<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">im just confused why damon if he wants to come to houston so bad cant take 1.8 million the only reasons why JVG is even remotley intersted in him is his quickness against someone like nash or parker</div> Apparently he cares more about the money. "Show me the money!" I'm not sure if Van Gundy is even interested in him. Everything about him screams anti Gundy- undersized, shoot first guard, attitude problems.
I would take Finley. Payton isnt the same at his ancient age lol hes having back problems and isnt the same, Sprewell that guy has attitude problems and will most likely want tons of money. Getting Finley means getting a VET that knows how to score and help his team.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">Apparently he cares more about the money. "Show me the money!" I'm not sure if Van Gundy is even interested in him. Everything about him screams anti Gundy- undersized, shoot first guard, attitude problems.</div> Not accurate. Jeff Van Gundy was one of the biggest supporters of Andre Barrett before he got cut. Van Gundy was also the guy who recruited Barrett and brought him in. He also praised Barrett's toughness, and hustle, leading many calling him a JVG type guard. Guess what? Barrett's SHORTER than Stoudamire. Where are u getting you're information from?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">Apparently he cares more about the money. "Show me the money!" I'm not sure if Van Gundy is even interested in him. Everything about him screams anti Gundy- undersized, shoot first guard, attitude problems.</div> Not accurate. Jeff Van Gundy was one of the biggest supporters of Andre Barrett before he got cut. Van Gundy was also the guy who recruited Barrett and brought him in. He also praised Barrett's toughness, and hustle, leading many calling him a JVG type guard. Guess what? Barrett's SHORTER than Stoudamire. Where are u getting you're information from? Attitude problem? They said worse things about Tmac, and Sura before they came to Houston, and now they're fan favorites. The only thing you may have is he's a "shoot first" type guard. But I don't think that's a bad thing. His 15pts a game could be actually be used on this team. I really want the Rockets to avg. 100pts this season. The way to do that is get guys that can put the ball in the basket. I've stated before that you can WIN in this league with scoring PG's. Chauncy Billups, Tony Parker, Damon Jones, even Steve Nash to some degree, all play on great teams. The "John Stockton" type pg is old. We can't compete with a guy who scores 5pts a game, so I don't know exactly what type of "pass first, score NEVER" PG you're looking for.
definetly not sprewell the ball hog coach choker not to mention hes 35 year old not payton cause hes old didnt work with lakers much less celtics...sigh...finley? the little cheater...he was the enemy...thats why i dont like him...i would have stoudamire but hes old, short, and 1.8 million might not be adequate...u guys dnot see that a pro nba player averages only a few seasons so u try to get as much money as possible its like more important than winning a title
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">Not accurate. Jeff Van Gundy was one of the biggest supporters of Andre Barrett before he got cut. Van Gundy was also the guy who recruited Barrett and brought him in. He also praised Barrett's toughness, and hustle, leading many calling him a JVG type guard. Guess what? Barrett's SHORTER than Stoudamire. Where are u getting you're information from? Attitude problem? They said worse things about Tmac, and Sura before they came to Houston, and now they're fan favorites. </div> Is there an article for this? If Van Gundy really praised him that much and liked him, Barrett would have stayed. Of course, since I'm not exactly in the Houston organization, I wouldn't know too much about the coach and player relationship between the two. There's actually a difference between Barrett and Stoudamire- Barrett was starting to develop into a good playmaker while Stoudamire isn't. Thats probably why many were starting to call him a Van Gundy type point guard. If you throw in the court general attribute, it doesn't really matter if he's shorter. Oh yeah and by the way, get this- those two are the exact same height. Funny huh. 5-10. Wow, astonishing huh. Where are you getting your information from. What was McGrady's attitude problem? That he was lazy and didn't give it his all? If you can average thirty points per game, I can let that slide. I've never actually heard people talk about Sura's "attitude" problem so I'm not going to comment on that. