is a moron when it comes to running an offense.

Why?

Cause it doesn’t take a genius to figure out how to run the inside/out game. JVG (the offensively challenged moron himself) has done it once before with the Knicks, when he turned a washed up Ewing into his mule to ride for the inside portion of the game and had his backcourt (more specifically Spree) be the outside portion of his offense. It worked and made him successful in NY......until Ewing literally became a ghost of his former splendor. And now with Yao and T-Mac, it will happen again.

bernardos70
10-04-2004, 09:15 PM
What makes you think the Drama between Kobe and Shaq won't be re-enacted by t-mac/yao. How many shots did T-Mac take per game in his whole NBA career? Who is the best Rockets player? And LA? Who was the one being selfish taking all the shots, shutting down the star of the team? We'll see how this pans out, but it has a lot of potential for a TNT DRAMA.

sike
10-04-2004, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by: Rockets34Life
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerranking?season=2005&week=-1

7 (12) Rockets 45-37 - As with Denver, some will say this is too steep a climb, especially since Rockets have PG issues. But we like the T-Mac move (and the throw-in Juwan Howard bonus) that much.

10 (7) Mavericks 52-30 - There's still too much there to drop Dallas out of the top 10 just because Nash left. On the other hand, it looks like Mavs still have too many scorers and not enough passers, even if they do improve on D.
good thing for you(Rocketssomethingsomething) that preseason rankings are always dead on....oh wait...the Pistons won the title last year, not the Lakers.....

i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gifi/expressions/moon.gif

Evilmav2
10-04-2004, 10:09 PM
I really hate having to make tiresome point-by-point responses, but the length of your earlier post mandates that I do so...



Ohh this post reeks so much "bias" I just had to answer.

First off, did the Kobe/Shaq experiment not teach you anything. During there championship run, the Laker teams from all three years had one thing in common. The so-called "supporting cast" that surrounded Kobe and Shaq stunk. Its was the weak link and everyone in LaLa land always complained about it. But did the team's stink themselves? Ohh yeah, they stunk so bad, they became the next Laker dynasty winning 3 NBA titles.

Shaq is the most dominant NBA center of the modern era, and perhaps of all time. Yao is Rik Smits with a faster learning curve.

The Rockets will probably field good, playoff-caliber teams with Yao until his body falls apart, but the big man's game impact is not, and will never be on a par with O'Neal's, and thus in my opinion, your attempt to equate a Yao/TMac axis with the Shaq/Kobe championship pairing is flawed and wholly fallacious.

Also, as far as the Rocket's supporting cast is concerned... If Juwan Howard is the biggest impact player in that cast of scrubs, journeymen, never-will-be's, and never-have-beens, I would say that prospects are not looking particularly bright for the birth of your new Rockets dynasty.


Now I'm not saying the Rockets T-Mac/Yao duo will be the next dynasty in the NBA. But to say they will stink is downright stupid. T-Mac, like Kobe, is instant offense that cant be stopped nor matched by anyone in this league, except for "the rapist" himself.

I might throw Vince Carter, Allen Iverson, Stevie Franchise, Baron Davis, Ray Allen, Dwaye Wade, or any number of other scoring guards into your category of being "instant offense that cant be stopped", provided they play on the right team. Playing alongside Shaq facilitates Penny/Kobe-style 'unstoppability', playing alongside Yao does not. Yao's just not that dominant, and because of that, I just don't see how substituting McGrady for Franchise is going to win them a better record than the deep and potent Dallas Mavericks, much less forge them into some kind of 'dynasty'. They Rockets finished 7th last year, and because I believe that the Franchise-McGrady swap only moderately improved Houston's talent level, I fully expect them to finish somewhere between 10th and 7th place in the strengthened Western conference of 04-05.


Yao, is currently the second best center in basketball. Sure the T-Mac/Yao combo might not be as potent as the Kobe/Shaq tandem. But they will be very comparable. And the one component that will make the Yao/T-Mac combo comparable or even better then Shaq/Kobe combo is that Yao and T-Mac wont have near as much drama between them as Shaq and Kobe did. Yao is too respectfull of a person and T-Mac has too much to lose, so dont expect chemistry porblems to happen between the two. This cohesion between the two superstars will give this Rocket team much better chemistry then any of the Laker dynasty teams ever had.

Cohesion and chemistry aren't worth as much as a Saddam dinar if the team doesn't have the requisite talent to challenge for a championship.

TMac and Kobe are comparable talents, and I am even inclined to think that McGrady is actually a better (albeit more injury prone) player than Kobe. However, in my opinion that is almost wholly irrelevant, because- let me say it again- Yao Ming is no Shaquille O'Neal.

There's no shame in that, but Yao is just incapable of having the kind of night-in, night-out dominant impact that the Big Diesel has had over the course of his career. Yao is good, and he is going to get better, but he will never, ever be as good as Shaq was during the Lakers three-peat. Rockets fans might disagree with me here, but they are going to be the ones reeking of "bias", dreaming the impossible dream of their Red-Chinese, jump-shooting log eventually becoming as dominant as the Big Daddy. When guys like Ed Najera and Shawn Bradley consistently make your your boy Yao look like a chump, I would say that any dreams you have of Yao possessing Shaq-like dominance are utterly delusional...


