LakersGround.net :: View topic - Houston 2015 pick position?

Houston 2015 pick position?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Cool426
Sixth Man

Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 80

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:04 pm Post subject:

jjww28 wrote:

Buck32 wrote:

jjww28 wrote:

Cool426 wrote:

jjww28 wrote:

Lin is a supersub, he played more 4th quarter and OT minutes per game than anyone else, Go check clutch time stats at nba.com, one of two rockets players could creat their own shoot effectively at clutch time.

Lin was nominated "Player of the week" two times last season, why? Beacuse he puts up big stats and wins over good teams during the absence of Harden. Is there any other bench player nominated twice last season?

Go back to Lin's thread with this. Here is about Houston's pick.

No one cares what he did in the 4th quarter OT minutes last year.
No one cares about his nominations last year.
No one cares about his clutch time shooting last year.

If you don't see how it is relevant, it is your problem.
Don't speak for others, Ok?

Well, he speaks for me. I don't care about Lin the person or the player or what the hell he did in Houston. I'm staying away from the Lin thread because of all the Lin worship, and I was hoping I won't see the same thing in other threads like this - a thread about the Houston pick!

I merely speaks the facts. Read my pervious post in this thread, Rockets still has TPE, MLE, BAE, but they haven't found proven replacement for Lin, yet.

Dreamshack just said Lin is not a supersub, thus won't effect Huston's standing. I disagree and give the facts, with no 6th man/ 2nd playmaker, especially in clutch time (you can easily verify it in stats.nba.com). Houston's record gonna suffer, I think it is totally relevant to this thread. I don't know how you fail to see it.

You sound like it is forbidden to mention Lin in this board other than Lin thread, and you need seek refuge to avoid discussion invovling Lin. This is ridiculous.

First, Lin didn't even get one vote for Sixth Man of the Year Award (link). There were 110 voters from various media affiliations. Not even a single third place vote! If you keep saying Lin as a "supersub," don't be surprised if most don't agree with you and hence the backlashes.

In your OP, you stated that Lin played more 4Q and OT minutes than anyone else. You didn't provide any link, so I checked NBA.com myself.

4th quarter total min (link)

Parsons, 64 game, 592 min
Lin, 68 games, 555 min

1st OT total min (link)

Parsons 5 games, 25 min
Lin, 5 games, 24 min

2nd OT (1 game) link

Parson 3 min
Lin 4 min

Lin played more games than Parsons and had less total minutes. No matter how you slice it, your statement is false!

Lin's clutch stats are not what you made out to be. His NeRtg, 2P%, 3P%, were all good but nothing impressive. The only outstanding stat was his TO's. He actually turned the ball only 3 times for the whole season during clutch (5-point and 5 min or less).

If you don't want to lose whatever little credibility you had left, provide links and crucial stats such as ppg, shooting %'s, apg to make your point, not how many times he was nominated for player of the week.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:11 pm Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

There is clearly some confusion here.

I said ....

Quote:

...it isn't unreasonable to surmise that maybe they'd finish 5-8 in the West.

In response, you said...

Quote:

it is

Thusly, you said being a 5th seed is unreasonable. How is that possible when you had the same record as the 5th seed this year?

Then that is my mistake. I don't think that is unreasonable. I do think it is unreasonable to say we will miss the playoffs.

What's the lowest win total a person could predict for the Rockets before you'd say that that is impossibly low? 45? 48? 51? 60?

I think the 50 game mark is impossibly low for the team (60% win clip). Howard missed 11 games last season (where we went 6-5) and we still won 66% of our games (54 win clip). Even as a Laker, he only missed 5 games. We won 68% of our games with him (a 55 game clip).

Pick any team that has two top 10 players on it and a decent supporting cast, and I think you would predict them to at worst win 50 games and make the playoffs. Last year, in one of the strongest years ever for the West, you only needed 49 wins to make the playoffs. In the 10 years prior, you needed 45, 45 (prorated due to lockout), 46, 50, 48, 50, 42, 44, 45 and 43 games to make the playoffs. So yes, I think it's laughable that some are predicting the Rockets to miss the postseason with Howard and Harden, especially when teams 6 and down (prior season finishes) still don't appear to have more talent than the Rockets do.

