Tracy McGrady, the choking loser

[StateOfMind12]

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-1 (2009)

Lettuce beef real tea here, Tracy McGrady is a loser and a choking loser at that.

Lettuce review

2001 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 7th seed in the East and lost in 4 against the Bucks.

Tracy McGrady shot a TS% or 48.3% which is pathetic. Anytime a TS% is below 50% you know its terrible. It is bad enough to have a TS% below 55% but below 50%? You have to be truly awful and an inefficient chucker to do that and that was what T-mac was in that series.

McGrady also shot a pathetic FG% of 41.5% and an even more pathetic 3 point percentage of 20%.

2002 NBA Playoffs- The Magic were the 5th seed in the East and lost to the Hornets in 4. However, the Magic and the Hornets finished with the same record of 44-38 that season. Hornets just happened to have won that tiebreaker and got HCA.

Tmac's numbers were nice if you look at the averages. However, anyone who saw that series knows how truly pathetic Tmac was especially down the stretch.

Baron Davis absolutely outperformed Tmac in the clutch. All of those games in that series was close but the biggest reason why the Hornets won that series especially in 4 opposed to 5 was the fact that Baron Davis was more clutch.

The Hornets were also missing their 2nd best player, Jamal Mashburn in that series. So Tracy McGrady got outperformed by Baron Davis and lost to a team that didn't even have their 2nd best player.

What makes this even more funny was that Tracy McGrady publicly criticized his own teammates after that series stating how Baron's teammates were much better. That doesn't sound like he is making excuses, it sounds like he a winner to me. :oldlol:

2003 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 8th seed in the East and lost to the Pistons in 7.

T-Mac was dominant in this series.....for the first 4 games. So dominant in fact that the Magic had a 3-1 series lead. T-Mac then stated how it finally felt nice to get out of the 1st round after Game 4. We all know what happened from there, Tmac ended up losing 3 straight games and he never made it past the 1st round. :oldlol:

2005 NBA Playoffs - The Rockets were the 5th seed in the West and lost to the Mavericks in 7.

The Rockets managed to steal HCA from the Mavericks immediately and won the first two games at Dallas. The Rockets ended up losing three straight games and the Rockets fell behind 2-3 after Game 5. Tmac was pathetic in that Game 7 and the Rockets lost by like 40 in that Game 7.

2007 NBA Playoffs - The Rockets were the 4th seed in the West and lost to the Jazz in 7. The Rockets had HCA in this series.

The Rockets had a 2-0 lead in the series. The Rockets then had a 3-2 lead in the series and they lost in 7.

Tmac was pathetic in this series. He shot below a TS% of 50% again in this series. He shot specifically 47.8% TS% in this series which is pathetic because anything under a TS% of 50% is pathetic and it is bad enough if it is below 53-55%.

Derek Fisher was guarding Tracy McGrady in this series, Derek ****ing Fisher and he managed to hold Tmac to a TS% of 47.8% and a FG% of 39.4%. That is pathetic. Derek Fisher is giving up like 7-8 inches to Tracy McGrady and he still manages to make him shoot less than 40% from the field? and a TS% of less than 50%? That is ****ing pathetic.

What was even more pathetic was Game 7 of the 4th quarter of how Tracy Mcgrady performed. All he ever did was settle for ***** jump shot after jump shot. They also had a lead coming into the 4th or at least midway in the 4th. They blew it though because Tmac is a choking loser.

2008 NBA Playoffs - The same thin as the 2007 NBA playoffs, The Rockets were the 4th seed in the West and lost to the Jazz in 7. The Rockets had HCA in this series. The only difference was that Yao Ming was out for this series due to an injury.

Still Tracy McGrady played just as pathetic, if not more pathetic than he did in 2007.

McGrady shot a TS% under 50% with 47.8% once again like he did in the last post-season against the Jazz.


If Tracy's career were to end after 2004 due to some devastating injury or due to a retirement or whatever then maybe you could justify how much of a loser he was. However, looking at how he was unable to do anything in Houston despite playing with all that talent he had shows everything you need to know about Tmac. The guy was a choking loser, plain and simple.

[SpecialQue]

Goddamn, dude. That thread title is harsh as hell.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-0 (2009)

http://airstre.am/dopamine72/Nicolas%20Cage%20Laugh.gif

RRR3 is raging

[MichaelCheazley]

http://i674.photobucket.com/albums/vv104/mariochalmers/tmac-1.jpg

[Zackmorris]

Goddamn, dude. That thread title is harsh as hell.


Word. WTF happen? :lol

[PJR]

One of the most overrated players on ISH. Just because his game was aesthetically pleasing, doesn't mean it was winning a brand. Good thread.

[kNIOKAS]

just when negs are gone :cheers:

I'm fine with T-Mac (some say T-Pain), I only dislike how he is overrated by his fans due to the animatic playing style. He was something to watch, sure. Just not exponentialy great, and playoffs record reminds.

[StateOfMind12]

One of the most overrated players on ISH. Just because his game was aesthetically pleasing, doesn't mean it was winning a brand. Good thread.
For real. People like to nag on LeBron for being a choker or a loser but LeBron isn't even close to being a loser like Tmac is. If you want to take look at a loser, you take a look at Tmac. LeBron looks like Bill Russell when compared to Tmac.

Tmac did nothing but underachieve in his career. While LeBron has also underachieved for part of his career, it certainly wasn't as much or as bad as Tmac's under achievements were. LeBron has also massively overachieved for most of his career and that is something we cannot say about and for Tmac.

[Owl]

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-0 (2009)

Lettuce beef real tea here, Tracy McGrady is a loser and a choking loser at that.

Lettuce review

2001 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 7th seed in the East and lost in 4 against the Bucks.

Tracy McGrady shot a TS% or 48.3% which is pathetic. Anytime a TS% is below 50% you know its terrible. It is bad enough to have a TS% below 55% but below 50%? You have to be truly awful and an inefficient chucker to do that and that was what T-mac was in that series.

McGrady also shot a pathetic FG% of 41.5% and an even more pathetic 3 point percentage of 20%.

2002 NBA Playoffs- The Magic were the 5th seed in the East and lost to the Hornets in 4. However, the Magic and the Hornets finished with the same record of 44-38 that season. Hornets just happened to have won that tiebreaker and got HCA.

Tmac's numbers were nice if you look at the averages. However, anyone who saw that series knows how truly pathetic Tmac was especially down the stretch.

Baron Davis absolutely outperformed Tmac in the clutch. All of those games in that series was close but the biggest reason why the Hornets won that series especially in 4 opposed to 5 was the fact that Baron Davis was more clutch.

The Hornets were also missing their 2nd best player, Jamal Mashburn in that series. So Tracy McGrady got outperformed by Baron Davis and lost to a team that didn't even have their 2nd best player.

What makes this even more funny was that Tracy McGrady publicly criticized his own teammates after that series stating how Baron's teammates were much better. That doesn't sound like he is making excuses, it sounds like he a winner to me. :oldlol:

2003 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 8th seed in the East and lost to the Pistons in 7.

T-Mac was dominant in this series.....for the first 4 games. So dominant in fact that the Magic had a 3-1 series lead. T-Mac then stated how it finally felt nice to get out of the 1st round after Game 4. We all know what happened from there, Tmac ended up losing 3 straight games and he never made it past the 1st round. :oldlol:

2005 NBA Playoffs - The Rockets were the 5th seed in the West and lost to the Mavericks in 7.

The Rockets managed to steal HCA from the Mavericks immediately and won the first two games at Dallas. The Rockets ended up losing three straight games and the Rockets fell behind 2-3 after Game 5. Tmac was pathetic in that Game 7 and the Rockets lost by like 40 in that Game 7.

2007 NBA Playoffs - The Rockets were the 4th seed in the West and lost to the Jazz in 7. The Rockets had HCA in this series.

The Rockets had a 2-0 lead in the series. The Rockets then had a 3-2 lead in the series and they lost in 7.

Tmac was pathetic in this series. He shot below a TS% of 50% again in this series. He shot specifically 47.8% TS% in this series which is pathetic because anything under a TS% of 50% is pathetic and it is bad enough if it is below 53-55%.

Derek Fisher was guarding Tracy McGrady in this series, Derek ****ing Fisher and he managed to hold Tmac to a TS% of 47.8% and a FG% of 39.4%. That is pathetic. Derek Fisher is giving up like 7-8 inches to Tracy McGrady and he still manages to make him shoot less than 40% from the field? and a TS% of less than 50%? That is ****ing pathetic.

What was even more pathetic was Game 7 of the 4th quarter of how Tracy Mcgrady performed. All he ever did was settle for ***** jump shot after jump shot. They also had a lead coming into the 4th or at least midway in the 4th. They blew it though because Tmac is a choking loser.

2008 NBA Playoffs - The same thin as the 2007 NBA playoffs, The Rockets were the 4th seed in the West and lost to the Jazz in 7. The Rockets had HCA in this series. The only difference was that Yao Ming was out for this series due to an injury.

Still Tracy McGrady played just as pathetic, if not more pathetic than he did in 2007.

McGrady shot a TS% under 50% with 47.8% once again like he did in the last post-season against the Jazz.


If Tracy's career were to end after 2004 due to some devastating injury or due to a retirement or whatever then maybe you could justify how much of a loser he was. However, looking at how he was unable to do anything in Houston despite playing with all that talent he had shows everything you need to know about Tmac. The guy was a choking loser, plain and simple.
There might be a case for T-Mac as a choker but this isn't it. Sorry but cherry picking specific stats doesn't make a for a watertight case.

I mean
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-0 (2009) What does that even mean. Teams without Tracy McGrady's win percentage in the playoffs is very slightly under .500 as historically, most teams haven't had Tracy McGrady.

2001: You looked exclusively at shooting percentages. To be sure T-Mac shot badly that series. He also had 8.3 assists per game, and generally filled up the box score. T-Mac's PER for the series 26.8. PER for their next best player (over 20 minutes per game) 14 (Bo Outlaw)

2002: T Mac's numbers do indeed look nice. But apparently he didn't perform down the stretch. Whatever, presumably being awesome 44 1/2 minutes per game isn't enough, yoou have to hit the winner and your team has to win or you're useless. T-Mac's PER 25.6, next best player Monty Williams 17.3.

2003: You acknowledge T-Mac was awesome for 4 games. Again McGrady was spectacular. Was it his fault Darrell Armstong put up 15 points in the last two games versus Chauncey Billups 77? The Magic had 5 guys who played more than a hundred minutes that series who had a PER below ten
for a quick view of how bad that is see the link http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2011&year_max=2011&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=per&c1comp=lt&c1val=10&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws&order_by_asc=Y
T-Mac PER 27. Next best Magic player Drew Gooden 16.8
Note, at point T-Mac had peaked. In 2004 injuries and heavy minutes took their toll. Mcgrady was never the same after 2004.
I'm not going to run through the rest of the series in part because I don't care as much about T-Mac after that point and in part because it seems like labouring a point. I'll just post this link http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/mcgratr01.html#playoffs::none Sure if you measure individual by team performance then McGrady wasn't a great player (Jud Buechler was though). If you look selectively at specific statistics he looks bad too. If you look at what he did rather than "clutchness" measured by team results then McGrady was a remarkable player.

[el_locoteee]

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-1 (2009)


Fixed.

Get your facts straight

[StateOfMind12]

There might be a case for T-Mac as a choker but this isn't it. Sorry but cherry picking specific stats doesn't make a for a watertight case.
It actually is, you tell me that I'm cherry picking stats yet you are doing the very same. lol.



2002: T Mac's numbers do indeed look nice. But apparently he didn't perform down the stretch. Whatever, presumably being awesome 44 1/2 minutes per game isn't enough, yoou have to hit the winner and your team has to win or you're useless. T-Mac's PER 25.6, next best player Monty Williams 17.3.
The guy was straight up outplayed in the clutch by Baron Davis in that series, a player that was clearly inferior to McGrady at the time and was inferior to McGrady for most of his career. If McGrady did perform well in the clutch then they actually would have gotten past the 1st round but he didn't so he didn't get past the 1st round. It is one thing to not perform well in the clutch and it is another to get outperformed by another player on the opposing team.

You want to know why LeBron gets ripped into pieces about his 2011 NBA Finals performance? Because he was outplayed by every single player out there in the 4th quarter/clutch. Now I'm not suppose to penalize Mcgrady for the same thing? You have to be ****ing kidding me.


If you look selectively at specific statistics he looks bad too. If you look at what he did rather than "clutchness" measured by team results then McGrady was a remarkable player.
The only thing remarkable about Mcgrady is how he managed to lose in every situation possible.

Lose with a good team
Lose with an average team
Lose with a bad team.
Lose with HCA
Lose without HCA
Lose by getting outperformed by another player on the other team in the clutch
Lose by blowing series leads.

How long do you want me to continue? I don't where I would rank McGrady of all-time but it is far far far far away from the top 50 and he has nothing on Paul Pierce.

[ChrisKreager]

His teams didn't always get good draws that were beatable:

2001- Orlando was basically lacking depth other than Mike Miller. Good luck trying to beat Milwaukee at the peak of the Allen-Robinson-Cassell trio.

2002- Again, lack of talent save for Miller. Charlotte was a tough team with Baron Davis, Mashburn, Eddie Jones.

2003- Other than T-Mac, who DID Orlando have that you could rely on? It's a miracle they even one three games in that series.

2005- This was virtually the same Dallas team that made the NBA Finals next year.

2007, 2008- Not a lot after him and Yao; hard to stop the Boozer-Deron-Okur squads.

Look at the rosters he was on and carrying; not exactly the 2008 Celtics.

[HurricaneKid]

Anytime a TS% is below 50% you know its terrible. It is bad enough to have a TS% below 55% but below 50%? You have to be truly awful and an inefficient chucker to do that and that was what XXXXXXX was in that series.


Derrick Rose shot <50% TS% in last year's playoffs. The year before that? You guessed it, <50%.

Is Derrick Rose a "truly awful and inefficient chucker" ?

[bdreason]

You can call him a choker... but he certainly isn't a loser.

[Dave3]

Tracy McGrady shot a TS% or 48.3% which is pathetic. Anytime a TS% is below 50% you know its terrible. It is bad enough to have a TS% below 55% but below 50%? You have to be truly awful and an inefficient chucker to do that and that was what T-mac was in that series.
Thought this point was interesting. You consider below 55% TS% bad...yet call a player with a 53 TS% the best scorer. Sounds smart.

[Owl]

.
It actually is, you tell me that I'm cherry picking stats yet you are doing the very same. lol.


The guy was straight up outplayed in the clutch by Baron Davis in that series, a player that was clearly inferior to McGrady at the time and was inferior to McGrady for most of his career. If McGrady did perform well in the clutch then they actually would have gotten past the 1st round but he didn't so he didn't get past the 1st round. It is one thing to not perform well in the clutch and it is another to get outperformed by another player on the opposing team.

You want to know why LeBron gets ripped into pieces about his 2011 NBA Finals performance? Because he was outplayed by every single player out there in the 4th quarter/clutch. Now I'm not suppose to penalize Mcgrady for the same thing? You have to be ****ing kidding me.


The only thing remarkable about Mcgrady is how he managed to lose in every situation possible.

Lose with a good team
Lose with an average team
Lose with a bad team.
Lose with HCA
Lose without HCA
Lose by getting outperformed by another player on the other team in the clutch
Lose by blowing series leads.

How long do you want me to continue? I don't where I would rank McGrady of all-time but it is far far far far away from the top 50 and he has nothing on Paul Pierce.
I didn't cherry pick I used PER in all instances and directed people to the full stats. I once mentioned assists per game to illustrate that in one series where you said he wasn't effective due to his shooting to illustrate that he did other things.
With regarded to bolded I would say that (1) I never claimed McGrady was clutch only that he was a very good player in the playoffs and (2) as I said before if you want to rate individuals by team performance fine T-Mac was useless.

I don't want you to have double standards so fine if you watched the games and McGrady was bad like James was fine. I don't happen to think 4th quarter performance is more important than the rest of the game. All 4 quarters count the same and McGrady was darned effective across the lot of them. If you think the order in which wins and losses are accumulated are important in a series are important and conceding a seires lead makes you a choker fine. I don't care about the order and as I have repeated I don't think team performance is a good indicator of the performance of one player.
"He" (actually his teams, or teams which he was on) lost with home court advantage. Once. That was the one time his team were the (very marginal) favourites. It was his worst performance. He was still his teams best player (not accounting for D) http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/2007.html#playoffs_advanced::5 . Yao was the better player by this point but he fell off much worse. But he was slightly below par this series so if that makes him a choker he is one.

He lost with bad teams for sure. He lost in a couple of competitive series when past his peak in Houston. This for me isn't as important because it's after his peak. But even then he bothered by nagging injuries, Yao was bothered by injuries (out in 2008), and those were 2 man teams.

I'd probably rank him below The Truth depending on the criteria because Pierce was generally a better defender and has had a much longer peak. That said Pierce was getting killed by Bill Simmons for dogging it in the middle of the last decade so it's not like he's a saint or anything, and neither could carry a team on their own.

[StateOfMind12]

Thought this point was interesting. You consider below 55% TS% bad...yet call a player with a 53 TS% the best scorer. Sounds smart.
I consider Kevin Durant the best scorer in the NBA right now. Tell me what is his TS% is this season because I'm pretty sure it is not below 55% dumbshit. I don't know why you can keep posting in my threads, have I seriously inside your head so bad that you have to annoy me in all of my posts and threads? That is pretty pathetic, oh well, jokes on you, then again you are a joke so you should already be use to it.


"He" (actually his teams, or teams which he was on) lost with home court advantage. Once. That was the one time his team were the (very marginal) favourites.
He had HCA in 2008 as well and honestly he could have easily gotten past the 1st round with that team if he didn't perform so poorly. Most all-star wing players would have gotten past the 1st round if they were to replace McGrady on the 2008 Rockets in my opinion.



It was his worst performance. He was still his teams best player (not accounting for D) Yao was the better player by this point but he fell off much worse. But he was slightly below par this series so if that makes him a choker he is one.
I don't get what you meant by this but yes McGrady playing horribly in the series was a large part of why they loss this series.

McGrady talked about how it was on him if he doesn't get past the 1st round this series. McGrady was also in tears in the Game 7 post-conference. That is ****ing pathetic, I mean get crying due to being happy and finally winning (e.g. Michael Jordan, Antoine Walker, etc.) but crying due to losing? I have one word for that and that is "pathetic."




I don't want you to have double standards so fine if you watched the games and McGrady was bad like James was fine. I don't happen to think 4th quarter performance is more important than the rest of the game. All 4 quarters count the same and McGrady was darned effective across the lot of them. If you think the order in which wins and losses are accumulated are important in a series are important and conceding a seires lead makes you a choker fine. I don't care about the order and as I have repeated I don't think team performance is a good indicator of the performance of one player.
"He" (actually his teams, or teams which he was on) lost with home court advantage.
That is your opinion, absolutely your opinion. I don't agree at all and I think we view Sports differently. Clutch absolutely matters, absolutely. I can explain more in detail if you want or need.



He lost with bad teams for sure. He lost in a couple of competitive series when past his peak in Houston. This for me isn't as important because it's after his peak. But even then he bothered by nagging injuries, Yao was bothered by injuries (out in 2008), and those were 2 man teams.
Like I said, if McGrady were to somehow get a career ending injury in 2004 before playing and getting traded to Houston or retired or whatever then many people including maybe myself would justify how he never got past the 1st round. IT would be pretty similar to Grant Hill before playing with Phoenix.

However, after seeing Tmac fail some more with Houston says it all about him.


I'd probably rank him below The Truth depending on the criteria because Pierce was generally a better defender and has had a much longer peak. That said Pierce was getting killed by Bill Simmons for dogging it in the middle of the last decade so it's not like he's a saint or anything, and neither could carry a team on their own.
There is no debate about who is better between Pierce and McGrady unless you put 100% value on peak and nothing else.

If that were the case then you better have Bill Walton in your top 5-10 since he was probably better than Duncan was in his peak. I have heard many times that Bill Walton was the GOAT during his peak as well, yet Walton is considered like barely top 30-40. That would be a complete double standard if you were to have Tmac above Pierce and then Bill Walton outside of your top 20.

I'm not sure what you have left or what your original point is. McGrady isn't really a loser but not a good playoff performer or what?

[Dave3]

I consider Kevin Durant the best scorer in the NBA right now.

Oh, today is Durant? Just 2 days ago it was Kobe...



The most superior scorer in the league needs to score the most amount of points so lets do it Kobe.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251748&page=4 - post 49....

Gotta make up your mind.

[CLTHornets4eva]

Oh, today is Durant? Just 2 days ago it was Kobe...



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251748&page=4 - post 49....

Gotta make up your mind.
:bowdown:

Great find. :lol

[StateOfMind12]

Oh, today is Durant? Just 2 days ago it was Kobe...



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251748&page=4 - post 49....

Gotta make up your mind.
With you stalking me so frequently, I thought you would also know that I am usually not very serious in game threads especially in Lakers ones.

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251976



Who is the best scorer in the NBA?
Kevin Durant



Good try though, maybe next time. Funny how most people picked Kobe in that thread though. I wish I could agree but I couldn't. Of course I'm sure you are raging since people consider someone superior than LeBron.

[Dave3]

With you stalking me so frequently, I thought you would also know that I am usually not very serious in game threads especially in Lakers ones.

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251976




Good try though, maybe next time.
Oh I see. You flip flop opinions, then use the classic "I'm wasn't serious!!!"

Good escape. Well...mediocre at best but it's what's come to be expected from you anyways.

[Rockets(T-mac)]

I'd say he choked twice, against Detroit and Dallas. The other playoff series, his team was either bad (Orlando) or injured (Houston). I think it was 2007, when during the playoffs no one other than McGrady and Yao could sniff double digit scoring. McGrady has dragged some bad teams to the playoffs, he deserves credit for that.

And I see very little people overrate him these days anyway. He's rarely mentioned on all time lists and most people (like the OP) call him a choking loser/first round virgin. Don't really see how he's overrated. :confusedshrug:

[StateOfMind12]

Oh I see. You flip flop opinions, then use the classic "I'm wasn't serious!!!"

Good escape. Well...mediocre at best but it's what's come to be expected from you anyways.
Yeah, good try though. I still feel sorry for you especially the part where you think people take you seriously, but hey this thread is talking about Tracy McGrady and how much of a loser he is. I know you are a loser as well but we are talking professional NBA players who are loser and had losers career, not losers in the real world because not even Tracy is not that bad.

See ya in another thread.



And I see very little people overrate him these days anyway. He's rarely mentioned on all time lists and most people (like the OP) call him a choking loser/first round virgin. Don't really see how he's overrated. :confusedshrug:

It's a different site that does overrate him but yeah you are right for the most part since this site seems to treat him more fair and rate him more correctly. I think he choked in the 2007 series though because they were up 3-2 in that series heading into Game 6. The Rockets could have buried them there in that Game 6 and in Game 7 but they didn't. McGrady also played pretty poorly since he couldn't even score at least score efficiently against Derek ****ing Fisher.

Just curious, Are you a Rockets fan or a Tmac fan? Your name is Rockets Tmac so I'm not too sure, lol.

[HurricaneKid]

Derrick Rose shot <50% TS% in last year's playoffs. The year before that? You guessed it, <50%.

Is Derrick Rose a "truly awful and inefficient chucker" ?

Still waiting...

DRose career playoff TS% .504

TMac- .517

[spiegel]

For real. People like to nag on LeBron for being a choker or a loser but LeBron isn't even close to being a loser like Tmac is. If you want to take look at a loser, you take a look at Tmac. LeBron looks like Bill Russell when compared to Tmac.

Tmac did nothing but underachieve in his career. While LeBron has also underachieved for part of his career, it certainly wasn't as much or as bad as Tmac's under achievements were. LeBron has also massively overachieved for most of his career and that is something we cannot say about and for Tmac.
RG you just cant let ur tmac hate tpo propup yao die. caN U

[spiegel]

It's a different site that does overrate him but yeah you are right for the most part since this site seems to treat him more fair and rate him more correctly. I think he choked in the 2007 series though because they were up 3-2 in that series heading into Game 6. The Rockets could have buried them there in that Game 6 and in Game 7 but they didn't. McGrady also played pretty poorly since he couldn't even score at least score efficiently against Derek ****ing Fisher.

Just curious, Are you a Rockets fan or a Tmac fan? Your name is Rockets Tmac so I'm not too sure, lol.

Whaa hipocreate. you sed to be a rockets fan when yao was there but now are a lakers fan. lool. you are the dfinition of a bandwagoner. lolo.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I left that McGrady thread alone, come back and see RocketGreatness has made yet ANOTHER McGrady hating thread. Seems like you're quite insecure inside. Watch me walk away from this thread. Meanwhile you'll still be here sounding like a child. Various posters have come up with facts and you choose to ignore them.

LOL @ "I wasn't serious". Yeah, you're a clown and you know it. Have a good day sir.

[disel]

Still had a better career then you're crippled god yao.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Whaa hipocreate. you sed to be a rockets fan when yao was there but now are a lakers fan. lool. you are the dfinition of a bandwagoner. lolo.

Yeah. And he ha the audacity to call me out for not being a 'real' Rockets fan. He is a Yao Ming only fan who likes to hate on TMac. His weird Yao obsession is weird and pathetic at the same time.

[StateOfMind12]

Derrick Rose shot <50% TS% in last year's playoffs. The year before that? You guessed it, <50%.

Is Derrick Rose a "truly awful and inefficient chucker" ?
In last season's post-season run, Derrick Rose played in 3x as many series as Tmac ever did in a post-season run. He didn't play well against the Cavs in 2010, sure, but he also dominated the Celtics in his rookie season and in his first playoff appearance.

I don't know what your point is either. Rose literally had no other weapons on his team last season or two seasons ago. With that being said, do you really think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Yao on his team, heck do you think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Luis Scola on his team? Those players were far better offensive players than anything Rose ever worked with. The only time Rose played with a good offensive player/scorer was Ben Gordon in 2009 and look at how Rose did in that post-season run...

Tmac has no excuses, plain and simple.

[disel]

I left that McGrady thread alone, come back and see RocketGreatness has made yet ANOTHER McGrady hating thread. Seems like you're quite insecure inside. Watch me walk away from this thread. Meanwhile you'll still be here sounding like a child. Various posters have come up with facts and you choose to ignore them.

LOL @ "I wasn't serious". Yeah, you're a clown and you know it. Have a good day sir.
he bashes tmac to make his yao look good. like he does with dwight. he has mental problems

[disel]

In last season's post-season run, Derrick Rose played in 3x as many series as Tmac ever did in a post-season run. He didn't play well against the Cavs in 2010, sure, but he also dominated the Celtics in his rookie season and in his first playoff appearance.

I don't know what your point is either. Rose literally had no other weapons on his team last season or two seasons ago. You really think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Yao on his team, heck do you think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Luis Scola on his team? Those players were far better offensive players than anything Rose ever worked with. The only time Rose played with a good offensive player/scorer was Ben Gordon in 2009 and look at how Rose did in that post-season run...

Tmac has no excuses, plain and simple.
Yao wasc a crippled who dissapeard as soon as teams started fronting him. soft as well.

[StateOfMind12]

Yao wasc a crippled who dissapeard as soon as teams started fronting him. soft as well.
Even as a cripple who disappeared as soon as teams started fronting him, he was still good enough to get past the 1st round. How many times did McGrady get past teh 1st round again? I cannot recall at this moment, I need a refresher, do you know?

[HurricaneKid]

Derrick Rose shot <50% TS% in last year's playoffs. The year before that? You guessed it, <50%.

Is Derrick Rose a "truly awful and inefficient chucker" ?

Still waiting...

DRose career playoff TS% .504

TMac- .517

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Tracy McGrady? LOL dude is a ****ing joke. Looks like he has down syndrome or some shit which explains him thinking he beat the Pistons in 2003 with a 3-1 lead LOL only to lose 3 games in a row.

Yeah those Houston Rockets teams were stacked.

Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

Guy is a ****ing loser. His fans are almost as bad as the ones that stroke off Iverson.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Tracy McGrady? LOL dude is a ****ing joke. Looks like he has down syndrome or some shit which explains him thinking he beat the Pistons in 2003 with a 3-1 lead LOL only to lose 3 games in a row.

Yeah those Houston Rockets teams were stacked.

Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

Guy is a ****ing loser. His fans are almost as bad as the ones that stroke off Iverson.

Ignorance is bliss. You have no idea how dumb you sound right now.

[AlphaWolf24]

ether...

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Ignorance is bliss. You have no idea how dumb you sound right now.

Huh? How about you combat my points if you disagree? If not step aside baby dick and let the big boys talk basketball.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Huh? How about you combat my points if you disagree? If not step aside baby dick and let the big boys talk basketball.

Sure. You kinda rambled in your post though. Can you tell me what it is that you're arguing first though?

FTR, my comment was in response to this:


Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Sure. You kinda rambled in your post though. Can you tell me what it is that you're arguing first though?

FTR, my comment was in response to this:

T-Mac had a great nucleus of players throughout his tenure in Houston. Yao when healthy was the best center in the game, and that team was surrounded with elite defenders and solid role players each and every year. To fail in the first round all those times is the ultimate example of an underachiever. LeBron took way less talented Cavs teams on big playoff runs and even had people betting on his team to win it all. Now that's greatness. Tracy McGrady shouldn't even be a hall of famer.

Abysmal percentages from the floor, quitting on his team, failing to lead them into playoff runs. It is all a joke.

[Fudge]

Yeah, good try though. I still feel sorry for you especially the part where you think people take you seriously, but hey this thread is talking about Tracy McGrady and how much of a loser he is. I know you are a loser as well but we are talking professional NBA players who are loser and had losers career, not losers in the real world because not even Tracy is not that bad.

See ya in another thread.
:wtf:

What are you 10? The **** kind of concluding comeback was that? :oldlol:

[Fudge]

And if you consider McGrady a "loser" then what does that make us? You specifically. Think about it. Wrong choice of words, poindexter.

[chazzy]

http://h.images.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/14621319.jpg

[Fudge]

http://h.images.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/14621319.jpg
Repped. :oldlol:

[StateOfMind12]

You can call him a choker... but he certainly isn't a loser.
Lets take a look at the definition of "loser."


1
: a person or thing that loses especially consistently
2
: a person who is incompetent or unable to succeed; also : something doomed to fail or disappoint

It looks like Mcgrady qualifies with his zero post-season series victories. Like I said, you could have justified McGrady's failures when he was in Orlando but everything solidified itself in Houston.

I'm just calling him by definition, at least you agree we can call him a choker though because he was. I'm sure his cult of fan boys will deny it though.


And if you consider McGrady a "loser" then what does that make us? You specifically. Think about it. Wrong choice of words, poindexter.
How would you define loser? Because I'm simply defining it the way the definition defines it. Someone who loses and loses consistently and someone who is unable to succeed.

Lets see, Tracy McGrady lost pretty consistently in the playoffs and he was someone that was unable to succeed in the playoffs.

You know you pretty much have no argument when you have to start getting personal about things. I'm just speaking about Tracy on behalf of his basketball/NBA/on-court performances. I don't give two shits what McGrady does off the court and what he does away from the game of basketball.

I'm speaking on half of his performances in basketball specifically in the 1st round of the playoffs and he was a "loser" by definition.

[Fudge]

Lets take a look at the definition of "loser."


It looks like Mcgrady qualifies with his zero post-season series victories. Like I said, you could have justified McGrady's failures when he was in Orlando but everything solidified itself in Houston.

I'm just calling him by definition, at least you agree we can call him a choker though because he was. I'm sure his cult of fan boys will deny it though.


How would you define loser? Because I'm simply defining it the way the definition defines it. Someone who loses and loses consistently and someone who is unable to succeed.

Lets see, Tracy McGrady lost pretty consistently in the playoffs and he was someone that was unable to succeed in the playoffs.

You know you pretty much have no argument when you have to start getting personal about things. I'm just speaking about Tracy on behalf of his basketball/NBA/on-court performances. I don't give two shits what McGrady does off the court and what he does away from the game of basketball.

I'm speaking on half of his performances in basketball specifically in the 1st round of the playoffs and he was a "loser" by definition.
And may i ask, what do you have against McGrady really? IIRC, you had a similar thread a few weeks ago bashing him? What for?

Get real. Like so what, he's a choker. Pretty sure everybody knows that by know. Nobody has him listed as a top 10 great. Get your head outta your ass kid.

[StateOfMind12]

And may i ask, what do you have against McGrady really? IIRC, you had a similar thread a few weeks ago bashing him? What for?

Get real. Like so what, he's a choker. Pretty sure everybody knows that by know. Nobody has him listed as a top 10 great. Get your head outta your ass kid.
I've seen him get overrated and have some excuses made from recently by his fan boys. Those fan boys have posted in this thread already by the way lol. He also does get overrated on other sites or at least this other site I occasionally view. I'm glad insidehoops is smart enough to know how good/great Tracy really was though and how he wasn't some all-time great. Insidehoops is pretty much the smartest basketball on the web so I should have known better and I apologize for that.

No, I don't like Tmac and I have a lot of reasons to not like him. I'll just start with broad reasons though. He was a quitter, was soft physically and mentally, was a terrible leader, an awful teammate, made excuses for all of his failures just like his fan boys also do, crumbled under pressure, and I can honestly go on. There was almost nothing to like about Tracy really.

[Fudge]

No, I don't like Tmac and I have a lot of reasons to not like him. I'll just start with broad reasons though. He was a quitter, he was soft physically and mentally, he was a terrible leader, he made excuses for all of his failures just like his fan boys also do, he crumbled under pressure, and I can honestly go on. There was almost nothing to like about Tracy really.
No, you just perfectly described LeBron.

[ImmortalNemesis]

T-Mac had a great nucleus of players throughout his tenure in Houston.

In some regular season stretches, yes, McGrady was surrounded by a supporting cast good enough to win in the 1st round. Unfortunately for him though, come playoff time his team was never 100% healthy. And in hindsight, McGrady never really did have a great supporting cast.

Let me elaborate. In 2005 Houston's starting lineup looked something like this: Yao, Ryan Bowen, McGrady, Wesley, and Sura.

In 2005 Yao Ming was not yet elite nor was he dominant. He'd been in the league for 2 or 3 year I believe. Yao in 2007 was arguably the best big man in the league, but NOT in 2005. Houston's 3rd best player and starting PF got injured before the playoffs started, so Ryan Bowen had to replace him. Guess who Bowen had to guard? Yeah, Dirk Nowitzki. They had to face a Dallas team, basically the same Dallas team that went to the finals the following year. Not an easy task if you ask me. Sura, Bowen, and Wesley? Those are NOT solid role players, sorry they just aren't. That team doesn't make the playoffs without McGrady. Houston's 6th man in 2005 was Mike James. Mike who? Exactly.


Yao when healthy was the best center in the game, and that team was surrounded with elite defenders and solid role players each and every year.

Yao and McGrady only played 2 playoff series together. Yao in 2005 was not the best big man in the league. Houston did choke in 2007, I'll admit that. That team was a 2 man show though. You know how hard it is to score when you have Alston, Battier, and Hayes on the floor at the same time? In one of those 2007 playoff games, Yao and McGrady were the only ones who scored in double digits. Yeah, such great role players those guys had.


