The Rockets looked absolutely masterful in that fourth quarter with the two point guards playing in tandem.  I’m becoming convinced that the lineups which see Dragic and Lowry sharing the backcourt are the team’s best.  They were relentless defensively and a blur on the break.

One particular play stood out, lending towards an idea: Jamal Crawford danced, spun, drove into the lane, only to have the ball stripped by Lowry, leading to a fastbreak.  While Crawford isn’t particularly large, he is regarded as one of the game’s shiftiest players.  All along, in the panic to keep Dragic, the popular sentiment among many has been to move him to the ‘2’, next season.  The idea made more sense, in theory, than the proposition of playing Lowry at the ‘2’, due to the players’ respective heights.  But is that the proper way to think about the matter?

Offense isn’t an issue – they can be interchangeable and sort things out.  Lowry can’t guard point guards (see Parker, Paul, Westbrook destructions of Lowry earlier this year) and Goran can.  We’ve asked whether Dragic could guard shooting guards.  It’s time to ask whether Lowry can, full-time.

I point to former Rocket David Wesley as a historical archetype who at barely 6’0 and a similar build as Lowry, was regarded as one of the game’s best defensive shooting guards.  With the Hornets, Wesley was that team’s most effective defender against 6’9 Magic forward Tracy McGrady, using his low center of gravity to bother him in the blocks.  I also point to Derek Fisher who, while with the Jazz, gave McGrady fits on the defensive end, similarly using his bulk to his advantage.

The 7 offensive rebounds are alarming, but might have been resultant of poor boxouts from the frontcourt rather than some effect of an undersized backcourt.  We’ll need to dig deeper when we have more data at season’s end, on this, and on the overall production of the Lowry-Dragic combo when sharing the court.  For now, perhaps there is hope to retain both.  Can Lowry guard shooting guards over the course of an 82 game season?

A final note: Patrick Patterson was instrumental in helping the team pull away by frustrating Lamarcus Aldridge inside.  It was good to see him do well after a difficult stretch in March.

Last night, Nate Robinson tackled Goran Dragic to the floor.  Two nights before, Luis Scola was laid out twice by different Lakers in the span of mere minutes, first by an elbow from Pau Gasol, then from a full on body-check by Matt Barnes.  The common thread among all three plays?  As has been the case all year, and since Artest, McGrady, and Alston all checked out, no Rockets came to their teammates’ defense.

I’ve discussed this topic previously in many posts, most recently after the ‘Love stomp.’  I know I might be in the minority, but this is something that really bothers me.  As I explained before, I’m not advocating retaliation; I just ask that someone stand up and get in someone’s face.  Let it be known that such thuggery won’t be tolerated against one’s team.

It continues to baffle me.  One staple of every dirty play shown around the league is that almost always, it’s followed up by some form of altercation.  Not punches or even shoves.  At the least, just verbal confrontation.  It floors me when I see a Rocket fly to the floor, and without fail, watch four Rockets rush in to help him up without even giving thought to challenge the offender.

Maybe I’m off.  Most of you don’t seem to be too bothered by this.  The Rockets are a good, winning team.  They play hard.  They usually rise to the challenge and play harder after these incidents.  Maybe that’s enough.  Is there a correlation between the lack of an enforcer and an increase of offenses against one’s team?  I always thought–from the NBA I know–that a team needed a psychological edge; a team couldn’t allow itself to be walked on.  But that’s more conventional wisdom than proven data.

What do you all think?  Is this lack of a response by the Rockets on these dirty plays problematic?  I’m curious to hear your thoughts.

Morey believed that Melo was a worthy star last season.  The conventional wisdom, based upon results, now, is that Melo is not a star.  But I’m not sure Morey would buy into that wisdom when Melo is essentially the exact same player.  He wouldn’t assess an item just based on results; he’d think that environment and surrounding circumstances played a significant determining role.  Morey wouldn’t do a complete 180 in his assessment on Melo just based on the Knicks’ struggles; he wouldn’t buy into the notion that the Knicks’ record validated the claims of Melo’s flaws.  If Morey were to change his assessment of a player, it would be due to some change intrinsic to the player himself.

This would be a classic ‘buy-low’ situation.  Perhaps Daryl feels that he could surround Melo with the right players, with the right coach, and turn things back on track.

Melo is also part of the ‘in-crowd’ and that in itself might hold sufficient value – maybe another star could finally be lured via free agency with Melo already in tow.

Of course, I’m playing devil’s advocate and I hope it doesn’t happen.  Carmelo Anthony is possibly my least favorite player in all of basketball.  It would be difficult to cheer for him.  But I wouldn’t be surprised to see Morey pull the trigger.

Last night the news broke that point guard Kyle Lowry will remain sidelined for up to a month.  In the meantime, the Rockets continued their losing ways.  The circumstances beg the question: now what?

You almost have to think the news on Lowry throws a wrench into the Rockets’ plans: even if another team were willing to waive a physical on Lowry, it would be a public relations disaster to trade an ailing player currently laying in a hospital bed.  In my opinion.  Maybe I’m wrong and it wouldn’t be a big deal.

The other issue is the season itself.  They’ll be without their best player, yet are insistent upon competing.  At this point, it wouldn’t make sense to tank anyways.  But they can’t possibly expect to win games with Jonny Flynn playing significant minutes.

I’m really at a loss for words.  If they finish 9th or 10th yet again, this season will have been a complete waste of time.

*Gasol/Randolph

*Amare/Chandler

*Dirk/whoever they end up getting

*Dwight/whoever

Rank these combos!  Go!

