thejohnnygold

Mostly agree with Johnny. To me, the whole Rondo pursuit just seems like it's too totally predicated on the belief in the necessity of a "third star". Don't know how tied to this idea Morey actually is, but sacrificing youth and depth (the second probably being our biggest roster-related issue last year and currently) doesn't seem like the right move, especially when Rondo, even if his question marks are proved wrong, wouldn't really be a groundbreaking upgrade over Beverly. An improvement for sure, but Beverly is no schluff, and that's a sizeable "if".

 

Our window is closing, and we did somewhat whiff this summer. But we do still have time. The Rondo move would just seem a little more desperate than is justified currently.

 

That said, if we did make a move for him, I can't say I wound't get excited to see how he meshes with Harden/Howard.

 

I'd like to add to this.  You say you share the notion that our window is closing.  This seems to be the view of the vast majority.  I simply don't agree.

 

First, the idea of a "window" is somewhat flawed.  It implies entitlement.  It implies that championships are won on paper and not on the court.  I don't want to ignore league-imposed rules and stipulations designed to enforce parity; however, these rules can be bent, and some even broken as long as owners are willing to pony up the money to do so--and Alexander, by ALL accounts, is willing to do so.

 

The attitude around here is so contrary to common wisdom.  We struck out this Summer on snagging a top tier free agent.  First--that guaranteed us nothing (unless you subscribe to the entitlement paradigm).  Second--there are other fish in the sea.

 

Why is that important?  James Harden is but a mere 25 years old.  It is generally agreed that he is constructed, both physically and skill-wise, to enjoy a long NBA career.  It is not out of the question to believe he will remain quite effective for another 10 years.  People seem to hang their heads in shame as if this Summer's rejections mean we aren't good enough and no one will ever love us again.  Pffffft!  Not likely.

 

Despite the media's insistence that we are an afterthought of a city and not a desirable player destination, nothing could be further from the truth.  As Houstonians, we should know better.  The players who come here all know it and can easily dispel such notions in recruiting other players.

 

Dwight, in my opinion, still has a solid 4-5 years of elite level play in him with a gradual decline after that.  During that span, I have little doubt that we won't be able to lure a quality free agent given the extremely high number of PG's and PF's in this league that are considered "stars".  Barring that, we also know Morey probably has 30 phones, each with a direct line to another team's GM so that he can try and trade for one.

 

Before moving onto potential free agents, I'd like to point out that even if we miss the alleged "Dwight Window" that still leaves 5+ years of quality Harden time.

 

Next year, Rondo, Dragic, Rudy Gay, Paul Millsap, and Monta Ellis will all be on the market and more (I'm not counting LeBron, Aldridge, or Love).  Any one of them would, theoretically, boost our team and do so without needing to surrender anymore than an end of the bench roster spot.

 

In 2016, some guy named Durant, Al Horford, Mike Conley, Ryan Anderson, and Jeff Green are all available.  Surely, one of these players between 2015-16 will look at Houston and think, "I can help put them over the top and they'll pay me handsomely to do it."  (Jeff Green I am iffy on, but lots of people like him).

 

In the meantime, Morey continues to build an unheralded core group around our two stars.  Does anyone think PG's aren't going to want to come here and rack up assists kicking it out to Daniels, Ariza, and Harden (who, believe it or not, will play off the ball more to facilitate an elite PG) or dropping it off to Howard for mega-dunks and alley-oops galore???  The answer is "yes".

 

Ryan Anderson enjoyed the best season of his career playing with Dwight.  Assuming he is healthy, Morey will be talking to his agent--let's be honest...Morey is already talking to his agent.

 

The point is this.  We've got potential studs all across the organization.  Jones, D-Mo, Daniels, Capela, and Johnson all have elite capabilities and if it "clicks" will be special players for us.  Papanikolaou and Gentile are also sleepers to become solid contributors.  We aren't a team with a bunch of re-treads who are ok players that have all reached their ceilings.  Quite the opposite.  There are lots of reason to be optimistic about our future and player development.

 

Combine all of that with Morey's deft cap management and the impending increases to come and everything is lining up beautifully.

 

Closing windows?  Hardly.  I think this window is still on the way up, not down.  More importantly, I think Morey is setting this team up to function like revolving doors do:  every time one closes a new one opens up right behind it. 

 

Apparently, the glass is still half-empty around here.  Dwight's window.  The Summer's losses.  Wasted season.  Not good enough.

 

While I do think Rondo would work well here I cannot possibly disagree more with what is being put forth as a good plan above.  Our PF position is the weakest on the team; yet, we should sweep the legs right out from under it and trade 3 bonus assets for Rondo and all of his question marks???

 

If you are asking whether we should gamble, with more on the table, in order to stave off competition and gain more chemistry versus waiting to see how his speed has held up and if his shot is improved while giving up less--then the answer should be obvious.  Of course, I don't seem to share anything remotely close to the same alarmed view of the Rockets so that colors my vision.  I certainly don't see how taking a shoe off of one foot to cover the other is a viable solution, but what do I know?

 

If the Celts aren't willing to take a bundle of solid prospects (Johnson, Canaan, Black, Papa, Pellies pick....pick any 4) for Rondo then there is no deal to be had.