To fail in the first round all those times is the ultimate example of an underachiever. LeBron took way less talented Cavs teams on big playoff runs and even had people betting on his team to win it all. Now that's greatness. Tracy McGrady shouldn't even be a hall of famer.

I can't speak for his Orlando days, but is pretty clear he never had good supporting cast even then. During his stretch in Houston, him and Yao were never healthy during the playoffs. In 2006, 2008 and 2009 either Yao, McGrady (or both) were injured in April. Go figure. When LeBron retires he'll be a top 20 player of all time, there's no point in comparing him to Tracy.


Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

McGrady had Scola in 2008 but Yao was injured. The 2008 starting lineup in 2008 consisted of Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, McGrady, and Alston. That team is NOT good enough to beat that 2008 Jazz team. In 2007, Hayes was still very raw offensively, and his defensive game wasn't fully developed. Mutumbo was a good back up center, agreed. Battier was a defensive beast but was a heavy offensive liability. The only time I remember him stepping up offensively is in 2009 when he hit clutch 3s vs Portland.

Artest? Are you kidding me? Why are you even mentioning Artest. McGrady never had Artest in the playoffs. Lowry? McGrady never had Lowry in the playoffs. Brooks? McGrady had Brooks in 2008. Brooks was a rookie and averaged like 5 pts in the regular season that year. Brooks did not even start. McGrady's supporting cast was either not good enough to win or injured. 2007 was his only legit chance, but even that team had offensive holes that could easily be exploited.

[StateOfMind12]

Immortal put up some nice excuses, I can't take that away from him.

I'm curious to know how many times a team that had two top 10-15 players in the league (Tracy McGrady and Yao Ming in 2007) lost in the 1st round.

I'm assuming pretty much never unless you consider Amare-Melo top 10-15 players last season but the difference was that Melo was traded to the Knicks mid-season while Yao and Tmac had been playing together for like 2-3 seasons then. Not to mention how Amare was injured in that series and also another key player, Chauncey Billups.

Insert most wing players with Yao Ming in 2007 and they get past the 1st round. Well that is just a hypothetical isn't it? Sure, but Tracy McGrady not being a loser is technically a hypothetical too. There is no proof that Tracy would have won anywhere else or been successful anywhere else. He is 0-7 in post-season series, 0-7.

I consider a loser someone who has never won in a playoff series especially when that someone is an all-star or superstar player like McGrady was. Well guess what? Tracy McGrady never won a playoff series so he is a loser. He doesn't have excuses, he has Yao Ming, what else do you need? You need the best perimeter defender? Well here is Shane Battier, and yet Tmac still couldn't make it past the 1st round.

The excuses are over. They could have been made in like 2004 or 2003 but his excuses and justification for being such an unsuccessful post-season performer were done in Houston.


Anyways, Tmac fan boys sound just like Tmac when he lost in that Game 7 in the 2007 playoffs series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XxT0zI2W7Y

Like a cry baby....



No, you just perfectly described LeBron.
:oldlol: Touche but really if you want me reasons those are it. You are a good poster though so I didn't really mean to offend you or anything.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I'm bored and have taken care of school work. I'll play along.

*reads post*

Nice. Continue with your rants. You can't dissect my post, you just can't. You can continue to bitch about how much a loser he is, but you won't address anything that I just posted. :applause:

[StateOfMind12]

I'm bored and have taken care of school work. I'll play along.

*reads post*

Nice. Continue with your rants. You can't dissect my post, you just can't. You can continue to bitch about how much a loser he is, but you won't address anything that I just posted. :applause:
Why do I need to address something that doesn't need to be addressed?

So you have a ton of excuses for Tmac, cool story bro. I don't live by hypotheticals like you do and every other Tmac fan boy, I live by what actually happened, the results. You want to know the results? Ok, Tracy McGrady was 0-7 in all of the post-season series he played in his career and is probably going to make it 0-8 after this season with the Hawks.

Tmac loses in every situation. If I go by hypotheticals then I can talk about how much more successful every other wing player would have been in Houston with Yao. If If don't go by hypotheticals then I can just continue to talk about McGrady was 0-7 in post-season series in his career.

What do you want me to address? You think the team wasn't good enough to get past the 1st round, well I think you are an idiot.

I'm not going to argue with some window licker about how a team that has the best Center and the best perimeter defender in the league is not capable of getting past the 1st round. If you don't think that most, if not any star wing players can do that then you are just stupid, and that is what you are.

T-Mac doesn't have any excuses left in the tank but you fan boys still haven't gotten the memo.

[ImmortalNemesis]

*Reads post*

Aaahhh, I see. In other words, you have no argument.

Other than 2007 Tracy never had a good supporting cast. I've posted the rationale behind that statement and you you've chosen to ignore it. I respect that, cool. Next time though, if you aren't going to properly debate, keep your mouth shut.

[StateOfMind12]

*Reads post*

Aaahhh, I see. In other words, you have no argument.

Other than 2007 Tracy never had a good supporting cast. I've posted the rationale behind that statement and you you've chosen to ignore it. I respect that, cool. Next time though, if you aren't going to properly debate, keep your mouth shut.
There was nothing rational about your post. You can continue thinking what you want to think though. It doesn't matter. Facts are facts and the fact is that Tracy Mcgrady never got past the 1st round when playing, hence why McGrady is 0-7 in post-season series. It's clear you pretty much have nothing and are almost a loner in this opinion since it seems like most people understand that Mcgrady was a choker and practically a loser for the most part. You'll obviously have your fan boys on your side but most others will tell you Mcgrady was a choker or a loser or both.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Facts are facts and the fact is that Tracy Mcgrady never got past the 1st round when playing.

I didn't know that, tell me more. Can you at least tell me what part of my post was irrational?


It's clear you pretty much have nothing

What does this even mean? I don't get what this means.

[ShaqAttack3234]

2001 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 7th seed in the East and lost in 4 against the Bucks.

Tracy McGrady shot a TS% or 48.3% which is pathetic. Anytime a TS% is below 50% you know its terrible. It is bad enough to have a TS% below 55% but below 50%? You have to be truly awful and an inefficient chucker to do that and that was what T-mac was in that series.

McGrady also shot a pathetic FG% of 41.5% and an even more pathetic 3 point percentage of 20%.

That was the one series of T-Mac's prime where he shot inefficiently, but he played well overall. Averaged 34/7/8 and played defense. He also did face a much more talented Bucks team who were the best offensive team in the league during the regular season with Allen, Cassell, Glenn Robinson and Tim Thomas. Granted, they were a poor defensive team with the aforementioned players being poor defenders and no interior presence at all. Cassell couldn't guard a chair, Tim Thomas has always been a low IQ defender who also gave no effort at that end and while Allen improved later, he didn't play much defense in his Buck days. So, you may expect a higher shooting percentage vs that team, but McGrady played well all around, and had a better series than he did in '02 when he shot efficiently.

League average for TS% hasn't even been 55% in recent years so that's not bad even now, but during McGrady's prime, league average was always around 52%, sometimes even below except for 2005 when it was an even 53%. 2007-2011 it was always 54%+, obviously below this year during the lockout.


2003 NBA Playoffs - The Magic were the 8th seed in the East and lost to the Pistons in 7.

T-Mac was dominant in this series.....for the first 4 games. So dominant in fact that the Magic had a 3-1 series lead. T-Mac then stated how it finally felt nice to get out of the 1st round after Game 4. We all know what happened from there, Tmac ended up losing 3 straight games and he never made it past the 1st round. :oldlol:

You'd like to see him finish off the series, but his cast was just flat out horrible and he was facing a good team/great defensive team. Blowing a 3-1 lead is never good, but when you shouldn't be up 3-1 in the first place(like the 2006 Lakers vs Suns), it's not as bad. The fact that T-Mac did have some amazing games vs a very good defense with no help is impressive. The turning point though was Tayshaun Prince guarding McGrady more, and also, as a series goes on, the more likely it is that the superior team will finish them off.


2005 NBA Playoffs - The Rockets were the 5th seed in the West and lost to the Mavericks in 7.

The Rockets managed to steal HCA from the Mavericks immediately and won the first two games at Dallas. The Rockets ended up losing three straight games and the Rockets fell behind 2-3 after Game 5. Tmac was pathetic in that Game 7 and the Rockets lost by like 40 in that Game 7.

Game 7 was poor, I'll give you that, but he had a great overall series. Hit a game-winner, was consistently productive for most of the season, put up huge numbers and was dominant most of the series while even guarding Dirk effectively for stretches. Averaged an efficient 31/7/7. In fact, the star who played very poorly in that series was Dirk, which shows that T-Mac wasn't on some incredible team. Yao was very good, but still developing and in foul trouble throughout the series(he used to get screwed by the refs more than any other star). That was also the only decent team T-Mac had during his prime.


.
You want to know why LeBron gets ripped into pieces about his 2011 NBA Finals performance? Because he was outplayed by every single player out there in the 4th quarter/clutch. Now I'm not suppose to penalize Mcgrady for the same thing? You have to be ****ing kidding me.

T-Mac didn't play as well as he could've down the stretch in that series, I won't dispute that because I've acknowledged it before, and Baron absolutely was better than him in those moments.

But it's not comparable to Lebron's 2011 finals. First of all, Lebron didn't even have a good series in general(not just 4th quarters), while T-Mac did. And T-Mac was nowhere near as invisible in crunch time during '02 despite underperforming down the stretch.

And it is worth noting that T-Mac's cast was horrendous during the season even when Mike Miller played, but Mike Miller was unable to contribute in that series. T-Mac himself was playing through a bad back and had to carry that pathetic cast all game, so it may not even be a matter of choking, but rather fatigue. These guys aren't super heroes. It was a winnable series, particularly without Mashburn available, but things need to be put into perspective.


In last season's post-season run, Derrick Rose played in 3x as many series as Tmac ever did in a post-season run. He didn't play well against the Cavs in 2010, sure, but he also dominated the Celtics in his rookie season and in his first playoff appearance.

I don't know what your point is either. Rose literally had no other weapons on his team last season or two seasons ago. With that being said, do you really think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Yao on his team, heck do you think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Luis Scola on his team? Those players were far better offensive players than anything Rose ever worked with. The only time Rose played with a good offensive player/scorer was Ben Gordon in 2009 and look at how Rose did in that post-season run...

Tmac has no excuses, plain and simple.

Rose's team last season was much better than T-Mac's during his prime('01-'05) and he wasn't as good as prime T-Mac, either.

I doubt prime T-Mac would fail to get past the first round if he had the best defensive team backing him and a team that killed opponents on the boards by 5.7 rpg.

So lets not act like they were in even remotely comparable situations, nevermind the fact that even offensively, I'd much rather go into the playoffs with Deng, Boozer and Noah than what T-Mac had during his prime.

If you're talking about post-'05, well, by '07, T-Mac had lost a step and his shot was flatter, so I view that period differently when evaluating T-Mac's prime. Though, I won't ignore it because he was still a borderline top 10 player, it just has little relevance to how good prime T-Mac was.

Anyway, I'll agree with you that I was disappointed watching T-Mac guarded by Fisher with a 6-7 inch height advantage just shooting long jumpers(and missing a lot of them). He was good as far as playmaking in the series, set up his teammates for quite a few threes, especially in game 7, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't expect more. And with Yao back in plenty of time for the playoffs, they missed a great opportunity to at least get to the WCF. With that said, Yao could've played better offensively himself given the match up, and Yao having to guard Boozer was a nightmare for Houston as Boozer was too quick and able to face up and drive or hit 15 footers all day. And there wasn't really an alternative because having Yao guard Okur at the 3 point line wasn't a more attractive option.

As far as '08? I didn't expect Houston to win with Yao out. He was Houston's best player and Utah was a good team. I thought T-Mac played fine in that series as well, had that 40 point game, and the low shooting percentage doesn't mean T-Mac was a choker because T-Mac's efficiency sucked in general by '08.

You mentioned Grant Hill as an example, but look at Hill in '97. He had a much worse team than the Hawks team he faced, but Detroit did have a lead, and had a chance to put them away in game 5, but Hill was scoreless in the 4th quarter of the deciding game, which I believe was the 2nd time he was held scoreless during the 4th quarter that series. That's kind of the situation T-Mac was often in, he'd overachieve to get his team in position to beat a superior team, but ultimately fall short, however, it was never as bad as the way Hill lost in '97.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Anyone remember in the 2001 Playoffs when Tmac called Glenn Robinson "Big Puppy"? lmao

[Johnni Gade]

He will always be a good player in my book

[Dave3]

http://h.images.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/14621319.jpg
You saved me a post :oldlol: .

[Rose]

That was the one series of T-Mac's prime where he shot inefficiently, but he played well overall. Averaged 34/7/8 and played defense. He also did face a much more talented Bucks team who were the best offensive team in the league during the regular season with Allen, Cassell, Glenn Robinson and Tim Thomas. Granted, they were a poor defensive team with the aforementioned players being poor defenders and no interior presence at all. Cassell couldn't guard a chair, Tim Thomas has always been a low IQ defender who also gave no effort at that end and while Allen improved later, he didn't play much defense in his Buck days. So, you may expect a higher shooting percentage vs that team, but McGrady played well all around, and had a better series than he did in '02 when he shot efficiently.

League average for TS% hasn't even been 55% in recent years so that's not bad even now, but during McGrady's prime, league average was always around 52%, sometimes even below except for 2005 when it was an even 53%. 2007-2011 it was always 54%+, obviously below this year during the lockout.



You'd like to see him finish off the series, but his cast was just flat out horrible and he was facing a good team/great defensive team. Blowing a 3-1 lead is never good, but when you shouldn't be up 3-1 in the first place(like the 2006 Lakers vs Suns), it's not as bad. The fact that T-Mac did have some amazing games vs a very good defense with no help is impressive. The turning point though was Tayshaun Prince guarding McGrady more, and also, as a series goes on, the more likely it is that the superior team will finish them off.



Game 7 was poor, I'll give you that, but he had a great overall series. Hit a game-winner, was consistently productive for most of the season, put up huge numbers and was dominant most of the series while even guarding Dirk effectively for stretches. Averaged an efficient 31/7/7. In fact, the star who played very poorly in that series was Dirk, which shows that T-Mac wasn't on some incredible team. Yao was very good, but still developing and in foul trouble throughout the series(he used to get screwed by the refs more than any other star). That was also the only decent team T-Mac had during his prime.



T-Mac didn't play as well as he could've down the stretch in that series, I won't dispute that because I've acknowledged it before, and Baron absolutely was better than him in those moments.

But it's not comparable to Lebron's 2011 finals. First of all, Lebron didn't even have a good series in general(not just 4th quarters), while T-Mac did. And T-Mac was nowhere near as invisible in crunch time during '02 despite underperforming down the stretch.

And it is worth noting that T-Mac's cast was horrendous during the season even when Mike Miller played, but Mike Miller was unable to contribute in that series. T-Mac himself was playing through a bad back and had to carry that pathetic cast all game, so it may not even be a matter of choking, but rather fatigue. These guys aren't super heroes. It was a winnable series, particularly without Mashburn available, but things need to be put into perspective.



Rose's team last season was much better than T-Mac's during his prime('01-'05) and he wasn't as good as prime T-Mac, either.

I doubt prime T-Mac would fail to get past the first round if he had the best defensive team backing him and a team that killed opponents on the boards by 5.7 rpg.

So lets not act like they were in even remotely comparable situations, nevermind the fact that even offensively, I'd much rather go into the playoffs with Deng, Boozer and Noah than what T-Mac had during his prime.

If you're talking about post-'05, well, by '07, T-Mac had lost a step and his shot was flatter, so I view that period differently when evaluating T-Mac's prime. Though, I won't ignore it because he was still a borderline top 10 player, it just has little relevance to how good prime T-Mac was.

Anyway, I'll agree with you that I was disappointed watching T-Mac guarded by Fisher with a 6-7 inch height advantage just shooting long jumpers(and missing a lot of them). He was good as far as playmaking in the series, set up his teammates for quite a few threes, especially in game 7, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't expect more. And with Yao back in plenty of time for the playoffs, they missed a great opportunity to at least get to the WCF. With that said, Yao could've played better offensively himself given the match up, and Yao having to guard Boozer was a nightmare for Houston as Boozer was too quick and able to face up and drive or hit 15 footers all day. And there wasn't really an alternative because having Yao guard Okur at the 3 point line wasn't a more attractive option.

As far as '08? I didn't expect Houston to win with Yao out. He was Houston's best player and Utah was a good team. I thought T-Mac played fine in that series as well, had that 40 point game, and the low shooting percentage doesn't mean T-Mac was a choker because T-Mac's efficiency sucked in general by '08.

You mentioned Grant Hill as an example, but look at Hill in '97. He had a much worse team than the Hawks team he faced, but Detroit did have a lead, and had a chance to put them away in game 5, but Hill was scoreless in the 4th quarter of the deciding game, which I believe was the 2nd time he was held scoreless during the 4th quarter that series. That's kind of the situation T-Mac was often in, he'd overachieve to get his team in position to beat a superior team, but ultimately fall short, however, it was never as bad as the way Hill lost in '97.
:applause: :applause:

[HurricaneKid]

Tracy McGrady? LOL dude is a ****ing joke. Looks like he has down syndrome or some shit which explains him thinking he beat the Pistons in 2003 with a 3-1 lead LOL only to lose 3 games in a row.

Yeah those Houston Rockets teams were stacked.

Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

Guy is a ****ing loser. His fans are almost as bad as the ones that stroke off Iverson.

TMac was DONE after 06-07. Yao played 48 games that year. Scola was still in Europe. Lowry and Brooks were still in college. Artest? he played there for 1 season two years later. Hayes avg 5.6pts. Mutombo played 40 minutes in a 7 game playoff series. Battier was a solid defender but scored ~10/gm. Their 3rd leading scorer was Rafer Alston. 4th was Luther Head. Lets not pretend this was a great team around TMac.

Yao was terrible in the playoffs that year too. He shot .440 and had 33 TOs in a 5 game series.

[HurricaneKid]

I don't know what your point is either. Rose literally had no other weapons on his team last season or two seasons ago. With that being said, do you really think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Yao on his team, heck do you think Rose would be shooting that poorly with Luis Scola on his team? Those players were far better offensive players than anything Rose ever worked with. The only time Rose played with a good offensive player/scorer was Ben Gordon in 2009 and look at how Rose did in that post-season run...

Tmac has no excuses, plain and simple.

TMac didn't play with Scola until he was DONE. Besides, are you seriously contending that Scola is as good as Boozer or even Deng? Yao shot .440 and avg almost 5 TOs/gm in 06 and was of little help.

You brought up TS% not me. You called TMac a lot of names.

Rose- 28 career playoff games TS%- .504
TMac- 38 Career Playoff games TS%- .517

[StateOfMind12]

Rose's team last season was much better than T-Mac's during his prime('01-'05) and he wasn't as good as prime T-Mac, either.
Not the '05 team, I might agree with the Magic teams though. Yao was far better than any player Rose ever played with, far better. That was my point anyways. Rose shot inefficiently because he was a one-man show. Give him a an elite offensive player like Yao and he wouldn't have shot so inefficiently. Hell, give Rose Luis Scola in 2008 and he would have shot more efficiently.


I doubt prime T-Mac would fail to get past the first round if he had the best defensive team backing him and a team that killed opponents on the boards by 5.7 rpg.

Rose never failed to get past the 1st round having the best defensive team backing him up and a team that killed opponents on the boards by 5.7 rpg. The only good defensive team Rose ever played on was last season's Bulls and he managed to win 60+ games with them, win the MVP, and reach the ECF. His teams were never that great defensively with Vinny Del Negro.


Anyway, I'll agree with you that I was disappointed watching T-Mac guarded by Fisher with a 6-7 inch height advantage just shooting long jumpers(and missing a lot of them). He was good as far as playmaking in the series, set up his teammates for quite a few threes, especially in game 7, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't expect more. And with Yao back in plenty of time for the playoffs, they missed a great opportunity to at least get to the WCF. With that said, Yao could've played better offensively himself given the match up, and Yao having to guard Boozer was a nightmare for Houston as Boozer was too quick and able to face up and drive or hit 15 footers all day. And there wasn't really an alternative because having Yao guard Okur at the 3 point line wasn't a more attractive option.
Yao was efficient hence why Yao's TS% was still very good while Tmac's TS% in that series was complete garbage. I mean really? Below 50% TS%? Yao shot like 55%-56% which is decent but it is below his own standard/average.

The fact that McGrady was shooting so inefficiently and god awful and they still managed to make it Game 7 or even have a 3-2 lead makes me believe that his team actually in fact was good enough, he just did not play good enough to win the series. Which is why I do think it is Tmac's fault for this series although it seems like everybody faults him for this series anyways including you.

Like I said, replace most wing all-star players for McGrady in that series and they probably do get past the 1st round. It's a hypothetical but hypotheticals is the only thing that is preventing Tmac from being called a loser by some people anyways.



You mentioned Grant Hill as an example, but look at Hill in '97. He had a much worse team than the Hawks team he faced, but Detroit did have a lead, and had a chance to put them away in game 5, but Hill was scoreless in the 4th quarter of the deciding game, which I believe was the 2nd time he was held scoreless during the 4th quarter that series. That's kind of the situation T-Mac was often in, he'd overachieve to get his team in position to beat a superior team, but ultimately fall short, however, it was never as bad as the way Hill lost in '97.
I stated how Grant Hill before playing in Phoenix was similar to Tmac before playing in Houston. If Tmac retired in 2004 for whatever reason, career ending injury, retirement, sick of the game, etc. then people would justify Tmac's ability to never get past the 1st round like what some of his fan boys are doing right now. However, the fact that McGrady was never able to get past the 1st round with Houston with a supporting cast of Yao Ming on his team was enough to let me know that this guy is simply a choking loser.



Do you agree with either statements that he was a choker or loser? I'm assuming you don't think he is a loser so I'm more curious on choker. I do think he was a choker and a loser and a massive one at that.

I have a hard time not calling someone a loser or a choker when they have blown huge series leads (3-1, 3-2, 2-0, etc.) and never got past the 1st round especially on teams where they were good enough to get past.

Like I said, McGrady before Houston may have some good justification for his playoff failures but Houston Tmac does not. Where do you rank him on your all-time list if you don't mind me asking either? I've seen idiots on other sites rank him above Pierce which is a ****ing joke.



TMac didn't play with Scola until he was DONE. Besides, are you seriously contending that Scola is as good as Boozer or even Deng? Yao shot .440 and avg almost 5 TOs/gm in 06 and was of little help.
One of the few times I'll respond to you but offensively Scola was better than both. Deng is the better all-around player and Boozer was better than Scola before 2008 or 2009 but Boozer in 2011 was not better than Scola in 2008 or any other version of Scola.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Not the '05 team, I might agree with the Magic teams though. Yao was far better than any player Rose ever played with, far better. That was my point anyways. Rose shot inefficiently because he was a one-man show.

'05 team still relied heavily on T-Mac, especially since Jeff Van Gundy was never a good offensive coach. Yao was already a very good big man in '05, but he was considerably better when he was healthy from '06-'09. So '05 Yao shouldn't really be confused with '06-'09 Yao.

T-Mac definitely received plenty of defense attention in '05.


Give him a an elite offensive player like Yao and he wouldn't have shot so inefficiently. Hell, give Rose Luis Scola in 2008 and he would have shot more efficiently.

Maybe, maybe not. Difficult to say, but that's irrelevant for this part of the debate because Rose is simply a better player than '08 T-Mac.


Rose never failed to get past the 1st round having the best defensive team backing him up and a team that killed opponents on the boards by 5.7 rpg. The only good defensive team Rose ever played on was last season's Bulls and he managed to win 60+ games with them and win the MVP. His teams were never that great defensively with Vinny Del Negro.

My point is that '01-'05 T-Mac didn't have a team like Rose's last year to begin with, especially the Magic teams who sucked defensively and offensively.


Yao was efficient hence why Yao's TS% was still very good while Tmac's TS% in that series was complete garbage. I mean really? Below 50% TS%? Yao shot like 55% which isn't bad but it is below his standard/average.

The fact that McGrady was shooting so inefficiently and god awful and they still managed to make it Game 7 or even have a 3-2 lead makes me believe that his team actually in fact was good enough, he just did not play good enough to win the series.

I didn't say that T-Mac's team wasn't good enough, I thought they would beat Utah at the time, and I still think they should've. And as I said, I expected more from T-Mac that series. More from Yao as well.

Yao's TS% was fine at 56%, that's not what I was referring to(though I'd like to see him shoot better than 44% from the field vs Boozer and Okur), but when thinking about Yao's performance, I don't really remember thinking he was shooting that poorly, but I did remember him turning the ball over quite a bit and not looking as dominant and looking at the numbers, he did in fact average 4.7 turnovers.

But the point wasn't to blame Yao, or even try to deflect the blame from T-Mac. I think that Houston should've won that series and that both stars should've played better.

I wanted to acknowledge that T-Mac let Fisher and Utah off the hook, but also acknowledge the other problems, and at least give T-Mac credit for what he did do, which was set up his teammates, particularly the 3 point shooters.


Do you agree with either statements that he was a choker or loser? I'm assuming you don't think he is a loser so I'm more curious on choker. I do think he was a choker and a loser and a massive one at that.

I think it's still questionable how far he could've taken a team in his prime, and I won't assume he could or couldn't have. I think he was unfortunate with injuries more than anything. I don't think he was ever so bad in the playoffs that he embarrassed himself either(whether we're limiting this to prime or not). So at least to me, a lot of that was left unanswered.

I think that T-Mac was a more limited player post-'05 when he finally had teams capable of contending, but even in 1 of the 2 all-star seasons left in T-Mac's career when he had a contending team was hurt severely by Yao's injury. So, I don't view him failing to get out of the first round without Yao the same as you do. He only played with Yao in the playoffs twice, one of them was before Yao's prime, and one of them was slightly past T-Mac's prime. In '06, they both missed too many games to qualify, in '08 Yao was out for the playoffs and in '09, T-Mac was.


Like I said, McGrady before Houston may have some good justification for his playoff failures but Houston Tmac does not. Where do you rank him on your all-time list if you don't mind me asking either? I've seen idiots on other sites rank him above Pierce which is a ****ing joke.

I don't really have career rankings beyond top 10-15, and my rankings are based heavily on prime, and exclusively on their time as an elite player(so '07 and '08 T-Mac would still factor in to rankings if I were to rank him "all-time", but has nothing to do with how good of a player I think T-Mac was at his best).

I'd rank T-Mac in his prime as the 5th best shooting guard behind Jordan, Kobe, West and Wade. Would have to think about where he should rank on an "all-time" shooting guard list.

[HurricaneKid]

One of the few times I'll respond to you but offensively Scola was better than both. Deng is the better all-around player and Boozer was better than Scola before 2008 or 2009 but Boozer in 2011 was not better than Scola in 2008 or any other version of Scola.

08 Rookie Scola? Who didn't even start half the season? Sometimes it hurts to read your positions. NO ONE is suggesting that 09 TMac was any good at all. So you are saying that rookie non-starting Scola was better than 11 Boozer who avg 17.5/9.6 on .510 shooting.

I actually LIKE Scola but you are getting out of hand with some of these points.

[StateOfMind12]

'05 team still relied heavily on T-Mac, especially since Jeff Van Gundy was never a good offensive coach. Yao was already a very good big man in '05, but he was considerably better when he was healthy from '06-'09. So '05 Yao shouldn't really be confused with '06-'09 Yao.
Regardless, most wing players still would have gotten past the 1st round with Yao even if it was the '05 version. McGrady and the Rockets blew a 2-0 lead coming back home to Houston, someone has to be fault, and the best player/leader is suppose to be that guy.


I think that T-Mac was a more limited player post-'05 when he finally had teams capable of contending, but even in 1 of the 2 all-star seasons left in T-Mac's career when he had a contending team was hurt severely by Yao's injury. So, I don't view him failing to get out of the first round without Yao the same as you do. He only played with Yao in the playoffs twice, one of them was before Yao's prime, and one of them was slightly past T-Mac's prime. In '06, they both missed too many games to qualify, in '08 Yao was out for the playoffs and in '09, T-Mac was.

I saw everything I needed to see with Tmac in Houston. There was no excuse for his failures in Houston. In Orlando though? Sure, but not in Houston where he failed in all three of the chances he got.

Go ahead and tell me what other star player would have failed with Yao, an elite big man in 05 and 07. Yao wasn't in his prime in 05, sure, but he was still good enough to get past the 1st round with, something Tracy failed in. What I am asking is a hypothetical question, sure, but it's a hypothetical alone to even believe that McGrady isn't a loser or would have succeeded.

Even in '08 without Yao, he should have still be able to lead them past the 1st round but he didn't play well enough once again. I guess being stopped by Matt Harpring is more acceptable than being stopped by Derek Fisher though.

Either way Tracy McGrady is a choking loser and pretty much the definition of a *****. You didn't really do or say anything to convince me otherwise, if that was what you were even trying to do.

I don't even know what you're arguing or what you have been arguing either. Tmac had enough to get past the 1st round in Houston and he failed and he had three shots at it. Tmac is a choking loser, period.

[Nick Young]

.
It actually is, you tell me that I'm cherry picking stats yet you are doing the very same. lol.


The guy was straight up outplayed in the clutch by Baron Davis in that series, a player that was clearly inferior to McGrady at the time and was inferior to McGrady for most of his career. If McGrady did perform well in the clutch then they actually would have gotten past the 1st round but he didn't so he didn't get past the 1st round. It is one thing to not perform well in the clutch and it is another to get outperformed by another player on the opposing team.

You want to know why LeBron gets ripped into pieces about his 2011 NBA Finals performance? Because he was outplayed by every single player out there in the 4th quarter/clutch. Now I'm not suppose to penalize Mcgrady for the same thing? You have to be ****ing kidding me.


The only thing remarkable about Mcgrady is how he managed to lose in every situation possible.

Lose with a good team
Lose with an average team
Lose with a bad team.
Lose with HCA
Lose without HCA
Lose by getting outperformed by another player on the other team in the clutch
Lose by blowing series leads.

How long do you want me to continue? I don't where I would rank McGrady of all-time but it is far far far far away from the top 50 and he has nothing on Paul Pierce.

wow, sounds alot like Lebron's career so far:eek:

[ShaqAttack3234]

Regardless, most wing players still would have gotten past the 1st round with Yao even if it was the '05 version. McGrady and the Rockets blew a 2-0 lead coming back home to Houston, someone has to be fault, and the best player/leader is suppose to be that guy.

No, most wing players wouldn't have, simply because most wing players aren't capable of performing like T-Mac did through that series. There are only a select few capable, and it'd be a good series even for them.

Looking at the other wing players in the '05 season, I'm not sure there's one of them that season I'd consider a better bet to play better than T-Mac did in that series.

And I'm not sure why you're going on about '05 Yao. He was good, but 1 player doesn't make up an entire supporting cast, and when you can talk about one player almost doing that, it's a player far beyond the level Yao was at in '05.


I saw everything I needed to see with Tmac in Houston. There was no excuse for his failures in Houston. In Orlando though? Sure, but not in Houston where he failed in all three of the chances he got.

Go ahead and tell me what other star player would have failed with Yao, an elite big man in 05 and 07. Yao wasn't in his prime in 05, sure, but he was still good enough to get past the 1st round with, something Tracy failed in. What I am asking is a hypothetical question, sure, but it's a hypothetical alone to even believe that McGrady isn't a loser or would have succeeded.

Even in '08 without Yao, he should have still be able to lead them past the 1st round but he didn't play well enough once again. I guess being stopped by Matt Harpring is more acceptable than being stopped by Derek Fisher though.

Either way Tracy McGrady is a choking loser and pretty much the definition of a *****. You didn't really do or say anything to convince me otherwise, if that was what you were even trying to do.

I don't even know what you're arguing or what you have been arguing either. Tmac had enough to get past the 1st round in Houston and he failed and he had three shots at it. Tmac is a choking loser, period.

My point is that you're unfairly grouping in '07 and even '08 T-Mac in with '01-'05 T-Mac. It's not like we saw what PRIME T-Mac could do in a good situation. '05 was the only year PRIME T-Mac even had a decent amount of help. And T-Mac was great in that series for the most part, again, he played much much better than the star on the other team(Dirk) did whose team actually won. So it doesn't always come down to which star plays better.

You're also the only one who finds losing in '08 a big deal considering Yao was out.

The reality with T-Mac is that during his prime('01-'05), he wasn't particularly fortunate. And I'm merely talking about how good prime T-Mac was.

So no, losing in '07 and especially '08 doesn't prove T-Mac was a loser all along. A lot of what that shows is how much he was already on the decline.

I know that you won't be convinced, your mind is already made up. Why? I don't know, but it is.

[FireDavidKahn]

This seems highly appropriate for this thread.

http://i39.tinypic.com/91bev9.gif

[StateOfMind12]

My point is that you're unfairly grouping in '07 and even '08 T-Mac in with '01-'05 T-Mac. It's not like we saw what PRIME T-Mac could do in a good situation.

The reality with T-Mac is that during his prime('01-'05), he wasn't particularly fortunate. And I'm merely talking about how good prime T-Mac was.
That is what I initially thought you were trying to say.

You pretty much believe that anything outside of that '01-'05 span for Tmac shouldn't count or doesn't matter and that's your opinion, but my opinion is that he does deserve punishment for his failures in Houston and I'm assuming it is many others opinion as well.

Is that honestly unreasonable?


The only reason why I still think he is a loser anyways is not just because of his playoff failures and chokes but also because of his attitude, the way he played, and all of that. His playoff failures were a large part of it though but it is not the only reason.

McGrady would always point fingers and blame his teammates after losses especially series, would quit which means he was a horrible teammate and leader, was not a big fan of practice, didn't play a lick of defense (Houston era after '05), lacks mental toughness, and would always choke on the big stage.

I actually explained this earlier when Fudge asked me why I hate him.




No, I don't like Tmac and I have a lot of reasons to not like him. I'll just start with broad reasons though. He was a quitter, was soft physically and mentally, was a terrible leader, an awful teammate, made excuses for all of his failures just like his fan boys also do, crumbled under pressure, and I can honestly go on. There was almost nothing to like about Tracy really.

He was like that way in Orlando too now that I think about it. I'm not one of those people that care about production and nothing else. I actually do look at the intangibles aspect of it and Tracy provided either none or negative intangibles.

[ShaqAttack3234]

That is what I initially thought you were trying to say.

You pretty much believe that anything outside of that '01-'05 span for Tmac shouldn't count or doesn't matter and that's your opinion, but my opinion is that he does deserve punishment for his failures in Houston and I'm assuming it is many others opinion as well.

Is that honestly unreasonable?

I was referring to this statement.



The excuses are over. They could have been made in like 2004 or 2003 but his excuses and justification for being such an unsuccessful post-season performer were done in Houston.


The excuses are not invalid for why T-Mac lost in his prime that's what I was talking about. What happened after his prime doesn't change the situation during his prime.

I already said this regarding '07


If you're talking about post-'05, well, by '07, T-Mac had lost a step and his shot was flatter, so I view that period differently when evaluating T-Mac's prime. Though, I won't ignore it because he was still a borderline top 10 player, it just has little relevance to how good prime T-Mac was.

