# Does Houston Really Have that Big of a Problem?



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

> The teams considered playoff contenders in the Western Conference include Portland, the LA Lakers, San Antonio, Dallas, Denver, New Orleans, Utah, and maybe Phoenix (and maybe Golden State). With the exception of Phoenix (and Golden State), all these teams made the playoffs in 2009. Only one Western Conference playoff team – the Houston Rockets – are generally omitted from the list of 2009-10 contenders.
> 
> The Rockets were dropped from the list when it was learned Yao Ming would miss the next season. Coupled with the injury to Tracy McGrady, the Rockets now face the prospect of entering the next season without a “star” player. Here is how Chris Mannix describes the team in Sports Illustrated: Houston is now a pale imitation of the team that took the Lakers to seven games in the Western Conference semifinals.
> 
> ...


[Full Post] The Wages of Wins Journal


----------



## Chan Ho Nam (Jan 9, 2007)

not a problem at all i imagine, no need for panic at least

i dont watch a lot of Rockets game but i'm familiar with their players, i'm sure they are use to the situation where one or both of their star players are out, they will only get better, Brooks, Landry, Scola and Ariza will gel well with this group

Tmac said he's going to be ready so that should be interesting, i'm predicting he will contribute a fair bit that should surprise us by A Star break, when he expires, the Rockets will pick up a player or two of upper tier caliber and they'll be the new TrailBlazers


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Aug 2, 2006)

T-Mac says he should be ready early in the season and be back to elite status. Of course we heard this last year also so with him that's a toss up.

In any case, this team can hold the fort with both guys missing time. If T-Mac were to return by the All-Star break then making the playoffs is no surprise.


----------



## gi0rdun (May 31, 2007)

T-Mac has been hibernating his whole career and his Orlando years were just tests of his level. When he wakes up from hibernation he's going to lead the Rockets to the championship dropping 60 points a game whenever he needs to.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

gi0rdun said:


> T-Mac has been hibernating his whole career and his Orlando years were just tests of his level. When he wakes up from hibernation he's going to lead the Rockets to the championship dropping 60 points a game whenever he needs to.


As with most players, TMac will improve in his 30's and get better from every major injury he suffers.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

WOW Aaron Brooks WP48 is a negative. 

This re-inforces me desire to trade him.
I just dont think he is a passing PG. Though we dont want a passing PG right now considering our offense. 

We should do a sign and trade for Iverson.

Something like
Brooks + Cook/Barry = Iveson + Young up coming PG Maybe one of the many PGs who came out in the draft this year.

I would even trade Dorsey or Hayes. Considering defence seems to be our biggest strength in the coming off season.

Though if LeBron moves to PF I think Chuck will be the best defender of LeBron in the league.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

hroz said:


> We should do a sign and trade for Iverson.
> 
> Something like
> Brooks + Cook/Barry = Iveson + Young up coming PG Maybe one of the many PGs who came out in the draft this year.
> ...


You're crazy. You do realise Iverson doesn't even have a team right now? He would ruin the chemistry of the team.


----------



## gi0rdun (May 31, 2007)

R-Star said:


> As with most players, TMac will improve in his 30's and get better from every major injury he suffers.


I told you he's hibernating. Don't you wonder why he always looks sleepy in games?


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Spaceman Spiff said:


> T-Mac says he should be ready early in the season and be back to elite status. Of course we heard this last year also so with him that's a toss up.
> 
> In any case, this team can hold the fort with both guys missing time. If T-Mac were to return by the All-Star break then making the playoffs is no surprise.


Your avatar is total win. Hang Time was an awesome game.

Sorry for being off topic


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Cornholio said:


> You're crazy. You do realise Iverson doesn't even have a team right now? He would ruin the chemistry of the team.


Sure, they'll be a .300 team, but they'll have chemistry!!!


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> Sure, they'll be a .300 team, but they'll have chemistry!!!


Iverson is not what we need right now.


----------



## Spaceman Spiff (Aug 2, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Sure, they'll be a .300 team, but they'll have chemistry!!!


We wouldn't have chemistry if the periodic table was on the locker room board.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Cornholio said:


> Iverson is not what we need right now.


They need a primary scorer. As it is we're going to be on the losing end of a lot of 80-70 games. Despite the "winshares" (which is seriously the most overrated stat in basketball) everyone out there plays off other guys. Only now they'll be doing without anyone to play off of.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> They need a primary scorer. As it is we're going to be on the losing end of a lot of 80-70 games. Despite the "winshares" (which is seriously the most overrated stat in basketball) everyone out there plays off other guys. Only now they'll be doing without anyone to play off of.


This season is already lost anyway. We'll use it to develop our young guys and see if anyone can emerge as a primary scorer.

I'd rather see what Brooks can do than pay a 34-years old Iverson for one season.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Brooks is a terrible primary scorer, and our young guys aren't all that good. The value of Iverson is that it keeps Brooks from slipping into bad habits that are going to need to be broken later. With or without him they don't have enough. That much I agree on. But right now it's a team comprised entirely of roleplayers that aren't going to be able score.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

ehmunro said:


> Brooks is a terrible primary scorer, and our young guys aren't all that good. The value of Iverson is that it keeps Brooks from slipping into bad habits that are going to need to be broken later. With or without him they don't have enough. That much I agree on. But right now it's a team comprised entirely of roleplayers that aren't going to be able score.


I agree, Rockets do not have a reliable, I hate to use the word "proven", scorer yet. It's going to be at least 30 games in before the $23 million man trying to make a comeback to elite status. I am not saying Rockets can go far with current roster situation, but it is possible that Brooks can run the show quite nicely. If he doesn't, it might turn into a long night. The two rookies, on the other hand, can be impact player on this team given that we are not very good playing with roughly $34 million effective salary.


----------