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The only thing you may have is he's a "shoot first" type guard. But I don't think that's a bad thing. His 15pts a game could be actually be used on this team. I really want the Rockets to avg. 100pts this season. The way to do that is get guys that can put the ball in the basket. I've stated before that you can WIN in this league with scoring PG's. Chauncy Billups, Tony Parker, Damon Jones, even Steve Nash to some degree, all play on great teams. The "John Stockton" type pg is old. We can't compete with a guy who scores 5pts a game, so I don't know exactly what type of "pass first, score NEVER" PG you're looking for.</div> That fifteen points doesn't equate to something that a distributor or playmaker does. A pass first point guard can give you eight assists and around ten points a game. That kind of point guard can run the offense more fluently instead of having McGrady needing to do point guard duty. It takes some burden off his shoulders so he can get set for shooting instead of having to set other people up. Personally, I don't care if we average 100 points a game. I'd much rather care about wins than how much we put up. If you use points per game as a measuring stick, Detroit and Indiana would be in the lottery. You've stated that you can win in this league with scoring point guards, but then you were shut down by Trip. They run totally different systems. Almost all of those teams have other players that distribute the ball as well- so its more of a team thing. Some players that come to mind that are free agents are good "pass first, score when they need to" point guards are Chris Duhon and Earl Watson. Must we debate in every thread?
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">Is there an article for this? If Van Gundy really praised him that much and liked him, Barrett would have stayed. Of course, since I'm not exactly in the Houston organization, I wouldn't know too much about the coach and player relationship between the two. There's actually a difference between Barrett and Stoudamire- Barrett was starting to develop into a good playmaker while Stoudamire isn't. Thats probably why many were starting to call him a Van Gundy type point guard. If you throw in the court general attribute, it doesn't really matter if he's shorter. Oh yeah and by the way, get this- those two are the exact same height. Funny huh. 5-10. Wow, astonishing huh. Where are you getting your information from. What was McGrady's attitude problem? That he was lazy and didn't give it his all? If you can average thirty points per game, I can let that slide. I've never actually heard people talk about Sura's "attitude" problem so I'm not going to comment on that. That fifteen points doesn't equate to something that a distributor or playmaker does. A pass first point guard can give you eight assists and around ten points a game. That kind of point guard can run the offense more fluently instead of having McGrady needing to do point guard duty. It takes some burden off his shoulders so he can get set for shooting instead of having to set other people up. Personally, I don't care if we average 100 points a game. I'd much rather care about wins than how much we put up. If you use points per game as a measuring stick, Detroit and Indiana would be in the lottery. You've stated that you can win in this league with scoring point guards, but then you were shut down by Trip. They run totally different systems. Almost all of those teams have other players that distribute the ball as well- so its more of a team thing. Some players that come to mind that are free agents are good "pass first, score when they need to" point guards are Chris Duhon and Earl Watson. Must we debate in every thread? </div> My point with Stoudamire was that he can very well become a Van Gundy type guard. You isolated his size saying that's one reason Van Gundy won't like him, but there has been players smaller than Stoudamire that Van Gundy has praised. If you watched the Rockets game, you would have heard the praise that Van Gundy had for Barrett (must not have not watched too many games). You're exaggeration of him (Stoudamire) not being a playmaker last season is getting old. Despite you're personal beliefs, he has been a decent distributor throughout his career. Last year he took it upon hisself to be a scorer and suprised alot of people with his accuracy. Actually we need as much firepower as we can get. I and alot of people in here realize the west is full of teams with alot of scorers. Some offense wouldn't hurt. Scoring 100pts a game is possible for this team. If you recall last year, when we scored near 100pts our record was INCREDIBLE. That's something we should work for. You're biggest problem is your against getting pretty much EVERYBODY, Finley, Stoudamire, Derek Anderson, but you have NO quality alternatives. If Stoudamire isn't fit enough for you, who would be you're pick? You don't like Finley, who should we pick to play SG and back up Tmac? That's why we go in circles because most of you're ideas are mostly laughable. Trip makes some valid points, but if you read the threads, I've never been "shutdown". On the other hand, I've shut you down plenty of times, Kfrumhtown is my witness to that. While I don't agree with ANY of you're ideas, I encourage you to post anytime. By the way, who cares what system who runs. It's proven that you can win a ring with a scoring point guard. Detroit and San Antonio have totally differents systems, but they both have PG's that can light you up for 30 any night. So I would seriously reconsider getting a "pass first" Charlie Ward guard, we would much better off getting somebody that can put some points on the board. Thank you