Anyway, I'll agree with you that I was disappointed watching T-Mac guarded by Fisher with a 6-7 inch height advantage just shooting long jumpers(and missing a lot of them). He was good as far as playmaking in the series, set up his teammates for quite a few threes, especially in game 7, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't expect more. And with Yao back in plenty of time for the playoffs, they missed a great opportunity to at least get to the WCF. With that said, Yao could've played better offensively himself given the match up, and Yao having to guard Boozer was a nightmare for Houston as Boozer was too quick and able to face up and drive or hit 15 footers all day. And there wasn't really an alternative because having Yao guard Okur at the 3 point line wasn't a more attractive option.

So I wasn't saying anything post-'05 doesn't count for his overall body of work, it just wasn't his prime and that should be pointed out.

I already said that '08 is a non-issue to me, and it does count towards his career, but it simply wasn't a bad loss to me.

I'm not going to say you were completely wrong about his attitude either, but I think you're overstating some of it and singling out T-Mac for things a lot of NBA stars do. Superstars often aren't the best teammates. Doesn't make it right, but it's just the way it is with a few exceptions.

Just wanted to explain my point of view, but I'm getting tired of this topic since we're basically repeating ourselves. So that's all for me in this discussion.

[The_Yearning]

Shaqattack, if Wade didn't have a ring would you still have him above T-Mac in all-time rankings?

[StateOfMind12]

The excuses are not invalid for why T-Mac lost in his prime that's what I was talking about. What happened after his prime doesn't change the situation during his prime.

So I wasn't saying anything post-'05 doesn't count for his overall body of work, it just wasn't his prime and that should be pointed out.
.
I was never talking about just Tmac in his prime. I was simply about Tmac overall and in his career, i.e. overall body of work although I didn't talk about Tmac in Toronto, so it was kind of like Tmac in his all-star seasons.

It's hard to dispute that he wasn't a choker and a loser for his overall career/body of work though.

I wouldn't mind Tmac in 00-01 to 02-03 on my team but any version of Tmac after that I would pass. I personally have Vince Carter ranked above him for all-time list, prime, etc. Peak Tmac beats out Peak VC though but not prime or overall.

[Duncan21formvp]

Have a bunch of full games of Mcgrady

2007 Game 7 vs Jazz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNyQD-rzMw8

2007 Game 5 vs Jazz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvMhygU3h6o

2007 Game 2 vs Jazz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuV2dkivEXg

2008 Games 1 and 2 vs Jazz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm8UZv0Nz5s&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLDC3B0F08106CE795

2008 Games 3 @ Jazz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDBQUkRfASo

2005 Game 6 vs Mavericks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmkwYBuS0rA

[iDefend5]

Tracy McGrady? LOL dude is a ****ing joke. Looks like he has down syndrome or some shit which explains him thinking he beat the Pistons in 2003 with a 3-1 lead LOL only to lose 3 games in a row.

Yeah those Houston Rockets teams were stacked.

Yao, Scola, Hayes, Mutombo, Battier, Artest, Lowry, Brooks? Those were amazing players to surround yourself with. If T-Mac really was a Hall of Fame he would be contending for the title with that squad, not struggling in the first round.

Guy is a ****ing loser. His fans are almost as bad as the ones that stroke off Iverson.
:lol :oldlol: :roll: :cheers: :applause:

[ImmortalNemesis]

I guess Fuhrer Hubbs decided to move out the way? Comment was ignorantly written.

[StateOfMind12]

I guess Fuhrer Hubbs decided to move out the way? Comment was ignorantly written.
Fuhrer Hubbs was right, he doesn't need to listen to some idiotic excuse making ******* to know how much of a loser Tmac really was.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Fuhrer Hubbs was right, he doesn't need to listen to some idiotic excuse making ******* to know how much of a loser Tmac really was.

Tracy had Artest, Lowry, Brooks. How did he lose? He was so right!

Did you ever point out what part of my post was irrational?

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

I guess Fuhrer Hubbs decided to move out the way? Comment was ignorantly written.

There was nothing to respond too. I was laughing at the paragraph after paragraph of excuses a T-Mac fanboy would make for the guy who shot 40% nearly every year with the Rockets. This is the NBA, every team has injuries. Yao was the best big when healthy especially during 2007 which is the time Shaqs decline was extremely noticeable and before Dwight Howard was a superstar.

For a "superstar" to not be able to get out of the FIRST ROUND one time is a joke and just shows that this inefficient chucker whose FG% AND TS% both sucked some historically bad amounts of **** was always overrated.

Lets just look at 2007, where is where he had the most amount of talent on his team since you want to bitch about every little minor injury or deficiency in some role players games even though they are just that, role players. But yeah we'll play it your way for now...

Yao Ming: 25-10 bigman best in the league
Rafer Alston/Luther Head/Shane Battier: all shot around 40% from three and Battier was arguably the best perimeter defensive player in the entire league.
Juwan Howard/Chuck Hayes: Gritty bigman duo Howard provided some mid range offense and Hayes provided toughness. Combined for 16 PPG and 13 RPG.
And Mutombo best backup center in the league

With this group of role players and a prime Yao/insert allstar swingman here, surely this team will contend for the title. Oh wait, they lost to the ****ing Jazz LOL. How did Tmac do? What he does best. Shoot 38% from the field in the playoffs while taking 23 FG/A per game with 47% TS LOL. Sounds like a great allstar player to build around.

It is no surprise this team took off and got over the hump when it played as a unit that focused on playing great defense built around Yao Ming as the primary threat. Not with some inefficient chucker hoisting up shots and hogging the ball while contributing nothing whatsoever on the defensive end.

[ImmortalNemesis]

There was nothing to respond too. I was laughing at the paragraph after paragraph of excuses a T-Mac fanboy would make for the guy who shot 40% nearly every year with the Rockets. This is the NBA, every team has injuries. Yao was the best big when healthy especially during 2007 which is the time Shaqs decline was extremely noticeable and before Dwight Howard was a superstar.


There was a lot to respond to. I already admitted Houston choked in 2007 but brought up an important point. Utah had scoring threads in all 5 positions while Houston had two. Yao and McGrady. Everyone else had a below average offensive game.

Battier, Alston, and Hayes are all below average offensive players and offensive liabilities.


For a "superstar" to not be able to get out of the FIRST ROUND one time is a joke and just shows that this inefficient chucker whose FG% AND TS% both sucked some historically bad amounts of **** was always overrated.

Nothing to respond to here, just another rant.



Lets just look at 2007, where is where he had the most amount of talent on his team since you want to bitch about every little minor injury or deficiency in some role players games even though they are just that, role players. But yeah we'll play it your way for now...

Yao Ming: 25-10 bigman best in the league
Rafer Alston/Luther Head/Shane Battier: all shot around 40% from three and Battier was arguably the best perimeter defensive player in the entire league.

Are you seriously going to bring up Alston's offensive game into the discussion? :roll: I see you didn't watch many Houston games. Luther Head was a good 3 pt shooter in the regular season. Is he even in the NBA right now? I'm surprised you even brought him up, it doesn't help your case. Another player who drifted into irrelevance without McGrady.


Juwan Howard/Chuck Hayes: Gritty bigman duo Howard provided some mid range offense and Hayes provided toughness. Combined for 16 PPG and 13 RPG.

Juwan Howard had severely declined in 2007. Hayes was the starting PF for a reason. And I mentioned this in another thread. Hayes was not fully developed defensively. And offensively was a HUGE HUGE liability. That said, I do believe Houston should have won that series.


With this group of role players and a prime Yao/insert allstar swingman here, surely this team will contend for the title. Oh wait, they lost to the ****ing Jazz LOL. How did Tmac do? What he does best. Shoot 38% from the field in the playoffs while taking 23 FG/A per game with 47% TS LOL. Sounds like a great allstar player to build around.

Huh? Did you even read my post. McGrady had one legit chance, that was in 2007. Yao and McGrady only played two series together. One of them was in 2005. Yao was NOT the best big man in the league, nor was he dominant. That is FACT. David Wesley, Ryan Bowen, Bob Sura, and a center who was in his 3rd year. Nice f*cking team. :oldlol: Are you even understanding my argument? Its not just about Juwan Howard being injured. I brought up the whole team. Wesley, Sura, Ryan Bowen. Ryan f*cking Bowen. You think that team is good enough to beat the same team who went to the NBA finals the next year?


It is no surprise this team took off and got over the hump when it played as a unit that focused on playing great defense built around Yao Ming as the primary threat. Not with some inefficient chucker hoisting up shots and hogging the ball while contributing nothing whatsoever on the defensive end.

Um, that 2009 team was miles ahead of the 2007 and 2005 squad.

McGrady never had Artest. FACT.
McGrady never had Lowry. FACT.
McGrady basically never had Brooks. FACT. (He was a rookie who didn't even start in 08)
McGrady never had Yao and Scola in the playoffs together. FACT.
McGrady had prime Yao for 1 playoff series. And they lost to the team that went to the Conference finals that year. FACT.

Yao
Scola
Battier
Artest
Prime Brooks is a much better starting line up than

Yao
raw Hayes
Battier
McGrady
Alston

Lowry off the bench > Mike James off the bench. Fact. The 09 team was simply better. It had nothing to do with McGrady not playing. You' aren't clever. I've refuted your argument many times in the past.

I was laughing my ass off at your earlier post.

B...bbbuuuu....but McGrady had Artest, Lowry, Brooks.

:oldlol:

You are clown shoes and you know it.

[StateOfMind12]

:roll: Oh look more excuses.

brb shooting inefficiently
brb having the best Center and an elite big man in the league on my team
brb having the best perimeter defender on my team
brb only expectation is to win a first round series and nothing more.
brb blowing 3-2 and 2-0 series leads
brb never getting past the 1st round
brb never playing a lick of defense and expecting everyone else to do that job instead
brb never hustling
brb never crashing the boards
brb getting shut down by Derek Fisher
brb team gets past the 1st round as soon as I stop playing

This is getting pathetic. By definition Tracy McGrady is a choking loser but this ******* will never quit.


Um, that 2009 team was miles ahead of the 2007 and 2005 squad.
The reason why the 2009 team was miles ahead of the 2007 and 2005 squad was because McGrady wasn't apart of the 2009 team while he was apart of the 2007 and 2005 team.

When you lose a liability/cancer/loser on your team, you are better, right? :confusedshrug: I'm pretty sure that is how it goes.

lol at not being able to get past the 1st round without an elite big man in 2005 and 2007, not being able to get past the 1st round without the best perimeter defender in the league in 2007 and 2008, and a well rounded team in 2008.

Put most all-star wings on Tmac's shoes in Houston and they get past the 1st round and maybe even further.

The more this thread is about Yao, the more I feel bad for Yao since he had to waste his career playing with this choking loser.

[ImmortalNemesis]

You can post a lot of smileys but you won't dissect my post. Siding with the guy who thought McGrady had Artest, Brooks, and Lowry isn't helping your case either.

By definition McGrady is a loser, yeah? I can agree with that. Why are you going by definition though? That's not really what I'm arguing.

Seeing as McGrady went 0-7 in the playoffs, he is, by definition, a total loser. It is mathematically impossible to be a winner when you have 0 wins

Who says shit like that? I'm talking about the spirit and stigma that comes with the word 'loser'. A 40+ yr old guy who lives with his parent is a loser. See how I'm using the word loser there? I'm not going by definition, because it'd be a f*cking joke.

You're going by definition for a reason. Because otherwise, it'd be entirely fair to call Yao a loser as well.

[ImmortalNemesis]

[QUOTE]The reason why the 2009 team was miles ahead of the 2007 and 2005 squad was because McGrady wasn't apart of the 2009 team while he was apart of the 2007 and 2005 team.

Fallacy.



lol at not being able to get past the 1st round without an elite big man in 2005 and 2007, not being able to get past the 1st round without the best perimeter defender in the league in 2007 and 2008, and a well rounded team in 2008.

Yao was not elite in 2005. 2008 he didn't have Yao. You are the only who makes a fuzz about it. Did you seriously expect Houston to win in 2008? I mean, seeing as you'd already seen what Tracy was about (2007 he got shut down by Fisher right? What a f*cking loser!) why'd you expect Houston to win in 2008?



3rd time. Can you tell me what part of my post was irrational? Or was that just some made up bullshit you typed because you didn't have a legit argument?

[StateOfMind12]

You can post a lot of smileys but you won't dissect my post. Siding with the guy who thought McGrady had Artest, Brooks, and Lowry isn't helping your case either.
I need to dissect some excuse riddled post.



You're going by definition for a reason. Because otherwise, it'd be entirely fair to call Yao a loser as well.
You keep dragging Yao with Tmac yet you fail to understand that Yao got past the 1st round at some point.

Yao has won a playoff series before, if you have won before, how are you a loser? Tmac? He has never won a playoff series before so he is a loser by definition.

How about Yao only lost because McGrady was on his team? Did you ever think of that or are Tmac's tiny dick stuck down your throat so hard that you can't even think straight anymore? :confusedshrug:


Yao was not elite in 2005. 2008 he didn't have Yao. You are the only who makes a fuzz about it. Did you seriously expect Houston to win in 2008? I mean, seeing as you'd already seen what Tracy was about (2007 he got shut down by Fisher right? What a f*cking loser!) why'd you expect Houston to win in 2008?
Yao was elite in 2005...

2008, he didn't have Yao but he had enough to get past the 1st round. Of course if Tmac played well enough maybe they could have won the series. Shot below 50% TS% again as usual in the post-season since he is some inefficient choker. They were 2-2 with Rafer Alston in that series. Yeah, that shows you how good Tmac is that he relies on Rafer Alston to win him playoff series, the same you bashed in that other pathetic excuse making post of yours.

This is too easy, go watch another sport....really..

[Deuce Bigalow]

http://blacksportsonline.com/index/tmax.gif

[ImmortalNemesis]

You keep dragging Yao with Tmac yet you fail to understand that Yao got past the 1st round at some point.

Yao has won a playoff series before, if you have won before, how are you a loser? Tmac? He has never won a playoff series before so he is a loser by definition.

Why are you going by definition? I simply don't get it. Can you explain it to me? Everyone who's won at least one playoff series is a winner, while McGrady who never won a playoff series, is a loser.

Do you realize how pathetic that sounds? Its stupid and silly. Read my earlier post.



Yao was elite in 2005...

2008, he didn't have Yao but he had enough to get past the 1st round. Of course if Tmac played well enough maybe they could have won the series. Shot below 50% TS% again as usual in the post-season since he is some inefficient choker. They were 2-2 with Rafer Alston in that series. Yeah, that shows you how good Tmac is that he relies on Rafer Alston to win him playoff series, the same you bashed in that other pathetic excuse making post of yours.

Only a Yao fan boy would say that. And again, you are the only one who makes a big deal out of that 08 series. Houston was not good enough.

4th time. Can you please tell what part of my post was irrational? Quote that specific sentence if you don't mind.

[StateOfMind12]

Do you realize how pathetic that sounds? Its stupid and silly. Read my earlier post.
It's only sounds pathetic to you because it insults Tmac. Tmac is a loser and a choker by definition so I don't see what is wrong with calling him that. It seems like a decent amount of people on this site and in the world call him that anyways so what is the problem?




Only a Yao fan boy would say that. And again, you are the only one who makes a big deal out of that 08 series. Houston was not good enough.

He was an elite big man, not an elite player.

Do you have anything else left for me or Hubbs? We are getting kind of tired owning some excuse making *******.

[ImmortalNemesis]

It's only sounds pathetic to you because it insults Tmac. Tmac is a loser and a choker by definition so I don't see what is wrong with calling him that. It seems like a decent amount of people on this site and in the world call him that anyways so what is the problem?



He was an elite big man, not an elite player.

Do you have anything else left for me? Me and Hubbs are kind of tired of jizzing all over your face in this thread.

I don't have a problem with calling McGrady a loser by definition. In fact, I agreed with you a few posts ago. You'd know if you actually read my posts. The thing is I don't get why you're going by definition. Why? You think the majority of the people on this board who call him a loser do so because of the math behind it? Really?

What's the point of having an elite big man if he's not an elite player? What you're saying is, relative to the rest of the players in the NBA Yao was not elite. And you can't be dominant if you're not elite.

You unknowingly agreed with me. Freudian slip?

[StateOfMind12]

I don't have a problem with calling McGrady a loser by definition. In fact, I agreed with you a few posts ago. You'd know if you actually read my posts. The thing is I don't get why you're going by definition. Why? You think the majority of the people on this board who call him a loser do so because of the math behind it? Really?
Probably because your excuses for him and the rest of the fanboys excuses for him are terrible and most people with logic know that Tmac doesn't have an excuse.



What's the point of having an elite big man if he's not an elite player? What you're saying is, relative to the rest of the players in the NBA Yao was not elite. And you can't be dominant if you're not elite.

You unknowingly agreed with me. Freudian slip?

Kobe won a championship with an elite big man but not an elite player, yet how many times do you see Kobe gets discredited for playing with Gasol? Nobody is even asking Tmac to win a championship either, just the 1st round which goes to show you how bad Tmac is. His only expectation is to get past the 1st round and he can't even do that.

You lose......just like Tmac all the time in the playoffs.

[ChrisKreager]

T-Mac essentially had one stud to work with and not much else.

Those early Orlando teams- it was basically him and Mike Miller. You think two guys alone were gonna beat the 2001 Bucks of Allen-Cassell-Robinson at their peak, or the 2002 Hornets of Baron Davis-Eddie Jones-Mashburn?

And maybe if they don't trade Mike Miller, maybe he's the difference in 2003 against the Pistons?

[iDefend5]

T-Mac essentially had one stud to work with and not much else.

Those early Orlando teams- it was basically him and Mike Miller. You think two guys alone were gonna beat the 2001 Bucks of Allen-Cassell-Robinson at their peak, or the 2002 Hornets of Baron Davis-Eddie Jones-Mashburn?

And maybe if they don't trade Mike Miller, maybe he's the difference in 2003 against the Pistons?
Mashburn was out for the series.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

There was a lot to respond to. I already admitted Houston choked in 2007 but brought up an important point. Utah had scoring threads in all 5 positions while Houston had two. Yao and McGrady. Everyone else had a below average offensive game.

Battier, Alston, and Hayes are all below average offensive players and offensive liabilities.

Lol so I guess you need an allstar at all 5 positions for McGrady to win just ONE playoff series. I'm sure many teams would love having All defensive team Battier who spreads the floor on offense as a shooter. A very good shooter at that (.421% from three). A player of 2007 Shane Battiers caliber is a VERY valuable NBA piece.

Why do you keep talking about Hayes offensive game? Are you ****ing retarded? That's like talking shit about Ben Wallace because of his scoring statistics. Hayes is a great defensive player and pretty much immovable in the post. Very solid rebounder too. A great complimentary player to two ALLSTARS. Too bad the Rockets only had one legit allstar and another ballhog chucker.

Alston isn't that good, but the Jazz had Fisher as a starter LOL. Also never knew Kirilenko was a great offensive player. But yeah dude keep saying bullshit like that to try and convince yourself that McGrady isn't a choking loser that failed time after time again. Keep the excuses coming.



Are you seriously going to bring up Alston's offensive game into the discussion? I see you didn't watch many Houston games. Luther Head was a good 3 pt shooter in the regular season. Is he even in the NBA right now? I'm surprised you even brought him up, it doesn't help your case. Another player who drifted into irrelevance without McGrady.

Head averaged 11 PPG on 44% shooting from three point land. Again in the NBA it is a successfull plan to surround two stars with defensive minded players and shooters. Most of the players on that team can be classified into either role and were quite successfull in their jobs. The blame is on the dude that was supposed to be a star, but was actually detrimental to the teams success.



Huh? Did you even read my post. McGrady had one legit chance, that was in 2007. Yao and McGrady only played two series together. One of them was in 2005. Yao was NOT the best big man in the league, nor was he dominant. That is FACT. David Wesley, Ryan Bowen, Bob Sura, and a center who was in his 3rd year. Nice f*cking team. Are you even understanding my argument? Its not just about Juwan Howard being injured. I brought up the whole team. Wesley, Sura, Ryan Bowen. Ryan f*cking Bowen. You think that team is good enough to beat the same team who went to the NBA finals the next year?

Yeah thats what I ****ing thought. No defense at all for Tmacs shit play in that series LOL. Thanks for bending over to my argument and taking it like a good little boy. Noone is talking about 2005. That series was over to begin with since we all know T-Mac is just a little pube compared to an alltime great like Nowitzki.



Um, that 2009 team was miles ahead of the 2007 and 2005 squad.

McGrady never had Artest. FACT.
McGrady never had Lowry. FACT.
McGrady basically never had Brooks. FACT. (He was a rookie who didn't even start in 08)
McGrady never had Yao and Scola in the playoffs together. FACT.
McGrady had prime Yao for 1 playoff series. And they lost to the team that went to the Conference finals that year. FACT.

Yao
Scola
Battier
Artest
Prime Brooks is a much better starting line up than

Yao
raw Hayes
Battier
McGrady
Alston

Lowry off the bench > Mike James off the bench. Fact. The 09 team was simply better. It had nothing to do with McGrady not playing. You' aren't clever. I've refuted your argument many times in the past.

Agreed I'd rather have Brooks with the ball in his hands than ballhog inefficient McGrady and much rather have Artest defending wing players than no defense McGrady. Thanks for admitting that two average players > your boyfriend LOL

Unlike with McGrady at the helm these guys got a chance to shine since he wasn't holding onto the ball for 22 seconds then hoisting up a 23 foot jumper. Team basketball, defensive minded basketball. Two things McGrady will never understand. The guy sucks ****. Anytime you'd take a collection of role players over a "superstar" it means that guy isn't an actual star LOL.




Do you have anything else left for me or Hubbs? We are getting kind of tired owning some excuse making *******.

Yeah bro his fans take after the player. All they can do is bitch and moan about every little thing and refuse to take any blame. Lol @ blaming the role players over the star....not once....not twice.....not three times, but for over half a ****ing decade LMFAO.

Yeah this guy is getting owned dude.

[Heavincent]

I like T-Mac :confusedshrug: He was a great player whose career was derailed by injuries. The playoff struggles are hard to look past, but shit happens.

Not to mention I met the guy and he was pretty cool. I would be an ingrate if I insulted him.

[StateOfMind12]

Yeah bro his fans take after the player. All they can do is bitch and moan about every little thing and refuse to take any blame. Lol @ blaming the role players over the star....not once....not twice.....not three times, but for over half a ****ing decade LMFAO.

Yeah this guy is getting owned dude.
Seriously.

Do people even understand that when the Rockets traded for Tmac that people were talking championships and multiple championships because of the Yao-Tmac duo? These two were supposed to be the next Kobe-Shaq since the Kobe-Shaq era had just ended when that trade was made. Yet at the end these two were never even able to get past the 1st round together.

This was by far the most underachieving duo ever and a large reason for that was because of of Tmac because Yao was doing just fine without Tmac. Tmac on the otherhand? He didn't jack shit before Yao, he didn't jack shit with Yao, and he hasn't been doing jack shit since.


Anytime you'd take a collection of role players over a "superstar" it means that guy isn't an actual star LOL.
Yup, I brought this up too. I thought superstar and all-star players couldn't be replaced? It looks like the Rockets didn't just get a replacement for Tmac in 2009 but an upgrade.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I thought we agreed Houston choked in 2007? Why is it that you focus so much on that series instead of 2005 or 2008?


Lol so I guess you need an allstar at all 5 positions for McGrady to win just ONE playoff series.

No. Nice use of hyperbole but unfortunately it doesn't add to the discussion.


I'm sure many teams would love having All defensive team Battier who spreads the floor on offense as a shooter. A very good shooter at that (.421% from three). A player of 2007 Shane Battiers caliber is a VERY valuable NBA piece.

Completely agree. I don't regret Battier playing for Houston. But you can't deny his offensive game is below average. All he can do is shoot open 3s, and his percentage behind the arc is average. He also has that baby hook shot in the post but teams seem not to worry about it since he doesn't look for his shot as much.


Why do you keep talking about Hayes offensive game? Are you ****ing retarded? That's like talking shit about Ben Wallace because of his scoring statistics. Hayes is a great defensive player and pretty much immovable in the post. Very solid rebounder too. A great complimentary player to two ALLSTARS. Too bad the Rockets only had one legit allstar and another ballhog chucker.

You didn't watch many Rockets game did you? The Chuck Hayes you see today is not the same Hayes who played for Houston in 2007. His finishing ability around the rim was one of the worst in the NBA. He was an above average defender, that's it about it. I never questioned Hayes' hustle but size is something you can't change.


Alston isn't that good, but the Jazz had Fisher as a starter LOL. Also never knew Kirilenko was a great offensive player. But yeah dude keep saying bullshit like that to try and convince yourself that McGrady isn't a choking loser that failed time after time again. Keep the excuses coming.

Fisher is still in the NBA. And it is almost a guarantee LA would not trade Fisher for Alston if they had that choice right now. Where is Alston now? Yet another player who drifted into irrelevancy post McGrady. He couldn't back up Jameer Nelson in Orlando. There was one thing Alston was VERY good at. That's taking care of the ball. Alston's defense was not that bad either. You are a fool if you think Alston is a good role player. You have no idea how much of an upgrade Brooks was when Alston got traded.



Head averaged 11 PPG on 44% shooting from three point land. Again in the NBA it is a successfull plan to surround two stars with defensive minded players and shooters. Most of the players on that team can be classified into either role and were quite successfull in their jobs. The blame is on the dude that was supposed to be a star, but was actually detrimental to the teams success.

I know what Head averaged. I watched every single one of his games. Head completely disappeared in the playoffs. Where is Head now? Right. Another player who's career went down hill after leaving Houston. Is amazing that you're trying to argue that McGrady's teammates were good, when almost all of them have drifted into irrelevance when leaving Houston. Alston was never a good shooter. Battier and Head were the only decent shooters in Houston. I'm not sure but I think that was Head's 2nd season? Anyway...




Yeah thats what I ****ing thought. No defense at all for Tmacs shit play in that series LOL. Thanks for bending over to my argument and taking it like a good little boy. Noone is talking about 2005. That series was over to begin with since we all know T-Mac is just a little pube compared to an alltime great like Nowitzki.

Settle down chump, you're trying too hard. No defense for McGrady's shitty play? I'm sure he could have played better. But if you're going to blame McGrady, you're gonna have to put some of that blame on Yao Ming. I also like how you ignored every single one of my arguments in that paragraph you just posted.

No one is talking about 2005? OK, so can we agree McGrady had no chance in 2005? K. That mean's we're left with one series: 2007. What are you even arguing here bro? 2007? Because I can live with McGrady choking in 2007. I'm fine with that. However, 1 series is not enough for you or any of us to label McGrady a 'loser'. Artest, Lowry, and Brooks didn't play for Houston in 2007. Do you admit that first post of yours was ignorantly written? Next time before you open your mouth, at least do a 5 minute research on the team. Unless you want to come off as clown again.




Agreed I'd rather have Brooks with the ball in his hands than ballhog inefficient McGrady and much rather have Artest defending wing players than no defense McGrady. Thanks for admitting that two average players > your boyfriend LOL

You agree Brooks handling the ball instead of McGrady? My God. I didn't realize I was dealing with another child. Your argument is all over the place. Go back and re-read your 2nd post. You're rambling. McGrady my boyfriend? I think you're running out of arguments. No offense taken. I didn't expect to know much about Houston anyway. Next time though... If you're ignorant about the subject can you ask or research before opening your mouth? Appreciate it.


Unlike with McGrady at the helm these guys got a chance to shine since he wasn't holding onto the ball for 22 seconds then hoisting up a 23 foot jumper. Team basketball, defensive minded basketball. Two things McGrady will never understand. The guy sucks ****. Anytime you'd take a collection of role players over a "superstar" it means that guy isn't an actual star LOL.

This isn't really an argument just biased McGrady opinions. You're like that other RocketGreatness kid. Just ramble and ramble, no coherent sentences or valid points. Typing "LOL" time and time again doesn't pass as an argument IMO. Sorry.

Lets take a look at your 3rd post. Shall we?


T-Mac had a great nucleus of players throughout his tenure in Houston. Yao when healthy was the best center in the game, and that team was surrounded with elite defenders and solid role players each and every year. To fail in the first round all those times is the ultimate example of an underachiever.


Read it carefully. You're bringing up McGrady's teammates when he was in Houston. Praising the role players. McGrady having a "great" supporting cast as you put it was your first argument.

Now take a look at this:


where is where he had the most amount of talent on his team since you want to bitch about every little minor injury or deficiency in some role players games even though they are just that, role players


You're dumb. I was simply addressing the argument YOU brought up and countered it; then instead of adding to it or trying to refute it, you tried to dismiss it. :oldlol: Why is it that you can bring up how 'good' or 'great' of a supporting cast McGrady had in Houston....then when I try to explain how or why his supporting cast wasn't that good, you try to play it off as me making excuses for Tracy? Why. It makes no sense. You can use the 'role players' argument but when I counter it, that's just me trying to make up any excuse I can. Do you now see how dumb you look?

You keep contradicting yourself and you don't even know it. McGrady has great supporting cast throughout his tenure in Houston yet he stood no chance against Dallas in 2005? Does that make sense to you?

You aren't 'owning' anyone here, instead you're babbling. Take off the clown shoes.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Seriously.

This was by far the most underachieving duo ever and a large reason for that was because of of Tmac because Yao was doing just fine without Tmac.

Um, how was Yao doing fine without Tmac? He'd made the playoffs the year before. I'm sure Francis (best player for Houston in 2004) had nothing to do with it. Yao wasn't fine before McGrady. In fact, Houston finally had a 50 win season when McGrady arrived.


Yup, I brought this up too. I thought superstar and all-star players couldn't be replaced? It looks like the Rockets didn't just get a replacement for Tmac in 2009 but an upgrade.

You're overrating 2007 McGrady, that's your problem.

Prime Yao, Scola, Battier, Artest, Brooks, and Lowry >>>>>>

Yao, Ryan Bowen, McGrady, Wesley, Sura, and Mike James. That is FACT.

[apesta]

i think the Rockets wouldve beat Blazers anyway with T-mac playing. That Blazer team was Rockets' weakest opponent compared to Mavs and Jazz. As much as i love Yao, i think Yao doesnt get enough criticism while all of it went to Tmac over their years playing together.

[StateOfMind12]

Um, how was Yao doing fine without Tmac? He'd made the playoffs the year before. I'm sure Francis (best player for Houston in 2004) had nothing to do with it. Yao wasn't fine before McGrady. In fact, Houston finally had a 50 win season when McGrady arrived.
Yao get past the 1st round without Tmac in 2009 right?

Yao also made the playoffs without Tmac before he ever arrived. He and the Rockets didn't get any further with Mcgrady so yeah I'm pretty sure he was doing just fine. It's too bad McGrady practically stunted his development and held him back from winning.

And no Francis wasn't better than Yao in his 2nd season, he was better than Yao in his rookie season though easily. I'm assuming that a lot of it had to do with JVG though since that was why Francis was traded in the first place.



You're overrating 2007 McGrady, that's your problem.

Prime Yao, Scola, Battier, Artest, Brooks, and Lowry >>>>>>

Yao, Ryan Bowen, McGrady, Wesley, Sura, and Mike James. That is FACT.
No McGrady vs. McGrady and the team with no McGrady is better. I'm not overrating 2007 McGrady, I think he is a choking loser, so you want to tell me how I'm overrating him when it is you that has been sucking his dick all thread long?




You aren't 'owning' anyone here, instead you're babbling. Take off the clown shoes.

And you are getting owned by the way, like double penetrated owned by me and Hubbs so I don't know why you continue to post.

All you have posted is a bunch of pathetic excuses for Mcgrady and nothing else. Mcgrady is a choking loser and every single way possible. He is a loser and a choker by definition so what are you even trying to argue?

I credit Mcgrady for being able to fail in every situation possible though, not sure if any other NBA player did or has been able to do that.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Probably because your excuses for him and the rest of the fanboys excuses for him are terrible and most people with logic know that Tmac doesn't have an excuse.

I'm sorry this doesn't answer my question. Are you 12? Serious question. I just feel you lack some serious reading comprehension skills. No offense, really. That's really how I feel. Why is it that you choose to go with the actual definition of a loser instead of how's it commonly used in casual conversation?



Kobe won a championship with an elite big man but not an elite player, yet how many times do you see Kobe gets discredited for playing with Gasol? Nobody is even asking Tmac to win a championship either, just the 1st round which goes to show you how bad Tmac is. His only expectation is to get past the 1st round and he can't even do that.

You lose......just like Tmac all the time in the playoffs.

I'm not discrediting Yao, that's not what I meant at all. And IMO, Gasol was very much elite in 2009 and 2010; but of course that's another discussion which I don't wish to discuss at this time. Kobe is a bad example anyway since he's pretty much a top 10 player of all time. Kobe is top 10.... McGrady, at least in your eyes, is an underachieving loser. Pretty black and white, no? I'm sure there's someone else you can choose to go to instead of Kobe. Besides, his supporting cast doesn't compare. Is way way better .

[ImmortalNemesis]

i think the Rockets wouldve beat Blazers anyway with T-mac playing. That Blazer team was Rockets' weakest opponent compared to Mavs and Jazz. As much as i love Yao, i think Yao doesnt get enough criticism while all of it went to Tmac over their years playing together.


This is what I've been telling RocketGreatness. I don't blame Tracy completely, just like I don't entirely blame Yao. The thing is he refuses to put any of that blame on Yao. Both of them were so called all stars, let both of them take the blame. And you're right. That Blazers team was an easier opponent than the 07 Jazz or 05 Mavericks.



Yao also made the playoffs without Tmac before he ever arrived. He and the Rockets didn't get any further with Mcgrady so yeah I'm pretty sure he was doing just fine. It's too bad McGrady practically stunted his development and held him back from winning.

Let me get this straight. Yao never had a 50 win season before pairing up with T-Mac. Yao won 1 playoff game.

McGrady arrives, leads Houston to multiple 50+ winning seasons....and goes 7 in the playoffs twice.....yet, Yao was fine without McGrady? You're riding him so bad.


And no Francis wasn't better than Yao in his 2nd season, he was better than Yao in his rookie season though easily. I'm assuming that a lot of it had to do with JVG though since that was why Francis was traded in the first place.

OK if you say so. Still doesn't explain how he was doing better before McGrady arrived.



No McGrady vs. McGrady and the team with no McGrady is better. I'm not overrating 2007 McGrady, I think he is a choking loser, so you want to tell me how I'm overrating him when it is you that has been sucking his dick all thread long?


Because of that bullshit "superstars can't be replaced" or whatever. McGrady can very much be replaced if the players replacing him are better. You're overrating him if you think otherwise. Get it? I have to explain everything to you, kid. Learn to read and comprehend.

And you still don't explain why you choose to go by the actual definition of a loser (that's hilariously funny btw) instead of how every day people use it in everyday casual convos. You're reaching.

[StateOfMind12]

Let me get this straight. Yao never had a 50 win season before pairing up with T-Mac. Yao won 1 playoff game.
Yao was in his 2nd year in the league and the team he faced was the 2004 Lakers who won the West. What is your problem again? :confusedshrug:



McGrady arrives, leads Houston to multiple 50+ winning seasons....and goes 7 in the playoffs twice.....yet, Yao was fine without McGrady? You're riding him so bad.

