you *are* kidding right? I mean i think Dream and Franchise had more to do with it than MoT Take francis out of that year for 20 some odd games then remove Dream totally. . . . . Don't blame last season on MoT being out or Kt's game that is just wrong Rocket River
First of all concerning KMart he's playing a lot of small forward this year. Getting 5 boards from the 3 spot is just fine. Last year he played the 4 in his rookie year and got 7.4 rebounds which is more than MoFat has EVER averaged for any season. I'd take KMart over MoFat in a heartbeat. KMart is exactly the type of tough guy we need on this team. I'd love to have KMart here throwing guys into the stands, running the floor, rocking the rim, and getting in people's faces on defense. We need that type of intensity on this team.
you *are* kidding right? from the 99-00 season to the 2000-01 season, the main differences were Hakeem being a bit more healthy and Mo. The rest of the team was the same.After the allstar break,Taylor averaged around 16 points,around the same time the team started to gel and winning some games. I know he's not a perfect player and kinda soft . Every player has a weakness. Hopefully we can mask his by getting Ming and a athletic SF. In my opinion, of the offensive end, the team seems more cohesive w/Taylor than Kenny. And Francis didn't miss 20 games that season(00-01).
aelliott- The biggest problem with those numbers, is that MoT didn't play at all this year (he's the person the data is dealing with), Francis missed a chunk, and we have 2 top 15 picks including that will factor into our roster makeup whether kept or trade. I want to say the Rockets were top 12 rebounding in 00/01, but I can't find the numbers. However, as for this past year, it's quick to draw on MoT, but as pointed out with the Francis injury-Francis is one of the top 3 rebounding PGs, maybe even guards in the league, and we replaced him with a guy who is just about average. There's a pretty big board difference right there. The forced turnover onus lays mainly on our guards. KT is probably way above average in steals for a PF, yet we were dead last. In 00/01, MoT played about 20 games at center-obviously, not his position. This year, we were busy playing a terrible defensive backcourt (even WORSE than last year...TLD has to be one of the worst defenders in the league), a couple of matadors at SF (Rice/Walt) and either an undersized PF, or a teenager that was only supposed to get garbage time. Eventually, maybe even by midseason I don't think it should be questioned that Griff is the future at PF. However, Mo still has a place on this team. PF/C with any kinds of offensive skills are always a great commodity coming off the bench. PS- Adding Lamar Odom's 7.5+ RPG, 1.5+ BPG, and 1+ SPG would help those categories a lot, don't you think?
The Francis thing is part of my point Had Francis been health all year I think our record would have been near what it was the year before WITH MO . . . So I do not see how Mo was the X-factor. . Steve's Health and no Hakeem account for the difference in record . . .no MoT The offense was just ok with KT Rocket River
MFGarza..Mo was NOT the reason we won all those games and thats all I have to say about thaaat (sorry...forrest gump is on like every 2 hours these days)
So, is it a problem for NJ that Kenyon Martin doesn't rebound well? No it isn't. They have a transition offense that eliminates the outlet pass. Martin could easily avg 10+ boards if he HAD to. He just doesn't have to. Also, KVH can get boards, Kidd can get boards, and so can T-Mac. Taylor SHOULD be getting a lot of rebounds. Martin SHOULDN'T be.