 

This team is good.  We didn't "lose" this Summer.  What we need to improve this season is not have our two main play-makers and ball-handlers pull a no-show in the playoffs.  That would be useful.  In spite of that it took two buzzer-beaters from Portland to topple us.  But yeah, we should panic, presume we aren't good enough, forget how young our guys are versus the veterans we are comparing them to, and make a rash decision based in fear of the contrived and unknown.

 

In the meantime, we can't avoid falling all over ourselves about how good Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, LaMarcus Aldridge, Kevin Durant, the entire Spurs organization, and countless others are; yet, our season is a tragedy when we fail to topple these same players/teams in the playoffs.  Huh?  Where is the disconnect?  If they are so amazingly good and we covet them for our own team then why are we surprised when they perform well (especially when we don't) and beat us?  Seems like a "Duh!" moment to me....

 

By the way, every one of those players (outside of the Spurs) has failed as much as we have--zero championships (and that's all that matters, right?  No 'chips?  Why bother?  You failed!  Loser.)--At least Rondo has won a ring....Oh, what's that?  It doesn't count because he had the Big Three.  Oh, nevermind then.

 

Patrick Beverley will never be an all-time, hall of fame PG in the NBA.  However, he can most definitely be a Derek Fisher type PG that just seems to find a way to kill other teams be it with a timely defensive play, a killer bail-out three just when you think your team got a stop, or any of those other Fisher-like things we have all grown to hate.  Beverley is good enough and I believe an ideal match for Harden.

 

Morey won't break the bank trading for a PG upgrade for this reason.

If we're relying on the JET, we are in massive trouble.

 

I'm hoping this is more snarky satire than an actual comment.  We're relying on a team--a collection of talent.  That's what my post was about.  It is irksome to have to clarify the obvious over and over.

 

Since we're talking Terry, it's fair to mention he has shot below 36% from 3 only twice in his 15 year NBA career--his rookie year and in 2004 he dipped to 34.7%.  I'd say it's fair to consider his 3 pt. shooting as reliable.

 

In his intro. interview he said he hasn't been healthy since leaving Dallas, essentially.  Go look at those numbers.  LINK  Let's also not neglect that he went from a very good team in Dallas to 2 different train wrecks in Boston and Brooklyn.  In that interview, he said he feels 100% and I believe him.  I think we may very well see some vintage Terry.  Now, we'll see how long that lasts as his injury history is a concern at this point.

 

People forget, or maybe never knew, that he used to be a go-to guy in Atlanta.  He wasn't quite good enough to get them over the hump, but he was close and that experience/talent makes him a superb 6th man.  He needs to be surrounded with talent to generate the mis-match that allows him to excel.

 

We all know what a healthy Terry can do and I think it is short-sighted to completely omit him from consideration when discussing our bench's potential.  Do I think he could carry us through the season, into the playoffs, and to the finals?  Of course not...that would be moronic...wouldn't it?

 

Do I think he can be good for this team off the bench as part of a second unit that can match up with just about any second unit in the league?  Absolutely.

 

Do I think he can be a great influence on ALL of our guys, but especially our guards (including Harden)?  Absolutely.

 

His presence on this team, like him or not, makes us better.  Is he just trade fodder for the deadline?  Perhaps...and if that is all he means to Morey so be it.  I think he has value to the team beyond facilitating transactions.  Think about it....Jason Terry was playing in the NBA when Dwight was a freshman in high school.  James Harden was in elementary school.  Troy Daniels was about 9 years old.  I don't think it is a stretch to think he can impart some wisdom and guidance to this team full of very talented young guards who could all use a bit of big brother mentoring.

Agreed Alituro.

 

Troy Daniels is the real deal people.  He is going to look like a rookie at times--because essentially he is one.  Somehow, it has yet to be mentioned that this guy with all the question marks is shooting 53% from deep in 4 games averaging over 4 attempts per game.  He's also notching a steal and a couple of rebounds in 18 mpg.  Did you feel that?....That was Daryl Morey grinning from ear to ear.

 

 

Daniels has elite 3&D guy written all over him.  Consider that his shooting will likely only get better.  Strength will increase.  IQ will increase.  This guy, barring a major trade, is going to be knocking down threes for us for a long time.  Here is his work against Phoenix:

 

 

So, there's one solid piece off the bench.

 

I'm also still on the Canaan train.  He's definitely got some.....short comings.  Still, he can ball in this league.  He can also run our offense while our "playmakers" sit.  I'll keep saying it until people remember that not all offense must be created outside-in the way Harden, Lin, and Parsons did it.  Which brings me to......

 

Donatas Motiejunas.  Canaan is quite capable of getting him the ball in the post.  Motie is a very good passer and a very good post man.  Surround him with some three point bombers (Daniels, Canaan, Papa) and a guy like Adrien, Black, Dorsey and that squad can do some serious damage.

 

Just watch these highlights and tell me you're still worried about running offense through D-Mo (against other back-ups no less).

 

 

Wow, we're up to 3 bench guys.  Maybe the sky isn't falling....

 

Jeff Adrien.  Go wander around his stats at basketball-reference.com.  His per36 numbers are reminiscent of some guy named Omer Asik (back when he was in Chicago) and one could argue slightly better.  Since he has entered the league he has been buried on benches behind veterans and high draft picks.  If he was 3-4 inches taller he'd be close to all-star level.  Sadly, there is a chance he doesn't make the roster--I hope he does.