Like I said, how many times did Yao get past the 1st round with Mcgrady and without him? :rolleyes:



Because of that bullshit "superstars can't be replaced" or whatever. McGrady can very much be replaced if the players replacing him are better. You're overrating him if you think otherwise. Get it? I have to explain everything to you, kid. Learn to read and comprehend.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is easy to replace a choking loser. I guess that would explain the Rockets got past the 1st round in 2009 and were never able to get past it with him.

:oldlol: This is too easy dude, WAY too easy.

If you're an all-star/superstar and you can find a few role players that are an UPGRADE over you, that pretty much means you aren't an all-star/superstar in the first place. Go ahead and tell me who can replace Kevin Durant, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant, besides players who are superior to them with a few role players.

Rockets were better off without McGrady.


And you still don't explain why you choose to go by the actual definition of a loser (that's hilariously funny btw) instead of how every day people use it in everyday casual convos. You're reaching.
Because I'm in a basketball forum discussing basketball and basketball is a sport so why would I define it in a everyday conversation when I'm specifically talking about sports/basketball? :confusedshrug:

[ChrisKreager]

If you're an all-star/superstar and you can find a few role players that are an UPGRADE over you, that pretty much means you aren't an all-star/superstar in the first place. Go ahead and tell me who can replace Kevin Durant, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant, besides players who are superior to them with a few role players.

Rockets were better off without McGrady.


Would they have been better off if they don't make the trade and stuck with Francis?

[ImmortalNemesis]

Yao was in his 2nd year in the league and the team he faced was the 2004 Lakers who won the West. What is your problem again? :confusedshrug:

Like I said, how many times did Yao get past the 1st round with Mcgrady and without him? :rolleyes:


That still doesn't explain how Yao Ming was fine before McGrady arrived.



Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is easy to replace a choking loser. I guess that would explain the Rockets got past the 1st round in 2009 and were never able to get past it with him.

So do you agree the 2009 squad was better than the 2007 or 2005 squad, yes or no? Let me guess, you're going to back peddle.


If you're an all-star/superstar and you can find a few role players that are an UPGRADE over you, that pretty much means you aren't an all-star/superstar in the first place. Go ahead and tell me who can replace Kevin Durant, Dirk Nowitzki, Kobe Bryant, besides players who are superior to them with a few role players.

Nowitzki and Bryant are top 25 players of all time. You keep using these bad bad examples. An outstanding supporting cast can very much replace Allen, Johnson, Ginobili, etc.


Houston was better off without McGrady?


So what you're saying is:

A team of

Yao, Hayes, Padgett (who would replace McGrady if he's out), Wesley, and Sura is a much better team than

Yao, Hayes, McGrady, Wesley, and Sura? Houston is better off without McGrady? You seriously believe that first line up is better than the 2nd one? :roll:

Lets do another one, it amuses me.

A team of Yao, Hayes, Battier, Head (Houston's back up SG in 07), and Alston is better than a team consisting of:

Yao, Hayes, Battier, McGrady, and Alston. LOL. Oh, it is indeed too easy.



Because I'm in a basketball forum discussing basketball and basketball is a sport so why would I define it in a everyday conversation when I'm specifically talking about sports/basketball? :confusedshrug:

What does basketball being a sport have to do with how you define the term 'loser'? You aren't comprehending what I'm getting at here. You're either a winner or a loser. You're saying McGrady is a loser because he never won a playoff series. You're taking the mathematical approach which is ridiculous. That would mean everyone who's won at least one playoff series is a winner. Hill was loser up until 2010? I didn't know that's how the board felt about Hill. I guessed I must have missed all of the Hill-bashing threads, huh? Why would Phoenix sign such a loser?! SARCASM.

1 playoff series separates a winner from a loser. Pretty arbitrary if you ask me.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Is funny that you'd take Francis over McGrady in 2004. Your Tracy hate is that strong I guess?

It was Van Gundy's fault Francis didn't do good in Orlando and New York. That's the first time I hear that one. You just keep posting stupid comment after stupid comment. How much stupid is left in you?

[StateOfMind12]

Would they have been better off if they don't make the trade and stuck with Francis?
I don't think Francis would ever been traded if JVG never became the Rockets coach, at least not for a while during that time. JVG is the only reason why Francis declined so fast and fell off in the face of the world in the first place.

It's too bad Rudy T. had that kidney disease or something too because that is the only reason why he stepped down during the late of Yao's rookie season. The Rockets probably would have made the playoffs had Rudy T. continued to coach instead of receiving that disease and being forced to step down.

They were better off never having McGrady that's for sure and I'm sure most real Rocket fans would agree with me on that but it makes sense since that was probably their best option for Francis at the time.


So do you agree the 2009 squad was better than the 2007 or 2005 squad, yes or no? Let me guess, you're going to back peddle.
Yeah, because McGrady was out and serviceable role players were in instead. Teams are better off without Mcgrady.


1 playoff series separates a winner from a loser. Pretty arbitrary if you ask me.
Well that's too bad because Yao did get past the 1st round while McGrady never did.

McGrady is the definition of a loser and a choking loser at that. I don't even understand what you're trying to do in this thread anymore besides get pissed off about how much of a pathetic failing loser Tmac was.

He has failed on teams where he wasn't suppose to win a playoff series and teams where he was suppose to win a playoff series. That's the difference between Hill before 2010 and McGrady now. Hill was never the favorite to win a playoff series like Tmac was in Houston.

Nobody thinks and nobody would or should think that Hill would have failed to get past the 1st round with Yao/elite big man on his team. Tmac? He managed to make that impossible happen.

What else do you have left for me? Do you have any more excuses?

It's hilarious though as Hubbs mentioned. You can't get past the 1st round with good shooters, you can't get past the 1st round with the best Center in the league and an elite big man, and you can't get past the 1st round with the best perimeter defender in the league. The only expectation for that player/McGrady was to get past the 1st round with that and he still couldn't even accomplish that. What else did Tmac needed? CP3? Nash? Dirk? Kobe? LeBron? Duncan? It sounds like nothing is enough so maybe the Dream Team?

That sounds like an underachieving loser to me, what about you, or do you have more pathetic excuses to throw at me? :confusedshrug:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yeah, because McGrady was out and serviceable role players were in instead. Teams are better off without Mcgrady.


Well that's too bad because Yao did get past the 1st round while McGrady never did.

Context?

Artest, Scola, Brooks and Battier >>>> Hayes, Alston, Mutombo (who averaged 1 rebound in the playoffs) and Luther Head.

Take a nose dive into your pillow, clown.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Yeah, because McGrady was out and serviceable role players were in instead. Teams are better off without Mcgrady.

So Houston won in 2009 because McGrady didn't play and instead was replaced by serviceable role players? OK, fair enough. Now lets apply that same logic to the 05 and 07 squads, shall we?

You believe Houston would have beaten Dallas with:

Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura. :oldlol:

Lets try this again. Do you believe Houston would of beaten Utah in 2007 with a team consisting of

Yao, Hayes, Battier, Head, and Alston? You really believe that team could have beaten Utah in 07? :applause: You, sir, are such a good poster. Your arguments are brilliant. Very brilliant. How could I ever counter what you just said?



He has failed on teams where he wasn't suppose to win a playoff series and teams where he was suppose to win a playoff series. That's the difference between Hill before 2010 and McGrady now. Hill was never the favorite to win a playoff series like Tmac was in Houston.

Oh, so that arbitrary "One playoff series win" line doesn't apply anymore, right? How convenient. You're either a loser or a winner. And going by how your define 'loser', Hill was a loser up to 2010. You can't change the definition when it suits you. You're back peddling, just like I predicted.


Nobody thinks and nobody would or should think that Hill would have failed to get past the 1st round with Yao on his team. Tmac? He managed to make that impossible happen.

The Yao-Hill combo is not a guaranteed playoff win but I'll give it to you anyways. So now you're taking 'teammates' into consideration huh? What happened? Why the change of heart? Just days ago you were bitching at Tracy for blowing that 3-1 lead against Detroit. He wasn't the favorite, yet you still bitched and tried to use it as one of your arguments. You completely ignored the teammates he had in 03. But with Hill is totally different. He can't be considered a loser because he was never the favorite to win. Back-peddling asshole.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Context?

Artest, Scola, Brooks and Battier >>>> Hayes, Alston, Mutombo (who averaged 1 rebound in the playoffs) and Luther Head.

Take a nose dive into your pillow, clown.


No, no no. Who cares if Artest, Scola, Brooks, and Battier are better than Hayes, Alston, and Mutumbo? You're just another Tracy fan boy making up any excuse you can to defend McGrady. Your logic sounds about right. But I won't agree because it doesn't suit my anti-McGrady agenda.

You're just an ignorant McGrady fan boy. Houston would have won in 2007 if McGrady didn't play.

[StateOfMind12]

You, sir, are such a good poster. Your arguments are brilliant. Very brilliant. How could I ever counter what you just said?
:applause: This is pretty much the first smart thing you said on the post. I'm glad we can come to an agreement for once. :cheers:



Oh, so that arbitrary "One playoff series win" line doesn't apply anymore, right? How convenient. You're either a loser or a winner. And going by how your define 'loser', Hill was a loser up to 2010. You can't change the definition when it suits you. You're back peddling, just like I predicted.

The Yao-Hill combo is not a guaranteed playoff win but I'll give it to you anyways. So now you're taking 'teammates' into consideration huh? What happened? Why the change of heart? Just days ago you were bitching at Tracy for blowing that 3-1 lead against Detroit. He wasn't the favorite, yet you still bitched and tried to use it as one of your arguments. You completely ignored the teammates he had in 03. But with Hill is totally different. He can't be considered a loser because he was never the favorite to win. Back-peddling asshole.
As I said before, in 2004 I wouldn't consider McGrady a loser because he was never the favorite and never expected to win although he did blow series leads and he did play in playoff series where he could win. After what I saw McGrady do in Houston though? It just confirmed my belief that Tmac was a loser.

You can flip flop and make all the excuses you want but at the end of the day Tmac is a loser. He hasn't won a single playoff series that were winnable and he has never won a playoff series that he has ever played in. He has lost, failed, and choked in all of those situations, that is the difference. Hill? That didn't happen before 2010 so why should I call him a loser? :confusedshrug: Hill was technically defined a loser by definition before 2010 but he had justification. What justification does McGrady have now a days that he has never won a playoff series? Nothing, there is your difference.

:oldlol: Get mad though. It's highly entertaining and I'm getting a great kick out of it.

I'm not sure what you have left but I'm assuming it's either excuses, a bunch of gibberish, or nothing but that is the same as a bunch of gibberish I guess.


By the way,

Serviceable role players that could fill in for Yao would be Luis Scola, Carl Landry, and Dikembe Mutombo and guess who McGrady played with in 2008 and in the 2008 playoffs? Oh yeah, those 3 guys and how exactly far did he get with them? No where.

Serviceable role players that could in for McGrady were Artest and Wafer and Yao got past the 1st round with those two.

There is another difference.

[ImmortalNemesis]

:applause: This is pretty much the first smart thing you said on the post. I'm glad we can come to an agreement for once. :cheers:

How about instead of playing along, you answer the two questions I asked earlier. Houston won in 2009 because McGrady didn't play and was instead replaced by serviceable role player. Apply that same logic to the 05 and 07 squads. Lets go genius, is not rocket science. Go ahead, apply it and answer the questions.

Let me add another one (just for the lulz).....You believe a team of Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston is good enough to beat Utah in 08?



As I said before, in 2004 I wouldn't consider McGrady a loser because he was never the favorite and never expected to win although he did blow series leads and he did play in playoff series where he could win. After what I saw McGrady do in Houston though? It just confirmed my belief that Tmac was a loser.

I get it now. Fair enough. Pretty rare that you mange to properly elaborate on a point without any sort of ramble. If that's the case, why do you still bitch about the 03 series? I mean McGrady wasn't the favorite so why use it against him? Hill was a loser up to 2010. But since he won a playoff series, he's a winner. That's so simplistic is like I'm talking to a 3rd grader. lol

[Lebron23]

You really hated Tracy Mcgrady.

[StateOfMind12]

Let me add another one (just for the lulz).....You believe a team of Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston is good enough to beat Utah in 08?
I already answered your pointless hypothetical in my edit.

You are right though that it isn't rocket science but apparently it is rocket science for McGrady to get past the 1st round.


I get it now. Fair enough. Pretty rare that you mange to properly elaborate on a point without any sort of ramble. If that's the case, why do you still bitch about the 03 series? I mean McGrady wasn't the favorite so why use it against him? Hill was a loser up to 2010. But since he won a playoff series, he's a winner. That's so simplistic is like I'm talking to a 3rd grader. lol
He blew a 3-1 lead in a series, that doesn't make him a loser but that makes him a choker. McGrady is both, he is a choker and a loser.

Are we done now? Cause you have had nothing for me for a while now and I'm just getting tired of answering and responding to your pointless posts that are irrelevant to the topic.


You really hated Tracy Mcgrady.
I still do hate him so I don't know why you say I hated him. There is nothing to like about Tracy McGrady so I don't see what the problem is. **** Tracy McGrady.

[Lebron23]

I already answered your pointless hypothetical in my edit.

You are right though that it isn't rocket science but apparently it takes rocket science for McGrady to get past the 1st round.


He blew a 3-1 lead in a series, that doesn't make him a loser but that makes him a choker. McGrady is both, he is a choker and a loser.

Are we done now? Cause you have had nothing for me for a while now and I'm just getting tired of answering and responding to your pointless posts that are irrelevant to the topic.


I still do hate him so I don't know why you say I hated him. There is nothing to like about Tracy McGrady so I don't see what the problem is. **** Tracy McGrady.

2001-2004 Tracy Mcgrady was one of the most exciting players in the league. He's been a better playoffs performer than Yao Ming. It's not Mcgrady's fault that the Rockets couldn't advanced to the next round.

[StateOfMind12]

2001-2004 Tracy Mcgrady was one of the most exciting players in the league.
So I'm suppose to like him because of that even though he brought nothing but a losing culture to a team? :confusedshrug:


He's been a better playoffs performer than Yao Ming. It's not Mcgrady's fault that the Rockets couldn't advanced to the next round.
http://airstre.am/dopamine72/Nicolas%20Cage%20Laugh.gif

You can talk to me when you even bother to read what I posted in my first post.

[Lebron23]

Did you watch the Pistons and Magic playoffs series on your cable channel? The Pistons were head and shoulders above the Magic, but the Magic still won 3 games in that series. Just look at Detroit's Pistons roster. I am still amazed that Mcgrady's Magic won some games in that series.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I read your edit but ignored it because it was irrelevant. Bro, you lack some serious critical thinking skills. And this is basketball for Christ's sakes. You said Houston was better off without McGrady that's why they won in 2009.

b...b...but Yao was replaced by serviceable role players in 08 and what did TMac do? Nuttin!!!!!!


Why is that important or why should I care?


I already answered your pointless hypothetical in my edit.



No. You didn't answer my questions.
I'll simplify it even more so you can understand it kid. Sorry if I'm putting you through hell, didn't mean to ask such difficult questions.

Do the Rockets beat Dallas in 05 with Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura...yes or no?

Do the Rockets beat Utah in 07 with Yao, Hayes, Battier, Head, and Alston...yes or no?

Do you believe the Rockets beat Utah in 08 with Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston...yes or no?

I mean, Houston was better with McGrady not playing and instead replacing him with role players right? Back peddling much?
Take the L and move on.



Are we done now? Cause you have had nothing for me for a while now and I'm just getting tired of answering and responding to your pointless posts that are irrelevant to the topic.

Oh, my posts are relevant.

[StateOfMind12]

Did you watch the Pistons and Magic playoffs series on your cable channel? The Pistons were head and shoulders above the Magic, but the Magic still won 3 games in that series. Just look at Detroit's Pistons roster. I am still amazed that Mcgrady's Magic won some games in that series.
Sure I saw him blow a 3-1 lead, what was the point of your post? McGrady failed in Houston and he was the reason why they failed. I'm barely talking about Orlando McGrady at least in the past few pages. There is no reason to bring up Yao if you want to discuss Orlando McGrady.


I mean, Houston was better with McGrady not playing and instead replacing him with role players right? Back peddling much?
Ok so you are practically arguing semantics here but okay yeah the Rockets were better with serviceable role players who weren't losers like Tmac instead of Tmac himself, now does that make you feel better? :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

[Lebron23]

Sure I saw him blow a 3-1 lead, what was the point of your post? McGrady failed in Houston and he was the reason why they failed. I'm barely talking about Orlando McGrady at least in the past few pages. There is no reason to bring up Yao if you want to discuss Orlando McGrady.


Post Mcgrady numbers in that series.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Ok so you are practically arguing semantics here but okay yeah the Rockets were better with serviceable role players who weren't losers like Tmac instead of Tmac himself, now does that make you feel better? :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

I'm not arguing semantics. Your argument is very clear. Was Houston better off without McGrady yes or no? Since your answer is more than likely yes, answer the questions:


Do the Rockets beat Dallas in 05 with Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura...yes or no?

Do the Rockets beat Utah in 07 with Yao, Hayes, Battier, Head, and Alston...yes or no?

Do you believe the Rockets beat Utah in 08 with Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston...yes or no?

[StateOfMind12]

Post Mcgrady numbers in that series.
I'll post you Games 5, 6, and 7. The games that Tmac blew because he thought he had the series wrapped up after he won game 4.

Game 5
McGrady - 19 points, 8 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 steals, 3 turnovers, 8-20 shooting, 1-5 3p shooting, 2-3 ft

Game 6
McGrady - 37 points, 11 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals, 4 turnovers, 11-28 shooting, 1-6 3p shooting, 14-17 ft

Game 7
McGrady - 21 points, 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 turnovers, 7-24 shooting, 2-6 3p shooting, 5-5 ft

Pistons blew out the Magic in all of those games too by the way.

I know McGrady dominated in the first 4 games that was why they were up 3-1. McGrady stopped playing, caring, or trying after those 4 games though and he shot horribly inefficient and wasn't playing well at all.




Do you believe the Rockets beat Utah in 08 with Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston...yes or no?
I say yes to '08 but since it's nothing more than a hypothetical I don't understand the point.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I say yes to '08 but since it's nothing more than a hypothetical I don't understand the point.

:roll:

Mutumbo, Scola, Battier, Bobby Jackson, and Alston beat

Okur, Boozer, Kirelinko, Brewer, and Deron Williams.

Stop it! Stop it. You're too much kid. Too much.

What about 2005 and 2007?

You believe Houston wins those series' without McGrady, yes or no?

[StateOfMind12]

You believe Houston wins those series' without McGrady, yes or no?
Oh I thought we were going to replace Yao with McGrady in 08, if that is the Rockets team that is going to play the Jazz in 08 then no, lol.

[Lebron23]

I'll post you Games 5, 6, and 7. The games that Tmac blew because he thought he had the series wrapped up after he won game 4.

Game 5
McGrady - 19 points, 8 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 steals, 3 turnovers, 8-20 shooting, 1-5 3p shooting, 2-3 ft

Game 6
McGrady - 37 points, 11 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals, 4 turnovers, 11-28 shooting, 1-6 3p shooting, 14-17 ft

Game 7
McGrady - 21 points, 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 turnovers, 7-24 shooting, 2-6 3p shooting, 5-5 ft

Pistons blew out the Magic in all of those games too by the way.

I know McGrady dominated in the first 4 games that was why they were up 3-1. McGrady stopped playing, caring, or trying after those 4 games though and he shot horribly inefficient and wasn't playing well at all.


I say yes to '08 but since it's nothing more than a hypothetical I don't understand the point.

I think it's actually a good all around numbers. Kobe "Son of God" Bryant struggled againts the 2004 Pistons teams in the NBA Finals.

[ImmortalNemesis]

The questions are asked for a reason obviously. You think Houston won in 2009 because McGrady didn't play.

Apply that same logic in 05, 07, and 08. Do the Rockets still win? I mean, you're replacing McGrady with "serviceable role players" right? Houston should be able to win, right?

To get to the point, Houston didn't win in 2009 because McGrady didn't play. That is a fallacy. Houston won in 2009 because the team as a whole (the role players) was simply better. You can't spew that "Houston won because McGrady didn't play" bullshit.

If you're going to use that logic, apply it to every series McGrady played in. Houston doesn't win without McGrady in 2005 and 2007, nor in 2008. Why? Because the team is simply not good enough. I know I'm sounding repetitive...but get this through your thick skull.

Houston won in 2009 because it was simply better. The role players were freaking awesome. Hell, I remember in game two of the 2nd round against the Lakers....Houston's bench, led by Lowry, brought them back into the game (and even took the lead at one point in the 2nd quarter). They were down by 14! That team was deep.


Oh I thought we were going to replace Yao with McGrady in 08, if that is the Rockets team that is going to play the Jazz in 08 then no, lol.

OK. But about 05 and 07. Lets cut the bullshit. The answer for both questions is obviously no. Houston doesn't win in 07 or 05 without McGrady. But the 09 team won, because it was WAY better. For the Trillionth time, Houston won because the role players were better; not because McGrady the loser, choker, black hole whatever you want to call him didn't play.

I know you hate McGrady because he let you down. You were probably a kid and looked up to him, but I think is time you moved on. I'm more than willing to admit Houston choked in 2007. I don't know why you can't some of the blame on Yao. You were truly emotionally scared, bro. Time will heal your wounds. But can you at least try to look at this without some sort of agenda?

[StateOfMind12]

For the Trillionth time, Houston won because the role players were better; not because McGrady the loser, choker, black hole whatever you want to call him didn't play.
The role players who replaced McGrady were better so that was why the Rockets got past the 1st round. Those role players weren't losers, chokers, or blackholes like Tmac was. I thought that we had established this already.

I already posted this at the top of the page



Ok so you are practically arguing semantics here but okay yeah the Rockets were better with serviceable role players who weren't losers like Tmac instead of Tmac himself, now does that make you feel better? :rolleyes: :confusedshrug:

:confusedshrug:

Again, you have made no point. Tracy McGrady is a choking loser.

So no, maybe the Rockets weren't better off without McGrady entirely or completely in '05 or '07 but they were better off never making the trade for McGrady or better off with those serviceable role players replacing McGrady instead.

Does that get through your thick skull? :confusedshrug:

[Lebron23]

http://dontblinkmixtape.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/mcgrady.jpg

[ImmortalNemesis]

The role players who replaced McGrady were better so that was why the Rockets got past the 1st round. Those role players weren't losers, chokers, or blackholes like Tmac was. I thought that we had established this already.

You aren't getting it. Was Houston good enough to win in the playoffs without McGrady in 2009? Yes.

Was Houston good enough to win in the playoffs without McGrady in 2008? No.

Was Houston good enough to win in the playoffs without McGrady in 2007? No.

Was Houston good enough to win in the playoffs without McGrady in 2005? No.

With that established, is it fair to say the 2009 Houston squad was way better than the 07, 08, and 05 squads? Yes.

Get it?


So no, maybe the Rockets weren't better off without McGrady entirely or completely in '05 or '07 but they were better off never making the trade for McGrady or better off with those serviceable role players replacing McGrady instead.

No need to back-peddle. Just go ahead and say it, Houston needed McGrady in 07, 05, and 08.

Re: bold part:

You're saying Houston was better off without McGrady in 09 because they finally won a playoff series. I'm saying that's total BS because, as we've already established, Houston's 09 squad was way better than any supporting McGrady ever had. Are you connecting the dots?

2009 team was way better, and you have to take that into consideration. You can't ignore it and say something fallacious like "Houston won because they replaced McGrady with role players."

[IamRAMBO24]

Leave Mcgrady alone. Dude was playing at less than 50% full capacity for most of his time with the Rockets and he had little help when he was on the Magic.

He put up better numbers being the one man savior than Kobe did when he had a bunch of scrubs after the Shaq trade.

I like Mcgrady. His head was in the right place: he studied Jordan's philosophy of team play and adapted his game to be more of a distributor than a shot chucker. Even as a star he had no problem letting Yao lead the team (the same can't be said about Kobe).

Mcgrady was riddled with injury and could not show the same greatness we saw during his time with the Magic. Unfortunately, when he actually had another star to take the load, he didn't have the same firepower to take the team over the top.

A healthy Yao and Mcgrady was a force to be reckon with. They were simply dominant together, so you can't blame it on Mcgrady alone, I truly believe his injury (and Yao's) had a huge part in the Rocket's sub par performance in the playoffs.

[StateOfMind12]

Get it?
I would suspect losing one of your best players and getting nothing in return would make your team worse. :confusedshrug:

Replace with serviceable role players or any other star wing player and they get past the 1st round though.


You're saying Houston was better off without McGrady in 09 because they finally won a playoff series. I'm saying that's total BS because, as we've already established, Houston's 09 squad was way better than any supporting McGrady ever had. Are you connecting the dots?
They were better off without McGrady and with those serviceable role players instead. They didn't need McGrady.

There is nothing complicated about what I said.


You can't ignore it and say something fallacious like "Houston was because they replaced McGrady with role players."
I can and I just did. So what is your issue? The fact that I'm still not sucking Tmac's left nut with you? :confusedshrug:

I'm pretty much repeating myself so expect to see a lot of copy and pastes since you are asking the same questions and giving me the same statements over and over again since you can't comprehend anything to save your life.

[IamRAMBO24]

Stateofmind, I think you are being a bit too melodramatic with Mcgrady. Did dude rape your mom or something? Give the guy a break. He was injured for most of his time on the Rockets and when they were finally getting things going, Yao would go down, and I remember they had that streak of 20+ wins without Yao in the lineup, so that kind of proves immortal's point that they had a much better team that year than all the other years.

His point is legit. A team with a 22 win streak without their star player is a pretty damn good team.

Mcgrady was playing with a limp leg, plus team was hovering over him with double teams even off of pick and rolls, so to hate an injured man with that much heat on him is being a bit unfair don't you think?

[StateOfMind12]

Stateofmind, I think you are being a bit too melodramatic with Mcgrady. Did dude rape your mom or something? Give the guy a break. He was injured for most of his time on the Rockets and when they were finally getting things going, Yao would go down, and I remember they had that streak of 20+ wins without Yao in the lineup, so that kind of proves immortal's point that they had a much better team that year than all the other years.
They won 10 games without Yao in that winning streak but Yao was in the 12 games so they didn't win 20+ without him.



Mcgrady was playing with a limp leg, plus team was hovering over him with double teams even off of pick and rolls, so to hate an injured man with that much heat on him is being a bit unfair don't you think?
You just helped me out. Why am I suppose to care or like or think some injury prone ***** is a good player?

The team was better off without him or never getting him in the first place. He practically stunted Yao's development and made Yao suffer 1st round exits with him. I feel sorry for Yao since he had to waste most of his career with this loser.

There is a reason why every single team that McGrady has been a part of boos him.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I would suspect losing one of your best players and getting nothing in return would make your team worse. :confusedshrug:

You're not getting it just yet. Almost there, but not yet.

Houston's team in 2009 was 10 deep. You just keep dismissing my points. Ignoring them won't help your case.

I broke it down as simply as I could, but you refuse to see it. Let me explain it to you again.

09 without McGrady = good enough to win
08 without McGrady = not good enough to win
07 without McGrady = not good enough to win
05 without McGrady = not good enough to win

With that established, is it fair to say the 2009 team was better than any supporting cast McGrady had in the past, yes or no? Why are you making it complicated? The logical answer would be: Yes, is fair to say the 2009 team was better than the 07, 05, and 08 team without McGrady. Is that a reasonable conclusion?



They were better off without McGrady and with those serviceable role players instead. They didn't need McGrady.


Yeah there's nothing complicated but your statement if fallacious. Take the 05, 07, 08, and 09 teams. Now, remove McGrady from everyone of those rosters.

The 09 team is significantly better than the rest. Do you agree, yes or no? If so, you have to take that into consideration. You can't spew that 'Houston won because no McGrady bullshit.'

[StateOfMind12]

With that established, is it fair to say the 2009 team was better than any supporting cast McGrady had in the past, yes or no? Why are you making it complicated? The logical answer would be: Yes, is fair to say the 2009 team was better than the 07, 05, and 08 team without McGrady. Is that a reasonable conclusion?
The problem is that the Rockets were good enough to get past the 1st round in 2008. Just because McGrady was on that team and failed doesn't mean most would.

The 09 team was better because McGrady wasn't on that team and had role players that were better than him filling in for him. I should start counting how many times I repeat this.




The 09 team is significantly better than the rest. Do you agree, yes or no? If so, you have to take that into consideration. You can't spew that 'Houston won because no McGrady bullshit.'
I can, I will, and I'm doing it right now. What are you going to do about? Oh yeah, nothing except b!tch, cry, and moan like you have been doing all this thread.

Do you have any arguments left in you? I don't even understand your purpose in posting in this thread right now. You are just posting a bunch of garbage that is just making me repeat myself.

Is your strategy to just fatigue me to get me to stop arguing so you'll feel or think you win or something?

[IamRAMBO24]

They won 10 games without Yao in that winning streak but Yao was in the 12 games so they didn't win 20+ without him.


You just helped me out. Why am I suppose to care or like or think some injury prone ***** is a good player?

The team was better off without him or never getting him in the first place. He practically stunted Yao's development and made Yao suffer 1st round exits with him. I feel sorry for Yao since he had to waste most of his career with this loser.

There is a reason why every single team that McGrady has been a part of boos him.

:facepalm

Really? Mcgrady stunted Yao's developement? WTF are you smoking? When both were healthy, they were the most lethal combo in the NBA. Mcgrady didn't do anything to Yao; Yao did it to himself. Yao was injury prone and that had MORE to do with the Rockets failing in the playoffs than anything Mcgrady did on the court.

In fact even Hollinger said once Mcgrady went down in 2009, the rockets had to put their title on hold.

The 09 team was f*ckin amazing (again kudos to immortal for pointing this out), but they needed Mcgrady to win the title. It was a given the team would of made it pass the 1st round that year, but the prediction was if they wanted to take it all, both Yao and Mcgrady had to be healthy.

They won 22 straight with Mcgrady in the line up (10 without Yao), so to say he was a parasite is just being dishonest.

You need to chill out and look at the facts. Immortal is right and you are flat out wrong.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

The questions are asked for a reason obviously. You think Houston won in 2009 because McGrady didn't play.

Apply that same logic in 05, 07, and 08. Do the Rockets still win? I mean, you're replacing McGrady with "serviceable role players" right? Houston should be able to win, right?

To get to the point, Houston didn't win in 2009 because McGrady didn't play. That is a fallacy. Houston won in 2009 because the team as a whole (the role players) was simply better. You can't spew that "Houston won because McGrady didn't play" bullshit.

If you're going to use that logic, apply it to every series McGrady played in. Houston doesn't win without McGrady in 2005 and 2007, nor in 2008. Why? Because the team is simply not good enough. I know I'm sounding repetitive...but get this through your thick skull.

Houston won in 2009 because it was simply better. The role players were freaking awesome. Hell, I remember in game two of the 2nd round against the Lakers....Houston's bench, led by Lowry, brought them back into the game (and even took the lead at one point in the 2nd quarter). They were down by 14! That team was deep.


Wrong, Houston won in 2009 because those new role players were better than McGrady and contributed to a superior product. Tracy McGrady was a playoff choker for years prior to that.

So yes...the role players were better, but they were also superior to McGrady who never let that team maximize it's potential with his 20 + FGA and shitty shooting percentages. Artest and Battier made for the best defensive swingman duo in a long time and Artest ultimately made that team better than McGrady with his toughness and intensity. Two things McGrady doesn't have. And this isn't Indiana Artest, this is Houston Artest LOL.

What it comes down to is this, you mad a crazy guy fit in better than you supposed "Superstar" ever did?

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

So slightly above average with him, elite without him. LOL. Yeah looks like they were better without him.

Oh and the year before that, no Yao Ming? first round exit. No McGrady? Win the franchise's first playoff series since 1997 LOL.

[ImmortalNemesis]

The problem is that the Rockets were good enough to get past the 1st round in 2008. Just because McGrady was on that team and failed doesn't mean most would.

Only a select few thought Houston would win in 2008, especially because Houston had lost to basically that same team the year before. This is ironic, you're one of the few who believes that team was good enough to win yet bash him constantly. I thought Tracy was this huge underachiever, mentally and physically weak, p*ssy. That's what you think about McGrady, yet you're one of the few who thinks McGrady had it in him to win it in 2008. Oh, the irony.

Anyway, your point is irrelevant. Are you even understanding what I'm getting at here? I'm saying the 09 supporting cast was WAY better than anything McGrady had to work with in previous years.


The 09 team was better because McGrady wasn't on that team and had role players that were better than him filling in for him. I should start counting how many times I repeat this.

I know. And I've refuted that silly argument, no?

You: Houston was better in 09 because McGrady was replaced by serviceable role players.

Me: If you want to go that way, apply that same logic to the 07, 05, and 09 squads. Houston doesn't win without him.

I thought Houston was supposed to get better without McGrady? Isn't that the reason why Houston won in 09? Yet, Houston without McGrady doesn't win in 08, 07, and 05.

Do you now see why your argument is stupid?

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

You: Houston was better in 09 because McGrady was replaced by serviceable role players.

Me: If you want to go that way, apply that same logic to the 07, 05, and 09 squads. Houston doesn't win without him.

I thought Houston was supposed to get better without McGrady? Isn't that the reason why Houston won in 09? Yet, Houston without McGrady doesn't win in 08, 07, and 05.

Do you now see why your argument is stupid?

What does this have to do with anything? He is talking about THE 2009 TEAM! The players that stepped in for McGrady provided more on the court than he ever did at any point as a Rocket.

I don't see how this information is hard to comprehend. Notice how his statement says "IN 09".

[StateOfMind12]

Only a select few thought Houston would win in 2008, especially because Houston had lost to basically that same team the year before. This is ironic, you're one of the few who believes that team was good enough to win yet bash him constantly. I thought Tracy was this huge underachiever, mentally and physically weak, p*ssy. That's what you think about McGrady, yet you're one of the few who thinks McGrady had it in him to win it in 2008. Oh, the irony.
I thought he was capable of winning the series, I didn't think he would. Why would I ever think Tracy McGrady would win a playoff series? Because of how successful he has been in the playoffs in the past? LMAO. Tracy McGrady is a choking loser, of course I expect him to lose in every playoff series he plays and of course I expect that 09 Rockets team to be better without him.

2008 Rockets were not the same as 2007 Rockets, different players, different coach, etc.



Anyway, your point is irrelevant. Are you even understanding what I'm getting at here? I'm saying the 09 supporting cast was WAY better than anything McGrady had to work with in previous years.
No I don't understand what you're getting at here because Tracy McGrady is still a 0-7 in all of the post-season series he has played in and he is still a choking loser.


I thought Houston was supposed to get better without McGrady? Isn't that the reason why Houston won in 09? Yet, Houston without McGrady doesn't win in 08, 07, and 05.

They are better with serviceable role players instead of him especially since Yao and the rest of the Rockets will maximize their potential and not take away his teams shots and jack up inefficient shots instead like Tmac would as Hubbs mentioned.

Of course I don't expect you to understand that concept of the game.

Keep'em coming simpleton.

[IamRAMBO24]

Wrong, Houston won in 2009 because those new role players were better than McGrady and contributed to a superior product. Tracy McGrady was a playoff choker for years prior to that.

So yes...the role players were better, but they were also superior to McGrady who never let that team maximize it's potential with his 20 + FGA and shitty shooting percentages. Artest and Battier made for the best defensive swingman duo in a long time and Artest ultimately made that team better than McGrady with his toughness and intensity. Two things McGrady doesn't have. And this isn't Indiana Artest, this is Houston Artest LOL.