Imagine what those Laker Dynasty team's offenses would have been like had Shaq and Kobe actually had some chemistry between them and been on the same page instead of arguing for who should have the ball. That would have been fun to watch and scary, all at the same time.

I think I remember seeing that. Didn't the Lakers won three straight championships playing that way?


This is what you can probably expect the Rockets offense to be like, even with the fact that JVG is a moron when it comes to running an offense.

I never cited JVG's coaching as a reason why I believe the Rockets are vastly overrated, but I can't argue with your point here...


Cause it doesn’t take a genius to figure out how to run the inside/out game. JVG (the offensively challenged moron himself) has done it once before with the Knicks, when he turned a washed up Ewing into his mule to ride for the inside portion of the game and had his backcourt (more specifically Spree) be the outside portion of his offense. It worked and made him successful in NY......until Ewing literally became a ghost of his former splendor. And now with Yao and T-Mac, it will happen again.

What will happen again? Jeff Van Gundy and his glorious "inside/out" game will make the playoffs, get knocked out year after year, and never win a championship? Here I agree with you again...

sike
10-04-2004, 10:26 PM
Yao is Rik Smits with a faster learning curve.....
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! While I may disagree with this, it had me laughing...nice oh mighty evil one!

NYCdog
10-05-2004, 01:04 PM
Evil,

I think everyone around the globe knows Yao will never be Shaq.

We've seen two years of him, and have never seen him flash this quality. But we have seen him in this past season, begin to develop a huge, arching, Kareem-like sky hook that would be unstoppable because of his 7'6" frame. He has continued to use it occasionally during the Olympics. If he continues to develop this shot and master it to become his signature move, he could be like an aging Kareem was for the Laker Showtime era. Kareem didn’t dominate the low post like Shaq did. But his presence on defense and his sky hook were just enough to make the Showtime Lakers what they were....another good example of having a superior inside/out game.

So do the Rockets need Yao to be as dominant as Shaq to succeed....nope.


The Rockets will probably field good, playoff-caliber teams with Yao until his body falls apart

Ah Ha, you concede the whole point of the topic here......the Rockets aren’t going to stink as you say they would.....nuff said.

And I'm guessing they will be good for a long being that it is unlikely that Yao's body will breakdown anytime soon. True he has his Chinese commitments......but he wont be reporting for the next 2 years, when it comes time for Olympic contention. Yao is only 23 and every time we see him, his upper body is getting bigger and stronger. Maybe not Shaq-like, but he certainly wont be on par with your hero's Rik Smits and Shawn Bradley.


I might throw Vince Carter, Allen Iverson, Stevie Franchise, Baron Davis, Ray Allen, Dwaye Wade, or any number of other scoring guards into your category of being "instant offense that cant be stopped",

This one I just cant figure out.

Steve Francis and Vince Carter are “instant offense.”

Francis doesnt have perimeter game, he relys on his athleticism to create miracle circus shots for him. Vince Carter was instant offense. But last few seasons, his game was more like "Instant Ovaltine" to me then instant offense.

However, I predict you will be right this season on Vince as we will see the "old Vince" we used to know return, now that he has something to play for in raising his trade value so he can get out of Toronto.

My whole point here is, are any of these guys offensive game on the same level as Kobe and T-Mac. Once upon a time AI was. Maybe D Wade will be one day. But the rest....dont even try to say they are.


Cohesion and chemistry aren't worth as much as a Saddam dinar if the team doesn't have the requisite talent to challenge for a championship.

Your Mavs proved you wrong last season.

They had "requisite talent" to challenge for the championship last season.

But we cant say they had chemistry, can we? Chemistry was the downfall of that team and it made Antoine Walker the scapegoat.

Last year, none of us thought Detroit had the "requisite talent" to challenge for the NBA Championship, even after the Sheed trade. Not when they were stack up to the Lakers roster on paper. But we can say this, the Pistons of last year had a whole lot better chemistry then the Lakers did.

And thus, Chemistry prevailed over having "requisite talent"


I think I remember seeing that. Didn't the Lakers won three straight championships playing that way?

Maybe the supporting cast had Chemistry but what you saw were those constant ESPN Headlines to start of Sports Center.......

“Kobe said this is his team, not Shaq's, Shaq responds”......

“Shaq said he needs the ball come crunch time, Kobe responds”…. blah blah blah......

How was that team chemistry?

Besides, one of those championships was one by a fluke "Big Shot Rob Horry" three at the buzzer. Ask Kings fans, they know what I'm talking about......


What will happen again? Jeff Van Gundy and his glorious "inside/out" game will make the playoffs, get knocked out year after year, and never win a championship? Here I agree with you again...

For one, JVG's inside/out made him a success, something his predecessor Don Nelson (Remember him?) couldn’t be in NY.

Oh might I remind you, the JVG and the Knicks in 1999 did something the Mavs have never done in their franchise's existence. They won their conference's crown and advanced to the NBA Finals. Just had to point that out.....

grndmstr_c
10-05-2004, 02:45 PM
[Yao] could be like an aging Kareem was for the Laker Showtime era. Kareem didn’t dominate the low post like Shaq did. But his presence on defense and his sky hook were just enough to make the Showtime Lakers what they were....another good example of having a superior inside/out game.

So do the Rockets need Yao to be as dominant as Shaq to succeed....nope.
Dude, that's laughable. Are you honestly trying to compare Yao's supporting cast to Kareem's cohorts on a team that some consider the best ever?
Tyronne Lue = Magic Johnson?!