 

We're also completely ignoring some guy named Jason Terry.  Last he was healthy, as he purportedly is for the first time in a couple years, he was a 6th man of the year caliber guy off the bench.  He can contribute to the cause.

 

By season's end, I think this bench (barring a cupboard clearing trade) will be one of the best in the league.

A very fair article about Mr. Harden.  It focuses on his defense and whether or not that prohibits him from being a star.  LINK

 

Here is a teaser...

 

 

So how bad was Harden on the defensive end? Harden’s opponents PER was 13.9 at the shooting guard position. That means he actually held his opponent below the league average of 15.0. The Rockets did however surrender more points to opponents shooting guards than any team in the league last year.

 

Jeremy Lin had something to do with that as well, as he was often Harden’s backup playing with Patrick Beverley when Harden rested. Lin’s opponent’s PER when at shooting guard was 17.4 and when Lin wasn’t in, it was Francisco Garcia, who came in at 15.1.

 

That should get the ball rolling...

Unlike your dystopian view of this situation, I think it could all be rectified by simply banning one word: rocketrick.

 

You are subject to the same standards as everyone else.  There is no conspiracy here.  There are no "Firemen" destroying the world's knowledge.  There is no Big Brother trying to keep people away from the truth.  There is just you, attacking people because you don't like their opinions.  Disagreeing has never been a problem here.  Not abiding by forum standards has.

 

Please stop spamming the boards with your contrived crusade against the invisible threat to your freedom of speech.  Please, if you disagree with a person use reason and logic to respond.  It's not about opinions--it's about tact and decorum.

 

This forum would benefit more from you using your vast knowledge and history with the team to share stories, experiences, and perspectives in a positive manner that many of the younger fans do not possess.  Instead, there seems to be a disconnect and there is no respect for those who "don't get it" which leads to the dismissive attitude.  It's a shame, really.

 

One last thing--returning to your Farenheit 451 reference.  If what you believe is true then would it not behoove you to become a "book" yourself?  Much like the hobos who lived outside the city were each a book unto themselves, you could become the History of the Rockets and, instead of hoarding that knowledge, share it with us....pleasantly.  Just a thought...

True, but the celtics also had good shooters at every position besides PG, including the greatest 3pt shooter of all time in Allen, Garnett in his prime (Who easily is the 3rd best player of the past generation behind duncan and kobe) along with pierce. A stacked bench and an ungodly defense. All of which we do not have, thus I see no value of rondo on a gutted version of this team.

 

Now my opinion on Jones is if he develops an average corner 3, decent mid range game, better on man/post defense, defensive rebounding/boxing out, and overall defensive awareness. He can be an allstar caliber talent (now he will never be an allstar in the west, because the forward position is so stacked, but talent and skill wise worthy). Now that is a lot of "ifs", but it is possible. We'll just have to wait and see. Then evaluate which I think Morey is doing. 

 

I did not feel compelled to mention the "Big 3" because we all are aware of the situation they had---which you and I seem to view quite differently.

 

Yes, they had quality all around him.  This is why I believe that, despite his shortcomings, he would work with our roster.  Kevin Garnett in his prime is a bit of a stretch--that was his 13th season and he was 31-32 years old.  His legs were already giving out on him.  Yes, he was still a high level player, but not the same guy who dragged Minnesota around on his back for the previous decade.

 

Allen was also in the same boat, having dragged the Bucks and Sonics around forever.  Pierce--the same.  What they had was three very high IQ players who were able to overcome their physical atrophy with smart, consistent play.  They also had solid role players for sure--many of whom were defensive aces: Tony Allen, James Posey, and Kendrick Perkins.

 

You stated that Houston is far, far from this.  To a degree, yes, that can be argued.  However, I would argue that we are closer than people think.

 

James Harden would be our equivalent to Paul Pierce.  He is already a heady, elite scorer and, at 25 years old, is only going to gain more guile as he progresses.  As Rahat likes to say, he is going to age like fine wine--much like Pierce did.

 

Dwight Howard.  Where Garnett brought leadership and defensive intensity Dwight is primed to do the same for us.  He isn't the pick and pop partner that Garnett was for Rondo, but Garnett at that point in his career was not the interior finisher that Dwight is today.  This can work just fine.

 

Troy Daniels is primed to provide the same three point shooting for us that Allen did for them.  He has already shown his end-game stones and, while his all-around game has yet to be shown, he has the ability to do for us what Allen did for Boston.  It's not like Allen was known for his defense--ever.

 

There's your "Big 3".  I know--not yet a Hall of Fame list; yet, the abilities are there--who cares about the credentials?  Those will come if they put it together and win championships.

 

As for the bench--that's debatable and we will see.  There is a lot to like.  Nobody knew who Toni Kukoc was until he started killing teams off the bench in Chicago.  Papanikoloau is in the same mold.  Pat Beverley moves to the bench--that's solid.  Francisco Garcia can still ball and last year's dud seems to have been an anomaly of sorts as he killed it in FIBA play.  Terrence Jones and D-Mo are still up-and-comers despite the eternity it seems we have been waiting for them.  We are on the precipice of when they should actually begin to truly blossom.  If they do, as I believe they will, we will have two solid, versatile bigs.  Jason Terry, for now, would be our version of Sam Cassell for the Celts.  One of Jeff Adrien/Joey Dorsey is going to take on a Leon Powe/Glen Davis role for us.  The similarities are there.  The talent is there.  To imply that Rondo would not be in a similar situation, in my opinion, is somewhat misguided.  