I can't recall ever seeing role players be valued so highly. This is not a role player league. It's a star league. If you have a top 10-15 player and he isn't surrounded by utter garbage then you have a solid shot of winning most nights in the regular season. Harden led this club to 45 wins with Asik, Lin, Parsons, a hole at PF and no bench. Some are predicting that he will miss the playoffs with a better PG for him (Beverly), a quality SF that isn't a significant downgrade (Ariza), an adequate PF (Jones) and arguably the best C in basketball (Howard), and no bench. Come on now....

ringfinger
Retired Number

Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:22 pm Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

There is clearly some confusion here.

I said ....

Quote:

...it isn't unreasonable to surmise that maybe they'd finish 5-8 in the West.

In response, you said...

Quote:

it is

Thusly, you said being a 5th seed is unreasonable. How is that possible when you had the same record as the 5th seed this year?

Then that is my mistake. I don't think that is unreasonable. I do think it is unreasonable to say we will miss the playoffs.

What's the lowest win total a person could predict for the Rockets before you'd say that that is impossibly low? 45? 48? 51? 60?

Well, I'm not sure there are many who are saying the Rockets will definitely miss the playoffs. I think the point (which isn't articulated very well), is that virtually any of those teams in the middle to late seeds in the West, could quite easily fall out of the playoff race because it's so tight. And one of those that could, is potentially the Rockets. I don't think they got better overall this offseason although I personally don't believe they got substantially worse.

You keep saying that people are overvaluing role players but I'm not sure why you're saying that. They think the loss of Asik/Lin/Parsons and the addition of Ariza is worth about negative two to four wins.

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

TheElectronica
Star Player

Joined: 30 Jan 2010
Posts: 1392

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 5:38 pm Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

There is clearly some confusion here.

I said ....

Quote:

...it isn't unreasonable to surmise that maybe they'd finish 5-8 in the West.

In response, you said...

Quote:

it is

Thusly, you said being a 5th seed is unreasonable. How is that possible when you had the same record as the 5th seed this year?

Then that is my mistake. I don't think that is unreasonable. I do think it is unreasonable to say we will miss the playoffs.

What's the lowest win total a person could predict for the Rockets before you'd say that that is impossibly low? 45? 48? 51? 60?

It is a star league which is why no one is saying Houston is going to fall apart and end up in the lottery. But you are acting like losing a point guard the caliber of Lin, a back up the caliber of Asik, and a small forward the caliber of Parsons while only adding a notorious contract season performer in Ariza is negligible.

No one is calling them out as a bad team. 50 wins is still a near elite team. But if the strength of the Western conference doesn't scare you then you are highly overrating your two stars.

The issue is that the season Harden led the 45 win Rocket team to the playoff is a different league. Phoenix got better, Dallas got better, Memphis is just as good, Clippers are just as good if not better, OKC is just as good, SA is just as good, Portland got better, and GSW got better. The same measurement of success two years ago cannot be the same as it is this year. 45 wins last year would have been good for 10th place in the West.

Not a single person here is saying the Rockets are a bad team. But if you don't think role players play a huge factor in a few games then you are overly confident in Harden and Dwight. Do you honestly expect them to overtake OKC, Clippers, or SA this year? Are you not worried about Portland who did beat you guys in the playoffs, or GSW who had a "down" year by their standards despite putting up 51 wins? Dallas just added Chandler and Parsons to an already dangerous team.

Your entire point is Harden and Dwight is enough for guaranteed 4th seed. I don't think so. I think it gives you a great shot at it, with potential to move up if players like Bev and Jones step up. But at the same time other teams have similar talent with better coaching. It is a competitive conference and it is far from laughable or unrealistic that Houston finishes worse than they did last year. Is it likely? No. No one is arguing that. But the loss of Parsons, Lin, and Asik for this year clearly puts them at a disadvantage since they lost overall talent. It makes it not unfathomable for them to drop.

AVoiceInTheCrowd
Sixth Man

Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 74

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:10 pm Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

^^^^^

The team won 65% of their games without Asik, and Lin was not a supersub.

This may be one of the few times I've seen the loss of role players, one who didn't provide much for the majority of the season, be reasoning for a team to collapse out of the postseason. I don't consider Parsons a role player but we still have a good SF.

That's because the difference between a 4th seed and 8th seed last season was essentially 4 games. I don't think it is unreasonable to say that losing Asik & Lin and adding Ariza might cost a small number of wins. Maybe 1, maybe 2, maybe even 4. If it's 4, that could mean an 8th seed finish.