EricaLubarsky
10-05-2004, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by: grndmstr_c

[Yao] could be like an aging Kareem was for the Laker Showtime era. Kareem didn’t dominate the low post like Shaq did. But his presence on defense and his sky hook were just enough to make the Showtime Lakers what they were....another good example of having a superior inside/out game.

So do the Rockets need Yao to be as dominant as Shaq to succeed....nope.
Dude, that's laughable. Are you honestly trying to compare Yao's supporting cast to Kareem's cohorts on a team that some consider the best ever?
Tyronne Lue = Magic Johnson?!

lol

bernardos70
10-05-2004, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by: NYCdog

Cohesion and chemistry aren't worth as much as a Saddam dinar if the team doesn't have the requisite talent to challenge for a championship.

Your Mavs proved you wrong last season.

They had "requisite talent" to challenge for the championship last season.

But we cant say they had chemistry, can we? Chemistry was the downfall of that team and it made Antoine Walker the scapegoat.

Either you didn't understand it or you were trying to slip this through us. If a bunch of scrubs have chemistry doesn't mean they'll beat the USA national team. And that's clearly what Evilmav was saying. Last year's Mavs had no chemistry true, and that was the problem. He said if you don't have talent to go with chemistry then it doesn't really matter how much chemistry you have.

NYCdog
10-05-2004, 03:35 PM
Dude, that's laughable. Are you honestly trying to compare Yao's supporting cast to Kareem's cohorts on a team that some consider the best ever?
Tyronne Lue = Magic Johnson?!


Read over again wise ...(EDITED for civility) .......no where in that paragraph did I even try to compare the Rockets to the Showtime Lakers.

I'm just pointing out that this Rocket team doesn’t need Yao to be as dominant as Shaq was in order for this Rocket team to be successful. What Kareem was to the Showtime Lakers was a good example of this.

I thought I was very clear on that. Obviously I wasn’t for some of the kids on this board. Maybe I should fill my blogs with simple words that first graders can understand like ....cat, dog, can, run etc.....

Next time your gonna try and smack someone down, try reading and comprehending the post a little better so you don’t look so stupid in the end.

Now everyone, LOL at that. But I bet that wont happen cause I dont fall in line with the general beliefs of others on this board.

NYCdog
10-05-2004, 04:15 PM
Either you didn't understand it or you were trying to slip this through us. If a bunch of scrubs have chemistry doesn't mean they'll beat the USA national team. And that's clearly what Evilmav was saying. Last year's Mavs had no chemistry true, and that was the problem. He said if you don't have talent to go with chemistry then it doesn't really matter how much chemistry you have.

Thank you, your gonna help me make my point a little bit clearer.

Obviously, you didnt see what happened in Greece this past summer. Our All-Star laden Team USA, which had the "requisite talent" to win the gold outright, got run over by our own country's commonwealth, Puerto Rico.

Someone tell me......does Puerto Rico have the "requisite talent" to even make it to Greece, much less medal?

Do I even need to answer that........

But Puerto Rico had plenty of chemistry being that they played together longer then Team USA.

And that's the problem with Team USA, and everyone knows it, even brainless idiots like Tom Tolbert and Bill Walton. Team USA is just thrown together in a few weeks without having the chance to play together and gain the team chemistry other national squads possess. You can put together whatever list of All-World players or "requisite talent" you can come up with, no matter how good they are. But if you have no team chemistry together, your gonna be in trouble if you run up against a team that has the concept down, no matter how poor there talent level might be. That became crystal clear in the loss to Puerto Rico. And that problem became quite evident as the Olympic Games went on.

And this is yet another good example of chemistry prevailing over "requisite talent." Big assist goes to Bernados for this one......

(EDIT: Bolded so EvilMav can put away his bi-focals)

grndmstr_c
10-05-2004, 04:22 PM
Read over again wise ...(EDITED for civility) .......no where in that paragraph did I even try to compare the Rockets to the Showtime Lakers.The comparison was implicit, and flawed, and from the hostility in your reply I can only assume that you know as much without me having to tell you. Next time try not to get so carried away defending the Rockets on a Mavs board and maybe you won't feel pressured in to reaching for bad analogies.

NYCdog
10-05-2004, 05:11 PM
The comparison was implicit, and flawed, and from the hostility in your reply I can only assume that you know as much without me having to tell you. Next time try not to get so carried away defending the Rockets on a Mavs board and maybe you won't feel pressured in to reaching for bad analogies.

I cant believe I'm gonna have to do this but.....lets break what I said down.


I think everyone around the globe knows Yao will never be Shaq.

We've seen two years of him, and have never seen him flash this quality.

No comparison of Rockets and Showtime Lakers.


But we have seen him in this past season, begin to develop a huge, arching, Kareem-like sky hook that would be unstoppable because of his 7'6" frame. He has continued to use it occasionally during the Olympics.

I did acknowledge that Yao is developing a sky hook.....which could be comparable to Kareem's sky hook simply because of the size of both men.

But again, no comparison of Rockets to Showtime Lakers.


If he continues to develop this shot and master it to become his signature move, he could be like an aging Kareem was for the Laker Showtime era.

Kareem didn’t dominate the low post like Shaq did.

But his presence on defense and his sky hook were just enough to make the Showtime Lakers what they were....another good example of having a superior inside/out game

Basically trying to illustrate my point here by providing facts and examples.