What it comes down to is this, you mad a crazy guy fit in better than you supposed "Superstar" ever did?

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

So slightly above average with him, elite without him. LOL. Yeah looks like they were better without him.

Oh and the year before that, no Yao Ming? first round exit. No McGrady? Win the franchise's first playoff series since 1997 LOL.

1. I'm going to side with Immortal on this since the 09 team was a force to be reckon with.

2. I will also agree with Hollinger that without Mcgrady the team could not win a title (which he was right).

3. When healthy, Mcgrady is a beast because he commands a double team everytime he touches the ball freeing up Yao and his teammates, plus the 22 win streak cannot be overlooked since we saw what he was capable of when healthy.

Point 1 and 3 are facts. Point 2 is a strong professional opinion by the creator of PER, so the problem with the Rockets cannot be solely blame on Mcgrady, but on a set of injuries suffered by both Yao and him.

I'll take Hollinger's opinon over your's anyday.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Wrong, Houston won in 2009 because those new role players were better than McGrady and contributed to a superior product. Tracy McGrady was a playoff choker for years prior to that.

At least you agree the 09 team was better, Jesus. This RocketGreatness kid doesn't even want to admit that. I understand what you're getting at, but don't agree with it. And frankly, there's no way to prove it.

Houston did have a better team in 09, yes the role players were better than any of the role players McGrady ever had to work with. But you can't state that Houston's role players in 09 were better than McGrady in 09 as a fact. Artest would have started over Battier if McGrady had stuck around. You're saying Battier is a much better fit for Houston than McGrady that yer. And I don't agree with that.

This isn't that complicated. I'm saying a team of

Yao, Scola, Battier, Artest, and Brooks is much better than Yao, Hayes, Battier, McGrady Alston.

The bench: Lowry, Hayes, Wafer > James and Barry or Head and Mutumbo


So yes...the role players were better, but they were also superior to McGrady who never let that team maximize it's potential with his 20 + FGA and shitty shooting percentages. Artest and Battier made for the best defensive swingman duo in a long time and Artest ultimately made that team better than McGrady with his toughness and intensity. Two things McGrady doesn't have. And this isn't Indiana Artest, this is Houston Artest LOL.


I don't believe the role players as a whole were superior to McGrady+ role players but OK. Your opinion and I respect that. You can't ignore the fact that the 09 team was WAY better than the previous supporting casts McGrady had though. That's pretty much a a fact.

[ImmortalNemesis]

What does this have to do with anything? He is talking about THE 2009 TEAM! The players that stepped in for McGrady provided more on the court than he ever did at any point as a Rocket.

I don't see how this information is hard to comprehend. Notice how his statement says "IN 09".

It's dumb. So what you're saying....or what you're saying he's saying, is....

Houston needed McGrady to win in 05, 07, and 08..but not 09? How convenient. I'm saying his statement is fallacious bro. Just because Houston won in 2009 doesn't mean the team had no need for McGrady. I personally believe the team could have gone further with Tracy; but that's up for debate.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I thought he was capable of winning the series, I didn't think he would. Why would I ever think Tracy McGrady would win a playoff series? Because of how successful he has been in the playoffs in the past? LMAO. Tracy McGrady is a choking loser, of course I expect him to lose in every playoff series he plays and of course I expect that 09 Rockets team to be better without him.

What? :lol I just read some bi-polar shit. McGrady was capable of winning it but didn't and you didn't expect him to win the series in the first place? Does that eve make sense?


They are better with serviceable role players instead of him especially since Yao and the rest of the Rockets will maximize their potential and not take away his teams shots and jack up inefficient shots instead like Tmac would as Hubbs mentioned.


I'm doing my best to understand and really comprehend your point; but I'm not seeing it bro.

You're saying Houston is better with serviceable role players instead of McGrady himself? OK, I get that. Is that only for 2009 or throughout his whole career in Houston? Because if not only for 2009, I can easily destroy your argument; like I've already done 2 or 3 times in the past.

The 05, 07, and 08 team without McGrady gets worse. Agree or disagree?

[IamRAMBO24]

One thing Mcgrady has proven is he can be a role player, so you can't put ALL the blame on a guy who is willing to trust his teammates and rely on them.

You can make the argument for Iverson or Kobe, but Mcgrady relies on his teammates as much as they rely on him, so when the team fails to get to the 2nd round, it is a team effort and not something we can blame purely on him.

The fact he took all the blame shows how humble the guy really is. Cut him some slack. If you are going to blame him since he was pretty much playing on a limp leg during his time with the Rockets, then blame Ming also since his injuries cost the Rockets many potential playoff and regular season wins.

[StateOfMind12]

Houston didn't need McGrady to match they did in '05 and '07. They would have made the playoffs with or without McGrady and they would have gotten eliminated in the 1st round. That is pretty much all Tmac ever took Houston anyways, the post-season and then a 1st round exit. Rockets could have done the same without Tmac. The Rockets were better off never getting Tmac and getting someone else instead or spending their money somewhere else.

It's that simple....


Wrong, Houston won in 2009 because those new role players were better than McGrady and contributed to a superior product. Tracy McGrady was a playoff choker for years prior to that.

So yes...the role players were better, but they were also superior to McGrady who never let that team maximize it's potential with his 20 + FGA and shitty shooting percentages. Artest and Battier made for the best defensive swingman duo in a long time and Artest ultimately made that team better than McGrady with his toughness and intensity. Two things McGrady doesn't have. And this isn't Indiana Artest, this is Houston Artest LOL.

What it comes down to is this, you mad a crazy guy fit in better than you supposed "Superstar" ever did?

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

So slightly above average with him, elite without him. LOL. Yeah looks like they were better without him.

Oh and the year before that, no Yao Ming? first round exit. No McGrady? Win the franchise's first playoff series since 1997 LOL.

Pretty much this. If McGrady continued to play for the rest of the season a lot of things would have changed such as trades. Would the Rockets have gotten rid of Alston if McGrady was still there? Probably not and the Rockets would have never gotten Lowry who was a key player for the Rockets.

Rockets would have lost in the 1st round with McGrady in 2009 opposed to without him.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

1. I'm going to side with Immortal on this since the 09 team was a force to be reckon with.

2. I will also agree with Hollinger that without Mcgrady the team could not win a title (which he was right).

3. When healthy, Mcgrady is a beast because he commands a double team everytime he touches the ball freeing up Yao and his teammates, plus the 22 win streak cannot be overlooked since we saw what he was capable of when healthy.

Point 1 and 3 are facts. Point 2 is a strong professional opinion by the creator of PER, so the problem with the Rockets cannot be solely blame on Mcgrady, but on a set of injuries suffered by both Yao and him.

I'll take Hollinger's opinon over your's anyday.

Why couldn't they have won the title? Had Yao not gotten hurt they easily could have, took the eventual world champs to 7 games. So just because someone works for ESPN their opinion > all? Cool let me know how that works out for you dude.

Oh he created PER? Damn I didn't know that! Here's a stat for you. It's called AWTG. Do you know what it stands for? Actually Watches The Games. It's something I do and something John Hollinger admits he doesn't do. Guy spends all his time in some basement creating mathematical formulas to evaluate basketball. Yeah I think I'll side with actual abilities that translate to being a successfull player that can be seen on the court.

And no legit defense is going to double McGrady in the late 00's. Doubleteam a guy with a 40%FG and a sub50 TS%? Lol yeah ok. Yao Ming was the one requiring double teams and giving the shooters open looks at the shot while clogging the paint defensively and anchoring that d.


It's dumb. So what you're saying....or what you're saying he's saying, is....

Houston needed McGrady to win in 05, 07, and 08..but not 09? How convenient. I'm saying his statement is fallacious bro. Just because Houston won in 2009 doesn't mean the team had no need for McGrady. I personally believe the team could have gone further with Tracy; but that's up for debate.

Houston always needed McGrady to play at a level higher than he actually did. When they traded for him they were supposed to be getting arguably the best nonbigman in the league(Kobe was better, but T-Mac was unquestioned top 5 at the time along with Duncan/shaq/KG).

He underperformed massively for nearly all of his years in Houston never recapturing anything close to the level he had in Orlando. The 12 in 30 seconds or w/e it was was cool, but it's probably the guys biggest highlight in Houston which shows a massive underperformance on his part.

McGrady could get on the highlight reals, but his style of basketball was not something you could build a team around. Lazy play, pisspoor shot selection, poor leadership. Before 2009 the team didn't have as much depth so they had to live with whatever McGrady gave them and hope for the best, but talent alone can only get you so far. The defensive team built around Yao Ming and Ron Artests talents was a much tougher team to play against and the record shows it.

[IamRAMBO24]

Houston didn't need McGrady to match they did in '05 and '07. They would have made the playoffs with or without McGrady and they would have gotten eliminated in the 1st round. That is pretty much all Tmac ever took Houston anyways, the post-season and then a 1st round exit. Rockets could have done the same without Tmac. The Rockets were better off never getting Tmac and getting someone else instead or spending their money somewhere else.

It's that simple....

Like who?

Dude, Ming was injured just as much as he was, so by that argument, they would of been better off drafting another first rounder.

You can't say someone is "better off" picking someone else based on injuries. Those things are unpredictable. Look how retarded you sound ... simple as that.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Houston always needed McGrady to play at a level higher than he actually did. When they traded for him they were supposed to be getting arguably the best nonbigman in the league(Kobe was better, but T-Mac was unquestioned top 5 at the time along with Duncan/shaq/KG).

He underperformed massively for nearly all of his years in Houston never recapturing anything close to the level he had in Orlando. The 12 in 30 seconds or w/e it was was cool, but it's probably the guys biggest highlight in Houston which shows a massive underperformance on his part.


McGrady could get on the highlight reals, but his style of basketball was not something you could build a team around. Lazy play, pisspoor shot selection, poor leadership.

No offense, but how does all that address my point, if that's what you're trying to get at? Read the thread bro. I don't feel like explaining it to you. RocketGreatness said Houston would have been better off without McGrady. :blah *Insert typical rant here* That's why I keep bringing up the 07, 05, and 08 squads whenever he brings the BS 'Houston won because McGrady didn't play' argument.


Before 2009 the team didn't have as much depth so they had to live with whatever McGrady gave them and hope for the best, but talent alone can only get you so far. The defensive team built around Yao Ming and Ron Artests talents was a much tougher team to play against and the record shows it.

The regular season record was about the same. I'm sorry, but seeing as we agree the 09 role players were better than any supporting cast McGrady had in the past....is not fair to say that Houston won because the role players outperformed McGrady. And like I said earlier, just because Houston won, doesn't mean they were better off without McGrady. At least you admit Houston's role players were considerably better in 09 though.

Here's the dilemma.

You think Houston was better off without McGrady, I think Houston could have used McGrady and gone all the way to the conference finals. Simple as that.

[StateOfMind12]

McGrady was capable of winning it but didn't and you didn't expect him to win the series in the first place? Does that eve make sense?
Yeah, meaning if McGrady played to his level or above his level, something he never does come playoff time at least with Houston, he could have won. I didn't expect him to do that because McGrady is a choking loser.




You're saying Houston is better with serviceable role players instead of McGrady himself? OK, I get that. Is that only for 2009 or throughout his whole career in Houston? Because if not only for 2009, I can easily destroy your argument; like I've already done 2 or 3 times in the past.

The 05, 07, and 08 team without McGrady gets worse. Agree or disagree?
Replace him with serviceable role players and they are better. This is like the 5th time I recall saying that but since you have no life you'll repeat what you just said and spin it around and I'll end up giving you the same results/answer.

How does any of this tie into how Tracy isn't a choking loser?




You think Houston was better off without McGrady, I think Houston could have used McGrady and gone all the way to the conference finals. Simple as that.
McGrady on that '09 team means another 1st round exit for Houston. You are just some Tmac fan boy with down syndrome who fails to understand how the Rockets were better without Tmac.

[IamRAMBO24]

OMG you are stupid.

[ImmortalNemesis]

And no legit defense is going to double McGrady in the late 00's. Doubleteam a guy with a 40%FG and a sub50 TS%? Lol yeah ok. Yao Ming was the one requiring double teams and giving the shooters open looks at the shot while clogging the paint defensively and anchoring that d.



Eh....I eat because I'm unhappy, I'm unhappy because I eat. Vicious cycle. You don't see it?

There's a reason for that FG%.

I watched 95% of Rockets game bro. Its that stat you like to call AWTG. Teams double-teamed McGrady all the time. Even the good defensive teams.

[IamRAMBO24]

Wow Furher probably has never seen a Rocket's game in his life.

Just like you Immortal, I've seen most of the Rocket's game. I think the both of them prob only read snippets and saw espn highlights of Rocket's games and not really watching them.

Teams were on Mcgrady like ugly on Whoopi Goldberg everytime he touched the ball. Only teams with really good defenders would try to go one on one with him, but most teams threw another body at him everytime he touched the ball.

[ImmortalNemesis]

OMG you are stupid.


:lol He's back-peddling like a motherf*cker.

Him: Houston gets better if you replace McGrady with "serviceable role players" (What a load of horse shit)

Me: OK, apply that logic to 07, 05, and 08....is the team better without McGrady?

Him: Yes.....um, no......well I don't know if they are better or not.

Look at his earlier post:


So no, maybe the Rockets weren't better off without McGrady entirely or completely in '05 or '07 but they were better off never making the trade for McGrady or better off with those serviceable role players replacing McGrady instead.

:oldlol:

I'm going to sleep man, later.

For the record, I'm not a McGrady fan boy. If I were, I'd know everything about him.

Why do you think I don't like to argue over his Orlando days? Because I didn't watch him.

The only thing I currently know about him is that he plays for Atlanta. I don't know his PPG, does he even start? I don't know.

McGrady fan boy? Nope. Just someone who's watched every Rockets game since 2003.

[IamRAMBO24]

Did you or did you NOT say this:

"So no, maybe the Rockets weren't better off without McGrady entirely or completely in '05 or '07 but they were better off never making the trade for McGrady or better off with those serviceable role players replacing McGrady instead."

Give it up homie. You just contradicted yourself.

[StateOfMind12]

Well at least everybody agrees that Tracy McGrady is a choking loser or one of the other and a choking loser by definition. I think I got what I wanted from this thread. It's too bad this Immortal guy continues to blow him off when the rest of the Houston fan base hates him to death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuMm0a5amo0

And no there was no back-peddling, Rockets were better off without McGrady in 2009 and the Rockets were better because they were without McGrady in 2009. I could do a detail explanation but Hubbs has said everything that needs to be said so why repeat?

That's all I have to say on that topic. You don't like it? Too bad because it's the truth and there is no way to dispute otherwise. Me and Hubbs, mainly Hubbs to be honest with you, have dominated this topic/thread.

[IamRAMBO24]

Ok you win. Everything you said is TRUTH. There can be no other opinion. I am sorry I even posted in this thread since your opinion is FACT and cannot NEVER be wrong. I am sorry I intrude on your god like presence: forgive me almighty ISH member, I am truly not worthy.

[iDefend5]

:lol It is very clear this Immortal guy cannot comprehend.


The regular season record was about the same. I'm sorry, but seeing as we agree the 09 role players were better than any supporting cast McGrady had in the past....is not fair to say that Houston won because the role players outperformed McGrady. And like I said earlier, just because Houston won, doesn't mean they were better off without McGrady. At least you admit Houston's role players were considerably better in 09 though.

Really?

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

:roll: It looks like they are a lot better to me.

McGrady shot like 38.8% so no if you are insisting that he shot bad because his team was awful that's not the case since this 09 team was clearly better and he shot even worse.

[StateOfMind12]

Since the topic of this thread has now changed about Tmac and 2009, I'll respond to what Immortal has to say since Immortal understands that Tmac is a choking loser and he just wants to argue how Tmac would have done something in '09 when he wouldn't have instead.


No offense, but how does all that address my point, if that's what you're trying to get at?
He is talking about how Tmac is a choking loser, you know what this thread and the thread title is about? The fact that he always underachieved and never performed to what the Rockets needed makes him a choking loser.


That's why I keep bringing up the 07, 05, and 08 squads whenever he brings the BS 'Houston won because McGrady didn't play' argument.
The Rockets won because McGrady was outplayed by those serviceable role players that took McGrady's job in '09 which was Wafer and Artest.

I would add Artest on the list of players who would have past the 1st round if they played with Yao. Insert Artest on that '07 team in place of McGrady and they do get past the 1st round. Insert many other all-star caliber wings too and I think they would get past the 1st round. I've said this many times though but you fail to comprehend that.


I'm sorry, but seeing as we agree the 09 role players were better than any supporting cast McGrady had in the past....is not fair to say that Houston won because the role players outperformed McGrady.
Your comprehension skills are laughable.

Did you even understand his post from earlier? He talked about how Tmac essentially took away shots from his teammates with his terrible shot selection and was an inefficient shooter/scorer so ultimately Tmac did not maximize his teammates potential by doing that. That '09 team was built around Yao/Artest, not around Tmac. With Yao/Artest, the potential of the role players were maximized opposed to with McGrady, nobody's potential was or would be maximized.

It is fair to say the Rockets role players outplayed Tmac but that is because Tmac didn't play and the role players potential were maximized. Their potential was maximized because McGrady was out and because the Rockets were building around better players specifically better team players in Artest/Yao opposed to with McGrady for the first time.

This pretty much means that while that '09 team may have a lot of talent but Tmac held them back from maximizing it and they could have easily failed to get past the 1st round again if McGrady had played opposed to him not playing.

Plus, we all know how bad Tmac is in the post-season anyways with Houston so he couldn't make up for those role players, he never could. He was an underachiever/under performer in the post-season with Houston.




You think Houston was better off without McGrady, I think Houston could have used McGrady and gone all the way to the conference finals. Simple as that.
Based on what? Their record without him and their record with him this season? What was it again? Let me check...

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

McGrady was practically done in 2009 so it ultimately did not matter. Unless you want to insert 2008, 2007, 2003, etc. Tmac onto that '09 team instead.

So no, the Rockets would have more than likely failed to get past the 1st round if Tmac were to play. He would have failed to maximize his teammates potential, the team would not be as good defensively since he has been a defensive liability since like '06, key trades for key players would have never went down, etc.

Rockets could have easily slipped to like the 6th, 7th, or even 8th seed if Tmac continued to play for the rest of the season and not get that surgery. The Rockets were better without him that season opposed to with him and the stats/record proves it.


There's a reason for that FG%.
What is the reason? I'm assuming you are going to talk about how McGrady had nobody to play with offensively opposed to Yao.

Yet in '09 when this Rockets team had this super/dominant supporting cast you claim, he shot the most inefficient in his career.

He shot his 2nd lowest TS% behind his '07-'08 season with 49.2% and he shot his lowest FG% ever with 38.8% that season. '07-'08 was a pretty good supporting cast though at least a better supporting cast he ever had in Houston before that (pre '07-'08).

So what's the reason? It can't be his teammates fault even though you have been blaming him for everything in this thread because statistically it shows that Tmac was worse playing with talent.


What do you have left? I expect to see a really long response where only two of the responses are actually worth responding to and talking about since you just spew a ton of garbage to make yourself look smart.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Since the topic of this thread has now changed about Tmac and 2009, I'll respond to what Immortal has to say since Immortal understands that Tmac is a choking loser and he just wants to argue how Tmac would have done something in '09 when he wouldn't have instead.


He is talking about how Tmac is a choking loser, you know what this thread and the thread title is about? The fact that he always underachieved and never performed to what the Rockets needed makes him a choking loser.


The Rockets won because McGrady was outplayed by those serviceable role players that took McGrady's job in '09 which was Wafer and Artest.

I would add Artest on the list of players who would have past the 1st round if they played with Yao. Insert Artest on that '07 team in place of McGrady and they do get past the 1st round. Insert many other all-star caliber wings too and I think they would get past the 1st round. I've said this many times though but you fail to comprehend that.


Your comprehension skills are laughable.

Did you even understand his post from earlier? He talked about how Tmac essentially took away shots from his teammates with his terrible shot selection and was an inefficient shooter/scorer so ultimately Tmac did not maximize his teammates potential by doing that. That '09 team was built around Yao/Artest, not around Tmac. With Yao/Artest, the potential of the role players were maximized opposed to with McGrady, nobody's potential was or would be maximized.

It is fair to say the Rockets role players outplayed Tmac but that is because Tmac didn't play and the role players potential were maximized. Their potential was maximized because McGrady was out and because the Rockets were building around better players specifically better team players in Artest/Yao opposed to with McGrady for the first time.

This pretty much means that while that '09 team may have a lot of talent but Tmac held them back from maximizing it and they could have easily failed to get past the 1st round again if McGrady had played opposed to him not playing.

Plus, we all know how bad Tmac is in the post-season anyways with Houston so he couldn't make up for those role players, he never could. He was an underachiever/under performer in the post-season with Houston.



Based on what? Their record without him and their record with him this season? What was it again? Let me check...

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14

McGrady was practically done in 2009 so it ultimately did not matter. Unless you want to insert 2008, 2007, 2003, etc. Tmac onto that '09 team instead.

So no, the Rockets would have more than likely failed to get past the 1st round if Tmac were to play. He would have failed to maximize his teammates potential, the team would not be as good defensively since he has been a defensive liability since like '06, key trades for key players would have never went down, etc.

Rockets could have easily slipped to like the 6th, 7th, or even 8th seed if Tmac continued to play for the rest of the season and not get that surgery. The Rockets were better without him that season opposed to with him and the stats/record proves it.


What is the reason? I'm assuming you are going to talk about how McGrady had nobody to play with offensively opposed to Yao.

Yet in '09 when this Rockets team had this super/dominant supporting cast you claim, he shot the most inefficient in his career.

He shot his 2nd lowest TS% behind his '07-'08 season with 49.2% and he shot his lowest FG% ever with 38.8% that season. '07-'08 was a pretty good supporting cast though at least a better supporting cast he ever had in Houston before that (pre '07-'08).

So what's the reason? It can't be his teammates fault even though you have been blaming him for everything in this thread because statistically it shows that Tmac was worse playing with talent.


What do you have left? I expect to see a really long response where only two of the responses are actually worth responding to and talking about since you just spew a ton of garbage to make yourself look smart.

Good post, pretty much covers everything that needs to be said. Expect many of the points to go unanswered though with paragraphs lacking any real substance.

[Fudge]

Get your Danish, spamming ass out of here.

[GatorKid117]

In this thread, RG agreeing with himself.

[ImmortalNemesis]

First let me LOL @ RocketGreatness talking to himself. You're just weird dude. You bump your own thread by deleting your last post and posting it again. Who does that? You're just a weird fellow. lol


Since the topic of this thread has now changed about Tmac and 2009, I'll respond to what Immortal has to say since Immortal understands that Tmac is a choking loser and he just wants to argue how Tmac would have done something in '09 when he wouldn't have instead.

Of course you're going to stick with the 2009 season. Why? Because you're back-peddling. Because if you want to apply that "Houston won because McGrady didn't play" logic to the 05, 07, and 08 teams, you'd lose. That is fact. I know what you're doing. You're up against a wall and looking for a way out. No, kid. If you're going to use that argument you have to apply it to every one of McGrady's supporting cast; not just 2009.

Sorry, you can't say that Houston was better with McGrady in 05, 07, and 08 but not 2009. Its stupid and screams of agenda. Its only fair if you apply that logic to every team McGrady had in Houston.



The Rockets won because McGrady was outplayed by those serviceable role players that took McGrady's job in '09 which was Wafer and Artest.

I understand. And I'm saying that team won because in comparison to the role players McGrady had in previous seasons, the role players were WAY better. You're saying Houston won because Artest/Wafer replaced him? Fair enough. Take that logic and apply it to the 2007 squad. Luther Head really would have made Houston better? I don't think so. Houston doesn't win that series. My point? Houston in 2009 because with or without McGrady that team was better than Portland. Houston won, doesn't mean they had no use or were better off without McGrady. That's a fallacy.




Did you even understand his post from earlier? He talked about how Tmac essentially took away shots from his teammates with his terrible shot selection and was an inefficient shooter/scorer so ultimately Tmac did not maximize his teammates potential by doing that. That '09 team was built around Yao/Artest, not around Tmac. With Yao/Artest, the potential of the role players were maximized opposed to with McGrady, nobody's potential was or would be maximized.

It is quite ironic that you're arguing against Tracy's ability to move the ball. Why is it ironic? Because you're bashing McGrady to make Artest seem better. Artest is your scapegoat? You're saying Artest is this guy with a team mentality who was willing to pass the ball. That's false. Did you watch the Rockets games that year? Artest was the only one who'd stop the ball. On several occasions, Matt Bullard and Bill Worell called Artest out for stopping the ball. I'm not saying Artest is a cancer, I'm saying Artest wasn't the reason Houston's role players were able to somewhat maximize their potential.


It is fair to say the Rockets role players outplayed Tmac but that is because Tmac didn't play and the role players potential were maximized. Their potential was maximized because McGrady was out and because the Rockets were building around better players specifically better team players in Artest/Yao opposed to with McGrady for the first time.

You're basing your whole argument on a 25-35 game stretch. You're saying Houston was better off w/o McGrady and you rely on that game stretch were Houston had a better record without him. Is not like McGrady didn't prove he could win in the regular season. Yes, I'm pointing to that 12 game winning streak without Yao. I understand your points perfectly, but don't agree with them. Houston didn't win Yao/Artest helped the role players maximize their potential. (Look at how far you're reaching just to make McGrady look bad). Houston won because the team, in comparison to the supporting cast McGrady had in previous years, was simply better. There's no need to over-analyze. Its quite simple actually. McGrady is out in 2009, so he is replaced by Artest and Wafer off the bench.

That argument doesn't apply to the 2007 or 2005 teams though, right? Because I'm sure Yao wouldn't have "maximized his teammate's potential" and won the series for them. Why? Because the talent isn't good enough. Houston was better off without McGrady? OK. Would Yao have helped Head maximize his potential in 2007 and as a result won the series? :oldlol: Your argument doesn't apply anymore, huh? How convenient.


This pretty much means that while that '09 team may have a lot of talent but Tmac held them back from maximizing it and they could have easily failed to get past the 1st round again if McGrady had played opposed to him not playing.


This is certainly up for debate. I don't believe McGrady was a cancer who held his teammates back. Now, was Houston better off without an injured McGrady? That is something I can agree with. Was Houston better off without healthy McGrady? No, I don't think so. Anyway, your argument is based on a hypothetical scenario so there's really no right or wrong answer. You think McGrady held them back, I think McGrady would have helped the team go further into the playoffs.


Plus, we all know how bad Tmac is in the post-season anyways with Houston so he couldn't make up for those role players, he never could. He was an underachiever/under performer in the post-season with Houston.


You're going in circles. Tracy was bad? A defense concentrated solely on him has nothing to do with it I'm sure. Especially in the playoffs, that's when team start to really scout you and start reading your plays/patterns. They just become more familiar with you.


Based on what? Their record without him and their record with him this season? What was it again? Let me check...

2009 Rockets with Mcgrady:20-15
2009 Rockets without McGrady: 33-14


Again, you're basing your argument on a game stretch in the regular season. There's a hole in that. First, don't you think you have to give the team some time to gel? Artest was new to the team, and like I explained earlier, he kept hogging the ball. The Rockets broadcasters mentioned his bad shot selection and inability to move the ball around early in the season several times. 2nd: Tracy McGrady was not even 50% when the season started. He was playing injured and NEVER recovered. And again I want to mention this: Houston WAS better off without an INJURED McGrady. Healthy McGrady? No. 3rd: Brooks wasn't a starter yet. Rafer Alston was the starting point guard. Guess who was the back up pg? It was Aaron Brooks. Houston did not even have Kyle Lowry yet. You're comparing two different teams.


McGrady was practically done in 2009 so it ultimately did not matter. Unless you want to insert 2008, 2007, 2003, etc. Tmac onto that '09 team instead.

This is something I can agree with. Injured "one legged" McGrady would have held the team back. But a healthy McGrady IMO would have increased the team's chances of reaching the conference finals.

Houston slipping to 6th or 7th if McGrady plays is hypothetical. That's your opinion and can't change it; but it doesn't add to the discussion.




What is the reason? I'm assuming you are going to talk about how McGrady had nobody to play with offensively opposed to Yao.

Yet in '09 when this Rockets team had this super/dominant supporting cast you claim, he shot the most inefficient in his career.

Because he was injured. Did you watch Houston in 2009? That was the year McGrady missed a wide open reverse dunk. That's how injured he was at that time in the season.


He shot his 2nd lowest TS% behind his '07-'08 season with 49.2% and he shot his lowest FG% ever with 38.8% that season. '07-'08 was a pretty good supporting cast though at least a better supporting cast he ever had in Houston before that (pre '07-'08).

IMO the 08 supporting cast wasn't significantly better than the 07 or 05 supporting cast. Houston had 40+ year old Mutumbo as a starting center. Again, you're one of the few who thinks McGrady had it in him to win in 08. Who is the one overrating him again?



What do you have left? I expect to see a really long response where only two of the responses are actually worth responding to and talking about since you just spew a ton of garbage to make yourself look smart.

Your argument is stupid anyway.

"Houston won because McGrady the ball hog finally didn't play. Instead, Yao and Artest helped the role players maximize their potential."

Oh God. :oldlol: Straw manning at its best.

I'm sure having Artest instead of Head is not important at all. I'm sure having prime Brooks instead of Alston or Sura is not important at all. I'm sure having Scola over Ryan Bowen didn't make a difference at all. Keep ignoring the facts even though they're right in front of you.

Besides, you're talking solely about the 09 season. Your stupid argument doesn't make sense when it is applied to the 2005, 2007, or 2008 teams.

[Fudge]

First let me LOL @ RocketGreatness talking to himself. You're just weird dude. You bump your own thread by deleting your last post and posting it again. Who does that? You're just a weird fellow. lol



Of course you're going to stick with the 2009 season. Why? Because you're back-peddling. Because if you want to apply that "Houston won because McGrady didn't play" logic to the 05, 07, and 08 teams, you'd lose. That is fact. I know what you're doing. You're up against a wall and looking for a way out. No, kid. If you're going to use that argument you have to apply it to every one of McGrady's supporting cast; not just 2009.

Sorry, you can't say that Houston was better with McGrady in 05, 07, and 08 but not 2009. Its stupid and screams of agenda. Its only fair if you apply that logic to every team McGrady had in Houston.



I understand. And I'm saying that team won because in comparison to the role players McGrady had in previous seasons, the role players were WAY better. You're saying Houston won because Artest/Wafer replaced him? Fair enough. Take that logic and apply it to the 2007 squad. Luther Head really would have made Houston better? I don't think so. Houston doesn't win that series. My point? Houston in 2009 because with or without McGrady that team was better than Portland. Houston won, doesn't mean they had no use or were better off without McGrady. That's a fallacy.





It is quite ironic that you're arguing against Tracy's ability to move the ball. Why is it ironic? Because you're bashing McGrady to make Artest seem better. Artest is your scapegoat? You're saying Artest is this guy with a team mentality who was willing to pass the ball. That's false. Did you watch the Rockets games that year? Artest was the only one who'd stop the ball. On several occasions, Matt Bullard and Bill Worell called Artest out for stopping the ball. I'm not saying Artest is a cancer, I'm saying Artest wasn't the reason Houston's role players were able to somewhat maximize their potential.


You're basing your whole argument on a 25-35 game stretch. You're saying Houston was better off w/o McGrady and you rely on that game stretch were Houston had a better record without him. Is not like McGrady didn't prove he could win in the regular season. Yes, I'm pointing to that 12 game winning streak without Yao. I understand your points perfectly, but don't agree with them. Houston didn't win Yao/Artest helped the role players maximize their potential. (Look at how far you're reaching just to make McGrady look bad). Houston won because the team, in comparison to the supporting cast McGrady had in previous years, was simply better. There's no need to over-analyze. Its quite simple actually. McGrady is out in 2009, so he is replaced by Artest and Wafer off the bench.

That argument doesn't apply to the 2007 or 2005 teams though, right? Because I'm sure Yao wouldn't have "maximized his teammate's potential" and won the series for them. Why? Because the talent isn't good enough. Houston was better off without McGrady? OK. Would Yao have helped Head maximize his potential in 2007 and as a result won the series? :oldlol: Your argument doesn't apply anymore, huh? How convenient.


This is certainly up for debate. I don't believe McGrady was a cancer who held his teammates back. Now, was Houston better off without an injured McGrady? That is something I can agree with. Was Houston better off without healthy McGrady? No, I don't think so. Anyway, your argument is based on a hypothetical scenario so there's really no right or wrong answer. You think McGrady held them back, I think McGrady would have helped the team go further into the playoffs.



You're going in circles. Tracy was bad? A defense concentrated solely on him has nothing to do with it I'm sure. Especially in the playoffs, that's when team start to really scout you and start reading your plays/patterns. They just become more familiar with you.


Again, you're basing your argument on a game stretch in the regular season. There's a hole in that. First, don't you think you have to give the team some time to gel? Artest was new to the team, and like I explained earlier, he kept hogging the ball. The Rockets broadcasters mentioned his bad shot selection and inability to move the ball around early in the season several times. 2nd: Tracy McGrady was not even 50% when the season started. He was playing injured and NEVER recovered. And again I want to mention this: Houston WAS better off without an INJURED McGrady. Healthy McGrady? No. 3rd: Brooks wasn't a starter yet. Rafer Alston was the starting point guard. Guess who was the back up pg? It was Aaron Brooks. Houston did not even have Kyle Lowry yet. You're comparing two different teams.



This is something I can agree with. Injured "one legged" McGrady would have held the team back. But a healthy McGrady IMO would have increased the team's chances of reaching the conference finals.

Houston slipping to 6th or 7th if McGrady plays is hypothetical. That's your opinion and can't change it; but it doesn't add to the discussion.



Because he was injured. Did you watch Houston in 2009? That was the year McGrady missed a wide open reverse dunk. That's how injured he was at that time in the season.



IMO the 08 supporting cast wasn't significantly better than the 07 or 05 supporting cast. Houston had 40+ year old Mutumbo as a starting center. Again, you're one of the few who thinks McGrady had it in him to win in 08. Who is the one overrating him again?




Your argument is stupid anyway.

"Houston won because McGrady the ball hog finally didn't play. Instead, Yao and Artest helped the role players maximize their potential."

Oh God. :oldlol: Straw manning at its best.

I'm sure having Artest instead of Head is not important at all. I'm sure having prime Brooks instead of Alston or Sura is not important at all. I'm sure having Scola over Ryan Bowen didn't make a difference at all. Keep ignoring the facts even though they're right in front of you.

Besides, you're talking solely about the 09 season. Your stupid argument doesn't make sense when it is applied to the 2005, 2007, or 2008 teams.
Good response. Too bad I can't rep.

[StateOfMind12]

Sorry, you can't say that Houston was better with McGrady in 05, 07, and 08 but not 2009.
I actually can and I just did so what is your issue other than me not sucking Tmac's dick with you? :confusedshrug:


I understand. And I'm saying that team won because in comparison to the role players McGrady had in previous seasons, the role players were WAY better
The role players were better because McGrady was stopping them from maximizing their potential with his inefficient shot jacking and his lack of defense. This isn't complicated.