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">Is there an article for this? If Van Gundy really praised him that much and liked him, Barrett would have stayed. Of course, since I'm not exactly in the Houston organization, I wouldn't know too much about the coach and player relationship between the two. There's actually a difference between Barrett and Stoudamire- Barrett was starting to develop into a good playmaker while Stoudamire isn't. Thats probably why many were starting to call him a Van Gundy type point guard. If you throw in the court general attribute, it doesn't really matter if he's shorter. Oh yeah and by the way, get this- those two are the exact same height. Funny huh. 5-10. Wow, astonishing huh. Where are you getting your information from. What was McGrady's attitude problem? That he was lazy and didn't give it his all? If you can average thirty points per game, I can let that slide. I've never actually heard people talk about Sura's "attitude" problem so I'm not going to comment on that. That fifteen points doesn't equate to something that a distributor or playmaker does. A pass first point guard can give you eight assists and around ten points a game. That kind of point guard can run the offense more fluently instead of having McGrady needing to do point guard duty. It takes some burden off his shoulders so he can get set for shooting instead of having to set other people up. Personally, I don't care if we average 100 points a game. I'd much rather care about wins than how much we put up. If you use points per game as a measuring stick, Detroit and Indiana would be in the lottery. You've stated that you can win in this league with scoring point guards, but then you were shut down by Trip. They run totally different systems. Almost all of those teams have other players that distribute the ball as well- so its more of a team thing. Some players that come to mind that are free agents are good "pass first, score when they need to" point guards are Chris Duhon and Earl Watson. Must we debate in every thread? </div> My point with Stoudamire was that he can very well become a Van Gundy type guard. You isolated his size saying that's one reason Van Gundy won't like him, but there has been players smaller than Stoudamire that Van Gundy has praised. If you watched the Rockets game, you would have heard the praise that Van Gundy had for Barrett (must not have not watched too many games). You're exaggeration of him (Stoudamire) not being a playmaker last season is getting old. Despite you're personal beliefs, he has been a decent distributor throughout his career. Last year he took it upon hisself to be a scorer and suprised alot of people with his accuracy. Actually we need as much firepower as we can get. I and alot of people in here realize the west is full of teams with alot of scorers. Some offense wouldn't hurt. Scoring 100pts a game is possible for this team. If you recall last year, when we scored near 100pts our record was INCREDIBLE. That's something we should work for. You're biggest problem is your against getting pretty much EVERYBODY, Finley, Stoudamire, Derek Anderson, but you have NO quality alternatives. If Stoudamire isn't fit enough for you, who would be you're pick? You don't like Finley, who should we pick to play SG and back up Tmac? That's why we go in circles because most of you're ideas are mostly laughable. Trip makes some valid points, but if you read the threads, I've never been "shutdown". On the other hand, I've shut you down plenty of times, Kfrumhtown is my witness to that. While I don't agree with ANY of you're ideas, I encourage you to post anytime. By the way, who cares what system who runs. It's proven that you can win a ring with a scoring point guard. Detroit and San Antonio have totally differents systems, but they both have PG's that can light you up for 30 any night. So I would seriously reconsider getting a "pass first" Charlie Ward guard, we would be much better off getting somebody that can put some points on the board. Thank you