The point being proven here........Yao doesn’t need to be dominant like Shaq was for the Rockets to be successful. Other teams have been successful before with out that type of dominance down low.

And alas, no comparison of Rockets to Showtime Lakers.



So do the Rockets need Yao to be as dominant as Shaq to succeed....nope.


Reinforcing the whole point to this paragraph, as crystal clear as I can make it, so there wont be any confusion to what I'm saying at all.

(EDIT: Bolded so there wouldn’t be any implying of any hidden meanings. What I say is what I mean, nothing more.)

And yet no comparison to Showtime Lakers and Rockets.

So in conclusion, the only thing "flawed" here is your reading and comprehension skills. And the only one here on this board who is feeling pressured is in fact you......reaching for bad excuses to hide your stupidity.

grndmstr_c
10-05-2004, 05:29 PM
I said:

The comparison was implicit,
Implicit - implied or understood though not directly expressed.

So given that, what exactly was the point of wasting all that bandwidth dissecting your own post when the only thing you were going to accomplish was a conclusive demonstration of the accurateness of my characterization of your mistaken analogy as having not been directly expressed?

And that's about enough of the insults. Your inability to keep this thread on the level does nothing for your argument.

Evilmav2
10-05-2004, 07:53 PM
Hahaha...

So, now you're backing off of your earlier arguments that a Yao/TMac duo is comparable to the old Shaq/Kobe pairing? And if I understand you correctly, you are now arguing that these newly assembled Jeff Van Gundy Rockets are going to have an unbelievably incredible chemisty, and Yao is destined to become the next Kareem Abdul Jabbar (and is even developing his own 'Sky Hook' as we speak)? And these newly revised arguments of yours, prove that I'm wrong in my belief that the Rockets will struggle to make the 7th or 8th seed in the West? That's nothing but bad comedy...

Earlier you rudely accused a couple of darned intelligent posters in Grandmaster and Bernardos of not being able to understand, "simple words that first graders can understand like ....cat, dog, can, run etc.....", but it looks to me like you are the guy who can't understand a simple argument.

Yao is not, and never will be as dominant as Shaq... Tracy McGrady is a comparable talent to Kobe, but over the course of his career, all of TMac's talent hasn't won anything greater for his team than the first pick in the lottery. And Yao and Tracy McGrady's Houston supporting cast consists of nothing but a big, brown sundae of dog shit, with a bright, red cherry named Juwan Howard squatting on top. The Rockets have not significantly improved...

Your overrated Yao-TMac axis notwithstanding, the Rockets are not the seventh best team in the league, and they are probably not even the seventh best team in the West either. In my opinion, Houston is going to have to fight and stuggle to make the playoffs in the West this year, and there's just no way in heck, that I can see the Franchise-McGrady trade transmogrifying them into the kind of Shaq/Kobe or Magic/Kareem dynasty, that you and so many other ill-informed Houston fans seem to be wet-dreaming about lately...

alby
10-05-2004, 11:08 PM
Your reference alone to the 'showtime' lakers implies that you are referring to the surrounding players around Kareem during the Lakers' reign in the 80s =]

magic, scott, worthy, cooper, ac
vs
lue, jj, juwan, sura, mutombo

houston dynasty here we come.. laff

EricaLubarsky
10-05-2004, 11:24 PM
Evil, I was shouting, "amen" until you said that the Rockets would be 7th best. I see them anywhere from 4-9. They can certainly surprise us.

Nash13
10-06-2004, 12:16 AM
And Yao and Tracy McGrady's Houston supporting cast consists of nothing but a big, brown sundae of dog shit, with a bright, red cherry named Juwan Howard squatting on top.

Entirely too funny!

NYCdog
10-06-2004, 01:06 PM
So, now you're backing off of your earlier arguments that a Yao/TMac duo is comparable to the old Shaq/Kobe pairing?

EvilMav,

I never back away from anything.

You guys just misconstrue everything.

I gave you an example of the success the inside/out game by bringing up the Kobe/Shaq tandem. You said Yao wouldn’t dominate like Shaq. So I just gave another example of how successful the inside/out game can be, no matter how dominant or not the low post player is, just to prove you wrong.


And if I understand you correctly, you are now arguing that these newly assembled Jeff Van Gundy Rockets are going to have an unbelievably incredible chemisty, and Yao is destined to become the next Kareem Abdul Jabbar (and is even developing his own 'Sky Hook' as we speak)?

I never said Yao WOULD be the next Kareem.

But if he masters the sky hook he's been trying lately, he could be like what an aging Kareem was to the Showtime Lakers, since it would be near impossible to stop that shot.

And just for Grandmaster and your sake......Because I included the words "IF" and "COULD," I'm either implying Yao will be like Kareem or FAIL......to be politically correct. But am I saying Yao is "destined" to be the next Kareem.....NO.

As for the chemistry part, did I ever say that?

Again, No

But I did say they would have better chemistry then Shaq and Kobe because Yao is to respectful and T-Mac has too much to lose after what happened in Orlando.

So in the end, you failed to understand anything I posted correctly. No surprise there......


Earlier you rudely accused a couple of darned intelligent posters in Grandmaster and Bernardos of not being able to understand, "simple words that first graders can understand like ....cat, dog, can, run etc.....", but it looks to me like you are the guy who can't understand a simple argument.