. You're saying Houston won because Artest/Wafer replaced him? Fair enough. Take that logic and apply it to the 2007 squad. Luther Head really would have made Houston better? I don't think so. Houston doesn't win that series. My point? Houston in 2009 because with or without McGrady that team was better than Portland. Houston won, doesn't mean they had no use or were better off without McGrady. That's a fallacy.
Rockets would have lost to Portland with McGrady, actually they might not even have made the 5th seed if McGrady was playing, they could have been the 6th, 7th, or even 8th seed if McGrady was playing instead. McGrady held the Rockets and the Rockets role players back from maximizing their full potential.

Why am I suppose to believe McGrady was going to do anything for the '09 team?

Rockets were 20-15 with him in the lineup and like 33-14 without him. They were better off.


It is quite ironic that you're arguing against Tracy's ability to move the ball. Why is it ironic? Because you're bashing McGrady to make Artest seem better. Artest is your scapegoat? You're saying Artest is this guy with a team mentality who was willing to pass the ball. That's false. Did you watch the Rockets games that year? Artest was the only one who'd stop the ball. On several occasions, Matt Bullard and Bill Worell called Artest out for stopping the ball. I'm not saying Artest is a cancer, I'm saying Artest wasn't the reason Houston's role players were able to somewhat maximize their potential.
Artest was better. He was the better offensive player, better defensive player, better shooter, better rebounder, etc. He was better than McGrady at everything in 2009.

The Rockets building their team around Yao/Artest in 2009 was far more successful than anything the Rockets did with McGrady or any team that has done anything with McGrady.


You're basing your whole argument on a 25-35 game stretch. You're saying Houston was better off w/o McGrady and you rely on that game stretch were Houston had a better record without him. Is not like McGrady didn't prove he could win in the regular season. Yes, I'm pointing to that 12 game winning streak without Yao.
Yeah, the Rockets were 20-15 with McGrady which is barely above .500 while the Rockets were like 33-14 without him which is elite. The Rockets were better off without him and better off with Artest and the role players taking shots instead of this inefficient shot jacking no defense playing choking loser.


I understand your points perfectly, but don't agree with them. Houston didn't win Yao/Artest helped the role players maximize their potential. (Look at how far you're reaching just to make McGrady look bad). Houston won because the team, in comparison to the supporting cast McGrady had in previous years, was simply better. There's no need to over-analyze. Its quite simple actually. McGrady is out in 2009, so he is replaced by Artest and Wafer off the bench.
Houston was more successful in 2009 because McGrady was not playing and the team finally maximized the role players potential since McGrady was no longer hoisting up a high volume of terrible shots with terrible efficiency.



That argument doesn't apply to the 2007 or 2005 teams though, right? Because I'm sure Yao wouldn't have "maximized his teammate's potential" and won the series for them. Why? Because the talent isn't good enough. Houston was better off without McGrady? OK. Would Yao have helped Head maximize his potential in 2007 and as a result won the series? Your argument doesn't apply anymore, huh? How convenient.
Actually I do think that Yao would have maximized his role players potential back in 2007 and in 2008 if he played in that playoff series opposed to McGrady.


This is certainly up for debate. I don't believe McGrady was a cancer who held his teammates back. Now, was Houston better off without an injured McGrady? That is something I can agree with. Was Houston better off without healthy McGrady? No, I don't think so. Anyway, your argument is based on a hypothetical scenario so there's really no right or wrong answer. You think McGrady held them back, I think McGrady would have helped the team go further into the playoffs.
McGrady was always some fragile ***** who was a choking loser, tell me what is your point? Because you did nothing but back me up here.

You think McGrady would have helped them go further yet the team was barely above .500 with McGrady playing while the Rockets were an elite team without him. You get the point? I'm assuming not with McGrady's dick shoved so deep down your throat.


Again, you're basing your argument on a game stretch in the regular season. There's a hole in that. First, don't you think you have to give the team some time to gel? Artest was new to the team, and like I explained earlier, he kept hogging the ball. The Rockets broadcasters mentioned his bad shot selection and inability to move the ball around early in the season several times. 2nd: Tracy McGrady was not even 50% when the season started. He was playing injured and NEVER recovered. And again I want to mention this: Houston WAS better off without an INJURED McGrady. Healthy McGrady? No. 3rd: Brooks wasn't a starter yet. Rafer Alston was the starting point guard. Guess who was the back up pg? It was Aaron Brooks. Houston did not even have Kyle Lowry yet. You're comparing two different teams.
Here is the problem, did you ever think that the Rockets might not have ever traded Rafer Alston and acquired Kyle Lowry had McGrady not gone down for the rest of the season? Everything changes if McGrady plays for the rest of the season opposed to if he doesn't. Von Wafer probably doesn't get playing time either if McGrady continues to play for the rest of the season and he was also instrumental in the playoffs.

Rockets: 20-15 with McGrady
Rockets: 33-14 without McGrady.

They are elite without him and they are barely above .500 with him.

What else do you want? I'm giving you facts here and you're just jumping around as usual.




This is something I can agree with. Injured "one legged" McGrady would have held the team back. But a healthy McGrady IMO would have increased the team's chances of reaching the conference finals.

Houston slipping to 6th or 7th if McGrady plays is hypothetical. That's your opinion and can't change it; but it doesn't add to the discussion.
It adds to the fact that the Rockets were better off without him in 2009 which they were.

You want facts?

Here you go

Rockets: 20-15 with McGrady
Rockets: 33-14 without McGrady.

Healthy McGrady? Sorry but that doesn't exist because everyone knows McGrady is a fragile puss.

Why am I suppose to believe your opinion is even true? Becuase of how deep Tmac went in the post-season before? Lets take a look at how far Tmac has made it in the playoffs in the past before 2009, oh he never got past the 1st round.

Why am I suppose to believe any of the bullshit you are spewing when you have nothing to back it up?


Because he was injured. Did you watch Houston in 2009? That was the year McGrady missed a wide open reverse dunk. That's how injured he was at that time in the season.
Yeah I know McGrady was a fragile puss that made his team worse. What is your point?


IMO the 08 supporting cast wasn't significantly better than the 07 or 05 supporting cast. Houston had 40+ year old Mutumbo as a starting center. Again, you're one of the few who thinks McGrady had it in him to win in 08. Who is the one overrating him again?
I thought he was capable of winning, I didn't think he was the favorite to win it though. There is a difference.

Then again I don't think McGrady should ever be favorite to win in any playoff series since he is a choking loser anyways. I have all the confidence in the world that he would have never gotten past the 1st round anywhere with any team and in any situation as the best player.

It's nice to know I refuted your terrible theory that McGrady was only inefficient because his teammates suck because he was even more inefficient with teammates though and you had to jump around again.


What do you have next?

[ImmortalNemesis]

I actually can and I just did so what is your issue other than me not sucking Tmac's dick with you?

You seem to be missing the point. You're saying Houston won in 09 because McGrady didn't hold the team back. The "cancer" and "the choking loser" was finally removed from the roster, thus Houston was able to succeed in the playoffs.

Its that simple huh? So if you remove the "cancer", "choking loser" P*ssy" from the 07, 05, and 08 playoff teams, do the Rockets win? The logical answer is: No, Houston doesn't win. But lets take a look at your actual response:


Actually I do think that Yao would have maximized his role players potential back in 2007 and in 2008 if he played in that playoff series opposed to McGrady.


What about 2005, is Houston better off without McGrady?

Is a team of Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura better off without McGrady?

You think Houston in 2007 and 2008 were better off without McGrady?

A team of Yao, Hayes, Battier, Luther Head, and Alston is better than

Yao, Hayes, Battier, McGrady and Alston? Really?


You're a f*cking retard. I'm done with you. You don't add to the discussion. You don't argue logically. I asked like 10 times if Houston is better off with McGrady in 2005 and you refuse to answer it. Why? Its pretty clear. Your argument gets shredded to pieces if you apply it to the 05, 07, and 08 teams. Because that "Yao helped his team maximize its full potential" doesn't work if you use it on the previous playoff teams Houston had. Because that BS "McGrady didn't play so Houston was better" argument doesn't make sense if you apply to previous role players McGrady had to work with.

Houston is not better without McGrady in 2007. You on the other hand, think otherwise. Why? Because you're a retard who isn't capable of posting anything than can be considered even remotely rational.

[ImmortalNemesis]

So no, maybe the Rockets weren't better off without McGrady entirely or completely in '05 or '07 but they were better off never making the trade for McGrady or better off with those serviceable role players replacing McGrady instead.

Just yesterday you somewhat admitted Houston wasn't better off without McGrady in 2007. Make up your mind pal. Is the question too profound for you broski? :oldlol:

Back-peddling asshole.

I think I have a PM from StateofMind12 begging for rep. Hold on a sec...

[StateOfMind12]

You seem to be missing the point. You're saying Houston won in 09 because McGrady didn't hold the team back. The "cancer" and "the choking loser" was finally removed from the roster, thus Houston was able to succeed in the playoffs.

Its that simple huh? So if you remove the "cancer", "choking loser" P*ssy" from the 07, 05, and 08 playoff teams, do the Rockets win? The logical answer is: No, Houston doesn't win. But lets take a look at your actual response:
I actually don't but I don't think they do any worse without him either. They would still make the playoffs without McGrady in 05, 07 and 08 so what is your point?




You're a f*cking retard. I'm done with you. You don't add to the discussion. You don't argue logically. I asked like 10 times if Houston is better off with McGrady in 2005 and you refuse to answer it. Why? Its pretty clear. Your argument gets shredded to pieces if you apply it to the 05, 07, and 08 teams. Because that "Yao helped his team maximize its full potential" doesn't work if you use it on the previous playoff teams Houston had. Because that BS "McGrady didn't play so Houston was better" argument doesn't make sense if you apply to previous role players McGrady had to work with.

Houston is not better without McGrady in 2007. You on the other hand, think otherwise. Why? Because you're a retard who isn't capable of posting anything than can be considered even remotely rational.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Someone is awfully upset.

The Rockets are not better off nor are they worse off without McGrady so what is your point? They still make the playoffs without him so what exactly are you trying to argue? McGrady provides more regular season wins? McGrady provides closer playoff series which will turn into a loss anyways because McGrady can't win a playoff series?

Yao was in his 3rd year in the league in '05. He didn't have that capability yet to make his teammates better and to be a dominant force. He didn't become a superstar or an elite player until like '06 or '07. He was an elite big man in '05 but not an elite player there is a difference.

I'll leave with a few facts as you go....




































































'08-'09 Rockets: 20-15 with McGrady
'08-'09 Rockets: 33-14 without McGrady.

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-1

http://www.hachisvertas.net/temp/gif/brown_block_LOL.GIF

[ImmortalNemesis]

I actually don't but I don't think they do any worse without him either. They would still make the playoffs without McGrady in 05, 07 and 08 so what is your point?

My point is the supporting cast in 09 was miles ahead of the 07, 05, and 08 teams. That's why if you remove McGrady from the roster, Houston STILL doesn't win in 05, 07, and 08. The team won in 09 without McGrady. The team doesn't win in 05, 07, and 08 without McGrady. Conclusion: The 09 team was way better and deeper than any supporting cast McGrady had in previous years.



Yao was in his 3rd year in the league in '05. He didn't have that capability yet to make his teammates better and to be a dominant force. He didn't become a superstar or an elite player until like '06 or '07. He was an elite big man in '05 but not an elite player there is a difference.


You said Yao was an elite big man. Yao is elite.....but can't make his teammates better, nor can he be a dominant force?

Pack-peddling much? Does not compute, it makes 0 sense. What kind of bullshit is that?

Yeah Yao was an elite big man but he still didn't make his teammates better nor was he dominant.

How much stupid is left in you?

Let me leave by posting this PM of you (RocketGreatness) begging for rep:

You are a clown and you know it.

http://i.imgur.com/EfEcJ.png

This was way back when I was nice to you because I felt sorry for you. Notice he admits to being NE9, which stands for NoEasy9; another one of his many usernames.

I have like 10 more PMs where he's asking me for rep. You sick f*ck.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Just yesterday you somewhat admitted Houston wasn't better off without McGrady in 2007. Make up your mind pal. Is the question too profound for you broski? :oldlol:

Back-peddling asshole.

I think I have a PM from StateofMind12 begging for rep. Hold on a sec...

Post that shit, asap! :oldlol:

[StateOfMind12]

My point is the supporting cast in 09 was miles ahead of the 07, 05, and 08 teams. That's why if you remove McGrady from the roster, Houston STILL doesn't win in 05, 07, and 08. The team won in 09 without McGrady. The team doesn't win in 05, 07, and 08 without McGrady. Conclusion: The 09 team was way better and deeper than any supporting cast McGrady had in previous years.
The Rockets were better in '09 because McGrady wasn't on that Rockets team holding his team back from maximizing their full potential.

'08-'09 Rockets: 20-15 with McGrady
'08-'09 Rockets: 33-14 without McGrady.

How many times have I repeated that? :confusedshrug:

You know just because you type and say a lot of things that doesn't make you smart especially when half of it is gibberish.



You said Yao was an elite big man. Yao is elite.....but can't make his teammates better, nor can he be a dominant force?
He was an elite big man that complimented a star back in '05 but he wasn't someone that could lead and win you a playoff series like he could in '07 and '08. McGrady pretty much held him back in '07 and in '08 he was just hurt.





How much stupid is left in you?

Let me leave by posting this PM of you (RocketGreatness) begging for rep:

You are a clown and you know it.

This was way back when I was nice to you because I felt sorry for you. Notice he admits to being NE9, which stands for NoEasy9; another one of his many usernames.

I have like 10 more PMs where he's asking me for rep. You sick f*ck.
Nice photoshop/paint skills. You want me to do photoshop/paint edit and make the same PM look just like that with the exact same words? Cause I know how to do it too.

Edit: Too bad I deleted your PMs, how about I just make random **** a victim instead? Of course you pick on me because I've been dominating you in this thread.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

http://i.imgur.com/EfEcJ.png

This was way back when I was nice to you because I felt sorry for you. Notice he admits to being NE9, which stands for NoEasy9; another one of his many usernames.

I have like 10 more PMs where he's asking me for rep. You sick f*ck.

:oldlol: :roll: :oldlol:

This kid LIVES on these boards. Wow!

[ImmortalNemesis]

LOL

He's saying the screen-shots are fake.

I'm a photoshop expert!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:

Here's another one.

He was bitching at me because people kept negging him. The PM is from NoEasy9, but he's asking me to rep StateofMind12

http://i.imgur.com/mK6KN.png


:roll: :roll:


I have many many many more. I'll stop here though, that's enough for today. :D:

[StateOfMind12]

Yeah dude your screenshot was totally legit...


Check out my legit screenshot of All Net begging me for rep.


http://i.imgur.com/geZ43.jpg



:roll: Yeah you know you have clearly dominated an argument when he has to resort to petty little shit like this.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Lol so the T-Mac fan is now posting screenshots of PMs because he cannot deal with the proven evidence that the 2009 Rockets were superior WITHOUT McGrady? Is this how people discuss basketball these days? :roll:

I saw something said about how it wasn't a big enough sample size LOL even though it was the entire seasons worth of data. Not a month, an entire season.

With T-Mac: 20-15
W/O T-Max: 33-14

Same casts minus the Rafer Alston trade pretty much. T-Macs teams weren't as good as 2009,but when the team is BETTER without its "star" player it means he wasn't a star in the first place. How many current actual stars in this leagues teams would be better off if they were done for the season? That doesn't happen with stars. It happens with team cancers which is what T-Mac was at that point in time. Even in the years prio to that his style of basketball was not successfull. It's just that the depth at the swingmen spots those years gave them no other options whatsoever. The trio of Artest/Battier/Wafer gave them superior basketball play than any McGrady/whoever pairing at any point during his Rockets tenure. Yes McGrady/Battier as well who was an absolute beast there. Just because the dude can't create his own offense doesn't mean he sucks. His tremendous impact on the defensive end was matched only be dominant interior bigmen. He was an elite shooter as well which spread the floor making it easier for guys like Yao/Artest/Scola. A much better shooter than McGrady. Teams would kill to have him as Houston did by giving up Rudy Gay.

Just ask Jeff Van Gundy/Rick Adelman who made his job a lot easier, T-Mac or Battier.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Reposting this since you decided to ignore it.

I thought we agreed Houston choked in 2007? Why is it that you focus so much on that series instead of 2005 or 2008?


Lol so I guess you need an allstar at all 5 positions for McGrady to win just ONE playoff series.

No. Nice use of hyperbole but unfortunately it doesn't add to the discussion.


I'm sure many teams would love having All defensive team Battier who spreads the floor on offense as a shooter. A very good shooter at that (.421% from three). A player of 2007 Shane Battiers caliber is a VERY valuable NBA piece.

Completely agree. I don't regret Battier playing for Houston. But you can't deny his offensive game is below average. All he can do is shoot open 3s, and his percentage behind the arc is average. He also has that baby hook shot in the post but teams seem not to worry about it since he doesn't look for his shot as much.


Why do you keep talking about Hayes offensive game? Are you ****ing retarded? That's like talking shit about Ben Wallace because of his scoring statistics. Hayes is a great defensive player and pretty much immovable in the post. Very solid rebounder too. A great complimentary player to two ALLSTARS. Too bad the Rockets only had one legit allstar and another ballhog chucker.

You didn't watch many Rockets game did you? The Chuck Hayes you see today is not the same Hayes who played for Houston in 2007. His finishing ability around the rim was one of the worst in the NBA. He was an above average defender, that's it about it. I never questioned Hayes' hustle but size is something you can't change.


Alston isn't that good, but the Jazz had Fisher as a starter LOL. Also never knew Kirilenko was a great offensive player. But yeah dude keep saying bullshit like that to try and convince yourself that McGrady isn't a choking loser that failed time after time again. Keep the excuses coming.

Fisher is still in the NBA. And it is almost a guarantee LA would not trade Fisher for Alston if they had that choice right now. Where is Alston now? Yet another player who drifted into irrelevancy post McGrady. He couldn't back up Jameer Nelson in Orlando. There was one thing Alston was VERY good at. That's taking care of the ball. Alston's defense was not that bad either. You are a fool if you think Alston is a good role player. You have no idea how much of an upgrade Brooks was when Alston got traded.



Head averaged 11 PPG on 44% shooting from three point land. Again in the NBA it is a successfull plan to surround two stars with defensive minded players and shooters. Most of the players on that team can be classified into either role and were quite successfull in their jobs. The blame is on the dude that was supposed to be a star, but was actually detrimental to the teams success.

I know what Head averaged. I watched every single one of his games. Head completely disappeared in the playoffs. Where is Head now? Right. Another player who's career went down hill after leaving Houston. Is amazing that you're trying to argue that McGrady's teammates were good, when almost all of them have drifted into irrelevance when leaving Houston. Alston was never a good shooter. Battier and Head were the only decent shooters in Houston. I'm not sure but I think that was Head's 2nd season? Anyway...




Yeah thats what I ****ing thought. No defense at all for Tmacs shit play in that series LOL. Thanks for bending over to my argument and taking it like a good little boy. Noone is talking about 2005. That series was over to begin with since we all know T-Mac is just a little pube compared to an alltime great like Nowitzki.

Settle down chump, you're trying too hard. No defense for McGrady's shitty play? I'm sure he could have played better. But if you're going to blame McGrady, you're gonna have to put some of that blame on Yao Ming. I also like how you ignored every single one of my arguments in that paragraph you just posted.

No one is talking about 2005? OK, so can we agree McGrady had no chance in 2005? K. That mean's we're left with one series: 2007. What are you even arguing here bro? 2007? Because I can live with McGrady choking in 2007. I'm fine with that. However, 1 series is not enough for you or any of us to label McGrady a 'loser'. Artest, Lowry, and Brooks didn't play for Houston in 2007. Do you admit that first post of yours was ignorantly written? Next time before you open your mouth, at least do a 5 minute research on the team. Unless you want to come off as clown again.




Agreed I'd rather have Brooks with the ball in his hands than ballhog inefficient McGrady and much rather have Artest defending wing players than no defense McGrady. Thanks for admitting that two average players > your boyfriend LOL

You agree Brooks handling the ball instead of McGrady? My God. I didn't realize I was dealing with another child. Your argument is all over the place. Go back and re-read your 2nd post. You're rambling. McGrady my boyfriend? I think you're running out of arguments. No offense taken. I didn't expect to know much about Houston anyway. Next time though... If you're ignorant about the subject can you ask or research before opening your mouth? Appreciate it.


Unlike with McGrady at the helm these guys got a chance to shine since he wasn't holding onto the ball for 22 seconds then hoisting up a 23 foot jumper. Team basketball, defensive minded basketball. Two things McGrady will never understand. The guy sucks ****. Anytime you'd take a collection of role players over a "superstar" it means that guy isn't an actual star LOL.

This isn't really an argument just biased McGrady opinions. You're like that other RocketGreatness kid. Just ramble and ramble, no coherent sentences or valid points. Typing "LOL" time and time again doesn't pass as an argument IMO. Sorry.

Lets take a look at your 3rd post. Shall we?


T-Mac had a great nucleus of players throughout his tenure in Houston. Yao when healthy was the best center in the game, and that team was surrounded with elite defenders and solid role players each and every year. To fail in the first round all those times is the ultimate example of an underachiever.


Read it carefully. You're bringing up McGrady's teammates when he was in Houston. Praising the role players. McGrady having a "great" supporting cast as you put it was your first argument.

Now take a look at this:


where is where he had the most amount of talent on his team since you want to bitch about every little minor injury or deficiency in some role players games even though they are just that, role players


You're dumb. I was simply addressing the argument YOU brought up and countered it; then instead of adding to it or trying to refute it, you tried to dismiss it. :oldlol: Why is it that you can bring up how 'good' or 'great' of a supporting cast McGrady had in Houston....then when I try to explain how or why his supporting cast wasn't that good, you try to play it off as me making excuses for Tracy? Why. It makes no sense. You can use the 'role players' argument but when I counter it, that's just me trying to make up any excuse I can. Do you now see how dumb you look?

You keep contradicting yourself and you don't even know it. McGrady has great supporting cast throughout his tenure in Houston yet he stood no chance against Dallas in 2005? Does that make sense to you?

You aren't 'owning' anyone here, instead you're babbling. Take off the clown shoes.

[Ikill]

didn't this mother****er already get clowned on real gm about the same topic

[ImmortalNemesis]

Yeah I feel so stupid for arguing with him now. Its clear he doesn't want to discuss the topic, he just wants to troll.

Google 'Tracy McGrady, the choking loser' and you'll the see thread on real gm. Those guys brought up some legit points and he just dismissed them with "bad TS% , 0-7 though"

:oldlol:

I can't get those hours back.

[StateOfMind12]

I'm not sure why Hubbs has to respond to a bunch of garbage excuses. Hubbs didn't ignore anything that was worth responding to or addressing about.

'08-'09 Rockets: 20-15 with McGrady
'08-'09 Rockets: 33-14 without McGrady.

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-1

What else really needs to be said? McGrady couldn't win with the best Center in the league and he couldn't win with the best perimeter defender in the league. Nobody is asking him to win a championship, all people are asking him to do is to get out of the 1st round and he still can't even do that.

This Immortal douche acts as if anything he is saying takes away the fact that Tmac wasn't a choking loser which it doesn't. He choked in 2005 and blew a 2-0 lead coming back home to Houston and stealing HCA. He choked in 2007 because he was the favorite to win and also had a 3-2 lead in that series. He played or at least shot poorly and inefficiently in 2008 and that was a large reason why they didn't win that series.

This guy really doesn't have anything. He has to post a bunch of fake screenshots because he knows he can't refute the point that the Rockets were better without Tmac. He can't refute the point that Tmac has never won a playoff series in his career even when he had the talent to get by.

He has nothing.....all he does is jump around and he doesn't even have a purpose. He just doesn't want someone who is logical about Tmac responding last in this thread so if that someone doesn't post, he thinks that he won the argument even though he has been getting dominated. He is just waiting for me and Hubbs to give up specifically Hubbs I'm guessing.

Also, it is pretty funny how ironic your post was. You talked about how he ignored you earlier even though it wasn't worth responding to yet you just ignored his most recent post. That is probably because you know you have nothing for that '09 argument you were trying to argue.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

I responded to that post several pages ago. No idea why a post from 7 or so pages ago is being reposted since it didn't bring much to the discussion anyway. Maybe I didn't put it in quotes, but if you actually read my posts which I'm now assuming you don't, you will see I responded to all of those counterarguments at one point or another. Do some research and then get back to me.

I still have yet to see any kind of legitimate claim to dispute the record with and without T-Mac. Keep ignoring points and posting more bullshit that isn't based on any kind of facts though. Seems like we are winning the argument since all I'm seeing is paragraph after paragraph of excuses with no groundwork

[ImmortalNemesis]

You never addressed what I posted.

Your claim was that McGrady had a great supporting cast in Houston and I more than countered that silly argument.

Keep contradicting yourself though. McGrady had a "great" supporting cast yet you admit he had no chance against Dirk Nowitzki in 2005. You've chosen to dismiss my arguments because I'm apparently making up any excuse I can. Again, I simply countered what YOU brought up. You said he had a good supporting cast, and when I countered it.....that was just me making up excuses.

Make up your mind pal.

I didn't expect better from you though.

B...bu....but McGrady had Artest, Lowry, Brooks.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

You never addressed what I posted.

Your claim was that McGrady had a great supporting cast in Houston and I more than countered that silly argument.

Keep contradicting yourself though. McGrady had a "great" supporting cast yet you admit he had no chance against Dirk Nowitzki in 2005. You've chosen to dismiss my arguments because I'm apparently making up any excuse I can. Again, I simply countered what YOU brought up. You said he had a good supporting cast, and when I countered it.....that was just me making up excuses.

Make up your mind pal.

I didn't expect better from you though.

B...bu....but McGrady had Artest, Lowry, Brooks.

I talked about McGradys cast in nearly all of my posts. Re-read them or give up. I'm not repeating myself for people that don't have the ability to search and find information that is readily available to them.

[SwooshReturns]

OP is a clown, and hideously inaccurate potrayl of Tracy McGrady the player.

[ImmortalNemesis]

I talked about McGradys cast in nearly all of my posts. Re-read them or give up. I'm not repeating myself for people that don't have the ability to search and find information that is readily available to them.


You didn't counter what I posted. You dismissed them and said I was making up excuses.

[iDefend5]

pretty sure just because he didn't respond word to word to all of your posts doesn't mean he didn't counteract what you said. Just saying.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

You didn't counter what I posted. You dismissed them and said I was making up excuses.

Maybe not individually to the post, but to the purpose of the post. Don't know why a post from page 7 is being reposted anyway when the discussion has indefinitely shifted. Probably because you can't argue any of the points at the current hand of discussion so your trying to backtrack. Here I'll repost something from THIS PAST PAGE that went ignored.:roll: because I have no reason to repost points that have already been restated several times throughout the thread by StateofMind or myself.


Lol so the T-Mac fan is now posting screenshots of PMs because he cannot deal with the proven evidence that the 2009 Rockets were superior WITHOUT McGrady? Is this how people discuss basketball these days?

I saw something said about how it wasn't a big enough sample size LOL even though it was the entire seasons worth of data. Not a month, an entire season.

With T-Mac: 20-15
W/O T-Max: 33-14

Same casts minus the Rafer Alston trade pretty much. T-Macs teams weren't as good as 2009,but when the team is BETTER without its "star" player it means he wasn't a star in the first place. How many current actual stars in this leagues teams would be better off if they were done for the season? That doesn't happen with stars. It happens with team cancers which is what T-Mac was at that point in time. Even in the years prio to that his style of basketball was not successfull. It's just that the depth at the swingmen spots those years gave them no other options whatsoever. The trio of Artest/Battier/Wafer gave them superior basketball play than any McGrady/whoever pairing at any point during his Rockets tenure. Yes McGrady/Battier as well who was an absolute beast there. Just because the dude can't create his own offense doesn't mean he sucks. His tremendous impact on the defensive end was matched only be dominant interior bigmen. He was an elite shooter as well which spread the floor making it easier for guys like Yao/Artest/Scola. A much better shooter than McGrady. Teams would kill to have him as Houston did by giving up Rudy Gay.

Just ask Jeff Van Gundy/Rick Adelman who made his job a lot easier, T-Mac or Battier.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Posting rolling emoticons doesn't really counter what I said doesn't it?

You never addressed what I posted. There's a reason for that, you can't.

I read your post, you're talking about solely about the 2009. Do I have to do this again? RocketGreatness tried that argument as well. Tracy, the "cancer" was removed from the team so Houston finally succeeded in 2009. That logic doesn't make sense when you apply it to the 05, 07, and 09 squads. Which goes back to my point, the team didn't win because Artest (LOL) or Yao helped the team maximize its potential. They won because they the role players were better than any role players McGrady had in previous years. Otherwise you have to argue Yao would have done the same thing in 07 and 05. Take McGrady off those teams though, and Houston still doesn't win; in fact, they get worse. Your argument is stupid, and I've already countered it. Read the thread. I pointed out obvious holes which don't show up in the (2009) record.


Can I ask you something though? Why is it that you're focusing so much on that 2009 team. What about 2005, 2007, and 2008? Because it doesn't suit your agenda that's why. Straw man argument.

[StateOfMind12]

:oldlol: This is hilarious, it's like this dude is covering his ears because people are spitting the truth about McGrady.

He jumps around everywhere for practically no reason. He brings up 2009 and now all of a sudden he brings up 2005, 2007, and 2008 again. This guy simply can't comprehend anything to save his life.

Posting a bunch of drivel that has nothing to do with the context doesn't make you smart, as a matter of fact doing that has the complete opposite effect.

'09 Rockets With T-Mac: 20-15
'09 Rockets W/O T-Mac: 33-14

But it's all bullshit right? :oldlol:


They won because they the role players were better than any role players McGrady had in previous years. Otherwise you have to argue Yao would have done the same thing in 07 and 05. Take McGrady off those teams though, and Houston still doesn't win; in fact, they get worse.
lol at this.

If McGrady was on that '09 Rockets team, the '09 Rockets would not be as good nor would they have gotten past the 1st round. Why should anybody believe it? Because of their record with and without Tmac? They were better without him that season.

The Rockets were elite without him and barely above .500 with him. What actually supports your argument? Go ahead and because you have been dodging it like the puss you are.

'05, '07, '08, and '09 have nothing to do with this conversation yet you act as if they're all the same teams. They're all Houston Rockets but they all had different players.

Rockets get worse in '05 and '07, sure, but they still make the playoffs don't they? They don't go any deeper with McGrady and they don't do much more with McGrady so why does it matter? People are suppose to be impressed by more regular season wins? Only a Tmac fan would say such a thing.

'05 and '07 Rockets would make the playoffs without McGrady. That is as far as Tmac ever took them. What is your argument? McGrady provides more regular season wins? Nobody disputes that.

Rockets had a better supporting cast in '09, I actually have said this and so has Hubbs. The problem is that if Tmac were playing on that '09 team then their potentials would not be maximized and they wouldn't have gotten past the 1st round.

I'm more than positive Hubbs views it almost the same way.



Your argument is stupid, and I've already countered it. Read the thread. I pointed out obvious holes which don't show up in the (2009) record.

You haven't countered anything. You have just been giving everyone laughs with your pathetic excuses and your inability to comprehend jack shit.

[StateOfMind12]

I'll just give him the cliffs because maybe this guy can comprehend cliffs better.

-It doesn't matter that the '09 supporting cast was better than anything McGrady worked with because McGrady would have lost in the 1st round again with the Rockets anyways since they were barely above .500 with him and elite without him.

'09 Rockets With T-Mac: 20-15
'09 Rockets W/O T-Mac: 33-14

-It doesn't matter that if you take away Tmac in '05, '07, '08 that they are worse because they would have still made the playoffs anyways and that is as far as Tmac led those Rockets teams. The Rockets in those years still would have been a playoff team so they wouldn't have accomplished any less without him.

Are they worse? Maybe, but they would still be a playoff team which is essentially as far as Tmac got them anyways. Why is anyone suppose to care that if he can lead the Rockets to a few more regular season wins if he is going to fail and underachieve in the post-season? This thread was specifically talking about how he was a choking loser which was about his post-season play, not his regular season play. I'm sure a lot of people will agree that Tmac is a good regular season player, I'll agree with that, nobody cares though and this thread wasn't aimed to talk about that.

-'05, '07, and '08 Rockets are not the same as the '09 Rockets so why we are applying the same context?

You talk about how the Rockets would be worse without McGrady in those 3 seasons so now you believe that the '09 Rockets would win and go deeper with McGrady for some reason.

Here is your problem,

-You already said the Rockets were much better in '09 in every other year so they were a different team. Those 3 seasons/teams do not apply to this one.
-The Rockets were better off without McGrady than with McGrady as the stats indicate that season


You seem to really love to ignore how the Rockets were much better without McGrady compared to with him in 2009, hence why you always dodge that statement when me and Hubbs make it. :oldlol:



What do you have next?

[Hotlantadude81]

Tracy mcGrady is a no producing piece of shit.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Posting rolling emoticons doesn't really counter what I said doesn't it?

You never addressed what I posted. There's a reason for that, you can't.

I read your post, you're talking about solely about the 2009. Do I have to do this again? RocketGreatness tried that argument as well. Tracy, the "cancer" was removed from the team so Houston finally succeeded in 2009. That logic doesn't make sense when you apply it to the 05, 07, and 09 squads. Which goes back to my point, the team didn't win because Artest (LOL) or Yao helped the team maximize its potential. They won because they the role players were better than any role players McGrady had in previous years. Otherwise you have to argue Yao would have done the same thing in 07 and 05. Take McGrady off those teams though, and Houston still doesn't win; in fact, they get worse. Your argument is stupid, and I've already countered it. Read the thread. I pointed out obvious holes which don't show up in the (2009) record.


Can I ask you something though? Why is it that you're focusing so much on that 2009 team. What about 2005, 2007, and 2008? Because it doesn't suit your agenda that's why. Straw man argument.

09 Role players > Any T-Mac hogging the ball and shooting ill-advised shots.

Yes the role players were better, but the team was better with advanced role players as opposed to having their "star" player on the team. We're comparing stars and role players. The NBA is a league driven by star talent and always will be. Seeing T-Macs continuous shortcomings year after year is a clear sign this guy is not what people thought he was and is massively overrated. That is one of the main points of this thread. Something I'm still not sure you understand after 14 pages of bickering.

Replace 05,07 whatever year T-Mac with guys like Artest, and Scola and the team will be better each and every year. You are posting the same thing each post, I'm getting tired of shutting down the same crap.

Still havn't seen a solid explanation for
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-Mac: 33-14

Pretty funny how me and StateofMind mention this in every post yet it gets ignored every time. This is an entire seasons worth of data. They were BETTER without him. The same team pretty much. So no the role players were not better, or any other crap. This is the SAME team and the difference is substancial. Had Houston used that money spent on McGrady in 2005/2007/whatever year on guys that could compliment Yao, the team would've seen more success in that era and the statistics show it.


I'll just give him the cliffs because maybe this guy can comprehend cliffs better.

-It doesn't matter that the '09 supporting cast was better than anything McGrady worked with because McGrady would have lost in the 1st round again with the Rockets anyways since they were barely above .500 with him and elite without him.