Last season was a bit of an aberration from most seasons, but I see no reason why next year would change much. You've have to pace for a 51 win season next year just to guarantee that you make the playoffs. Normally, that would be much lower at slightly over .500.

The Rockets won 45 games without Howard, with Harden, Parsons and scrubs. After Howard turned 21 his Orlando teams won 52, 59, 59 and 52 games, prior to him getting hurt in 11/12. Even when he got hurt, Orlando won 60% of their games with him (would be good for a 50 win clip). But some expect a team with Howard and Harden, with one year together under their belt, to miss the postseason? Because they lost a backup C that they won 65% of their games without, Lin and swapped SF's? When has a backup C ever been given so much credit to team success when the team had arguably the games best C? Or for any position where the team has arguably the best player in the game at that position and the backup will be playing limited minutes because the stud in front of him is going to get the lion's share (this is the main reason the team won so much without Asik)?

It's almost as if folks forgot/ignore that this is the one league where having one stud player can make all the difference in the world. The Rockets still had two of them last I checked. As far as the regular season is concerned, those two and decent supporting cast (which they still have) should still be a lock for the postseason.

Never have I seen role players get so much credit for team success.

It's obvious that your a Rockets fan. But, your opinion is just that of one fan. Those scrubs Asik and Lin on that 45 win season were more than just scrubs that year. In a radio interview by Morey, his stats (his own formula) listed the players who contributed the most win/shares that year. 1. Harden - 2. Asik - 3. Lin - 4. Parsons. Those scrubs certainly contributed a lot to the team's success in the 45 win season. I trust Morey's stats, more than any fan's opinion.

Yes, Houston may have won 65% without Asik but they won 67% of the games with Asik playing. They were still technically better with him than without him. I know small difference.

That 67% is a little misleading because in the beginning they tried to force the twin towers to start games which didn't work. They ended up going 11-8. When they finally figured that out and brought Asik off the bench they went 21-8. They won 72% of their games when they used him correctly and brought him off the bench.

Also, Lin. Houston has a winning percentage of 55% when he was out. And they had a winning percentage of 68% with him playing. They were better with him than without him. (I know that it's a small sample size of only 11 games without him)

Parsons is a little better player than Ariza.

My point is that these players helped Houston win more games with them than without them. And there hasn't been any replacements besides Ariza. The general consensus by experts is that Houston is a weaker team this year than last year. And as so many other posters have pointed out. If Houston wins 4-6 fewer games next year, than they might be fighting for the 7 or 8 spot.

-Showtime-
Starting Rotation

Joined: 12 Jul 2014
Posts: 324

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:40 pm Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

KBH wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

The Rockets were 5 games from missing the postseason last year. That's it.

This is the key point. In the west, losing a little bit COULD mean dropping from a 4ish seed to a 6, 7 or 8. Relative to the other western conference teams, the Rockets aren't so loaded with talent, and have average at best coaching. A slight slip in talent could easily mean a slight slip in wins, and in the west that could mean a noticeable slip in seeding.

Which teams that finished 6-9th in the West last year have more talent on their roster than Houston, and better than average coaching?

It doesn't matter. The point is Houston finished 4th and was only 4 games from being 8th.

Houston lost two key players in Asik and Lin. Added Ariza. That's probably a net loss, albeit small.

In a landscape where 5 losses can be the difference between being 4th and being out of the playoffs, it isn't unreasonable to surmise that maybe they'd finish 5-8 in the West.

You've got to be a Rockets fan -- it's the only explanation for your refusal to accept that a few extra losses is the difference between 4th and 8th.

West is extremely tight. I see the Rockets dropping below Portland next year and possibly Dallas as well.

The Rockets losing 3 key players, Lin, Asik and Parsons will make the team weaker. They were easily eliminated in the first round by Portland last year and they are even weaker now. Additionally, the Rockets will lose games when Howard is injured as they used Asik to back him up when that happened. If Howard is out for a stretch they could even miss the playoffs.

KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number

Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:49 pm Post subject:

-Showtime- wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

KBH wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

The Rockets were 5 games from missing the postseason last year. That's it.