See this is exactly what I'm talking about.

READ BEFORE YOU POST.

Did I ever accuse Bernardos......or even imply.

NO.

My post was strictly aimed at Grandmaster. I even posted my reply to his post separate from my reply to Bernados's post, just so there wouldn’t be any confusion.

Then in the post to Bernados, I even gave him an "assist" for helping me make my point a little bit more clearer. (I'll even edit the post just so I can BOLD it for you)

I'm gonna tell you the same exact thing I told Grandmaster.

Next time your gonna try and smack someone down, try reading and comprehending the post a little better so you don’t look so stupid in the end.


Yao is not, and never will be as dominant as Shaq...

Tell me, show me, where did I say or even imply Yao will be as dominant as Shaq?

Oh that's right, you can’t find such an incriminating statement against me cause I never said or implied it to begin with.

What I said was that Yao was the second best center in basketball today. Geez, I wonder who could be the first? This is irrefutable simply because there is such a weak talent pool in the center position.


Tracy McGrady is a comparable talent to Kobe, but over the course of his career, all of TMac's talent hasn't won anything greater for his team than the first pick in the lottery.

Geez, I wonder what you analysis of Erick Dampier would be.

Atleast T-Mac has led his teams to the playoffs.

Can the Mavs new toy say that?


And Yao and Tracy McGrady's Houston supporting cast consists of nothing but a big, brown sundae of dog shit, with a bright, red cherry named Juwan Howard squatting on top. The Rockets have not significantly improved...

Your overrated Yao-TMac axis notwithstanding, the Rockets are not the seventh best team in the league, and they are probably not even the seventh best team in the West either. In my opinion, Houston is going to have to fight and stuggle to make the playoffs in the West this year, and there's just no way in heck, that I can see the Franchise-McGrady trade transmogrifying them into the kind of Shaq/Kobe or Magic/Kareem dynasty, that you and so many other ill-informed Houston fans seem to be wet-dreaming about lately...

Your making your icons, Bill Walton and Tom Tolbert, proud for this analysis......

I could argue this but I think I'll just wait for the season to start, when this team proves your analysis is worth only the lint that's at bottom of your empty purse.

mcsluggo
10-06-2004, 03:02 PM
Man, you's guys are soooo bitchy.


If you all have big boobs, and would do your arguing in ripped t-shirts around a carwash, this whole thread could be a scene out of a made-for-cinemax-after-dark movie. that would be cool.

TripleDipping
10-06-2004, 04:10 PM
nycdog: I don't know where you get the idea that the 3-peat Lakers' supporting cast were weak. Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, Rick Fox, Robert Shaw formed a solid supporting cast up to the 02-03 season where the Lakers lost in the playoffs.

Look at all the past NBA champions and you will see; the showtime Lakers were filled with HOFers, Bird's Celtics had guys like McHale, Parish and Dennis Johnson, Jordan and Pippen had Rodman and Harper, and the current Pistons are stacked with contributors.

You don't win championship with just 2 superstars, period.

Evilmav2
10-06-2004, 04:48 PM
So you're resorting to name calling again? First, simply because they disagreed with your dubiously presented arguments, you insulted two good posters in Grandmaster and Bernardos, writing that they can't understand "1st grader", three letter words, and now you say that I carry a purse? And, that I'm so poor that all I carry in my purse is lint?

Well, all I'll say to you buddy, is that I haven't seen you present one damned argument in this thread that convincingly refutes my earlier prediction about the Rockets, and I will say that any little kid who constantly resorts to rudely insulting others from behind the safety of his computer screen in trying to win his computer-land arguments, is a little coward, and I sure as shit would bet that you wouldn't have the sack-weight to make your comments to my face, or to any of the other posters that you've insulted in your short and fairly-worthless time on this board. And I'll further say that if you did, you'd find out pretty quickly how it feels to get stuffed head-first in a trashcan and kicked down a flight of stairs...

I'm done with talking to you, you little, new york, urban fashion-conscious, monkey-faced child.

seal614
10-06-2004, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by: TripleDipping
nycdog: I don't know where you get the idea that the 3-peat Lakers' supporting cast were weak. Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, Rick Fox, Robert Shaw formed a solid supporting cast up to the 02-03 season where the Lakers lost in the playoffs.

Look at all the past NBA champions and you will see; the showtime Lakers were filled with HOFers, Bird's Celtics had guys like McHale, Parish and Dennis Johnson, Jordan and Pippen had Rodman and Harper, and the current Pistons are stacked with contributors.

You don't win championship with just 2 superstars, period.


"DFish", Horry, and Shaw are in no way superstars... I'm not going to mention that 4th "player" in the same sentence as the word "superstar".

The threepeat Lakers were essentially Shaq/Kobe... Because the other guys made contributions does not change their status in the L. I'm not sure if this argument is whether or not the Rockets are sick... but the fact that Yao is "developing a sky hook as we speak" is completely irrelevant. Yao will do his thing the same way he has the past two years... he uses his short range fade and a number of other moves which work in much of the same way the skyhook does. Creating space with a fade (if you're able to consistently hit) is as useful as releasing way up like a Sky Hook. Rockets will be solid, but I wouldn't put them anywhere above/below the Mavs.