'09 Rockets With T-Mac: 20-15
'09 Rockets W/O T-Mac: 33-14

-It doesn't matter that if you take away Tmac in '05, '07, '08 that they are worse because they would have still made the playoffs anyways and that is as far as Tmac led those Rockets teams. The Rockets in those years still would have been a playoff team so they wouldn't have accomplished any less without him.

Are they worse? Maybe, but they would still be a playoff team which is essentially as far as Tmac got them anyways. Why is anyone suppose to care that if he can lead the Rockets to a few more regular season wins if he is going to fail and underachieve in the post-season? This thread was specifically talking about how he was a choking loser which was about his post-season play, not his regular season play. I'm sure a lot of people will agree that Tmac is a good regular season player, I'll agree with that, nobody cares though and this thread wasn't aimed to talk about that.

-'05, '07, and '08 Rockets are not the same as the '09 Rockets so why we are applying the same context?

You talk about how the Rockets would be worse without McGrady in those 3 seasons so now you believe that the '09 Rockets would win and go deeper with McGrady for some reason.

Here is your problem,

-You already said the Rockets were much better in '09 in every other year so they were a different team. Those 3 seasons/teams do not apply to this one.
-The Rockets were better off without McGrady than with McGrady as the stats indicate that season


You seem to really love to ignore how the Rockets were much better without McGrady compared to with him in 2009, hence why you always dodge that statement when me and Hubbs make it. :oldlol:



What do you have next?

:applause: :applause: :applause:

This guy still probably won't get it though. :banghead:

[ImmortalNemesis]

09 Role players > Any T-Mac hogging the ball and shooting ill-advised shots.

That's your opinion. But is pretty much a consensus that McGrady in his Houston years was better than Battier. When McGrady went out for the rest of the season in 09, Battier took his spot. Wafer's minutes/role on the team wouldn't have changed. He would have still gotten the same minutes and produced the same off the bench. What you're essentially arguing is Battier's impact on the team. And I believe a Tracy's positive's outweigh Battier's positives. You can think otherwise but its pretty clear McGrady could have helped the team a little more.

You keep pointing to that record at the start of the 09 season. I addressed that, I didn't ignore it. How about you take a step back and re-read what I posted a few hours ago.


Yes the role players were better, but the team was better with advanced role players as opposed to having their "star" player on the team. We're comparing stars and role players.

Your entire argument is a huge fallacy. The team was not better without McGrady. Just because Houston won in 2009 doesn't mean Houston was better off without him. I believe healthy McGrady could have helped the team even more.


Seeing T-Macs continuous shortcomings year after year is a clear sign this guy is not what people thought he was and is massively overrated. That is one of the main points of this thread. Something I'm still not sure you understand after 14 pages of bickering.

That's what we've been discussing for the past day, yeah. We're discussing Tracy's career. So why is it that you focus so much on that 2009 season? Why is it that you focus so much on the season in which McGrady was never 100%? I doubt he was even 50%. McGrady failed in Orlando because his team was a joke. I explained and elaborated on McGrady's supporting cast in 2007 and 2005. Ignoring it doesn't constitute as a counterargument.


Replace 05,07 whatever year T-Mac with guys like Artest, and Scola and the team will be better each and every year. You are posting the same thing each post, I'm getting tired of shutting down the same crap.

Replace McGrady? Who said anything about replacing him? That's not what I'm arguing. I'm saying the team doesn't get better without McGrady. It wouldn't have gotten better in 05, 07, 08, nor 09. Your argument is that the cancer was finally removed from Houston in 2009 so Houston finally was ever to maximize its potential. Isn't that a little convenient? It screams of agenda.

Houston was better with McGrady in 05, 07, 08, but not 09.

What a f*cking joke. :oldlol:

If you're arguing Houston was better off without a healthy McGrady, then I disagree. Why? Because McGrady proved he's capable of leading his team to multiple 50+ seasons. "B...but he failed in the playoffs!".

Yeah no shit captain obvious. That's where the role players argument comes in, and you've already admitted the 09 team was miles ahead of any other supporting cast McGrady had to play with.

Don't you think having Artest instead of Wesley is a MAJOR improvement?
Don't you think having Scola instead of Ryan Bowen is a MAJOR improvement?
Don't you think having Brooks instead of Alston is quite an improvement?

The team was simply better. Why is that so hard to grasp?


Still havn't seen a solid explanation for
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-Mac: 33-14

I'm pretty sure I did. Try reading the thread.


his is an entire seasons worth of data. They were BETTER without him. The same team pretty much. So no the role players were not better, or any other crap. This is the SAME team and the difference is substancial. Had Houston used that money spent on McGrady in 2005/2007/whatever year on guys that could compliment Yao, the team would've seen more success in that era and the statistics show it.

You must have missed the post where I addressed the record. Again, try reading the thread. Houston was better because the team as a whole started playing better. The team didn't suddenly start playing good ball because the cancer was removed. There were some major roster changes. Besides, a team in playoff contention always start rolling when the playoffs start getting close. The record is different mainly because:

Houston had one legged McGrady. (And I already agreed Houston was better off without injured McGrady)
Key roster changes (improvement of back-court and bench) were made.
Houston started to gel late in the season. Is not uncommon for teams to start rolling come playoff time.

Brooks didn't have key role in Houston until Alston got traded. When I bring up the fact that Lowry was not yet a Rocket in early 09, you dismiss it.

Houston was basically the same team.

Do you remember your first post which was ignorantly written? You brought up Lowry and Brooks.

McGrady had Brooks, Lowry, Artest :blah

That was your first argument. Yet when I try to use that same argument against you, you dismiss it and type some bullshit like "It was basically the same team." Do you not see the double standard? Make up your mind. Are role players important or not?

[StateOfMind12]

:oldlol: This guy still doesn't get it and he is ignoring me because I've dominated him all thread long.


That's your opinion
IT is also your opinion that the Rockets would have been better with McGrady opposed to without him.

It is a fact that the Rockets would have been better without McGrady opposed to with him though.

'09 Rockets With T-Mac: 20-15
'09 Rockets W/o T-Mac: 33-14


Your entire argument is a huge fallacy. The team was not better without McGrady. Just because Houston won in 2009 doesn't mean Houston was better off without him. I believe healthy McGrady could have helped the team even more.
What is this? Oh, that's right an opinion. There is no evidence behind your opinion anyways since the 09 Rockets were better without him than with him.

The Rockets played 35 games with him, that's almost half the season. The Rockets played better for the rest of the season without McGrady because they removed the cancer in that '08-'09 season.



That's what we've been discussing for the past day, yeah. We're discussing Tracy's career. So why is it that you focus so much on that 2009 season? Why is it that you focus so much on the season in which McGrady was never 100%? I doubt he was even 50%. McGrady failed in Orlando because his team was a joke. I explained and elaborated on McGrady's supporting cast in 2007 and 2005. Ignoring it doesn't constitute as a counterargument.
Why are you bringing up "healthy McGrady"? That player doesn't even ****ing exist. Why should the Rockets take away a player's biggest weakness while nobody else gets anything else in return?

The rest is bunch of horseshit that is not even worth responding to as the rest of his posts are like. Since all he did was talk about how healthy McGrady would have helped when McGrady was done in 2009 and not healthy anyways.

This guy simply has nothing.

[WockaVodka]

You can't really call Mcgrady a loser if we are talking about his life. He made millions and millions of dollars in the NBA and from endorsements. You can easily call him a choker though and you seem to have done that quite well by listing all of his playoff failures.

I liked Mcgrady when I was a kid but as I grew up I realized what kind of player he was and he was someone that do not attribute to winning. If you listen to his interviews and read articles about him and such you would know that he never had a winning attitude. He always made excuses for his failures and never took any responsibility and he always threw his teammates under the bus even when and during he was playing with those very teammates.

I think you're being harsh on him though but I understand your point of view.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

While I feel he's overrated, posters who call Tracy Mcgrady a 'choking loser' are mentally ill. You gotta have some serious hate to continuously ridicule one of the best swingmen ever.

[iDefend5]

While I feel he's overrated, posters who call Tracy Mcgrady a 'choking loser' are mentally ill. You gotta have some serious hate to continuously ridicule one of the best swingmen ever.
:roll: Shitty music is your forte, not basketball. Try again.

[Fudge]

:roll: Shitty music is your forte, not basketball. Try again.
What does that have to do with anything he posted? Ohh, the "one of the best swingmen ever" part? Its true though so... :confusedshrug:

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

That's your opinion. But is pretty much a consensus that McGrady in his Houston years was better than Battier. When McGrady went out for the rest of the season in 09, Battier took his spot. Wafer's minutes/role on the team wouldn't have changed. He would have still gotten the same minutes and produced the same off the bench. What you're essentially arguing is Battier's impact on the team. And I believe a Tracy's positive's outweigh Battier's positives. You can think otherwise but its pretty clear McGrady could have helped the team a little more.

You keep pointing to that record at the start of the 09 season. I addressed that, I didn't ignore it. How about you take a step back and re-read what I posted a few hours ago.


Tracy McGrady > Battier as an individual? Sure, but give me Battier on my team 10/10. I know I'm not winning a title with T-Mac as my franchise guy so at least I'll take a guy that can contribute positively to my franchise. T-Mac offers nothing to the game if he isn't scoring and hogging the ball/being the primary scorer and frankly he is too inefficient for that for my tastes as well as any other person that has a brain.

Tell me, what does T-Mac offer to a team if he is not on one of his streaky scoring streaks. That is pretty much the ONLY thing.



Your entire argument is a huge fallacy. The team was not better without McGrady. Just because Houston won in 2009 doesn't mean Houston was better off without him. I believe healthy McGrady could have helped the team even more.

Well your belief is wrong ****er. The numbers indicate they were in fact MUCH BETTER with McGrady LOL. Do I need to get the team record with and without him again? Oh I think I do
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-Mac: 33-14

LMAO. Hopefully you'll be able to comprehend these numbers this time, but I seriously doubt it.



That's what we've been discussing for the past day, yeah. We're discussing Tracy's career. So why is it that you focus so much on that 2009 season? Why is it that you focus so much on the season in which McGrady was never 100%? I doubt he was even 50%. McGrady failed in Orlando because his team was a joke. I explained and elaborated on McGrady's supporting cast in 2007 and 2005. Ignoring it doesn't constitute as a counterargument.

Because the 2009 season is a good indicator of how the team would do if T-Mac was replaced with capable role players instead of a guy that contributes little other than streaky scoring on the basketball court. Looked quite successful to me.

Failed in Orlando because his team was a joke? He was up 3-1 on the Pistons and gave the famous interview that he is happy to finally get to the 2nd round. Guess how he did in the 3 games that followed?
19 points, 40% shooting
37 points, 39% shooting
21 points, 29% shooting

Classic T-Mac. And this is the shit Houston would become accustomed to for years to come. Poor shooting percentages across the board. Now I am not implying that his team was good, because quite frankly it was awful. However when you up 3-1, and just need to win 1 game before the other team wins 3 is a joke. It's not that he lost the series, it's how he lost.

Since your repetitive bullshit is starting to get my dick soft, lets lookat T-Macs performance in the 2005 playoffs vs Dallas. It was a tough series. It went down to Game 7. Surely T-Mac proved he was the star among stars in this series right? LOL wrong Rockets took it in the ass from the Mavs as the leader doesn't show up til Dallas has a commanding win and T-Mac ends up shooting 38% from the field LOL. Dallas wins by like 40. Typical ****ing T-Mac.




Replace McGrady? Who said anything about replacing him? That's not what I'm arguing. I'm saying the team doesn't get better without McGrady. It wouldn't have gotten better in 05, 07, 08, nor 09. Your argument is that the cancer was finally removed from Houston in 2009 so Houston finally was ever to maximize its potential. Isn't that a little convenient? It screams of agenda.

Houston was better with McGrady in 05, 07, 08, but not 09.

What a f*cking joke.

If you're arguing Houston was better off without a healthy McGrady, then I disagree. Why? Because McGrady proved he's capable of leading his team to multiple 50+ seasons. "B...but he failed in the playoffs!".

Yeah no shit captain obvious. That's where the role players argument comes in, and you've already admitted the 09 team was miles ahead of any other supporting cast McGrady had to play with.

Don't you think having Artest instead of Wesley is a MAJOR improvement?
Don't you think having Scola instead of Ryan Bowen is a MAJOR improvement?
Don't you think having Brooks instead of Alston is quite an improvement?

The team was simply better. Why is that so hard to grasp?

Clearly you havenot caught on to our argument after page after page of discussion.

It is that the players of 2009 are superior to McGrady and help contribute to winning basketball more than he ever will. Again these are role players and this is a guy that is going to get Hall of Fame consideration. That is the ****ing joke. This year is the best example that proves McGrady was always overrated and not the star ESPN hyped him out to be. It took Houston years to get this talent because all of their assets were tied to him and Ming, but once they did and replaced him they played better than they did with him. These are facts, not opinion.


There were some major roster changes. Besides, a team in playoff contention always start rolling when the playoffs start getting close. The record is different mainly because:

Houston had one legged McGrady. (And I already agreed Houston was better off without injured McGrady)
Key roster changes (improvement of back-court and bench) were made.
Houston started to gel late in the season. Is not uncommon for teams to start rolling come playoff time.

Stop all the bullshit about "Oh McGrady would've been great if he was healthy!". Does that player even exist? LOL. McGrady is just another brittle ***** and always had a bruised ****** at one point or another. You can only use the injury excuse for so long.

A team in playoff contention always starts rolling when the playoffs get close? Really? Any evidence to back this up? Just as many teams limp into the playoffs as ones that surge into them. Lets see two statements in this paragraph so far with no merit.

Major roster changes = Alston for Lowry? Lol ok, yet another statement with no merit.




Brooks didn't have key role in Houston until Alston got traded. When I bring up the fact that Lowry was not yet a Rocket in early 09, you dismiss it.

Houston was basically the same team.

Do you remember your first post which was ignorantly written? You brought up Lowry and Brooks.

McGrady had Brooks, Lowry, Artest

That was your first argument. Yet when I try to use that same argument against you, you dismiss it and type some bullshit like "It was basically the same team." Do you not see the double standard? Make up your mind. Are role players important or not?

So Brooks magically got better over night? Yeah like this guy would have the ball at all with McBallHog in the lineup. With McGrady they just wanted some dude to be a spotup shooter and look pretty. Who cares that Brooks can create at a more efficient rate than McGrady, he was voted in by the chinese for the allstar game!

And I just named all the Rockets players in recent years off the top of my head. Get over it dude.

Ill finish this post off with the record with and without T-Mac in 2009. Enjoy
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-mac: 33-14

[iDefend5]

What does that have to do with anything he posted? Ohh, the "one of the best swingmen ever part"? Its true though so... :confusedshrug:
Not really. He is not top 10.

[ChrisKreager]

My take: T-Mac's playoff teams never got what I'd call a winnable playoff series opponent.

2001 Bucks- good luck trying to beat the Big Three of Milwauke at their apex.

2003 Pistons- Essentially the same team that won a title the next year.

2005 Mavericks- They nearly won 60 games and made the Finals next year.

Not defending him here, just something to consider.

[SwooshReturns]

My take: T-Mac's playoff teams never got what I'd call a winnable playoff series opponent.

2001 Bucks- good luck trying to beat the Big Three of Milwauke at their apex.

2003 Pistons- Essentially the same team that won a title the next year.

2005 Mavericks- They nearly won 60 games and made the Finals next year.

Not defending him here, just something to consider.
No, that's about right. Then throw in the fact he was a tremendous playoff performer his whole career. With supporting casts that were less than average in Orlando, and then in Houston had players that were soft as hell (Yao Ming) who didn't pick up any slack or play better in the playoffs. He always held himself overly accountable. He cared enough to cry about his failures in a post game conference. And even with a bad back, delivered a tremendous game 7 performance againt he Jazz.

[Fudge]

:oldlol: This guy still doesn't get it and he is ignoring me because I've dominated him all thread long.
You haven't "dominated" anybody in this thread, tbh. Sit down.


It is a fact that the Rockets would have been better without McGrady opposed to with him though.

'09 Rockets With T-Mac: 20-15
'09 Rockets W/o T-Mac: 33-14
No its not. Thats an opinion.

Same situation with Chicago (minus the past post season failures which is why Mac was put on the block that season). At the rate the Bulls are going this year, they'd finish with an identical record without Rose. That Houston team was built around defense. The core of Artest, Yao, Mutombo, Hayes, Battier was what got them their wins. Not saying that 2009 McGrady is even on par with current Rose. But McGrady's being traded wasn't the main reason they advaned out of the first round that year.

Are they good without Rose? Yes. Are they better off without him? Not at all.



The Rockets played 35 games with him, that's almost half the season. The Rockets played better for the rest of the season without McGrady because they removed the cancer in that '08-'09 season.
You've said this exact same thing in almost every paragraph of the post im quoting from you. Granted, Houston went on to win 33 of their next 47 games without him. But you clearly said something along the lines of "Ohh, this thread is mainly targeted for Tracy's post season failures, i could care less about his regular season numbers, we all know he was great during the regular season". Way too lazy to look that up. So you pointing out their regular season post-McGrady era record in every response to Immortal isnt really helping your argument.


Why should the Rockets take away a player's biggest weakness while nobody else gets anything else in return?
Huh?


The rest is bunch of horseshit that is not even worth responding to as the rest of his posts are like. Since all he did was talk about how healthy McGrady would have helped when McGrady was done in 2009 and not healthy anyways.
No, its because you have absolutely nothing else to spew in your McGrady agenda besides that 33-14 record stat, which in your case it wouldnt matter, because it was the regular season right? And we all know that McGrady's a great regular season performer right? Ohh, just taking words that came straight from your mouth. Take it how it is.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

I stopped reading Fudge's post when he compared T-Mac being out in 2009 to Rose this year LMAO. What a ****ing homo LOL. Comparing like two weeks of games to an entire season. LOL

[StateOfMind12]

You haven't "dominated" anybody in this thread, tbh. Sit down.
Why am I not surprised a Tmac fan would think this? :rolleyes:


Same situation with Chicago (minus the past post season failures which is why Mac was put on the block that season). At the rate the Bulls are going this year, they'd finish with an identical record without Rose. That Houston team was built around defense. The core of Artest, Yao, Mutombo, Hayes, Battier was what got them their wins. Not saying that 2009 McGrady is even on par with current Rose. But McGrady's being traded wasn't the main reason they advaned out of the first round that year.

Are they good without Rose? Yes. Are they better off without him? Not at all.
The Bulls have been playing without Rose for playing like 10 games? That's not enough of a sample size, the Rockets played with McGrady for like 35 games and they were barely above .500. They wouldn't even have been a 50+ win team had Tmac played for the rest of the season.

Bad example since it was 3x less of the sample size.


You've said this exact same thing in almost every paragraph of the post im quoting from you. Granted, Houston went on to win 33 of their next 47 games without him. But you clearly said something along the lines of "Ohh, this thread is mainly targeted for Tracy's post season failures, i could care less about his regular season numbers, we all know he was great during the regular season". Way too lazy to look that up. So you pointing out their regular season post-McGrady era record in every response to Immortal isnt really helping your argument.
I brought that up to let him know the Rockets would have been better off without McGrady and his stupid hypothetical of Tmac making the '09 Rockets better is full of shit. I don't care about his regular season numbers. I just brought it up to let him and every other Tmac fan know that the Rockets were better off without him and that regular season sample size is the evidence for that. This shouldn't be confusing.


Huh?
He talked about how Tmac when healthy, health was one of Tmac's weakness so why should we get to be able to take away his weakness and nobody or anyone else's?


No, its because you have absolutely nothing else to spew in your McGrady agenda besides that 33-14 record stat, which in your case it wouldnt matter, because it was the regular season right? And we all know that McGrady's a great regular season performer right? Ohh, just taking words that came straight from your mouth. Take it how it is.

I already addressed this above in this post.

You got nothing either.

[Fudge]

Tracy McGrady > Battier as an individual? Sure, but give me Battier on my team 10/10.
Ohh so you're the type of guy that would take a talent of Battier over the inefficient "ball hoggin, primary scoring"(as ONLY you would call it) talents of Kobe, Westbrook, hell even put Rose in there. Correct?

Shut your overreacting ass up. :oldlol: Reaching way too far up your ass.


I know I'm not winning a title with T-Mac as my franchise guy so at least I'll take a guy that can contribute positively to my franchise.
Positively as in knocka couple of 3's for your team and putting above average defense. I'll take a "inefficient ball hogger" in McGrady in that Game 7 for the Rockets against LA rather than Battier without any hesitation. Battier and Artest combined actually. But sure. Have an offensive liability for your front court who would get you a couple three's now and then for you in 30+ minutes, rather than a guy who would get you 25/5/5 no matter his ball hogging and "inefficiency". Your call.

You're superstar duo over there of (Artest + Battier) went 4-16 combined that night btw.




Tell me, what does T-Mac offer to a team if he is not on one of his streaky scoring streaks. That is pretty much the ONLY thing.
Much, much more than what your good ol Battier offers. I can tell you that much. :oldlol:


Ill finish this post off with the record with and without T-Mac in 2009. Enjoy
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-mac: 33-14
What does that even say? That they're a better team without McGrady in the regular season? Sure. But "ohhhhh regular season doesn't matter in T-Macs case. We're talking about his post season failures remember!!!!!" :oldlol: Fugg outta here.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Tracy McGrady > Battier as an individual? Sure, but give me Battier on my team 10/10. I know I'm not winning a title with T-Mac as my franchise guy so at least I'll take a guy that can contribute positively to my franchise.

You're not making any sense. Because McGrady won't win a title for you, you're going to choose Battier over McGrady? Please tell me you're joking.


T-Mac offers nothing to the game if he isn't scoring and hogging the ball/being the primary scorer and frankly he is too inefficient for that for my tastes as well as any other person that has a brain.

You're reaching. Tracy offers a lot more than just scoring. You just described Kevin Martin. Martin can't do anything but score. Tracy on the other hand is an all around good player. His shot selection was questionable at times. But to say "all he did was score" is laughable. Tracy was an outstanding scorer, rebounder, and more importantly...an outstanding facilitator. His court vision and handles is one of the best. There's a reason why McGrady was considered a top point forward back in the day.



Well your belief is wrong ****er. The numbers indicate they were in fact MUCH BETTER with McGrady LOL. Do I need to get the team record with and without him again? Oh I think I do
With T-Mac: 20-15
W/o T-Mac: 33-14

Why are you going back to Houston's record early in the season? Didn't I just talk about this. McGrady was 50% and Houston basically had a different team. Like I said, what you are essentially arguing is Battier's impact on the team. You're saying Battier as a starter contributes more than McGrady as a starter. That's total bullshit. McGrady's positives heavily outweigh Battier's positives.




Because the 2009 season is a good indicator of how the team would do if T-Mac was replaced with capable role players instead of a guy that contributes little other than streaky scoring on the basketball court. Looked quite successful to me.

Right. Except if you apply that logic to the 05, 07, and 08 teams.....Houston gets noticeably worse. Are you going to use that argument only when it suits you? Why do you refuse to apply that logic to the 2005 Rockets squad?

Remove McGrady from the 05 roster. You're left with Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura. I'm not even sure if that team makes the playoffs in the Western Conference.



Since your repetitive bullshit is starting to get my dick soft, lets lookat T-Macs performance in the 2005 playoffs vs Dallas. It was a tough series. It went down to Game 7. Surely T-Mac proved he was the star among stars in this series right? LOL wrong Rockets took it in the ass from the Mavs as the leader doesn't show up til Dallas has a commanding win and T-Mac ends up shooting 38% from the field LOL. Dallas wins by like 40. Typical ****ing T-Mac.

Houston had no business winning that series in the first place. But if you want to go that way, how about you put some of that blame on Yao, no? I mean, according to you Yao was already a top big man in the league. Anyway, I broke down the roster for you. I'm sure having Lowry off the bench instead of Mike James makes no significant difference at all.





Clearly you havenot caught on to our argument after page after page of discussion.

It is that the players of 2009 are superior to McGrady and help contribute to winning basketball more than he ever will. Again these are role players and this is a guy that is going to get Hall of Fame consideration. That is the ****ing joke. This year is the best example that proves McGrady was always overrated and not the star ESPN hyped him out to be. It took Houston years to get this talent because all of their assets were tied to him and Ming, but once they did and replaced him they played better than they did with him. These are facts, not opinion.

It is a fact Houston was better off without injured McGrady, yes. That, I can agree with. Houston's role players in 2009 >> Injured McGrady in 2009. That's something I can agree with. Here's your fallacy...because Houston finally won in the playoffs that year, you think Houston was better without McGrady after all. Because Houston won that year, that proves McGrady is a loser who always held the team back. That is a HUGE fallacy. You're ignoring the level of talent the team was made of. Again, having guys like Artest, Brooks, Scola, Lowry, and Brooks is a huge improvement over guys like Bob Sura, David Wesley, Ryan Bowen, Bobby Jackson, Mike James, or Jon Barry. Your argument is a fallacy, you're ignoring the talent disparity on the team.



Stop all the bullshit about "Oh McGrady would've been great if he was healthy!". Does that player even exist? LOL. McGrady is just another brittle ***** and always had a bruised ****** at one point or another. You can only use the injury excuse for so long.


McGrady was healthy in 3 playoff series for Houston. If you want to bitch about an INJURED McGrady, go right ahead. I don't mind. Here's the thing...you say Houston was better off without McGrady in 09, and the records prove it. McGrady was injured that year, he was like 50% healthy. Youtube "McGrady misses dunk", you'll see how bad Mcgrady was physically speaking. There's a big hole in your argument. Tracy McGrady was injured early in 2009. You're pointing to the regular season record...and in previous years, McGrady proved he could win more games with much lesser talent around him. This is what you're saying:

Houston was better off without an injured McGrady in 2009.


And I agree with that, that's pretty much a fact. Here's the problem. You're taking that statement and using it to support your claim that if Houston replaces McGrady with decent role players, Houston is a much better team capable of winning in the playoffs. That's a huge fallacy. You're saying because Houston in 2009 had a better record without an injured McGrady, that proves McGrady was a cancer and a detriment to the team in previous years. Do you not see how ridiculous that sounds? That's not an accurate statement at all.



A team in playoff contention always starts rolling when the playoffs get close? Really? Any evidence to back this up? Just as many teams limp into the playoffs as ones that surge into them. Lets see two statements in this paragraph so far with no merit.

The point of those two statements was that Houston after the trade started playing much better. Why? because of roster changes because of team chemistry (which develops over time). Houston finished 25-10 going into the playoffs that year.


So Brooks magically got better over night? Yeah like this guy would have the ball at all with McBallHog in the lineup. With McGrady they just wanted some dude to be a spotup shooter and look pretty. Who cares that Brooks can create at a more efficient rate than McGrady, he was voted in by the chinese for the allstar game!


What type of mental disorder do you have that prevents you from properly analyzing what I post? When did I say Brooks got better over night? How did even come to that conclusion? I said Brooks did not have a key role in Houston before the trade. He had limited minutes, and in those minutes one could see he made the team much better. He kept getting better and better over the course of the season. He came off the bench, and off the bench he impressed the GM enough for him to realize Alston was no longer needed. Jesus, brain cells die every time I read one of your posts.

With McGrady brooks waz just anohter spot up shooter!!!1111!! because McGrady is a ball hog ha ha ha!!!11


:facepalm Can you stop acting like a child? Please.



And I just named all the Rockets players in recent years off the top of my head. Get over it dude.


If you named those players off the top of your head or not is irrelevant. I could not care less. The point is, you tried using that argument to support your claim that McGrady always was surrounded by a group of players good enough to win in the playoffs. Yet, when I try to use that same argument you dismiss it and type some bullshit like "They were basically the same team". Again, make up your mind. Are role players important or not? Flip-flopping like a motherf*cker aren't you? :lol

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Ohh so you're the type of guy that would take a talent of Battier over the inefficient "ball hoggin, primary scoring"(as ONLY you would call it) talents of Kobe, Westbrook, hell even put Rose in there. Correct?

Huh? Where did I say that? You think T-Mac is in Kobe or Rose's league? These are guys who have led their teams deep into the playoffs and actually won playoff series. LOL yeah I'll take those guys over Battier. Legit franchise players. Not some overrated **** that doesn't play defense and shoots 40%.


Positively as in knocka couple of 3's for your team and putting above average defense. I'll take a "inefficient ball hogger" in McGrady in that Game 7 for the Rockets against LA rather than Battier without any hesitation. Battier and Artest combined actually. But sure. Have an offensive liability for your front court who would get you a couple three's now and then for you in 30+ minutes, rather than a guy who would get you 25/5/5 no matter his ball hogging and "inefficiency". Your call.

You're superstar duo over there of (Artest + Battier) went 4-16 combined that night btw.

Battier was the best perimeter defender in the league at the time and a 42% shooter from downtown. Guys like that are core pieces on championship contenders. However no team has won with a guy that shoots 20+ FGA, a sub 50% TS, and doesn't play any defense at all. No team. If you can find me a guy that has be my guest, but we all know there isn't any. Learn some basketball then talk to me baby dick.

Yeah Yao Ming was out that game. Those guys are complimentary guys and Yao Ming was the star. No shit that's going to happen. With Yao Ming and those guys we all saw a very successful team. 33-14 in the regular season and the franchises first playoff win in 12 years. What did your boy McGrady ever accomplish as the top dog of that franchise? Oh yeah. Nothing LMFAO.


Much, much more than what your good ol Battier offers. I can tell you that much.


Yeah I don't think I see one thing listed LOL, bow to my **** you inferior scrub. Battier with elite shooting and defense and T-Mac with.....nothing LOL. Name one thing other than streaky scoring...Go ahead I'll be here all day.


What does that even say? That they're a better team without McGrady in the regular season? Sure. But "ohhhhh regular season doesn't matter in T-Macs case. We're talking about his post season failures remember!!!!!" Fugg outta here.

Says they were by far a superior team without him. Maybe if you ever got your high school diploma you would be able to analyze numbers LOL.

Yeah this guy got owned.

[Fudge]

Why am I not surprised a Tmac fan would think this? :rolleyes:
Think what? :confusedshrug:


That you haven't "dominated" anyone? No no, its cause you haven't.



The Bulls have been playing without Rose for playing like 10 games? That's not enough of a sample size, the Rockets played with McGrady for like 35 games and they were barely above .500. They wouldn't even have been a 50+ win team had Tmac played for the rest of the season.

Bad example since it was 3x less of the sample size.
So what? Like an 8-2 record without the leagues Most Valuable Player isn't slightly impressive? They're a good team without Rose, but a great team with.

And at the rate they're going, they'd sure hover around the same record. They're whole line-up is identically built the same if you take close look at it.


I brought that up to let him know the Rockets would have been better off without McGrady and his stupid hypothetical of Tmac making the '09 Rockets better is full of shit. I don't care about his regular season numbers. I just brought it up to let him and every other Tmac fan know that the Rockets were better off without him and that regular season sample size is the evidence for that. This shouldn't be confusing.
Yeah, then again, they're built for the regular season. Houston got exploited when it mattered. In the playoffs. They lacked offense on most nights and relied on streaky shooting from Brooks to even stretch that series out. You're oh so godly defensive tandem of Battier and Artest (which were your main players for your argument that made them successful) went 4-16, and 1-10 from 3's. Thats when you take McGrady into account. McGrady would definitely be twice as much productive as those two were regardless if it was an inefficient night. They needed a closer, scratch that...they needed a ball hogger when it mattered. They got exploited. I dont care what you have to say next. I'll take a player that still would manage to put up 25 points with ease on a poor shooting night against Kobe than a completely lost Artest running the offense.


You got nothing either.
:oldlol:

And what do you have again?

[StateOfMind12]

That you haven't "dominated" anyone? No no, its cause you haven't.
:rolleyes: You're only saying that because I'm not arguing for Tmac. That's why.


So what? Like an 8-2 record without the leagues Most Valuable Player isn't slightly impressive? They're a good team without Rose, but a great team with.

And at the rate they're going, they'd sure hover around the same record. They're whole line-up is identically built the same if you take close look at it
It's a small sample size, 3 times less than the sample size of the Rockets with McGrady and like 4-5 times less than the sample size of the Rockets without McGrady.


Yeah, then again, they're built for the regular season. Houston got exploited when it mattered. In the playoffs. They lacked offense on most nights and relied on streaky shooting from Brooks to even stretch that series out. You're oh so godly defensive tandem of Battier and Artest (which were your main players for your argument that made them successful) went 4-16, and 1-10 from 3's. Thats when you take McGrady into account. McGrady would definitely be twice as much productive as those two were regardless if it was an inefficient night. They needed a closer, scratch that...they needed a ball hogger when it mattered. They got exploited. I dont care what you have to say next. I'll take a player that still would manage to put up 25 points with ease on a poor shooting night against Kobe than a completely lost Artest running the offense.
I don't even get the point of this part of your post. The Rockets got past the 1st round without McGrady in 2009. The Rockets never got past the 1st round with McGrady from '04-'05 to '07-'08.

Why am I suppose to care how Tmac would have done against Kobe and the Lakers when the Rockets would have never faced Kobe and the Lakers if Tmac was playing in the first place? It would have been another 1st round exit for the Rockets with Tmac as usual.

The Rockets were better without McGrady. We saw the story of how Tmac did with Yao in '04-'05, '06-'07, why do we need to see it again? They would have lost the 1st round again and it would be because of Tmac.

With Wafer and Artest replacing Mcgrady's role in '08-'09 though? They got past the 1st round.

If they got exploited in the playoffs in 2009 then what would be the term for what happened to the Rockets in 2005 and 2007? Humiliated? Embarrassed? I'm curious since apparently the '09 Rockets were exploited.


It is pretty simple. There is almost nothing that backs up McGrady in this argument, none.

[Fudge]

Huh? Where did I say that? You think T-Mac is in Kobe or Rose's league? These are guys who have led their teams deep into the playoffs and actually won playoff series. LOL yeah I'll take those guys over Battier. Legit franchise players. Not some overrated **** that doesn't play defense and shoots 40%.
Would certainly be up there with those guys. After his run with Houston, he pretty much fell off as player.

Because the guys i listed guys bring as much as what McGrady brought. Even to a lesser extent.


Battier was the best perimeter defender in the league at the time and a 42% shooter from downtown. Guys like that are core pieces on championship contenders. However no team has won with a guy that shoots 20+ FGA, a sub 50% TS, and doesn't play any defense at all. No team. If you can find me a guy that has be my guest, but we all know there isn't any.
Kobe?


Learn some basketball then talk to me baby dick.
:oldlol:

Epic. Not sure whether to laugh at that insult or the fact that you like to constantly talk about *****.


Yeah Yao Ming was out that game. Those guys are complimentary guys and Yao Ming was the star. No shit that's going to happen. With Yao Ming and those guys we all saw a very successful team. 33-14 in the regular season and the franchises first playoff win in 12 years. What did your boy McGrady ever accomplish as the top dog of that franchise? Oh yeah. Nothing LMFAO.
:roll: :roll:

Ohp, Here we go. The Yao excuse. They stretched the series to seven games without Yao. Yao wasn't the issue. Try again. :oldlol:


Yeah I don't think I see one thing listed LOL, bow to my **** you inferior scrub. Battier with elite shooting and defense and T-Mac with.....nothing LOL. Name one thing other than streaky scoring...Go ahead I'll be here all day.
Give me 30 points on 12 out of 100 shots than a defensive player on a team with another then-elite defensive player in Artest. That team lacked scoring, and be my guest if you'd continue to rely on Artest's offense to get those guys over the hump. LOL :oldlol:


Says they were by far a superior team without him. Maybe if you ever got your high school diploma you would be able to analyze numbers LOL.
:confusedshrug:


Yeah this guy got owned.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

You're not making any sense. Because McGrady won't win a title for you, you're going to choose Battier over McGrady? Please tell me you're joking.