 

I think he would be surrounded by talent--both on the wings and inside.  Oh, I forgot Trevor Ariza--Mr. Consolation Prize--this is another grossly under-estimated piece of the puzzle.  The guy is extremely talented and on this roster, having a defined role, free of the burden of trying to carry a mediocre team, and with an elite PG setting him up there is no reason for him not to replicate his success from last season.

 

As for coaching, Doc Rivers was on the hot seat and fans had long been calling for his head in Boston prior to that championship run.  Funny how winning changes things.  McHale would silence most of his critics if we get to the finals.  With Rondo, and the rest of these guys, I think Houston could do just that.  (I think we can do it without Rondo as well)  By the way, that was Tom Thibodeau on the bench for Rivers...where is our Thibs, Morey?!?!?!

 

Getting back to Jones, I agree.  He will most likely never see the floor of an All-Star game.  That does not mean he can't be an "all-star" for us.  It has been said before, but I will say it again.  He is 22.  In an ideal world, he would be entering his rookie year after 4 years in college.  In reality, he is entering his 2nd year (first year was all-D-League).  The ceiling for him is still very high.  We get spoiled by the players who come in and excel in their first year.  For most players, this is not the reality.  In case people forgot, Kevin Durant did not set the world on fire his first year either.  He showed the flashes necessary to know that patience would pay off--which is what we have with Jones.  Look at Kobe--he didn't break a PER of 20+ until his 4th season.  I'm not saying Jones is on their level--just saying that even the best players need time to acclimate--especially, when they enter the league early.

 

Long story short--We agree that Rondo needs to be surrounded by talent to be useful.  I think the talent is here.  What this circus could really use is a ring leader--either on the court or off it--since we're sticking with McHale then on the court would be the place to look.

 

Another last thought--it's not like Garnett, Allen, and Pierce spent their entire careers on crummy teams.  Each had their shots with solid rosters--and fell short.  It wasn't until they had an elite, play-making PG that it all came together.  I'm not saying that was the only factor, but it certainly seemed to help.

Great post, JG.  BTW, Bradford Doolittle at ESPN has projected Parson's as the 9th best shooting forward in the league.  Ariza is ranked 11th.  Given the huge disparity in contracts, it seems clear that the Rox made the right choice.

 

Glad you guys appreciate the posts--it is a perspective I hadn't really considered until this Summer's events made me curious.

 

Parsons as #9, eh?  Those lists are very subjective and, these days, convoluted by positional ambiguities.  ESPN lists Jeff Adrien as a SF and his PER ranks him in the top 10 of SF's....huh?

 

Guys who are definitely ahead of Parsons?  Durant, James, George, Anthony, Gay, Batum, Leonard.....I am already starting to feel like I am in the gray area.  Jeff Green?

 

(Just for fun, ESPN's fantasy player rater has Ariza #6 and Parsons #10...so there's that...)

 

Let's forget that stuff and check out some head to head stats for Parsons and Ariza.

 

Here is a Win/Loss split for both Parsons and Ariza with Parsons first:

 

 

...and here is Ariza...

 

 

you can click on the charts to enlarge them

 

While the sample sizes are different (which means these numbers may be meaningless) let's trudge forward anyways.  The thing that strikes me is Ariza's stat lines are pretty steady aside from 1 missed fg/game and 1 missed ft/game in losses.  His shot attempts and peripheral stats are steady.

 

On the other hand, Parsons shows a distinct shift between losses and wins...and it does not bode well for Dallas.  His FG attempts increase and he generates 1 extra ppg, but his FG% decreases, rebounds decrease, assists decrease, turnovers increase and pretty much anything negative that can happen does while playing roughly the same mpg.  This is a reflection of increased usg% (what Dallas allegedly has planned for him).

 

Now, I haven't gone through each game log and seen who might have been hurt, what exact teams we played, or any other factor that could explain some of this.  Just looking at it blindly, I like that Ariza seems to be a steady hand win or lose.  He is going to show up and do his thing.  Morey used to preach variance.  I think the move from Ariza to Parsons could signal a shift in his team building.  We are no longer looking for variance; rather, we are looking for steadiness and consistency to put around our variance guys (Dwight and James).

 

I think this is why our team seemed to be in so many lop-sided games last season.  If everyone is "on" then we blow a team out and vice versa.

 

With this new direction, I believe we will be better equipped to win more often.  Why?  Because if we presume improved defensive play and combine that with steady, consistent contributions from our role players then we can better withstand the "off" nights from our stars and still win games we would otherwise have lost.  Brace yourselves...lots of numbers coming  

 

We were 8-11 in games where Harden shot sub 40% from the field.  We were 8-0 when Harden shot 60% or better.

 

We were 8-11 in games where Harden scored less than 20 points.  We were 17-6 when Harden scored more than 30.

 

We were 7-9 when Harden notched 3 or fewer assists.  We were 20-9 in games where Harden notched 7+ assists.

 

I know--common sense stuff....

 

We were 17-8 in games where Harden had 5+ turnovers.  We were 11-7 in games where Harden had 2- turnovers.