- Brian

TripleDipping
10-06-2004, 05:11 PM
"DFish", Horry, and Shaw are in no way superstars... I'm not going to mention that 4th "player" in the same sentence as the word "superstar".

The threepeat Lakers were essentially Shaq/Kobe... Because the other guys made contributions does not change their status in the L. I'm not sure if this argument is whether or not the Rockets are sick... but the fact that Yao is "developing a sky hook as we speak" is completely irrelevant. Yao will do his thing the same way he has the past two years... he uses his short range fade and a number of other moves which work in much of the same way the skyhook does. Creating space with a fade (if you're able to consistently hit) is as useful as releasing way up like a Sky Hook. Rockets will be solid, but I wouldn't put them anywhere above/below the Mavs.

- Brian

???
We are talking about if having a team with just 2 superstars and a bunch of useless scrubs can win a championship. I don't think anyone here is questioning the status of either O'Neal or Bryant.

NYCdog
10-07-2004, 09:52 AM
First, simply because they disagreed with your dubiously presented arguments, you insulted two good posters in Grandmaster and Bernardos, writing that they can't understand "1st grader", three letter words,

EVILMAV,

For one, I wouldnt even call it "insulting." Grandmaster completely misunderstood what I posted and I simply pointed out that he has bad reading-comprehension skills, which is the obvious truth.

As for Bernados, I can care less if you drag his name into this. Its quite obvious that he knows I didn’t call him out in any way, otherwise he would have responded long ago trying to defend himself, much like Grandmaster did with his cheap "implied" excuses.


and now you say that I carry a purse? And, that I'm so poor that all I carry in my purse is lint?

Finally, you understood me correctly.

But don’t forget, this is what you argument is worth also being that you have provided no facts to back up what you say.


Well, all I'll say to you buddy, is that I haven't seen you present one damned argument in this thread that convincingly refutes my earlier prediction about the Rockets, and I will say that any little kid who constantly resorts to rudely insulting others from behind the safety of his computer screen in trying to win his computer-land arguments, is a little coward, and I sure would bet that you wouldn't have the sack-weight to make your comments to my face, or to any of the other posters that you've insulted in your short and fairly-worthless time on this board. And I'll further say that if you did, you'd find out pretty quickly how it feels to get stuffed head-first in a trashcan and kicked down a flight of stairs...,</u> [/b]

I'm done with talking to you, you little, new york, urban fashion-conscious, monkey-faced child.


I'm not the one making EMPTY THREATS to a computer screen.......YOU ARE, as illustrated in your post.

Therefore, this statement above that you posted aptly describes the person that I'm dealing with here.

TripleDipping
10-07-2004, 10:32 AM
Care to answer my question, NYC?

grndmstr_c
10-07-2004, 01:24 PM
Comprehending Impied Meaning - 101:

Statement A - 80's Lakers were a good team.

Statement B - If Yao = Kareem then Houston will be a good team.

Now here's your question: Which of the following two statements, if true, would make (B) true if (A) is also true?

Statement C - Yao's supporting cast is NOT comparable to Kareem's supporting cast.

Statement D - Yao's supporting cast IS comparable to Kareem's supporting cast.

If you said [Statement D], then you were correct. You see class. Even though it's wrong to suggest that Yao's supporting cast is comparable to Kareem's supporting cast, it would have been even worse to try to justify statements (A) and (B) by saying or intending the opposite, because that would constitue a logical fallacy, and only inbred morons with Lilliputian intellects would do something so stupid, so completely innane and bereft of even the tiniest earmarks of intelligence as to try to argue that Houston would be good because LA was good if Yao was comparable to Kareem when Yao's supporting cast was NOT comparable to Kareem's supporting cast.

Tune in tomorrow for: Why It's Not Wise to Insult Your Betters - 101.

RocketFan11
10-10-2004, 03:13 PM
I think everyone overrates their own teams. Mavs and Rockets fans included.

If you think that the post-Franchise era Rockets won't be vastly improved, well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

As for that ignorant Rik Smits comment, I'm of the opinion that you either haven't seen a lot of both players' games, or you're just trying to piss NYCdog off. It's like me saying that Dirk Nowitzki is Detlef Schrempf with less playmaking skills.

EDIT: As for the Rockets surrounding Yao and T-Mac with a crap supporting cast... Didn't Jim Jackson average 19.3ppg 5.3rpg 48.3 FG% and 59.3 3PT% against the Mavs last year? And didn't Juwan Howard average 17.8ppg and 7.1rpg as the fourth option with the Mavs?

Evilmav2
10-10-2004, 06:13 PM
http://www.cnnsi.com/basketball/nba/2000/playoffs/news/2000/06/14/pacers_lr/t1_pacers_ap_01.jpg
Rik Smits averaged 14.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.4 apg, and 1.28 bpg, while shooting .507 fg% over the course of his 12 year career, whereas Yao has career averages of 15.5 ppg, 8.6 rpg, 1.6 apg, and 1.85 bpg, shooting .511% from the field. Rik Smits was a lumbering, solid 7'4" player who was a capable rebounder, and often scored in bunches with the help of his deadly turn-around jump shot (and I used to live up in Bloomington, IN, so I have seen more than my share of Rik playing for the blue and gold). Yao is a lumbering, solid 7'5" player who is a capable rebounder who often scores in bunches with the help of his deadly turn-around jump shot.

