Lets not call Dan the Messiah at SF just yet. There was a reason he wasnt picked till the second round. And, even remembering that, to be honest, I have been dissapointed by Dan this year. Is he the type that needs a few years of crap minutes before he gets good or is he the type that either can be a solid contributor or not. I definitely see the athletisicm and height, and have heard about the scoring abilities (but lets be honest, he's no machine gun scorer when he is fortunate enough to get 5-8 minutes in a game) but havent really seen any signs so far in a real game situation (Rocky Mountain Revue does not count) that he is getting better or will be anything more next year than what he is right now. I hope Im wrong, but to answer your question, there is most likely a SF out there in the draft that is mroe skilled and more prepared to play on the NBA level than Langhi is right now. ------------------
Once Dan gets used to the theater, he should be fine. The guy can flat out shoot, airballs in real games notwithstanding. ------------------ (===)
Langhi - a 7 footer?. Pre scout reports had him at 7'-1''. Media draft reports had him all over the place. Post signing him CD referred to him as "our 7 footer". Team programs and ESPN(et al) are about equal in reliability so lets eliminate them right off. Short of me actually measuring him myself … well … let's say this … I stood beside both Dream and Langhi and Cato. Langhi looked the smallest in body mass (and he is by a wide margin) but he also looked the tallest. There even appeared to be a considerable difference between Langhi and Dream. I know this is not so … of course, Dream might have been squatting to tune in the little pale guy, and Cato may have been crouching over, too lazy to stand up (or maybe he was arguing with someone about a some obscure infraction visited upon him by some mythical agent of abuse) …. LOL. I'll ask him. But anyway, he didn't given any height away with these guys. Or if he did, it was not picked up by me. ( No authority of these matters themselves, but Bill and Murph refer to him a lot as the 7 footer.) The Draft - I personally don't think the Rockets are going to get a big choice over the big men. They will go with the best available. Personally I like Haywood. I do not think you could go wrong with Curry or Woods. I don't think they will draft an underclassman. And. I'll tell you why …….. Scouting - Let me briefly explain how the Rockets look at drafting talent. They do extensive … no … let's call it … exhaustive … leg work on literally hundreds of players over several years. The interviews are as much a psychological profile as medical exam, expressed/demonstrated skills, potential assessment, physical strength, style, leadership, etc… . They look at his personal growth, where he is emotionally, how he developed the personal agenda he presently has, all sorts of in-depth things. Family background. Attitudes. Interview high school teammates, coaches, neighbors, employers. Then they test out these findings against real and hypothetical incidents. Everything from game situations to personal crisis management. Eventually they develop a table of data that is "scored" so that any particular player (regardless of position) can be compared against others and to narrow down the possible "high rates" and the "too lows". (The bell curve extremes if you will.) This accumulative score is used to compare potentials head to head without being concerned about some of the other more common things like their height, weight, college team strength, or their playing position. A 6' 10" guy that plays way above his head and is scored "right curve" on the bell, would be chosen over a 7'3" guy that plays below or 'left curve" of the score. So you see, if you are young, inexperienced, etc… you would have to score pretty high in a lot of fields to undo the figurative "negative" of having NOT played in certain situations or NOT lived long enough to gain or master a life skill. This doesn't mean you can't, just that your score is lowered because of it. This may be one on the reasons Rashard Lewis was been passed over during the draft. I do know he was close (to the score) but was beat out by a better overall scoring. Hey, its not perfect. Anyway, when they are shopping for a draft pick they look at the position they are attempting to fill, but also looking at these scores overall. An example would be a player that was passed over by other drafting teams, but scored far to the right (excellent) on the Rockets report. Even if he played in a position that was second or third on their list they may not be able to pass on him. Another scenario would be a player that gets picked at the position they want to draft at, but he is a "nowhere" player. "What the hell did they draft that guy for when …… was available?" Because although he was media hyped or shown as the better player, he scored far below on the Rocket report card when compared to others. (I am told they had Fizer and Stromile ahead of Kenyon Martin.) Kenny T - He has matured over two years beyond anyone's expectations. That being said, he may be in a position similar to Kevin Willis. A great off the bench player with a number of good all-around skills. Plugs a lot of needs, does his job, whatever is asked of him. Doesn't complain. Kevin Willis to an inch. BUT. But,Kevin was traded to facilitate a very necessary move. Sad. But, that's the uncertainty