Which teams that finished 6-9th in the West last year have more talent on their roster than Houston, and better than average coaching?

which would be bad for us.

but ya, they'll be 6th or 7th for sure
Dallas has a better squad than them now. and Portland does too. Hou and the Warriors will compete for the 6th/ 7th spots

Telleris
Star Player

Joined: 28 May 2013
Posts: 2371

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:14 pm Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

There is clearly some confusion here.

I said ....

Quote:

...it isn't unreasonable to surmise that maybe they'd finish 5-8 in the West.

In response, you said...

Quote:

it is

Thusly, you said being a 5th seed is unreasonable. How is that possible when you had the same record as the 5th seed this year?

Then that is my mistake. I don't think that is unreasonable. I do think it is unreasonable to say we will miss the playoffs.

What's the lowest win total a person could predict for the Rockets before you'd say that that is impossibly low? 45? 48? 51? 60?

Lin and Asik were more valuable as injury reserves than as backups, and Houston suffered above average injuries, if it got even worse, it could be really painful in that stretch.

Portland, meh, record level of non injuries, and super streaky, think Memphis, I know they only won 49 games, and recency bias is stronger than the force. Dallas? I think people are still remembering Tyson Chandler before he scrubbed up the last 2 years on the knicks (how the hell Phil got rid of Felton and got the mavs best 3 point shooters on what should have been a salary dump is beyond me, that fleecing was like Boston's of Brooklyn).

DJ Slik
Starting Rotation

Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 432

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:30 pm Post subject:

houston will be worse than last year--bank on it. they have lost a great deal of depth and what's worse--PLAYMAKING. losing JLin and parsons is a lot bigger than morey supposes. beverley is a horrendous playmaker and canaan sucks. Ariza is going to wish he stayed in washington. they'll be good but not great. i think they will be 6-8 with another first round exit and this will be mchale's last season.

-Showtime-
Starting Rotation

Joined: 12 Jul 2014
Posts: 324

Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2014 11:14 pm Post subject:

DJ Slik wrote:

houston will be worse than last year--bank on it. they have lost a great deal of depth and what's worse--PLAYMAKING. losing JLin and parsons is a lot bigger than morey supposes. beverley is a horrendous playmaker and canaan sucks. Ariza is going to wish he stayed in washington. they'll be good but not great. i think they will be 6-8 with another first round exit and this will be mchale's last season.

On offense, Beverley just dribbles the ball up and passes it to Harden then stands around the 3 point line. You're right about Ariza, he's going to miss Wall passing him the ball when Harden does his iso's, and runs the clock down while the rest of the team watches.

jjww28
Sixth Man

Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Posts: 52

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 3:29 am Post subject:

Cool426 wrote:

jjww28 wrote:

Buck32 wrote:

jjww28 wrote:

Cool426 wrote:

jjww28 wrote:

If you don't see how it is relevant, it is your problem.
Don't speak for others, Ok?

64 and 68 are their appearances in 4th quarter during regular season, not how many games they played.

Lin played 71 games (one game vs hawks starts 4mins then injured), Parson played 74 games during regular season.

http://nbawowy.com/query/nfe3zn4hoh4r6bt9

see above link, during regular season, Lin played 585mins(2054 total), Parsons played 620mins (2783 total) in 4th and OT.

585/(71-1)=8.36mins, 28.5% total mins
620/(74)=8.38mins, 22.2% total mins

All right, my bad, 2nd most 0.02 mins short.

clutch time performance: NetRtg=17.1, TS=60% , very low TO ratio, as 2nd playmarker/scorer , and you are not impressed:)

Lin is not gonna make 6MPOY by taking 9 shots per game.

Back to the point, Lin is a supersub. Now Rockets backup PG is canaan, who is clearly unproven.

yinoma2001
Retired Number

Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 4:22 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

yinoma2001 wrote:

Since you've soured so much on Asik/Lin, would you finally admit that Morey's foray into getting them was a failure (since you admit they amounted to very little last year)? What was their purpose if they sucked so badly last year?

I haven't soured on Asik. I'm simply stating the fact that the team won a ton of games last regular season without getting much of a contribution from him. I'm failing to understand how the team would be in trouble now without him.

I've been sour on Lin since we acquired him.

I don't think it was a failure to acquire either as Morey paid them $5M per season. That's average player money. I do think it was a mistake to give up assets to dump Lin at this point, as opposed to holding those assets for a midseason trade (since no star came in with his caproom).