Sure, Yao has shown himself to be a stronger rebounder than Smits used to be, but then again, Yao has yet to play alongside a rebounding power-forward as capable as Dale and Antonio Davis were throughout the 90's. Other than that slight differential in rebounding productivity though, Yao and Rik's statistical production is remarkably similar, and in my opinion, they play the same kind of game on the court. Watching Yao's ponderous, competent, and sometimes unstoppable, high-FG% offensive game over the last two years, has reminded me very strongly of what the old Dunking Dutchman used to do for my Pacers, and that is why I wouldn't be surprised if Yao ends up having a very Rik-like career.

I can see him anchoring good playoff teams for much of the next decade, easily averaging around 18-20 ppg and pulling down a good 8 or 9 rebounds, and consistently shooting above .500% from the field, until the inevitable stresses of playing basketball with that enormous frame of his starts to force him to spend longer and longer periods of time on the IR list, and eventually forces him to retire prematurely (my guess would be that he probably has 10 years of basketball in him).

As I said, I believe he should be able to anchor some pretty good playoff teams, but just like Rik with the Pacers of the late 90's (where we made 3 straight Eastern Conference finals), his game is probably best suited to filling a 2nd or 3rd banana role on those teams of the future. He is not as offensively unstoppable as Shaq, he is not a natural shot-blocker who can dominate another team with his defensive presence, and as good a rebounder as he is, I don't think he possesses the athleticism to truly be able to dominate the NBA game on the boards.

What he is, is an extremely tall, thickly built, decently mobile pivot who is pretty good at using his bulk and height advantage to snare rebounds, and create space for his highly-effective jumper, and for his evolving repetoire of little hooks and pivot moves, just like Rik...

kg_veteran
10-11-2004, 02:54 PM
I've got to admit, I don't have the patience to read all of the arguing that has taken place in this thread, but I'll just say this:

Anybody counting on the Rockets to be substantially improved is going to be sorely disappointed.

kg_veteran
10-11-2004, 03:24 PM
I had a chance to go back and read some of the unfortunate comments in this thread. I've edited appropriately. Let's clean it up, guys.

bernardos70
10-11-2004, 06:39 PM
Well, Puerto Rico didn't win it all so what's your point? And if they beat the USA, they had enough chemistry AND talent to hang with the USA enough to beat them, and so they did.

Rockets34Life
10-13-2004, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by: kg_veteran
I've got to admit, I don't have the patience to read all of the arguing that has taken place in this thread, but I'll just say this:

Anybody counting on the Rockets to be substantially improved is going to be sorely disappointed.

What is your argument on the Rockets not improving after the additions of T-Mac, Howard, Gaines, Lue, Ward, Sura, Mutombo, and Ryan Bowen?

We are filled at every spot on this roster and this team was one of the top defenses in the league. Francis wasn't a PG on this team last year and I'm glad he moved on to another squad. I think we will miss Mobley and Cato, but T-Mac and Mutombo will fill in their spots nicely.

I know Howard didn't work out much with the Mavs, but w/ Yao on his side (and the Mavs didn't have a center at the time - who was it...."Stilts" Bradley?) he can be a PF instead of a center.

Ward, Sura, and Lue are point guards that can play point and only point (which is all we need on this team). They can fight it out.

I'm glad we picked up Ryan Bowen and Reece Gaines. Ryan is a scrappy player that JVG will love. Gaines is a work in progress, but JVG will iron him out.

Let's see how the Mavs are going to run this year w/ an actual center. How is Finley going to feel about Stack taking up his time? Is Daniels going to be able to run the squad like Nash did?

FilthyFinMavs
10-13-2004, 01:09 PM
Let's see how the Mavs are going to run this year w/ an actual center

They probably won't run too well but it is sure going to feel great to know we actually have the ability to play defense this year.



How is Finley going to feel about Stack taking up his time?


I'm sure he won't care since Fin will be playing the 3 this year.




Is Daniels going to be able to run the squad like Nash did


I doubt he will being that he won't be our starting point guard. JT will.

Rockets34Life
10-13-2004, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs



They probably won't run too well but it is sure going to feel great to know we actually have the ability to play defense this year.

Now that'll be a first. Dampier will play D, but will the others?


I'm sure he won't care since Fin will be playing the 3 this year.

Don't they play both positions? And who is starting the 2? Howard, Harris, Daniels?


I doubt he will being that he won't be our starting point guard. JT will.

Now is JT a PG/SG like Francis? It's going to be interesting watching Nelson mold JT into a PG rather than a shoot-first, pass-second player.

FilthyFinMavs
10-13-2004, 03:02 PM
I have all the same questions as you but I can only answer from what i've heard from the Mavs staff.


Now that'll be a first. Dampier will play D, but will the others?

Sure they will. Atleast that's what the Mavs organization is fedding us but I don't see reason to believe otherwise.


Don't they play both positions? And who is starting the 2? Howard, Harris, Daniels?

Daniels is the starting two and I imagine that is where Stack will recieve the majority of his minutes at. He will see some minutes at the 3 but nothing to change how many minutes Fin will be playing.


Now is JT a PG/SG like Francis? It's going to be interesting watching Nelson mold JT into a PG rather than a shoot-first, pass-second player.

Everything you saw from Nash that is what Nellie made. Nash wouldn't be the player he is today with out Nellie's coaching and that also is a reason why Nash won't play any defense. JT was forced to be a shoot first guy in Atlanta and still managed to dish out 6-7 assists a game.