 

This one is counter-intuitive a bit.  We were 6-2 in games with 6+ turnovers.  We were 4-0 in games with 7+ turnovers.  This is why nobody chides Harden for his turnovers as much as the other players.  His aggression and play-making generates more mistakes....and more wins.

 

I'm getting to a point....I promise.    Let's do the same for Parsons.

 

We were 12-8 when Parsons shot sub 40% from the field.  We were 12-4 when Parsons shot 60% or better.

 

*I'm adjusting the points comp because Parsons only scored 30+ twice and we were 1-1 in those games.  In fact, I will have to adjust the other numbers as well for scale.

 

We were 14-4 when Parsons scored fewer than 12 points.  We were 10-8 when Parsons scored more than 20 points.

 

We were 7-11 in games where Parsons notched 2 or fewer assists.  We were 21-6 in games where Parsons notched 5+ assists.

 

We were 19-5 when Parsons had 1- turnovers.  We were 1-4 when Parsons had 4+ turnovers.  (He had a lot of 2-3 turnover games.)

 

 

Stop right there.  Immediately something jumps out.  Parsons is a higher variance player than Harden.  Harden had 27 games that fell outside of the NBA "bell curve" (40%-60% shooting).  Parsons has 36!...and that is out of 74 games, not 82!  That's huge.  49% of Parsons' games had him shooting well above or well below average (20 below compared to 16 above).

 

Another interesting point is the overall effect each player's performance had on winning.  Harden's poor shooting led to a winning% of .421 while his good shooting led to a winning percentage of 1.00.  Parsons, on the other hand has a wining% of .600 when he shoots poorly and a winning% of .750 when he shoots well.

 

So, while Harden is less of a variable overall--his performance has a much bigger impact on winning% (+.579).  Parsons, who is much more variable game to game brings a smaller winning% impact (+.150).  Now, I understand that usg% is a factor here.  Harden's usg% was 27.8 and Parsons was 19.3--roughly 1/3 less.

 

Where Parsons' effect was really visible was in creating for others.  When he was racking up assists, we were racking up wins.  That has been mentioned as a point of concern by quite a few--there is some validity here.  I think Beverley can make up for some and Ariza brings about 3 per game...we'll have to see how this one works out.

 

Parsons' turnovers had the normal effect one expects to see.

 

I apologize for this huge mess of a post (welcome to my mind  ).  The point is that I think we have brought in a player who will help us generate more wins overall (and this is before factoring in the defensive upgrade) by virtue of providing a consistent offensive contribution versus a sporadic one.

 

Regarding the rankings--Parsons will most likely produce more "eye-popping" stat lines next season and people will see him as "better".  However, as Johnny Rocket noted, when looking at contract value and the hopeful improved fit for us in that position we are in great shape.

I did not see the game the other night, so I haven't seen the added weight, but that would be an interesting way to go. I don't remember him posting up much at all here. That would be something we did not utilize at all during his tenure if he can be effective from the block in Dallas.

 

I also agree $15M for a player that transforms you into a contender is an easy sell, but I was unaware Parsons was that kind of player. I mean we were about to massively overpay for Bosh, but he made us an instant contender so we were all on board with it. I guess the general public agrees with Cuban and that Parsons does vault them into the contender status. I just don't see it. We will see come regular season. For all I know, I could be that bitter ex-gf just thinking of all the flaws during our relationship just to make myself feel better. 

 

Hold up there...I'm not saying he is that kind of player either.  I think most fans have not really seen him play aside from highlights.  Check out this info. on team TV ratings: LINK

 

The Rockets rank 9th in the league, but that number is skewed beyond belief--we are still 4 spots below "average" because it is so top heavy.

 

Here is a breakdown of every single nationally televised game from last season along with ratings.  LINK  Houston had a total of 7 games that scored an above average rating (avg. is 1.956M viewers).  Of those games, the highest was HOU vs. SA on Christmas day.  Here are all 7 in descending order:

 

HOU/SA (12/25) Won 111-98

 

HOU/MIA (3/16) Lost 104-113

 

HOU/LAL (11/7) Lost 98-99

 

HOU/DAL (11/20) Lost 120-123

 

HOU/NYK (11/14) Won 109-106

 

HOU/GSW (2/20) Lost 102-99

 

HOU/CHI (12/18) Won 109-94

 

(bonus 8th game because it came in just under the average  ratings score)

 

HOU/OKC (1/16) Lost 92-104

 

So, the 8 games people saw the most from our season were these.  We went 3-5 in those games, beating CHI, NYK, and SAS ( meaning we pissed off two large markets while getting no credit for SA because--as always--no one cares about SA until they win another championship).  Meanwhile, we got beat by media darling teams like Golden State, Miami, The Lakers, and Dallas (which only matters here in Texas).

 

Is it any surprise that we get zero respect nationally?  That was our showing--for the most part--from last season.

 

Now, let's look at what Mr. Parsons did in those games.  Again, in descending order.

 

8-14 (5-9 from deep), 21 pts, 6 reb, 6 ast, 1 to

 

4-9 (0-1 from deep), 9 pts, 1 reb, 5 ast, 4 stl, 2 to

 

6-11 (1-3 from deep) 16 pts, 3 reb, 1 ast, 1 stl, 1 to

 

7-10 (4-5 from deep) 21 pts, 5 rebs, 11 asts, 4 stl, 2 to  (no surprise, this was against DAL...they liked what they saw)

 

7-11 (2-5 from deep) 22 pts, 2 reb, 2 ast, 2 stl, 0 to

 

8-24 (3-10 from deep) 21 pts, 8 reb, 5 ast 1 stl, 1 blk, 3 to

 

8-14 (3-4 from deep) 19 pts, 9 reb, 3 ast 1 blk, 2 to

 

4-13 (3-9 from deep) 14 pts, 4 reb, 2 ast, 1 stl, 4 to.