Not really. It was $16.3m/year in cap hits for players you now say were dispensible to begin with. What was the opportunity cost of that $16.3m cap hit>
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:15 am Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

Yes, I think it's unreasonable to say the following will cause a team with two top 10 players on it to go from the playoffs to missing the playoffs:

- losing a average PG whose production is easily replaceable
- losing a good SF and replacing him with a good SF
- losing a backup C that didn't provide much for the majority of the season, when you have the best C in basketball

You thin it's reasonable to predict that a team with two top 10 players, one being a pivot and the other being a wing, and a decent supporting cast will miss the postseason? Exactly how many times has that happened?

yinoma2001
Retired Number

Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:20 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

Are you really that high on Ariza? Hasn't he already burned the Rockets once with contract year production? At least then, he was in his early 20s. Now he's closer to 30.

I understand you want to put a strong face to losing Asik, Lin, Parsons, but to say the team is better with Ariza and other bench replacements is a stretch.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals

ringfinger
Retired Number

Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:22 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

That's not what I said. Did you not read my post?

I said I thought it was reasonable to say that losing Lin/Asik/Parsons, even with adding Ariza, could result in a win total that is no more than 4 wins fewer.

Whether that results in a postseason seeding is dependent on everyone else, not the Rockets.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:26 am Post subject:

TheElectronica wrote:

It is a star league which is why no one is saying Houston is going to fall apart and end up in the lottery.

There are posts in this thread predicting Houston to wind up in the lottery. My responses have been noting that the team won't miss the playoffs.

TheElectronica wrote:

But you are acting like losing a point guard the caliber of Lin, a back up the caliber of Asik, and a small forward the caliber of Parsons while only adding a notorious contract season performer in Ariza is negligible.

I'm acting like losing a PG like Lin, a C that provided what Asik provided last season and taking a small step back at SF won't cause the team to go from the playoffs to the lottery. That's all.

TheElectronica wrote:

No one is calling them out as a bad team. 50 wins is still a near elite team. But if the strength of the Western conference doesn't scare you then you are highly overrating your two stars.

It doesn't scare me enough to think we won't make the playoffs.

TheElectronica wrote:

The issue is that the season Harden led the 45 win Rocket team to the playoff is a different league. Phoenix got better, Dallas got better, Memphis is just as good, Clippers are just as good if not better, OKC is just as good, SA is just as good, Portland got better, and GSW got better. The same measurement of success two years ago cannot be the same as it is this year. 45 wins last year would have been good for 10th place in the West.

The Rockets got better as well, mainly by adding Howard. No team that finished from the 6 seed and below last season has more talent on the roster than Houston does.

TheElectronica wrote:

Do you honestly expect them to overtake OKC, Clippers, or SA this year?

No. Those teams all finished ahead of Houston last year. My responses have been related to Houston making the playoffs.

TheElectronica wrote:

Are you not worried about Portland who did beat you guys in the playoffs, or GSW who had a "down" year by their standards despite putting up 51 wins? Dallas just added Chandler and Parsons to an already dangerous team.

Portland finished 5. And as far as regular season finished go, I'm not worried about them because I don't expect Harden to shoot 38% over the course of the regular season (that's the main reason we lost a close series to Portland, because our star played like crap). I noted that no team from 6 and below has more talent than Houston. No, I am not worried about the Rockets being worse than every team from 5-8 and missing the playoffs.

TheElectronica wrote:

Your entire point is Harden and Dwight is enough for guaranteed 4th seed.

Where did I say that? I said Houston won't miss the playoffs.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:32 am Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

yinoma2001 wrote:

Not really. It was $16.3m/year in cap hits for players you now say were dispensible to begin with. What was the opportunity cost of that $16.3m cap hit>

I've always noted Lin was overpaid. I don't think acquiring him was a mistake because he was signed when we were going into tank mode (pre Harden trade).

Asik is a starting caliber center. Unless you think Morey should have predicted that Howard would leave LA for Houston when he signed Asik then I'm not sure what you are arguing.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:34 am Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:

Are you really that high on Ariza? Hasn't he already burned the Rockets once with contract year production? At least then, he was in his early 20s. Now he's closer to 30.