<i> aelliott- The biggest problem with those numbers, is that MoT didn't play at all this year (he's the person the data is dealing with), Francis missed a chunk, and we have 2 top 15 picks including that will factor into our roster makeup whether kept or trade. I want to say the Rockets were top 12 rebounding in 00/01, but I can't find the numbers. However, as for this past year, it's quick to draw on MoT, but as pointed out with the Francis injury-Francis is one of the top 3 rebounding PGs, maybe even guards in the league, and we replaced him with a guy who is just about average. There's a pretty big board difference right there. The forced turnover onus lays mainly on our guards. KT is probably way above average in steals for a PF, yet we were dead last. In 00/01, MoT played about 20 games at center-obviously, not his position. This year, we were busy playing a terrible defensive backcourt (even WORSE than last year...TLD has to be one of the worst defenders in the league), a couple of matadors at SF (Rice/Walt) and either an undersized PF, or a teenager that was only supposed to get garbage time. Eventually, maybe even by midseason I don't think it should be questioned that Griff is the future at PF. However, Mo still has a place on this team. PF/C with any kinds of offensive skills are always a great commodity coming off the bench. PS- Adding Lamar Odom's 7.5+ RPG, 1.5+ BPG, and 1+ SPG would help those categories a lot, don't you think? </i> Nike, You're missing the logic. It's not a case of Taylor himself being the sole cause of us being bad rebounders or bad defenders. Let's try an analogy. Have you every played in a Rotisserie style fantasy league? You get points for your standing in each of 10 or so categories. When you go to build your team, you've got a fixed number of players and you need to cover yourself in as many categories as possible to be successful. The best scenario of course is to draft guys that are great in many different categories, but there's not a whole lot of those guys. So, the other trade off is you get a guy that is great in one or two categories, but offers nothing in the other categories. If you take a player that is that specialized, then he's got to be on the very high end of his specialty, otherwise it's not worth losing out in the other categories. Once you run out of those guys, then you come to guys that are not great at anything in particular, but still contribute points in many categories. Lastly, there's the guys that are fairly specialized, but just don't rank that highly in their specialty. Now if you think about it, it's pretty similar in building a successful NBA team. You've got a fixed number of players and a fixed number of minutes and there's several factors that go into being successful (outside shooting, rebounding, post game, defense, shot blocking, passing, 3pt shooting, forcing turnovers, etc...). Just like in Rotisserie Basketball, you need to cover yourself in as many of those categories as you can. There's only 5 spots on the floor and only 48 minutes available at each position. If you go with a guy that only contributes in one way, then you have to hope that other players can pick up the slack for that player in the other areas. The problem is that we've a couple of the skill areas covered, but we're missing several others. Since we don't have anybody that is a monster at rebounding and playing defense, it's very difficult to play a guy that is only going to be a 13 point a game or so, scorer and contribute very little else. Unless we can get a monster rebounder, then we need to have all 3 front court positions pick up that excess slack. He simply doesn't help us in enough ways and he's not exceptional enough in his area of strength (scoring) to justify playing over a more well rounded player. Can he help a team comming off the bench? Sure, he can. But, at over $6M per season and the fact that when he's on the floor he's taking minutes away from much more well rounded players (who score almost as much), it's not worth it. We're simply not getting anything approaching fair value for our money. Like you said, Griffin is the future. Thomas contributes in many more ways than Taylor and he's much cheaper. Both of those guys make more sense than Taylor. If we take Ming, then in a short time, Ming and Griffin will be getting the bulk of the minutes at the 4 and 5 spot. Even if we didn't have Thomas, it's pretty hard to justify paying a one-dimensional player $6M/year to play spot duty. You're absolutely correct about our guards playing poor defense, but unless they're going to miraculously improve or you believe that they will be traded, then we're going to have to make the defensive improvements in the front court. That's alot to ask and I don't believe that we can do that if we also have a poor defender at the PF position. As far as Odom, would he help us with rebounding and blocked shots? Yes. But, would he help us, overall, in more ways than Ming? No, not even close.
MFGarza..Mo was NOT the reason we won all those games I said he was part of the reason along w/Hakeem staying healthy. When he finally fit in, it seemed like we played well. And we did have a good couple of months during that stretch.
We have differing opinions on Mo vs. KT- KT scores nearly as much (or more) than Mo but he scores on isos-I consider that, in an offense with Steve/Cat, counterproductive when you have a guy like Mo who scored his 14 a game, mainly as the 3rd, and sometimes 4th (behind Dream) option. One thing of note-Kenny Thomas is only a marginally better rebounder than Mo. Shouldn't all this apply to him as well? We'll see how much cheaper he is when he's asking contract extension next summer. But to steer it away from Mo vs. KT Part 6 million 357: I don't like the mix of a Ming/Griffin/Taylor/Cato/Thomas frontcourt-if you assume you to build it around Ming/Griffin, you'd want more of a physical presence. If we draft Ming, I'd move Mo to get a physical presence, but if we can get that and keep Mo, that's even better. The price of a good backup is a funny thing. I'm not bothered by paying 6+ mill for a good backup that provides depth. I think even with Ming and Griffin, if Griffin fills out like he should, Taylor will still get nearly 30 MPG playing next to Ming or Griffin. Good offensive big men off the bench are a great commodity. How much is Detroit paying Williamson? Mo could probably win a 6th man award if he were coming off the bench. If I were in charge, I'd replace Moochie with a stud defensive backup, like Tyronn Lue. My whole point was-I think the defense is far better than it showed this year- Francis is much better than Norris, my grandmother is better than Walt, and Eddie has shown he'll be a stud in the future. Add Ming or a tough banger at center, and we could get by with Mo. The Odom vs. Ming thing has far more implications not worth getting into in this thread- Shortly put, the frontcourt works if you get a tough banger at center like Hilario next to EG/Odom-I saw your Oyedeji comment in the other thread...about even with comparing Ming to Shawn Bradley. BTW-who is a great defender on Boston? Tony Battie?