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">My point with Stoudamire was that he can very well become a Van Gundy type guard. You isolated his size saying that's one reason Van Gundy won't like him, but there has been players smaller than Stoudamire that Van Gundy has praised. If you watched the Rockets game, you would have heard the praise that Van Gundy had for Barrett (must not have not watched too many games). You're exaggeration of him (Stoudamire) not being a playmaker last season is getting old. Despite you're personal beliefs, he has been a decent distributor throughout his career. Last year he took it upon hisself to be a scorer and suprised alot of people with his accuracy. Actually we need as much firepower as we can get. I and alot of people in here realize the west is full of teams with alot of scorers. Some offense wouldn't hurt. </div> I didn't isolate his size. I listed three knocks on his game- size, attitude, and shoot first mentality. In my last post, I already said that Barrett was developing to be a better playmaker than Stoudamire. I don't watch too much Rockets games since I don't live in the area, but I'm sure the media crew asked Van Gundy on what he thought of Barrett. Thats basically asking for praise- its not like Van Gundy would go saying that Barrett is a bad player and such, since it would leave bad chemistry problems between the two. My exaggeration of Stoudamire as not a playmaker is getting old? Its the truth. And, for the record, its not like the repeated it argument after argument. I was simply discussing my thoughts on this topic- I wasn't even replying to anything you said. A lot of your arguments are getting old too, like in the other thread- experience, experience, experience! I say Stoudamire is a decent distributor, I agree. However, Houston doesn't need a decent distributor and good scorer. We have that in Mike James. I know you're going to argue about the comparison but here's the point- James plays around ten less minutes than Stoudamire but has just four or three less points while just two less assists. We need a good passer and a scorer that can put around ten points on the board. Stop over emphasizing the image of the Stockton guard. There's plenty of players out there that can do a good job of passing as well as scoring. The guys that I mentioned- Duhon or Watson can put up ten points a night as well as dishing out eight assists. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Scoring 100pts a game is possible for this team. If you recall last year, when we scored near 100pts our record was INCREDIBLE. That's something we should work for. </div> I never said 100 points isn't possible. I said I simply don't care. , you're arguing against nothing. If we win while scoring 100 a game, great, if we win while scoring seventy points, thats great too. In fact, I agree with you on this one. Scoring 100 points a game is entirely possible. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Rock4life:</div><div class="quote_post">You're biggest problem is your against getting pretty much EVERYBODY, Finley, Stoudamire, Derek Anderson, but you have NO quality alternatives. If Stoudamire isn't fit enough for you, who would be you're pick? You don't like Finley, who should we pick to play SG and back up Tmac? That's why we go in circles because most of you're ideas are mostly laughable. </div> I actually wanted Finley in Houston. Here, I'll quote something I said in Dallas' Get something for Finley Thread- <div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post"> Charlie Ward, Moochie Norris, Vin Baker, Clarence Weatherspoon from Houston for Michael Finley. It gives Dallas a bunch of expiring contracts to relieve cap space (although its going to take much more than that) while giving Houston a perfect third option to complement McGrady and Yao. I don't know if Dallas would do this but I'm pretty sure Houston would go for it in a heartbeat. Its not creative, but I think it works for both teams.</div> And here's another one- <div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">As for Michael Finley, his defense is lackluster so the only reason why he would be brought here is for his instant offense. I wouldn't be too much against that since he would be the third option that we need</div> Please read my posts before replying. I don't want to repeat myself anymore, so as far as point guards goes, (see above). And shooting guards? Finley, Kittles, or any other shooting guard that can run the floor, defend, and pop jumpers. Lets all laugh about that for a second ok? Wait for it, wait for it... <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> Trip makes some valid points, but if you read the threads, I've never been "shutdown". On the other hand, I've shut you down plenty of times, While I don't agree with ANY of you're ideas, I encourage you to post anytime. Kfrumhtown is my witness to that. </div> It really depends on your definition of shutdown, but same to you anyways <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">By the way, who