 

Some of those stat lines are superb!  Really, there were only two duds and they came against MIA and OKC.  Over the 8 games, Parsons averaged this line:

 

17.9 pts, 4.8 reb, 4.4 ast, 1.6 stl, 0.25 blk, 1.9 to on 49% shooting ( 46% from deep)

 

For comparison, his season averages are:

 

16.6 pts, 5.5 reb, 4.0 ast, 1.2 stl, 0.4 blk, 1.9 to on 47% shooting (37% from deep)

 

Well, is it any surprise the average NBA fan thinks Parsons is a star?  Given the public perception that between McHale and Harden no player can prosper here it all paints a pretty picture.  Add to that a decent playoff showing and here we are--everyone thinks he's going to break out....except most of us who have watched him the last 3 years who think this is about as good as it gets.

 

Again, I don't think anyone is saying Parsons isn't good and I think most everyone wanted us to keep him moving forward.  What we're dealing with is some really good PR/marketing versus the old adage about coveting a hot girl...you know the one....you see some girl and think she must be the best thing ever....just remember....somewhere, some guy is sick of her.

 

Parsons has joined the enemy and I look forward to the next years of competition between us and them.  I hope he does well (except against us) and nothing would make me happier than meeting them (and beating them) in the WCF's on our way to the NBA Finals.

OK, so once again I am reminded I should not post before coffee. 

 

Yes, my post was a bit stronger than I intended.  Let me elaborate a bit and respond to a few things.  RBF has touched on quite a few and pretty much understands where I'm coming from.  Still, there are things I need to acknowledge.

 

This post is directly related to yesterday's back and forth between Datruth and myself (I mistakenly said Jatman this morning--again with the lack of coffee).  I presume most everyone read that, but if not it starts here and you can follow it along if you want.

 

We have not harped on Red94 standards for some time now--those who have been around a while can recall when not a week would go by without reminders.  One of the standards of Red94 is to back up your assertions with facts, cite your sources, and try to avoid speculation--if one does speculate it is fine, but acknowledge it as such--too often these days it gets presented as fact.  That's not what we do.

 

So, yesterday I found myself trying to deal with this sort of issue and woke up today to find that everything I had chided Datruth for was squarely in Rahat's article.  Did I find that frustrating?  You betcha!   I certainly vented a bit and apologize for the harshness of it.  Yet, here I sit with a double standard in hand.  It's cool.  I can adjust.  If this is the direction we are headed then so be it.  It's not like many were adhering to the core standards all that much.

 

The idea was to have a special place that, unlike most of the others, rose above the norms of profanity, absurdity, abusive posts, absurd emotional rants, and all the other stuff that can be found encasing the occasional  quality posts that can be found.  A forum that was fun to read, informative, and thought-provoking was the ideal and for a long time that was (mostly) what we had.

 

These days, I feel like I am trapped in the mind of a self-loathing perfectionist when I read a lot of the posts here.  Nothing is good enough and the cure is more self-berating.  I'm sorry if that offends--and it is not directed at all--but it does fit a lot.

 

Honestly, I don't know where we stand on this issue now, but if this is the direction people want to go then so be it.  Let's go.

 

So, now to address a few other things.

 

I did read the entirety of Rahat's article and I realize he paid plenty of compliments.  Again, my ire was directed at the quoted section in my post which undermined the very thing I was fighting for yesterday.  I'm not saying Rahat hates Harden or wants him traded.  I was using hyperbole to paint a picture--often, it isn't that much of an exaggeration.  Obviously, my meaning was lost a bit and that is my fault.

 

Possibly the thing that concerns me most is this:

 

 

 

 And your reactions, JG are why most people hesitate to post anything critical of Harden on here.

 

Firstly, I'm not sure people are hesitating to post anything critical of Harden; however, if I am preventing earnest discussion then I clearly need to step back.  I have always, and repeatedly, stated that people's opinions are of no concern to me--it is the standard of keeping things on the level.  That's the thing.  Where is the legitimate, creditable validation for any of these claims?  James Harden has become a meme unto himself and the mere mention of him elicits pre-conceived beliefs, attitudes, and, worst of all, "truths".  I thought it was something we would want to avoid here, but it seems I am incorrect about that.

 

I will be muzzling myself.  Everything is fair game.  You guys go nuts and do not worry about any scolding from me.  It wasn't ever meant to be bullying, but I can see how it looks and so I apologize for those who suffered any bullying from me.  I was trying to uphold the standards here and failed to do so tactfully.

 

In short, I still believe we should uphold the standards of Red94--they may not be what brought most of us here, but are a big reason why we have stayed.  Perhaps, like many, you lurked here just reading for a while before finally joining in the discourse.  The bottom line is this is supposed to be a high-quality safe space for everyone and if I am contributing to it not feeling safe for people then I am not doing my job correctly.