Evilmav2
10-13-2004, 03:03 PM
I know Howard didn't work out much with the Mavs, but w/ Yao on his side (and the Mavs didn't have a center at the time - who was it...."Stilts" Bradley?) he can be a PF instead of a center.

You're deluding yourself if you think that the addition of Juwan and his venerable hitch-shot is going to be a significant help to your team. He's slow-footed, undersized, can't play defense, and his biggest impact for y'all will probably come in the area of taking away shots from Yao, and angering Maurice Taylor by taking away some of his minutes (Y'alls Taylor/Howard power forward combo might end up being almost as effective as Gooden/Howard was for the Magic last year).


Ward, Sura, and Lue are point guards that can play point and only point (which is all we need on this team). They can fight it out.

The question shouldn't be whether they can play "point and only point" but whether that motley crew of bums and retreads can actually play. The Houston Rockets possess what is quite possibly the absolutely worst stable of point guards on any roster in the NBA, and to my mind, I can't see how that won't significantly hamper your team next year, and any fierce "fight" that all of your band-aid point guards end up having over the starting postion won't change that. You can throw a group of street vagrants a wadded-up $100 bill, or a day old box of KFC, or a crack vial, and those bums might end up fighting it out for possesion of the prize, but the intensity of that fight won't change the fact that those bums are living on the street, and it certainly can't change them into NBA quality point guards.


I'm glad we picked up Ryan Bowen and Reece Gaines. Ryan is a scrappy player that JVG will love. Gaines is a work in progress, but JVG will iron him out.

I like Ryan Bowen, but the guy is a 30 year old rotation journeyman who has only averaged 3.2 ppg and 2.6 rpg over the course of his career (last year he averaged 0.9 ppg, 1.7 rpg, and 0.3 apg). His scrappy hustle might take away some minutes from your shot-happy Juwan Taylor power forward combo, but that's probably the best impact that any realistic Houston fan might be able to hope his aquisition will make.

As for Reece Gaines...

Old Reece has already distinguished himself as an early favorite to end up being the biggest bust of the 2003 draft, and y'all will just have to hope that your new combo guard is able to muster more than the 1.8 ppg and .291 FG% that he produced while playing for the worst team in the league last year. During the couple of occasions I got to watch him play last year, he looked to me like a broke man's Sam Mack...

But, as I have said before, in my opinion Yao and McGrady clearly constitute a better long-term core for your team than Franchise and Yao did, but the overall decrepitude of the rest of your roster will probably mandate that it's going to take a couple of seasons for that improvement to show up in y'alls win/loss record...

FilthyFinMavs
10-13-2004, 04:41 PM
30 years old? Damn.

orangedays
10-16-2004, 10:34 AM
I realize that this is in reply to a post from a while ago...but I've recently been forced into this particular board out of sheer boredom (WHY CAN'T THE SEASON START????)

But after reading that...uhm...interesting insight into Yao's future NBA career I feel I have to come to the defense of the Dynasty.

Let's go over some of the basics first:

Yao is a two-time starter at the All-Star game. Granted, this is because fans voted him in and he was not the best center in the league during either of the two starts...but the sensationalism surrounding his entry in the NBA has already put his career heads and shoulders above that of Smits. Also, keeping in mind that our dear friend Yao just turned the ripe old age of 24. The averages provided by our dear friend evilmav2 are deceiving because Yao performed pretty badly in his <u>rookie</u> season, averaging only 13.5 ppg and 8.2 rpg (noting that bad for Yao is about right for Rik). Last year he rocked to the tune of 17.5 and 9, and I will bet you the farm (any farm) that Yao will do better than those numbers this season. You have questions about durability? He's been playing professional basketball for at least 6 years now. While the CBA season is not as rigorous as the NBA one, those 6 years of court thumping did not prevent Yao from playing in, and starting, 82 games last season. Also, didn't Yao play in those Olympics? It doesn't seem to have slowed him down in camp or preseason. Odd that he remains healthy despite his freakish build (an opinion you implied...you like that word right?). I like how you ignore precedent as well...isn't Shaq still playing (and well too might I add)? Is it just me or did Kareem average over 22 ppg and 7.5 boards into the mid 80s? Those guys are both pretty old and have enormous frames...right?

The stuff I just wrote was ok...but here's the kicker I guess:

And I quote...

"Rik Smits averaged 14.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.4 apg, and 1.28 bpg, while shooting .507 fg% over the course of his 12 year career"

I see...very intriguing...

"I can see him anchoring good playoff teams for much of the next decade, easily averaging around 18-20 ppg and pulling down a good 8 or 9 rebounds."

I believe I can safely assume you were referring to Yao.

Here's your argument:

Smits - 14.8 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.4 apg, 1.28 bpg
Yao - 19 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 1.6 apg, 1.8 bpg (I averaged your totals for convenience)

Yao = Smits

*Ahem*

So you're equating a player who will average 18-20 ppg and 8-9 boards...for 10 years, to someone who only scored above 18 ppg once in his career and never averaged more than 7.7 rpg <u>ever</u> in his career?

Yao is not Shaq. Shaq is not Yao. Thanks for driving that point home. Yao is the next dominant center in the NBA, let's try not to dog his ...er...future too much by analyzing something that we have no understanding of ok? (Oh...and by "we"...i mean you).