I'm high enough on Ariza as to where I don't think he is a huge dropoff from Parsons and can be relied on to start at SF for a playoff team. If you think he is a huge dropoff or isn't a quality starting SF please detail why.

yinoma2001 wrote:

I understand you want to put a strong face to losing Asik, Lin, Parsons, but to say the team is better with Ariza and other bench replacements is a stretch.

Where did I say the team was better? Please link this post.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:37 am Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

That would still be a 50 win team, which would still make the playoffs. What year did a 50 win team not make the playoffs in the West? Even last year 49 got you in. I went back a decade and the high for the 8 seed was 50.

Are you reading my posts? All I'm arguing is that it is unreasonable to say Houston won't make the playoffs. If you don't think they will miss the playoffs then we are debating about nothing.

yinoma2001
Retired Number

Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:40 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

yinoma2001 wrote:

Are you really that high on Ariza? Hasn't he already burned the Rockets once with contract year production? At least then, he was in his early 20s. Now he's closer to 30.

yinoma2001 wrote:

I understand you want to put a strong face to losing Asik, Lin, Parsons, but to say the team is better with Ariza and other bench replacements is a stretch.

Where did I say the team was better? Please link this post.

I liked Ariza in LA, but he is the quintessential "contract year" player. While he is an upgrade defensively, let's see how durable he is (Parsons played 74 games last year). Ariza, last 4 years (77 games, 56, 41, 75). 2010-2012 (3 seasons) saw his #s dip significantly up until it was a contract year.

We'll see. You have him for 4 years so we'll see if he puts in the work to keep his body right as he enters his 30s.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals

ringfinger
Retired Number

Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 5:57 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Maybe we just don't agree, but, I don't think that that is an unreasonable thing to say. It might be wrong, but it's not unreasonable is it really?

You're confusing season record with playoff eligibility. Your team only has control over wins. Whether that is enough to make the playoffs is not up to you, it's up to everyone else.

That confusion is clear when you make statements such as "...even last year 49 got you in..." That is simply not true. There was only 1 team with 49 wins. If there were two teams with 49 wins, they would not both have advanced to the postseason since one of them would have lost via tiebreaker.

All people are saying is ... it's a super tight race. 54 wins was a 4th seed yet only 5 fewer wins away from being a lottery team. So it's super close, every game is going to be important. For a team that lost some key rotation players, it's certainly possible that they net fewer wins. Whether that will still be enough depends on what everyone else does, but we are coming off a season where the 9th seed had the best record for a 9th seed in NBA history.

The only people that would be absolutely shocked if the Rockets win 49 or 50 games next season instead of 54 are Rockets fans.

Bottom line, I would expect it to be a very, very competitive season in the West again next year. Wouldn't you? And thus, every win is really important because even good teams that win at a 60% clip could miss the playoffs.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 6:07 am Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

You're confusing season record with playoff eligibility. Your team only has control over wins. Whether that is enough to make the playoffs is not up to you, it's up to everyone else.

Season record determines playoff eligibility. Based on league history, I think it's fair to say if you win 50 games you will make the playoffs. Do you disagree?

ringfinger wrote:

That confusion is clear when you make statements such as "...even last year 49 got you in..." That is simply not true. There was only 1 team with 49 wins. If there were two teams with 49 wins, they would not both have advanced to the postseason since one of them would have lost via tiebreaker.

There is no confusion. Even last year, a very contested year, you only needed 49 wins to get in the playoffs. Going back a full decade the most you have ever needed is 50 wins. Are you predicting some outlier year where you suddenly need more than 50 wins to make the postseason? If not, then even your prediction of 4 more losses would have Houston in the postseason.

ringfinger wrote:

All people are saying is ... it's a super tight race. 54 wins was a 4th seed yet only 5 fewer wins away from being a lottery team. So it's super close, every game is going to be important. For a team that lost some key rotation players, it's certainly possible that they net fewer wins. Whether that will still be enough depends on what everyone else does, but we are coming off a season where the 9th seed had the best record for a 9th seed in NBA history.

It wasn't a tight race last year? What year has "what everyone else does" resulted in a team needing more than 50 wins to make the postseason?

ringfinger wrote:

The only people that would be absolutely shocked if the Rockets win 49 or 50 games next season instead of 54 are Rockets fans.