of the business. LaFrentz - Rudy can look exasperated. He can look angry. He will yell. He will go through agony on the bench. He will shake his head. But the difference is: he will go out of his way not to embarrass you. Not to have you take his exasperation as your own personal problem. When they call him (rightly or wrongly) "a great player's coach" or "a player's player", that's is why say those things. In the huddle at the bench he can be a pain but never is it a personal affront to you. I-Man on the other hand is a bombastic tyrant who is poorly equipped for the skills needed to communicate a competitive need without personally affronting someone. This year's problems with "managing egos" are not new to him. I personally think Raef would not be any problem with RT. As a matter of fact, IMHO I see him as more likely blossoming into a "Nowitski with more competitive edge" under Rudy and the guys. If you got this far in reading... I appreciate your attention. Cheers. ------------------
You could quote the dictionary and most people here would read every word....myself included. Thanks for the updates, Pops! ------------------ Behad Sergeant at Arms of the Clutch BBS
Great stuff, Oeilpere. I think you and some others have shared information before on how the Rockets draft, but it's nice to get it in such detail. I must say I really hope the Rockets can pull a deal for LaFrentz. When Clutch revealed all the might-have-beens earlier, I was crushed most by the possibility of a Cato/LaFrentz trade. I still question whether LaFrentz can be the 'answer' at 5, but I do think he could get the job done, and regardless, I think his strengths fit the team's needs to a 'T' and he'd definitely contribute to a good front court. Langhi may not be our SF of the future for many reasons, but the primary one I feel is not lack of ability or talent, which some are second-guessing because of his limited play this season, but as Win14me said in another Langhi thread, that he and Rudy have yet to decide his role on the team. Heypartner and others have argued that the conventional roles are fading, if not already gone, and with versatile forwards like Garnett and Odom, it makes sense. I haven't written off the playoffs yet, although I get depressed thinking about it, but that doesn't change that I'm really excited where this team is going. I'm happy with this team where it is. I don't mean that it's set and I don't want it to change, but I'm happy with the pieces the Rockets have together, the chemistry that's formed between the players, and the direction the Rockets are moving in. We can be unhappy with the way the Rockets have not been closing games lately, but we can't be unhappy with how far they've come and where they're headed. Go Rockets! ------------------ [This message has been edited by Relativist (edited March 30, 2001).]
Oh my god, I LOVE THIS FREAKING SITE! And I love you, OILY! If you were here I would give you a big fat kiss! Living in Dallas, with no cable or means of watching the Rockets, this kind of info is like ice water to a dehydrated man. I soak it up and want more, but this will do for now. You are a huge help and asset to this site. This is why this site dwarfs all others who oppose. Thanks, oilepiere. ------------------ "Any event, once it has occurred, can be made to appear inevitable by a competent historian." Lee Simonson
Hey oily, quick question. Do you have any info on Rudy's thought process or strategy when he puts in odd lineups like he did last night in the Phoenix game? I believe the particular lineup was Mooch/KT/Bull/Walt/??? Not sure, but it was a very odd lineup, and other people have made mention of it tonight on the BBS... do you have any idea why he does this? Is he just playing with the lineup, or is he attempting to get certain players playing time? Thank you for taking the time to relay all this great stuff to us. ------------------ "Any event, once it has occurred, can be made to appear inevitable by a competent historian." Lee Simonson
Actually I thought he did that pretty consistently over the last several weeks. I saw no new setups. Basically his main strategy (his emphasis, his "main forte") is on matchups. He prepares well, and adjusts to games by matchups more than anything else. Mooch he uses to control tempo, but lately he hassparked off the bench. Moosch and Bull are hard to defend against. I know, I knnow evereyone looks and says, yeah but what about Stevie and Cat? But really they have some great moves, but when they ..... 1. Become predictable (Cat to the left, Cat to the left, Cat to the left or Francis in to three quarter and pop, Francis in to three quarter and pop) 2. Draw away from an advantageous postion mostly in NOT recognizing mismatches and passing to a more opportunistic teammate(we are not talking about ball-hogging here,just SEEING the opportunity)Example: A sure fire three on the corner but Francis/Cat driving to the center that is clogged with every inhabitant that ever put on a Suns uniform. Turnover. 3. Tired. Some guys were plain tuckered out. No question there. get em out when you can. We needed legs. 4. A quick reset with a couple fast threes. Mooch is hot at the three. Bull the best of the best at the trey. KT threatening from outside but a beautiful passer around the horn to an open three. Walt trying like hell to get lit up at the downtown line. 5. Suns on the bench. Sometimes you just have to go with what they give you. Sit down Jason, okay sit down the backcourt and rest. Fire out, okay rest my fire too. Rodgers is slow on recovery after the second quarter. Put some wheels on and run past the mother. 