McHale has the reputation of developing bigs. But I don’t think Thabeet is mean (or crazy) enough to be a real contributor to any team. In this league people talk about toughness, which is just code for borderline cheap tricks and a willingness to bang bodies. Chandler looked like he was about to fight half of the Thunder’s bigs on every play. I think Thabeet wilts under the pressure of playoff veterans playing him “tough.”

A reader, Jeby, replied:

Thabeet may not be “mean” by nature, but “meanness” can be learned. I live about ten miles from where Kevin Garnett grew up in SC. People tell stories around here about how players would go out of their way to agitate him on the court in high school, but he was too polite to react.

After enough scouts told him he needed to change, he developed a Jekyll/Hyde complex for when he stepped on the court.

You can learn meanness, you can learn offensive/defensive sets, and you can learn to make smart basketball decisions.

You can’t learn 7’3.” You also can’t teach a [i]desire to improve. As long as Thabeet displays those two qualities on his own (he’s got the first pretty much nailed down), I think he’s salvageable.

This is interesting because since the start of the Francis era, personality reformation is a concept to which I’ve given great thought.  Can basketball personality traits be developed/changed with time?

We wondered if Steve Francis would ever gain composure and maturity with age.  It never happened but it’s not something out of the ordinary for guards.  It happened for Cuttino Mobley.

But what about big men?  Since Yao Ming was drafted, I’ve wondered if it was possible for big men to develop desire or a mean streak.  It never happened for the late Eddie Griffin or Stromile Swift. Now, we find ourselves in a similar situation with Jordan Hill and Hasheem Thabeet on the roster.  We place hopes upon them suddenly getting “it” and developing desire or a mean streak. But I ask – has it ever happened?  Guys learn to calm down or play smarter.  But are there examples of big men in NBA history who came in with little desire or toughness and later accrued it?

This series of questions is for the purpose of determining the team’s short-term prospects.  I now ask you:

1. Is the superstar theory axiomatic? (ie: is a true superstar required to win?): Looking at the standings, you then have the Lakers, Mavs, Thunder, Hornets, Clippers (Griffin), and perhaps even the Kings (Cousins) who should all stand a better chance than this team in the near future.
2. Which teams in the West have staying power?  The Lakers have a good two years left.  Who knows with the Spurs.  Dallas always seems to reload, but who knows with Kidd’s age.  The Thunder and Grizzlies aren’t going anywhere while the Hornets, Grizzlies, Blazers, and Nuggets would all seem to be at Houston’s level.

Can this Rockets team conceivably compete with the Thunder and Lakers over the next two years?

Among other potential targets, if the Clips got cheap with DeAndre (with the thinking they can’t commit more big money to the center spot with Kaman around), would you throw big bucks there based on potential?  How about Greg Oden?  Huge upside there but equally high risk.  (What people tend to forget is that when healthy, Oden has been scary productive per-minute – this is not a bust in the sense of anything other than injuries.)

The one name on the list that really jumps out is Yao Ming.  While I’ve never seen him play, I had read about him on the internet in 2007.  He can score from either block but allegedly carries injury risks.  Might be worth a flier at the right cost.

That being said, I was hoping to open the floor to you all regarding the use of statistics – both in the NBA in general and here at Red94.    Clearly there are several different uses for statistics.  Coaches, scouts, and management (and sometimes players) use statistics (at varying levels of sophistication..) to gain any advantage possible, whether it’s on the court or through player transactions.

From the fan’s perspective, the level of statistical depth depends on both the will and sophistication of the observer.   While it’s fun to play “armchair GM” (and I’ll be the first to do it), there comes the sobering reality that whatever conclusions you draw, the actual decision-makers will always be more informed with better information.   So, to the observer whose career does not depend on the accuracy of his conclusions, given limited data and resources, isn’t it almost futile to compete?  Gone are the days of any advantage being drawn from the antiquated box score – even advanced derived metrics like PER.

My question is, what is the biggest reason you all are interested in basketball statistics?  Is it more out of passive interest, the urge to play “armchair GM”,  or to just better understand the game? (or something else?)  Genuine responses are appreciated – I’ll try to cater future posts to your interests.

In today’s Chronicle, Rick Adelman hailed Patrick Patterson as the team’s best frontcourt help defender.  For an organization as meticulous as the Rockets, they certainly cannot be too pleased with Hill’s lapses.

What are your thoughts on the future of this duo?  Patterson seems like a “Rocket”, in the mold of Battier and Hayes, cerebral and hard-working though unspectacular.  Hill has come a long way but has even further to go leading one to wonder when the front office will lose patience.  Will the Rockets hang on to both and let them develop or will one be shipped to clear the log jam?

He is a 6’4 small forward, though he often plays shooting guard.  We have Courtney Lee and Kevin Martin ahead of him in the depth chart, and there really is little chance of him breaking into meaningful minutes with our current roster, barring unforeseen injuries.  Is his increase in usage lately a sign that he will be a part of the Rockets’ future or a sign that we are trying to shop him?

Other than a desire to mercilessly throw to the forefront the question we’ve all been willfully avoiding in our minds, I ask because, in reviewing the responses to my previous query, I realized we don’t even have a starting point for discussion.  How do you even determine what to do when there’s little consensus on the team’s position?

So essentially, I’m asking, is the draft pick off limits?  Or at 5-12, can the team still come back from the dead?  (Obviously, this gives rise to other questions, chiefly, would that even be a desirable outcome, but we’ll ignore that for now.)

So have at it.