I'm beginning to wonder if there's something to this. Clearly the Rockets have a lot of problems right now, but their record sans Lawson(when suspended, not when he sits or plays limited minutes) is alarming. I'm starting to get a Shaq in Phoenix vibe from this trade. Remember how the Suns were a dominant regular season team for 4 straight years a decade ago(between 54 and 62 wins each season) but lost 2 out of those first 3 years in the playoffs to the Spurs? Granted, Horry hipchecking Nash into the scorers' table in 2007 had a lot to do with that, but clearly they needed help in the frontcourt. So they traded for Shaq and suddenly they got smoked in the first round that season by the Spurs and then were a lotto team the next year. Once they realized that experiment had failed, they dealt Shaq and were right back in the Conference Finals the following season. I'm not naive enough to think that trading away Lawson will by itself fix everything. But it's entirely possible this could still be a case of addition by subtraction once he's gone.
then let them. they can say all they want after one of the biggest chokes in the history of the nba. it still doesn't matter
It doesn't matter that we've won without him. The fact of the matter is, in the grand scheme of things, we still will need him or a player like him the playoffs to create. Without him, we are the same team as last year and maybe worse (No Josh Smith) because of the lack of creators outside of Harden. That will be exposed in the playoffs without a Ty Lawson type player.
i can see the similarity but Shaq's presence entirely changed how Suns played on both sides of the floor I don't think we play that differently with Lawson, one because he rarely gets any consistent minutes, two he doesn't really do much when he does gets playing time.
This. As much as I would like to put the blame on Lawson (because he is the ONLY significant roster difference compared to last season), I just can't do it rationally. He has not changed our game a bit other than everybody seem to be playing with much less motivation.
Yeah. This has little to do with Lawson, Lawson was actually playing well before the suspension and injury. I think it's just that people are playing better. Beverly, Ariza, and even Brewer on offense at times. Fact is, when you have an overpowered team like we do (or we were predicted to have) you can miss some of your best players and still win games against half of the league. Clippers will need Blake to make a run just like the Rockets will need Lawson to make the run in the end.
Well said. Very true. He's shown some encouraging signs lately, so hopefully that continues, but it needs to start translating to more wins and higher quality play fairly soon. Won't just click come playoff time.
Rockets are 6-0 without Lawson. I'd say, either use him correctly and hope he responds in an aggressive way or bench his ass. Terry actually does well at time to change momentum.
They went on a huge winning streak without Blake last year when he had that elbow injury. Maybe the Clippers just need to have him sit halfway through the season every year kinda like the how Spurs go on their rodeo road trip and pile up wins.
Actually 8. NOP CHA (sans Batum, Jefferson) POR PHI NOP CHA (sans Jefferson) WAS UTA (many DNPs) CHA is on a 7 game losing streak. Sure, 8 wins is 8 wins, and 5 were on the road. But none against a .500 team. I'm not posting this to say anything about Lawson. Just saying LAC are fortunate Griffin is out with that schedule.
And to add to that, they aren't playing Josh Smith, who they wanted to sign for bench depth at PF. Josh Smith and Lance Stephenson collecting DNP CDs. Quite the additions. I find it very odd that the Clippers are galvanizing while Griffin is out.
Realistically though, they haven't played anybody. Those teams have a combined record of 81-144 (.360).
not much to be impressed about with the teams the rockets beat without lawson except maybe the clippers when harden didn't play that well.
Better than the Griffin-less schedule of the LAC...most definitely LAC, CHA and IND All .500 teams at the time. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I'm not really interested is trying to find meaning in our 4-0 record. To me, it's just a fun stat, nothing more.