 

Also, in case anyone thinks I am one who thinks Harden is perfect and infallible that is simply not true.  Believe it or not, I agree with many of the criticisms levied against him--perhaps not as harshly as some, but I agree.

 

Also, I did not mean to imply people were lemmings.  It has been my experience that many readers often treat Rahat's words as gospel.  Obviously we have lots of smart, knowledgeable readers--this is part of why I fight for the standards--I expect good things from everyone here.

 

Thanks for reading and I hope this ends up as water under the bridge sooner than later.  Now, let's all get back to what we should be doing--dissecting every aspect of our team 

Wow, This team needs to come together. No playoff wins since I don't know when. -------------->2009.  Been following us long?

This is harden 6th year.

In one way i want to say , where there is smoke there might be a fire,------------->Yes, the fire from the torches of those who would like nothing better than to see Houston, Harden, Howard, and Morey burn.

 

then again i say those type of things happen in sports.  ------------>D-Mo never said that which you refer to but keep harping on it--that helps

 

even at the high school level the stars sit with the stars,---------->this....what?  No......

but you never want to hear, again and again that certain players look down at other players.----->What's worse is when people believe everything they read

 

Then again if you can stand around on defense and just shoot the ball all game

you might think you above the team.------------> There you go.  Fly that flag high.  Don't be coy.  Your true colors shine brightly.

 

Sorry if my response seems terse or mean.  But what else could you possibly expect when making a post like this on a Rockets' Forum?  The court of public opinion is possibly one of the most frightening things in existence as it seems to prefer the electric rush from collective hatred over the droll acknowledgement of facts.  Your preference seems pretty clear.....

 

This is not what Red94 is about.  It's a big part of what initially brought me here.  A real website, with real information, real analysis, and fans who know what they're talking about combined with a no tolerance policy for jerks and garbage information.  Let's keep it that way for as long as possible.

What's this?!?!?!  A rational article with actual research and facts....weird.  Here is what D-Mo actually said: LINK

I am surprised at how you guys are viewing Beverley's contributions and abilities.  His role was to be a floor spacer and spot up from three last season.  He was fourth in line for "play making" and it went in this order: Harden, Lin, Parsons....and one could argue that he was fifth behind Howard who was asked to "make plays" in a different way.  If anyone wants more evidence of his "role" just check out his usg rates of 15.4% (2013) and 14.8% (2014).

 

Is he an elite passer/playmaker?  Doubtful, but I've seen him make the same pocket pass that Harden draws raves for.  He can hit Dwight with an alley-oop.  He can drive and kick.

 

According to NBA.com, he led the team in secondary assists per game--that has value (or they wouldn't track it).  According to basketball-reference.com, Bev's per36 numbers from his first season had him at 5.9 assists and that plummeted to 3.1 for last season (again signalling the role change).  For reference, Lin's per36 assist numbers from the last two seasons: 6.8 (2013) and 5.2 (2014).  James Harden?  How about per36 numbers of 5.5 (2013) and 5.8 (2014).  So, he is right in line with our two best play makers when put into that role.

 

I would not be so quick to judge Bev from his assist numbers.  He's no Paul or Rondo, but he can manage the offense and distribute the ball.  Sure, we can pine for other players, but I think Bev is going to impress and be a solid contributor for us on offense.

Yet another "quality" article about our beloved Rockets.  Bleacher Report is cranking out anti-Rockets articles as fast as they can.  "Those Rockets are so hot right now."  This totally unbiased article poses the question of whether or not we are still a top 4 team in the West.  What they actually wrote was another re-hash of how we gambled horribly in free agency, came up short, treated our players like garbage, were so much better off before, have selfish stars, gave away great players that will go on to be the most amazing people the planet has ever known, and in general are giant losers who are too arrogant to see the error in our ways.  (phew!   )

 

They use such subtle techniques as the classic, "So, have you stopped hitting your wife?" lead-ins.

 

The author, Dan Favale, hypocritically refers to the loss of our "role players" and then, in the very next paragraph, rails against Dwight and James for calling them "role players" only to nonchalantly return to using the term himself sentences later.  Towards the end, Trevor Ariza is nothing but a "cog".

 

He can't resist a Spurs reference and comparison, but it is a brief one.

 

Next, he busts out some stats...and they sound awfully impressive....to anyone who doesn't know much about the game, team, or stats.

 

"Asik, Lin and Parsons rank as the sixth-most efficient three-man combo that logged at least 400 minutes for the Rockets last season,according to NBA.com. Separately and together, they were valuable weapons."

 

Ooooooooooooooooohhhhh....Aaaaaaaahhhhh.....    Oh my!!!!  Whatever will we do?!?!?!?!

 

Wait a minute....I went ahead and clicked that link...Looks like he is right...they are 6th.....and of the 19 3-man combos they list all but 2 of them include, one, or both, of Harden/Howard.  The only other one that did not was #19 (last) with T-Jones, Lin, and Parsons.

 

Weird, it would seem that the evidence to support his stance actually solidifies the very thing he is trying so hard to vilify us for.  James and Dwight are the cornerstones.  In fact, Patrick Beverley finds himself in 4 of the top 5 3-man units...but whatever....T-Jones makes quite a few appearances as well.  But hey, let's ignore the other 18 line-ups and dramatically over-emphasize that we just gave away our 6th rated 3-man line-up.  (by the way, it was a .4 net rating drop from them to the next line-up....less than half a point)

 

The author steps boldly into his next point--Chandler Parsons is amazing!  He starts out by comparing him to LeBron James, Kevin Durant, and Kevin Love.     Oh really?  I can guarantee you that if we were playing pick up basketball and those were the 4 guys you had to choose from Parsons goes last every single time.