6. Bench time. It is a very thin line most coachs walk handing out PT to a roster. everyone has to remain sharp and satisfied. 7. Shake them up. Drop some guys that are completely opposite to what the opponent has been seeing for the last ten minutes or more. I mean watch what happens when KT subs MoTay. The Suns stand around and gawk wondering why their coverage is not clicking. KT to the basket, KT out at 16 feet, KT penetrating and passing off. All this after watching Mo post, then fade high, then stick his feet in the key and stay there. It's got to be crazy to suddenly switch off that kinda head space. 8. Some players work well together. Ask me if I know why Walt the Wizbang and Bull play well together with teams like the Suns. I don't know. But they do. Maybe it's the double threat from the outside on offense. Maybe Bull is one of the most underrated slide-over double teamers in the game, and he gets bypassed when someone is trying to push the middle a little too much. Bang! Where the hell did Bullard come from? Maybe it's Walt's soft face-up (read:sieve) on D but absolutely deadly baseline cut-offs. Like I said, I don't know. Cheers, brother man. ------------------
Damn, what can I even say? I could sit here and read your posts ALL DAY LONG. Thanks again, man. This site kicks SO MUCH ASS!!! ------------------ Jazzkiller
rock! I've got some comments...but for later. Right now....oeilpere rock! bask man, and if you ever want me to draw one of your subtle sights in flash for you, just ask! i'm at your service.
Hey Oeilpere, I was wondering, have the Rockets ever looked into acquiring Paul Pierce from Boston to fill our SF position? Would Boston even consider letting him go? He'd be cheaper than SAR & is definitely a more consistent shooter than Walt. I'm asking because I believe that someone mentioned him as a possibility a long time ago, but for the life of me I can't remember who or where I heard it from. Any thoughts on this? Wow, now that's spooky. My 429th post at 4:29 PM. I wonder what that means. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Hottoddie (edited March 31, 2001).]
How would Pierce be cheaper? The guy, IMO, is so much better than SAR it isn't even funny. You may be talking about their current contracts, but in the long run Pierce will cost more. And although I like Pierce a lot, I rockets need a top flight PF or Center more than a SF, so I don't think they would consider investing in Pierce unless their was a trade so that the rockets could keep the cap space intact. ------------------ I am an invisible man.
Kbm, That's what I was referring to. Have they looked into any trade options? I was also referring to the fact that his contract is cheaper, currently, than SAR's. While Pierce would cost us a pretty penny when his contract is up, if we can acquire these players now, within the CBA rules, we will be in a position of resigning & keeping a very talented nucleus together for a long time. Assuming of course, that Les doesn't mind paying the luxury tax. ------------------
Thx a lot for the info oil. ------------------ PrEsident of The Danforth Langhford FAN CLUB... He IS our future All-Star Small Forward
Nice read Pops, still want A. Jamison...BADLY !! DaDakota ------------------ If you like RTS games, check out this one. www.frontierwars.com coming soon to a PC near you.
I just wanted to keep this going. Oil- Do you know what we could do to get rid of Cato's contract? A couple of the radio guys have suggested packaging Cat and Cato. Any opinions on that. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
Hey oeilpere: I hope you don't mind answering a few more questions, but I bet I'm not the only one curious to hear more, now that we know we aren't going to make it to the playoffs, and that we have our lottery draft pick. <ol>[*] Shareef - Any more details on the possibility of obtaining him in the off season? What Rockets were being offered in trade before? [*] high lottery draft pick. - Do you have any idea if we could package any players or picks to obtain a higher lottery pick to get a Curry, Chandler, Griffen, or Battier? [*] Shandon - Do you know anything about this talk about Shandon being unhappy with the Rocket's system? Would we move him, let him go, or even sign and trade him somewhere, and if so, what do you think we could get for him? Would we be able to get Lafrentz from Denver? [*] Walt&Cato - Were there trade possiblities for them during the season? Who do you think we could get for them in trade? have you heard of any teams who would like to get either of them? [*] Next Year's Team - So, who do you think will be on next year's roster? [/list=a]</li> Thanks. ------------------ the more I know, the more I know I don't know... [This message has been edited by Sherlock (edited April 10, 2001).]
wow sorry this is late. just saw it. anyways my take is that issel will defintely go before raef. good chance issel is gone this summer, which would be good. itll be nice to see how raef does under a diff. coach as the two havent always gotten along. live, good call on issels personality. if he doesnt like you, good chance he dumps you (gatling for instance). ------------------ the nuggets suck...i know, i know!