<A HREF="http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=teamstatreb&season=2001&seasontype=2">Team Rebounding and +/- Differential</A> <center> 2000-2001 Regular Season Team Rebounding <table><tr><td>TEAM</td><td>OWN</td><td> OPP</td> <td> DIF </td></tr><td>Detroit </td><td>45.5</td><td>44.9 </td><td>+0.6 </td></tr><tr><td>Golden State </td><td>45.5</td><td> 45.5</td> <td> -0.0 </td></tr><tr><td>Sacramento</td><td> 45.0</td> <td>45.9</td><td>-0.9 </td><tr><td>Philadelphia</td><td> 44.8</td><td> 40.9 </td><td>+4.0 </td></tr><tr> <td>LA Lakers</td><td>44.7 </td><td>41.3 </td> <td>+3.4 </td></tr><tr><td>Toronto</td><td>44.5 </td> <td>41.9 </td><td>+2.6 </td></tr><tr><td>Charlotte</td> <td> 44.4 </td><td>40.6 </td><td>+3.8 </td></tr><tr> <td>Denver</td><td>44.2</td><td> 44.6</td><td> -0.3 </td> </tr><tr><td>San Antonio</td><td> 44.1 </td><td>41.5 </td> <td>+2.6 </td></tr><tr><td>LA Clippers</td><td> 42.9 </td> <td>42.4 </td><td>+0.5 </td></tr><tr><td>Orlando</td> <td>42.9</td><td>44.8</td><td>-1.8 </td></tr><tr> <td>Atlanta</td><td>42.9 </td><td>43.5 </td> <td>-0.5 </td></tr><tr><td>Indiana</td><td>42.9</td> <td> 43.1</td><td> -0.3</td> </tr><tr><td>Phoenix </td> <td> 42.7</td><td> 42.6</td><td> +0.1 </td></tr> <tr><td>Milwaukee</td><td>42.4</td><td>42.7</td> <td> -0.4 </td></tr><tr><td>Minnesota</td><td>42.3</td> <td>42.3</td><td>0.0</td></tr><tr><td>Cleveland</td> <td>42.1</td><td>41.3</td><td>+0.8</td></tr><tr> <td>Houston</td><td>42.0</td><td>41.6 </td><td>+0.4 </td></tr><tr><td>Portland</td><td>42.0</td><td>38.8</td><td>+3.1 </td></tr><tr><td>Seattle</td><td>41.7</td><td>42.4</td><td>-0.7</td> </tr><tr><td>Dallas</td><td>41.5</td> <td>45.0</td><td>-3.5 </td></tr><tr><td>Washington</td> </td><td>41.3</td> <td>40.7</td><td> +0.5 </td></tr><tr> <td>Utah</td><td>40.6</td> <td>37.3</td><td>+3.3</td> </tr><tr><td>Memphis</td><td>40.5</td><td>43.7</td> <td> -3.2 </td></tr><tr><td>New York</td><td>40.2</td> <td>40.1</td><td> +0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Boston</td> <td>39.8</td><td>43.1</td><td>-3.3 </td></tr><tr> <td>Miami</td><td>39.6</td><td>42.0</td><td> -2.4</td> </tr><tr><td>New Jersey</td><td>39.6</td><td>44.2</td> <td>-4.6 </td></tr><tr><td>Chicago</td><td>38.9</td> <td>42.8</td><td>-3.9 </td></tr></table></center>
I thought the problem was just on the previous BBS software. Live and learn. --------------------------------------------------------------- A favorable difference in team rebounding versus the opponent seems to indicate a good team. The two teams in the 2001 NBA Finals, Lakers and Philly, both had a good positive differential while the Rockets' number was slightly positive. Mango
<i>How much is Detroit paying Williamson? Mo could probably win a 6th man award if he were coming off the bench.</i> Just on the outside chance that you were seriouly asking: Corliss Williamson : $4M Mo Taylor $6.5M <i>The Odom vs. Ming thing has far more implications not worth getting into in this thread- Shortly put, the frontcourt works if you get a tough banger at center like Hilario next to EG/Odom- </i> No, it works if you can get a guy like that and if the guy is any good. There's no guarentee that Hilario can make the switch to center and there's no guarentee that he can beat out Cato for the starting job. Adding him as a PF, would be pointless. Hilario is really raw. He's got a tremendous upside, but just because he's athletic and aggressive, that doesn't mean that he'll be succesful. <i> I saw your Oyedeji comment in the other thread...about even with comparing Ming to Shawn Bradley.</i> I was serious, I really thought I remembered you lobbying for Oyedeji at #9. Am I confusing OO with Moiso?