Even using your prediction of 50 they would still be a playoff team. Again, I am only arguing that is is laughable to say this team will miss the playoffs.

ringfinger wrote:

Bottom line, I would expect it to be a very, very competitive season in the West again next year. Wouldn't you? And thus, every win is really important because even good teams that win at a 60% clip could miss the playoffs.

It was a tight race last year, and the team that won at a 60% clip did not miss the playoffs.

jlhiah
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 1

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:24 am Post subject:

Obviously, Rox is sending out writers to readjust the media for their damage control, but it's too late. My prediction are: 2015: 42 wins. 2016: 39 wins (Howard lost patient, demanding trade). Reasons: - Last year, they did have a lot of weapons to work on with 3 diff. playmates (Harden, Parson, Lin). Now they have only Harden and it's easy for any opponent team to penetrate. - Chemistry, you can't just lost 3 core players and think it's will be ok. You can trying to argue that Parson+Lin+Asik are none factors but they are in FACT contributed a huge success to Rox's play off in 2013. - Depth. If Harden or Howard is joining injury list, they are doom. Last edited by jlhiah on Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:43 am; edited 1 time in total

ringfinger
Retired Number

Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 8:35 am Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

You're confusing season record with playoff eligibility. Your team only has control over wins. Whether that is enough to make the playoffs is not up to you, it's up to everyone else.

Season record determines playoff eligibility. Based on league history, I think it's fair to say if you win 50 games you will make the playoffs. Do you disagree?

Season record does not determine playoff eligibility. Winning X games doesn't guarantee you of anything. Your season record, relative to other teams' season records is what determines playoff eligibility. I don't know if you didn't know this, or if you're just being difficult.

Definitely fair to say that if you win 50 games you will make the playoffs. But given how competitive the West was last year, it wouldn't be a major shock if a 50 win team didn't make it by virtue of a tiebreaker or something either.

I have no idea why you are the only person on the planet that would be absolutely floored if the Mavericks or Suns, etc miss the playoffs next year with 50 wins given that the Suns missed it with 48 last year. It's possible. It almost happened last year.

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

Haha. You're still confused! 49 wins would NOT have guaranteed you a playoff spot last year.

I've already given you the answer but teach yourself and go figure out why.

I'm not predicting an outlier at all. Your fandom is just blinding you to a very reasonable conversation. "Hey, the West is competitive, hey, a 48-win team didn't make it last year, that's crazy. Can't even exhale with 50 wins next year" is the crux of the conversation. For very obvious reasons, you can't seem to want to stomach that. It's not coinkadink that you're a fan of a team who sits right in the heart of that very discussion.

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

It wasn't a tight race last year? What year has "what everyone else does" resulted in a team needing more than 50 wins to make the postseason?

I'm not sure what else to tell you. I can't have a rational conversation with the irrational. 50 wins doesn't guarantee you anything. That's a fact. You can give me 100 reasons why your beloved 50-win team is definitely going to make the postseason and we'll just laugh at the passionate fan knowing we do the same silly things about our own team.

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

The only people that would be absolutely shocked if the Rockets win 49 or 50 games next season instead of 54 are Rockets fans.

Even using your prediction of 50 they would still be a playoff team. Again, I am only arguing that is is laughable to say this team will miss the playoffs.

For the love of all that is basketball -- 50 wins guarantees you nothing. Well, in your mind it does. You're a Rockets fan and the Rockets never. give. up.

Dreamshake wrote:

ringfinger wrote:

It was a tight race last year, and the team that won at a 60% clip did not miss the playoffs.

Talking to you about the Rockets is like talking to a vegan about eating meat. Well, it's also like talking to Kobe fans about Lebron.

Dreamshake
Franchise Player

Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13711

Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:25 am Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:

Season record does not determine playoff eligibility. Winning X games doesn't guarantee you of anything.

Actually, going by league history, winning 50 games does guarantee you a playoff spot. Since the league went to the 16 team playoff format, a team that has won 50 games has NEVER missed the postseason (FACT). We can agree to disagree on whether something that has NEVER occured would be shocking or not. I feel quite comfortable saying the trend of 50 games = playoffs will continue, just as it did last season when you did not need 50 wins to make it.

ringfinger wrote:

Haha. You're still confused! 49 wins would NOT have guaranteed you a playoff spot last year.

Yes it would have. The 9 seed had 48 wins. Another FACT.

Display posts from previous:

LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge

All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Page 5 of 9

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.

We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.