cares what system who runs. It's proven that you can win a ring with a scoring point guard. Detroit and San Antonio have totally differents systems, but they both have PG's that can light you up for 30 any night. So I would seriously reconsider getting a "pass first" Charlie Ward guard, we would be much better off getting somebody that can put some points on the board. Thank you </div> The system depends on what type of point guard you've got. If you've got a run and gun team, it doesn't matter what type you've got (see Iverson). If you've got a jump shooting team, more than likely the entire team is the point guard and ball movement is the key (see Kings). If you've got a team where passing is emphasized, draining the shot clock is emphasized and they play half court sets, then it doesn't really matter (see Detroit or San Antonio). We are a different team. We need a floor leader that can set McGrady or Yao up for open shots. Whats with the Ward comment? You're totally exaggerating what an ideal pass first guard is. Its not like a pass first guard is totally mentally or physically unable to put at least ten points on the board. Honestly, as fun as this has been debating over and over with you being so stubborn, I've grown tired of this. I'll be the better man in this- lets just agree to disagree, since this is getting us no where- you're for the shoot first guard while I'm for the floor general.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">Apparently he cares more about the money. "Show me the money!" I'm not sure if Van Gundy is even interested in him. Everything about him screams anti Gundy- undersized, shoot first guard, attitude problems.</div> same here...to me, he seems to be nothing but trouble (like Chucky Atkins to Kobe..just not kool )...I say we reach out to Payton, at least I could see him playing defense plus we would be getting him for very cheap
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">I actually wanted Finley in Houston. - Please read my posts before replying. I don't want to repeat myself anymore, so as far as point guards goes, (see above). And shooting guards? Finley, Kittles, or any other shooting guard that can run the floor, defend, and pop jumpers. Lets all laugh about that for a second ok? Wait for it, wait for it... :</div> Before it was <div class="quote_poster">Quoting AznxBaller:</div><div class="quote_post">True, Mark Cuban doesn't exactly care about using money. However, I did hear from this one thread in the Dallas forum, that they plan on waiving him or already waived him, I'm still confused about it- allowing them to not have to pay as much luxury tax and which would also give Finley a fresh start. Check it out here. Still, I don't really want him. He's aging- in fact, he's already pretty old so I'd doubt he'd be able to keep up with the faster shooting guards of the league. And at this point of his career, Finley's going in the decline. Finley's defense isn't great either so it would probably allow the better shooting guards of the league to explode on him..</div> How quickly we forget.
I think stoudamire would be good for the team. Though he demands the ball, we could use that as a consistent third option. The fact that he can still explode for 50 is pretty good for us at times like the seventh game of the playoffs. I also think it could put depth on our team, a big advantage dallas had over us. Possibly we could move sura as a starter at the SG and have wesley back him up and james back up stoudamire. I dont think we have to worry about attitude. He really wants to come to houston and that is a sign that he isnt very selfish.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">How quickly we forget. </div> People can change opinions you know. You should try accepting other people's opinions too. After figuring out that Finley can actually come cheap (I was confused by the Amnesty Clause then), I decided that it would be good to have Finley here. Of course, not for too long of a contract. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Though he demands the ball, we could use that as a consistent third option. The fact that he can still explode for 50 is pretty good for us at times like the seventh game of the playoffs.</div> Yeah, but during that game he was playing like Iverson- which can be a bad thing at times too. In that fifty point game, he had the ball in his posession a lot of times and basically did what Iverson does- shoot, drive, and shoot. He won't be able to do that with Houston unless Yao and McGrady both get injured.
^I dont want him to be playing like that, but he can come out and do that, which will be usefull at times. It just proves that we can still turn to him at points of the game, say yao and/or tmac arent at their best, he can take control of the game. I think that he would know his role if he came to houston as just a role player.