 

The author proceeds to quote another B/R writer who is also beating the "Parsons is Great" drum.

 

"If Houston needed him to score, he scored. The Rockets went 27-11 in games where he scored at least 17 points.

 

If the Rockets needed him to be a distributor, he distributed. Houston went 20-6 in games where Parsons had at least five assists.

 

If they needed Parsons to rebound, he hit the glass. They registered a 18-7 record when he recorded at least seven boards."

 

Again, that's very compelling data.  Wait a minute....they pulled the 'ol switch-a-roo on us!  By phrasing it thusly, we are lead by the nose to their own desired conclusion.  What really happened is, when Parsons had a good game we were more successful.  I think we can safely assume that Parsons was asked to do all of those things every time on the floor; yet, of our 54 wins he can only claim to have "done what we needed" in 27 of them according to this clown.  He acts like there is no overlap in those stats (without looking, I can guarantee there is a huge amount of overlap).  Does this count as reporting?  What is he reporting exactly?

 

"This just in.....I am a fame-chasing hack who will write whatever gets me the most clicks while preying on the fact that most readers are too dense to realize they are being spoon-fed public opinion."

 

I, for one, hear you loud and clear, buddy.

 

Rockets fans....let us all stop and give thanks....thanks for having a place like Red94.  It's not perfect, but when it comes to discussing the ins and outs of our favorite team it beats having to rely on the musings of outsiders with agendas that prioritize themselves above actual reporting.

 

The real crime isn't that these guys write this stuff--it is how many people so readily devour it and regurgitate it all over the place until the world is painted in their vomit.  Truly, it stinks.

 

@Baller93....30 extra miles over the course of the season.  OK, let's break that down.

 

Chandler plays 37.8 mpg which is 78.3% of a regulation NBA game.  Our pace last season was 96.3 (meaning on average we had that many possessions per game).  If we multiply the number of possessions by Parsons' percentage of time played we get 75 (75.4, but I rounded to the nearest whole number).

 

So, assuming 75 possessions per game for 74 games (the number Parsons played) we get 5,550 total possessions.

 

Parsons was exactly 29.6 miles ahead of James.  However, he played one extra game (2.7 mpg) so we must subtract that to get to 26.6 miles further than James.  Converted into feet, that is 140,448 feet.  If we divide that number by the number of possessions we will get a better idea of how much more running Parsons did per play.  Answer: 25.3 feet per play.

 

If we consider that Parsons plays off the ball and spent some time running around screens and cutting while James ran the offense from the top of the key that would explain some of it.  The baseline is 50'.  How many times per game does Parsons run from one baseline 3 pt. spot-up, under the rim, and to the other side?  5?  10?  I think 10 is a safe bet.  That's 500' per game.  So, multiply that by 74 and you've got 37,000 feet, or 7 miles.

 

Further, If we consider that James operated from the top of the key while Parsons was often in the corners for kick outs that would explain some of it (it's roughly 23 feet from the top of the key to the baseline 3 pt. shot.  That's 46 ft. per possession difference and would only need to occur 115 times to equal an extra mile.  So, if that were to occur 1/5 of the 75 possessions he plays (a likely estimate) that would be 17 times per game.  Multiply that by 74 games and we have 57,868 feet, or 11 miles.  Math is Amaaaaaaaaazing!

 

That moves us down to a mere 8.6 miles further than James for the season (I could probably whittle it some more, but the point has been made).  That is roughly 32% of where we started, or 8.1 feet per play.  Now, for a guy who stands 6' 10"....how many steps does it take to cover roughly 8'?  I'd say 1-2 depending on the stride and speed.  We can call it an average of 2 steps.  Two steps per play.  Wow....are we going to crucify James over 2 steps per play?  HECK YES WE ARE!!!!  Because he is abhorred by fans.  And that's what fans do.

 

You can eye test all you want.  Any cop can tell you that people's eyes are about as trustworthy as the criminals they are trying to get off the streets.  10 people can see the same thing happen and give 10 different accounts of said event.  You like the number your friend showed you because it supports what you already believe.

 

The truth is, Harden ran the second furthest of any Rocket player including Dwight, T-Jones, Lin, or P-Bev.  He held the second highest per game average (behind the wonderful Mr. Parsons) tied with Beverley (who did it in 7 fewer minutes than Harden) with 2.3 miles per game.

 

Look, I'm not here to say Harden's defense is amazing.  I'm here to shoot down terrible logic.  You want to post an emotional rant about how much Harden sucks?  Go for it.  If you want to use data to support that emotion it better be good and relevant.  Parsons ran more because his job was to run more.  Shocking!

 

Also, tell your friend that if he looks 3 slots to the right from the speed/distance tab there is a "defensive impact" tab.  There, one can see all the times James Harden gets "blown by" with his terrible defense.  Apparently, it is a whopping 2.3 times per game with a completion rate of 1.3 per game.  So, 2.6 ppg.  Yowza!

 

Sources: NBA.com, basketball-reference.com, NBA Floor Specs