Why would I want a franchise player that isn't going to give me a chance at a title? I'll take Battier as a roleplayer and look elsewhere. T-Mac offers nothing toa team unless he is the primary scoring option, while Battier thrives on any team. Good luck winning anything notable with a sub 50% TS as your primary option!



You're reaching. Tracy offers a lot more than just scoring. You just described Kevin Martin. Martin can't do anything but score. Tracy on the other hand is an all around good player. His shot selection was questionable at times. But to say "all he did was score" is laughable. Tracy was an outstanding scorer, rebounder, and more importantly...an outstanding facilitator. His court vision and handles is one of the best. There's a reason why McGrady was considered a top point forward back in the day.

Kevin Martin helps spread the floor. McGrady doesn't even do that.

An outstanding rebounder? I didn't know averaging 5.7 RPG for a 6'8 guy was considered "outstanding" nowadays. LMFAO

Court vision and handles? A guy with a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio is now considered an "outstanding faciliator". One of the best court vision/handles? Every team has a guy that is like that or at least better. Not impressive. McGradys only asset to a team was when he was on one of those crazy scoring binges. If he wasn't, he was just some inefficient ****er who took bad shots.



Why are you going back to Houston's record early in the season? Didn't I just talk about this. McGrady was 50% and Houston basically had a different team. Like I said, what you are essentially arguing is Battier's impact on the team. You're saying Battier as a starter contributes more than McGrady as a starter. That's total bullshit. McGrady's positives heavily outweigh Battier's positives.


"WAHHHHH WAHHHHHH MCGRADY WAS HURT"

The guy wasn't anymore healthy in 2009 than he was in 07 or 08. Just some guy with a bruised ****** and constant injuries. Yeah I'll take the all nba defender and elite shooter over the guy that can't take one shot without his ****** cramping up. Good luck with that shit.



Right. Except if you apply that logic to the 05, 07, and 08 teams.....Houston gets noticeably worse. Are you going to use that argument only when it suits you? Why do you refuse to apply that logic to the 2005 Rockets squad?

Remove McGrady from the 05 roster. You're left with Yao, Ryan Bowen, Padgett, Wesley, and Sura. I'm not even sure if that team makes the playoffs in the Western Conference.

Why would I apply the logic when the team had very little outside of Yao/T-Mac? Noone is arguing that someone like David Wesley > T-Mac. Guys like Battier, Artest. Those are the ****ers I want toughing it out for my team on the court. Not some talentless scrub like Wesley or a ***** like T-Mac.



Houston had no business winning that series in the first place. But if you want to go that way, how about you put some of that blame on Yao, no? I mean, according to you Yao was already a top big man in the league. Anyway, I broke down the roster for you. I'm sure having Lowry off the bench instead of Mike James makes no significant difference at all.

Why would I blame Yao Ming when he had a 69% TS in that series shooting 21 PPG? T-Mac had a subpar 52% TS percentage yet took 171 field goal attempts to Yao Mings 84. Now that isa ****ing joke. You would think Houstons chances of winning would go up had McGrady looked his way a little more. Dallas had noone that could guard him. Unfortunately in the NBA as a bigman you need someone to get you the ball so it's hard to completely dominant when you have some guy taking over 25 shots per game and not even making them at an amazing percentage. Not to mention doesn't play ANY defense whatsoever.


It is a fact Houston was better off without injured McGrady, yes. That, I can agree with. Houston's role players in 2009 >> Injured McGrady in 2009. That's something I can agree with. Here's your fallacy...because Houston finally won in the playoffs that year, you think Houston was better without McGrady after all. Because Houston won that year, that proves McGrady is a loser who always held the team back. That is a HUGE fallacy. You're ignoring the level of talent the team was made of. Again, having guys like Artest, Brooks, Scola, Lowry, and Brooks is a huge improvement over guys like Bob Sura, David Wesley, Ryan Bowen, Bobby Jackson, Mike James, or Jon Barry. Your argument is a fallacy, you're ignoring the talent disparity on the team.

Give me Artest, Brooks,Scola over McGrady and co any year, healthy or not. Not like this guy was ever healthy to begin with in 07 or 08 so you don't even have an argument there.



The point of those two statements was that Houston after the trade started playing much better. Why? because of roster changes because of team chemistry (which develops over time). Houston finished 25-10 going into the playoffs that year.

Yeah and 11-2 the month IMMEDIATELY following the McGrady trade. Team in general just became so much better and the changes were instant.



What type of mental disorder do you have that prevents you from properly analyzing what I post? When did I say Brooks got better over night? How did even come to that conclusion? I said Brooks did not have a key role in Houston before the trade. He had limited minutes, and in those minutes one could see he made the team much better. He kept getting better and better over the course of the season. He came off the bench, and off the bench he impressed the GM enough for him to realize Alston was no longer needed. Jesus, brain cells die every time I read one of your posts.

With McGrady brooks waz just anohter spot up shooter!!!1111!! because McGrady is a ball hog ha ha ha!!!11


Can you stop acting like a child? Please.

http://tnation.t-nation.com/forum_images/mytphotos//fullSize/2/a/2a0ca-Good_Good_Let_the_Butt_hurt_flow_through.jpg

Brooks would never have thrived with McGrady seeing as how Brooks style of play involves having the ball and slashing/creating for others. McGrady would dominate the ball and Brooks would be forced to stand at some three point corner. Judging from your posts I doubt you've ever actually played basketball, but that's what would happen when you combine two players that both need the ball. Brooks talents were wasted with McGrady and part of the reason he exploded. Addition with subtraction!!

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Kobe?

:oldlol:

Ohp, Here we go. The Yao excuse. They stretched the series to seven games without Yao. Yao wasn't the issue. Try again. :oldlol:


Give me 30 points on 12 out of 100 shots than a defensive player on a team with another then-elite defensive player in Artest. That team lacked scoring, and be my guest if you'd continue to rely on Artest's offense to get those guys over the hump. LOL :oldlol:


What year did Kobe shoot sub 50 TS%. Also Kobe is a good defender. Limited basketball knowledge = exposed.

You honestly think that team was better without Yao? They won on grits, but without the star it was obvious LA was going to win. Probably the most predictable Game 7 in NBA History. Houston had no hope winning on the road without the guy that was the catalyst for that team all ****ing year long.

Yeah I'm not even responding to your posts anymore. At least the other guy isn't a monkey LOL. "Give me the guy who shoots 12%". LMFAO

[Fudge]

:rolleyes: You're only saying that because I'm not arguing for Tmac. That's why.
Why would i care regardless if you were against McGrady or not? Like i give a flying ****. :oldlol:


It's a small sample size, 3 times less than the sample size of the Rockets with McGrady and like 4-5 times less than the sample size of the Rockets without McGrady.
Still doesn't matter. They've shown that they can compete without Rose. They've beaten a Celtics team with Rondo running the point against Watson. Convinces me already.


I don't even get the point of this part of your post. The Rockets got past the 1st round without McGrady in 2009. The Rockets never got past the 1st round with McGrady from '04-'05 to '07-'08.
Because it always revolves around McGrady right? Ever take into account the teams they were playing? They played Portland. Possibly one of the easier 1st round matchups for the Rockets. That team wouldnt have been better, wouldnt have been any worst with or without T-Mac in that line-up.


Why am I suppose to care how Tmac would have done against Kobe and the Lakers when the Rockets would have never faced Kobe and the Lakers if Tmac was playing in the first place? It would have been another 1st round exit for the Rockets with Tmac as usual.
What?

So a line-up of Brooks/McGrady/Artest/Scola/Yao with Battier wont get you past Portland but a team substituted with Battier rather than McGrady will? Please. :oldlol:



The Rockets were better without McGrady. We saw the story of how Tmac did with Yao in '04-'05, '06-'07, why do we need to see it again? They would have lost the 1st round again and it would be because of Tmac.
Again, just repeating yourself.


If they got exploited in the playoffs in 2009 then what would be the term for what happened to the Rockets in 2005 and 2007? Humiliated? Embarrassed? I'm curious since apparently the '09 Rockets were exploited.
Were talking about 2009. I didn't hint out anything to back up any argument to those past playoff rounds. They were failures. Simple as that. And I can honestly say that.

[Fudge]

What year did Kobe shoot sub 50 TS%. Also Kobe is a good defender. Limited basketball knowledge = exposed.

You honestly think that team was better without Yao? They won on grits, but without the star it was obvious LA was going to win. Probably the most predictable Game 7 in NBA History. Houston had no hope winning on the road without the guy that was the catalyst for that team all ****ing year long.

Yeah I'm not even responding to your posts anymore. At least the other guy isn't a monkey LOL. "Give me the guy who shoots 12%". LMFAO
What made Tracy a bad defender? Enlighten me. His defense wasn't as bad as you make it out to be. Nit picking all of the possible things you can do to rag on the dude. :oldlol: Basic knowledge from a basic typical basketball fan. Expand your mind a bit kid.

Inb4 you respond to this post. :oldlol: LOL LMFAOOOOO

[Fudge]

Kevin Martin helps spread the floor. McGrady doesn't even do that.
:roll:


An outstanding rebounder? I didn't know averaging 5.7 RPG for a 6'8 guy was considered "outstanding" nowadays. LMFAO
:roll: :hammerhead:



Court vision and handles? A guy with a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio is now considered an "outstanding faciliator". One of the best court vision/handles? Every team has a guy that is like that or at least better. Not impressive. McGradys only asset to a team was when he was on one of those crazy scoring binges. If he wasn't, he was just some inefficient ****er who took bad shots.
:roll: :roll: :roll:



Why would I apply the logic when the team had very little outside of Yao/T-Mac? Noone is arguing that someone like David Wesley > T-Mac. Guys like Battier, Artest. Those are the ****ers I want toughing it out for my team on the court. Not some talentless scrub like Wesley or a ***** like T-Mac.
So McGrady is/was "talentless" now? :roll:



No no, dont stop. Keep going. You're on a roll.

[StateOfMind12]

Still doesn't matter. They've shown that they can compete without Rose. They've beaten a Celtics team with Rondo running the point against Watson. Convinces me already.
They also lost to them....


Because it always revolves around McGrady right? Ever take into account the teams they were playing? They played Portland. Possibly one of the easier 1st round matchups for the Rockets. That team wouldnt have been better, wouldnt have been any worst with or without T-Mac in that line-up
Again, do you also understand that if Tmac was playing for the rest of the season that the Rockets don't get the seed they get? They would probably get worse and get a worse seed since the Rockets were worse with McGrady in '09.

Unless you expect McGrady to just come back come playoff time but then he could also disrupt the chemistry and lose the playoff series as well.

Sorry, but you have nothing over here.



Were talking about 2009. I didn't hint out anything to back up any argument to those past playoff rounds. They were failures. Simple as that. And I can honestly say that.
Good you aren't like that Immortal *******.

I just don't agree with you about how the Rockets would be better with McGrady on that '09 team. Most of the evidence points towards that but I understand why you would think that.



So McGrady is/was "talentless" now? :roll:

I'm pretty sure he was referring to Wesley as talentless and Tmac as the ***** or ******* or something like that.


What made Tracy a bad defender? Enlighten me. His defense wasn't as bad as you make it out to be. Nit picking all of the possible things you can do to rag on the dude. Basic knowledge from a basic typical basketball fan. Expand your mind a bit kid.

Tmac's defense after '05 was horrendous. It was liability esque. It was decent in '04-'05 but it was god awful afterwards.


Ohp, Here we go. The Yao excuse. They stretched the series to seven games without Yao. Yao wasn't the issue. Try again
Not really. The Lakers just stopped caring as soon as Yao went down. Nobody thought the Rockets had a chance after Yao went down in the series. The Rockets team continued to fight though and they managed to push it to game 7 but they were killed in Game 7. Why? Because the Lakers actually cared for that game and were coasting in the 3 other ones. Rockets never stood a chance without Yao against the Lakers.


Kobe?
Kobe always shot a TS% in the high 50s, so no. I think you're thinking of FG% but FG% is not as valuable or as useful as a stat as TS%. TS% accounts for 3s, FTs, and 2 point shots.

[Fudge]

They also lost to them....
Fair enough. But they've constantly showed they can hang without any of their key players. Noah, Boozer, Deng, Rose, have all been out for many games and still played up to par with the elites. That was how the Rockets were built. Like the Nuggets this year.



Again, do you also understand that if Tmac was playing for the rest of the season that the Rockets don't get the seed they get? They would probably get worse and get a worse seed since the Rockets were worse with McGrady in '09.


Unless you expect McGrady to just come back come playoff time but then he could also disrupt the chemistry and lose the playoff series as well.
But like you said, McGrady is a great regular season performer. Maybe it just wasn't his year. Something might have been bothering him (that could probably be it, dont really remember). But its not like they were doing terrible WITH him in the line up anyways. Maybe its opinion based but i'd rather have a line-up of Brooks/McGrady/Artest/Scola/Yao and rather have Battier as 6M for the regular season and playoffs and go from there. Who knows what might've happened.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Why would I want a franchise player that isn't going to give me a chance at a title? I'll take Battier as a roleplayer and look elsewhere. T-Mac offers nothing toa team unless he is the primary scoring option, while Battier thrives on any team. Good luck winning anything notable with a sub 50% TS as your primary option!

You'd take Battier because you lack the ability to properly analyze a player without some sort of bias or prejudice. Any GM would have taken McGrady over Battier 9/10. In hindsight? No, because of injuries. But if we could somehow go back in time, almost every GM would take McGrady over Battier. That is fact.


Kevin Martin helps spread the floor. McGrady doesn't even do that.

Just look at how far you're going to just to discredit McGrady. McGrady is a much better offensive player than Kevin Martin. It seems like you're running out of arguments so you're instead spewing garbage like this.


An outstanding rebounder? I didn't know averaging 5.7 RPG for a 6'8 guy was considered "outstanding" nowadays. LMFAO


'Outstanding' can be differently defined. But lets not act like that's one aspect of the game in which Battier beats McGrady. That's the whole point of this comparison, stupid. We're comparing what these two guys contribute to the team. Smarten up.


Court vision and handles? A guy with a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio is now considered an "outstanding faciliator". One of the best court vision/handles? Every team has a guy that is like that or at least better. Not impressive. McGradys only asset to a team was when he was on one of those crazy scoring binges. If he wasn't, he was just some inefficient ****er who took bad shots.


Again, Tracy McGrady was widely considered a top point forward in the NBA. Whether it impresses you or not doesn't matter to me. Tracy always was a top point forward in the NBA. That is fact by consensus.


"WAHHHHH WAHHHHHH MCGRADY WAS HURT"

The guy wasn't anymore healthy in 2009 than he was in 07 or 08. Just some guy with a bruised ****** and constant injuries. Yeah I'll take the all nba defender and elite shooter over the guy that can't take one shot without his ****** cramping up. Good luck with that shit.


Now you're just rambling. Did you just say 09 McGrady was no different than 07 McGrady? Seriously? Honest question: How much of a stupid f*ck do you have to be to come to that conclusion?



Why would I apply the logic when the team had very little outside of Yao/T-Mac? Noone is arguing that someone like David Wesley > T-Mac. Guys like Battier, Artest. Those are the ****ers I want toughing it out for my team on the court. Not some talentless scrub like Wesley or a ***** like T-Mac.


OK. At least you admit the 05, and 07 teams weren't good enough to win without McGrady in the playoffs. That's a start.



Why would I blame Yao Ming when he had a 69% TS in that series shooting 21 PPG? T-Mac had a subpar 52% TS percentage yet took 171 field goal attempts to Yao Mings 84. Now that isa ****ing joke.

Oh boy. TS? Remember yesterday?

PER? Brah, I got a stat for you!!11! Its called AWTG

Actually watch the game, you'd know Yao did not play significantly better than Tracy. In fact, Tracy was quite dominant, Yao also did what he was supposed to do.



Give me Artest, Brooks,Scola over McGrady and co any year, healthy or not. Not like this guy was ever healthy to begin with in 07 or 08 so you don't even have an argument there.


You'd choose Artest, Brooks, and Scola over McGrady? Cool. Is kinda stupid mentioning Scola though, since he's part of the front court. Whether McGrady plays or not doesn't significantly change how Scola plays or the impact he has on the team. I wouldn't expect you to understand this though. You lack even the rudimentary thinking skills necessary to properly analyze a player. Martin better offensive player than McGrady?! :oldlol: How much those clown shoes cost, bro?



Yeah and 11-2 the month IMMEDIATELY following the McGrady trade. Team in general just became so much better and the changes were instant.


OK? And what is your point? McGrady was traded the following year (2010). I'm pointing to the 2009 season. Do you even understand my points bro? I'm saying the 2009 record doesn't tell the whole story. McGrady was playing with one leg. That's why I agreed with you, Houston WAS better off without an injured McGrady in 2009.

You seem to be missing the point and I'm going to do my best to explain it to you. Lets get one thing straight though: Physically and athletically speaking, 07 McGrady is NOT the same as the 09 McGrady. McGrady played in 2007, I doubt he even played 40 games in 09. For you to say McGrady was basically the same player those two years is stupid. Again, you have no real concept or knowledge of what Houston was all about that year. If you want to debate, fine; but educate yourself on the subject first. Anyway, I'll do my best to explain your fallacy.

We've already established Houston was better off without injured McGrady in 2009. Houston was also good enough to win in the playoffs without McGrady. However (and this is where you lose me) you think because Houston won in 2009, that proves McGrady had been holding the team back that year. Injured McGrady? No shit. Not only that...you're also taking that statement (Houston played better without an injured McGrady) and using it to support your claim that Houston would have been better off in 2007 or 2005 if they'd replaced McGrady with some role players (Artest, Battier). There's where your logic falls apart.

You're saying because Houston was better off without an injured (09) McGrady, that proves McGrady was a detriment and cancer to the team in previous years. Does that logic make any of sense to you?



Brooks would never have thrived with McGrady seeing as how Brooks style of play involves having the ball and slashing/creating for others. McGrady would dominate the ball and Brooks would be forced to stand at some three point corner. Judging from your posts I doubt you've ever actually played basketball, but that's what would happen when you combine two players that both need the ball. Brooks talents were wasted with McGrady and part of the reason he exploded. Addition with subtraction!!

Once again, please educate yourself on the subject. It is a known fact amongst Rockets fans that 'passing' was Brook's biggest weakness. His passing skills weren't that great and could easily be exploited. Brooks' game doesn't involve penetrating and kicking it to the open 3. That was a fundamental flaw in his game. Seriously, ask any other Rockets fan and they'll tell you the same. But just for the LULZ, I'll let that slide.

OK, so Brooks' game involves holding the ball, slashing and creating for others. Wasn't that McGrady's role? What you're essentially saying is Brooks was a better player than McGrady, no? Is that what you're implying? McGrady's game also involves handling the ball, driving and kicking, etc, etc. How is Brooks any better than McGrady?

Besides your point of view is so simplistic I'm not sure if you realize how dumb you sound when you post.

If Mcgrady played he would dominate the ball and brooks would be forced to camp in the 3 pt line...



What are you like 10 years old? :oldlol:

What I'd like for you realize though is your logical fallacy. Houston was better without injured McGrady in 2009. That doesn't really translate to McGrady being a detriment and cancer to the team that year or in previous years.

[StateOfMind12]

But like you said, McGrady is a great regular season performer. Maybe it just wasn't his year. Something might have been bothering him (that could probably be it, dont really remember). But its not like they were doing terrible WITH him in the line up anyways. Maybe its opinion based but i'd rather have a line-up of Brooks/McGrady/Artest/Scola/Yao and rather have Battier as 6M for the regular season and playoffs and go from there. Who knows what might've happened.
I'm pretty sure they would have lost in the 1st round as the Rockets always did when Tmac was playing.

McGrady was an inefficient shooter that provided almost nothing other than scoring streaks. He was a decent playmaker but he sucked at everything else especially on defense and the '09 Rockets team were one of the best defenses in the league. If Mcgrady plays then the '09 Rockets are no longer an elite defense in the league because Mcgrady was a liability defensively.

Mcgrady's inefficient shooting would have hurt his team. He took like 15 fga and then convert like 38% of them that season? He would have ultimately stole and wasted 15 shots from his teammates and for his team by playing.

Now factor in how the Rockets were 20-15 with McGrady and 33-14 without him and it becomes easy to know why the Rockets were better off without McGrady in '09.


EDIT - lol at Immortal's terrible post again. Hubbs shouldn't waste his time with him but I guess he is having a kick dominating this *******.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

:roll: Shitty music is your forte, not basketball. Try again.

You are obsessed, puppet.

[Scholar]

I like T-Mac, but I suppose he wasn't much of a performer when it truly mattered. I mean, he did drop 13 in 35 seconds against the Spurs in the regular season, but that's the thing... It was the REGULAR season, as in the loss probably annoyed the Spurs but in the long run, it didn't have much affect on them.
If McGrady could've performed just as well in the Playoffs, I think the Rockets at the time would've been an unstoppable force.

Maybe.

[NortonMang]

Tracy McGrady post-season series record when playing: 0-7.
Tracy McGrady post-season series record when not playing: 1-1 (2009)

Lettuce beef real tea here, Tracy McGrady is a loser and a choking loser at that.



13 points in 31 seconds. Yea, he's a real loser. The man isn't 25. The game wears on most guys over 30, especially at guard. What's the most you ever scored? What's preferable, past his best years NBA superstar or sports forum loser?

[ImmortalNemesis]

And just to summarize the discussion in the thread:

-McGrady is supposedly surrounded by a "great" supporting cast.

- We established the 05 and 08 teams weren't good enough. Not only that, 05, 07, and 08 don't win without McGrady. However a few posters think the team doesn't get significantly worse without McGrady in 2007. (Replacing McGrady with Luther Head doesn't make the team worse lol)

-Later as the discussion took a few steps forward Fugher Hubbs admitted Tracy's supporting cast in 2005 was "trash" or had "scrub" starters.

-So instead of admitting McGrady simply didn't have good enough supporting cast to win, they decided to concentrate on the 2009 season. The 2009 season is a testament to how well the team could have been if McGrady doesn't play and is instead replaced by good role players. (Artest, Battier).

-I personally think McGrady could have contributed more to the team than Shane Battier. They think otherwise. Why? They point to the regular season record. Of course Houston is better off without injured McGrady. No shit. How does that support your claim that McGrady in previous years always held the team back from maximizing its potential?

-However Fuhrer Hubbs tried to use that statement (Houston played better without an injured McGrady in 2009) to support his claim that Houston would have been better off if they'd replaced McGrady with good role players in 05 and 07. And that's where their logic falls apart. Houston played better in 2009 without an injured McGrady. How does that in any way shape of form support the argument that Houston could have gone further (in 07 and 05) if they'd signed good role players instead of McGrady? How does that statement (Houston played better without injured McGrady) translate to McGrady being a detriment and cancer to the team in previous years? It makes 0 sense. An injured one legged McGrady is being used to support a claim that Houston is better off without healthy (and prime) McGrady. Now that is just f*cking stupid.

McGrady misses wide open reverse dunk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKggO62YPs4)

Watch that video. That was in early February of 2009. Its clear he wasn't even 50% healthy in 2009. I mean how f*cked up does your body have to be for you to miss an open dunk? McGrady had no elevation, he was playing with one knee. And again, if you think 07 and 09 McGrady are the same, then that just further proves you have no true concept or knowledge of what went on in Houston during the 08-09 season.

What you and StateofMind12 aka RocketGreatness (which I put on my ignore list yesterday) are doing is taking an injured McGrady and using him to support a silly argument: 'Houston could have gone further in 07 and 05 with decent role players instead of prime McGrady'. You're reaching.

I've tried to argue logically but these two clowns refuse to post anything that can be considered even remotely rational.
They've gone as far as saying:

Kevin Martin does much more offensively than McGrady
Houston is a better team in 2007 if Luther Head replaces McGrady.
Shane Battier contributes more to the team than McGrady.
They would take Battier over McGrady.
McGrady hindered Aaron Brooks.

Where is Brooks now btw? Is McGrady still preventing him from developing his game? lol

Blatant trolling. How am I supposed to logically argue with someone who spews garbage like that? They're cynical, it gets boring after a while.

[StateOfMind12]

I like T-Mac, but I suppose he wasn't much of a performer when it truly mattered. I mean, he did drop 13 in 35 seconds against the Spurs in the regular season, but that's the thing... It was the REGULAR season, as in the loss probably annoyed the Spurs but in the long run, it didn't have much affect on them.
If McGrady could've performed just as well in the Playoffs, I think the Rockets at the time would've been an unstoppable force.

Maybe.
:oldlol: Thanks for supporting my argument.

McGrady is a choking loser and nobody has done jack shit to argue otherwise. This Immortal **** is just making up a bunch of excuses for him. Yeah brah, it's totally reasonable to not get past the 1st round without an elite big man, the best Center in the league, and the best perimeter defender in the league, absolutely.

Oh and the Rockets would have played better with McGrady in '09, hence why the Rockets had a better record without McGrady in '09 than they did with him.

He didn't perform when it mattered the most, that was why he always lost. It has nothing to do with his teammates, it has nothing to do with being unfortunate or whatever bullshit was argued. You could say that for Orlando Tmac but you can't say that for Houston TMac. He always had his foot out the door when the series was coming to an end which was why he always blew series leads, played like garbage in those elimination games and so on.

[iDefend5]

McGrady was no more healthy in '07 and '08 than he was in '09. Weak excuse but typical coming from a Tmac dick sucker.

[Lebron23]

http://images.buyitsellit.com/197383.jpg

[iDefend5]

http://images.buyitsellit.com/197383.jpg
http://www.kingofforwards.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mdvirgin.jpg

[Balla_Status]

There's a thread in the Rockets forum that was i nthe main forum years ago called, "Dirk or Tmac."

Lots of morons chose Tmac.

[iDefend5]

There's a thread in the Rockets forum that was i nthe main forum years ago called, "Dirk or Tmac."

Lots of morons chose Tmac.
:roll:

Yeah what a ****ing joke. Dirk is a top 20-25 player of all-time, Tmac is not even top 50, probably not even top 75 and people would take she-mac over him? What a ****ing joke. Tmac is a loser who can't even stay on the court and when he does stay on teh court he can't even lead his team past the 1st round. Who the ****s wants this loser?

Tmac is a joke, biggest loser of this generation, and possibly ever in NBA history.

[WockaVodka]

There's a thread in the Rockets forum that was i nthe main forum years ago called, "Dirk or Tmac."

Lots of morons chose Tmac.
Four years ago? Wow, it was unreasonable to take Tmac over Dirk then but it wasn't so unreasonable to take Tmac over Dirk back in 2005 and before.


As for the debate that has been taking place in this thread between ImmortalNemesis, StateOfMind12, and Fuhrer Hubbs.

The best and only evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent is his record playing with the 2008-2009 Houston Rockets team. The record was not good obviously as the stat was repeated many many times and in many many pages in this thread.

I understand why ImmortalNemesis believes that it is not accurate to say that the 2009 Rockets were better without him because he was injured. However, as I stated above, the stat that has been posted many times is the best and only empirical evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent and that evidence does not support McGrady at all.

While Tmac may or may not have been injured in 2009. He obviously wasn't injured enough to stop playing, so it is kind of weak to just completely deflect the stat away and act as if it holds no meaning because it in fact does hold meaning.

Essentially, there is no empirical evidence or data that supports that Tmac would succeed and do well with the Rockets in 2009 or with any kind of talent because that data shows that the Rockets were not very good with him.

You can argue and speculate that he would do well but there is no actually evidence that he would.

[iDefend5]

I like T-Mac, but I suppose he wasn't much of a performer when it truly mattered. I mean, he did drop 13 in 35 seconds against the Spurs in the regular season, but that's the thing... It was the REGULAR season, as in the loss probably annoyed the Spurs but in the long run, it didn't have much affect on them.
If McGrady could've performed just as well in the Playoffs, I think the Rockets at the time would've been an unstoppable force.

Maybe.
yeah good regular season guy, shitty playoff performer, sounds about accurate

[StateOfMind12]

Four years ago? Wow, it was unreasonable to take Tmac over Dirk then but it wasn't so unreasonable to take Tmac over Dirk back in 2005 and before.


As for the debate that has been taking place in this thread between ImmortalNemesis, StateOfMind12, and Fuhrer Hubbs.

The best and only evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent is his record playing with the 2008-2009 Houston Rockets team. The record was not good obviously as the stat was repeated many many times and in many many pages in this thread.

I understand why ImmortalNemesis believes that it is not accurate to say that the 2009 Rockets were better without him because he was injured. However, as I stated above, the stat that has been posted many times is the best and only empirical evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent and that evidence does not support McGrady at all.

While Tmac may or may not have been injured in 2009. He obviously wasn't injured enough to stop playing, so it is kind of weak to just completely deflect the stat away and act as if it holds no meaning because it in fact does hold meaning.

Essentially, there is no empirical evidence or data that supports that Tmac would succeed and do well with the Rockets in 2009 or with any kind of talent because that data shows that the Rockets were not very good with him.

You can argue and speculate that he would do well but there is no actually evidence that he would.
:applause: Well that wraps it up. I wonder what this Immortal guy could honestly say.

Since he is too much of a ***** to argue with me because me and Hubbs have been dominating him in this entire thread, maybe he'll listen to you and understand what people have been trying to say to him this entire time. :oldlol:

[ImmortalNemesis]

The best and only evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent is his record playing with the 2008-2009 Houston Rockets team. The record was not good obviously as the stat was repeated many many times and in many many pages in this thread.

I understand why ImmortalNemesis believes that it is not accurate to say that the 2009 Rockets were better without him because he was injured. However, as I stated above, the stat that has been posted many times is the best and only empirical evidence we have of Tmac playing with talent and that evidence does not support McGrady at all.

While Tmac may or may not have been injured in 2009. He obviously wasn't injured enough to stop playing, so it is kind of weak to just completely deflect the stat away and act as if it holds no meaning because it in fact does hold meaning.

Essentially, there is no empirical evidence or data that supports that Tmac would succeed and do well with the Rockets in 2009 or with any kind of talent because that data shows that the Rockets were not very good with him.

You can argue and speculate that he would do well but there is no actually evidence that he would.

Good post and you made some valid points. And you're right, there's really no evidence to support the claim that healthy Tracy would have succeeded with Houston in 2009. I think for you to really understand my argument though, you first have to realize how bad injures had taken a toll on McGrady that year. I get what you're saying. He was healthy enough to play, but he was literally playing with one knee. Matt Bullard (Rockets broadcaster) once said during that 09 season that he'd talked to McGrady. He was told the knee was hurting McGrady so bad. Some days he was able to play, some days he wasn't. McGrady's injury was in a day-to-day status. Adelman addressed this issue and asked McGrady to sit until he got 100% healthy. My point is, this wasn't just some minor injury that could easily be ignored. Shit was serious business. McGrady eventually decided to sit out the rest of the season to get microfrature surgery. <------ That's how bad McGrady was that year.

I didn't dismiss the record w/ and w/o McGrady. And IMO, the Alston for Lowry trade had a HUGE impact on the record. Lowry is great now, he was this good even back then except his 3 pt was inconsistent.

I'll the take the only evidence available into consideration. But having watched 90% of Tracy's games in Houston, I know healthy Tracy could have helped the team even more. I'm sure the majority of fans who watched Rockets ball back then would agree. The record holds some merit, and even though that's the only evidence available you have to bear in mind Houston was playing with a 'one legged' (that's how he was known for by Rockets fan in 09) McGrady. So to me that record is not accurate at all.

Houston succeeding with a healthy McGrady in 2009 can only be speculated. And IMO, that's where logic and common sense comes into play. What's essentially being argued is this:

Battier brings more to the team than McGrady.

I'm sorry, but that's something I can't agree with. Artest would have been a starter regardless if Tracy was healthy or not. Wafer's role off the bench wouldn't have changed. Seeing as Scola is a PF, his role wouldn't have changed and most importantly his impact on the game wouldn't have significantly changed. Battier is the one who would have taken a step back to McGrady.

Again, it depends on how much merit you want to put on McGrady's injury. So to really comprehend my side of the story you first have to really understand how bad (physically speaking) McGrady was in 2009. I did my best to explain how bad injuries had taken a toll on Tracy that year.

Lastly let me end by saying this: Houston being better off without McGrady in 2009 doesn't translate to McGrady being a cancer or detrimental to the team in previous years. That is what RocketGreatness and Hubbs were arguing earlier. That is a huge fallacy.

[WockaVodka]

ImmortalNemesis,

You might think or believe that the Rockets would be better with McGrady in 2009 but as I said there is no empirical evidence or data that supports it. It is just your opinion that the Rockets would do better with McGrady in '09 and nothing more. All the evidence however points to the fact that the Rockets would indeed get worse with Mcgrady than without Mcgrady.

I don't think that most Rockets fans believe that McGrady would make this team better and they would have gotten past the 1st round with him either. McGrady is very hated Houston, he is hated in Houston just as much as he is hated in Orlando and in Toronto. They don't like him and I honestly understand why.

I've lived in Houston before and I have friends in Houston and they told me they don't like him and they also told me that they wouldn't have gotten past the 1st round with him either like some people have already said in this thread. This is just from my personal experience though. I'm not going to speak for the majority of the Rockets fan though but obviously some don't agree with you which is my point.

I don't think you should speak for the majority of the people or a fan base though especially when it is just your opinion. You can think that, sure, I won't stop you, but you shouldn't think that just because you think that, everybody else in your fan base will think that as well.

Also, if Mcgrady were healthy or to play for the rest of the 2009 season, the Lowry-Alston trade might not have ever been made. Alston was traded like a day or on the deadline if I recall correctly and Houston and its fans were shocked when they heard that Alston was traded. So Alston was traded after McGrady had already been injured and ruled out for the season. There is no evidence that the Rockets would have continued to make that Alston-Lowry trade had McGrady played for the rest of the season. You have to also keep this in mind as well.

[ImmortalNemesis]

+1 for everything you posted before this. I didn't mean to speak for the entire fan base. Opinions will obviously vary. But personally, going by what I've been told by weekly acquaintances....a good majority believe healthy McGrady would have made the team better. I can't really understand how one would choose Battier over a healthy McGrady though. I simply can't grasp it. What's your take on this if I may ask?


Also, if Mcgrady were healthy or to play for the rest of the 2009 season, the Lowry-Alston trade might not have ever been made. Alston was traded like a day or on the deadline if I recall correctly and Houston and its fans were shocked when they heard that Alston was traded. So Alston was traded after McGrady had already been injured and ruled out for the season. There is no evidence that the Rockets would have continued to make that Alston-Lowry trade had McGrady played for the rest of the season. You have to also keep this in mind as well.

@ bold: Why is that? I believe Houston would have traded Alston regardless if McGrady were hurt or not. The Alston trade happened shortly after McGrady was officially ruled out for the season. Now that you mention it, there's a reason why Rockets fans (the hardcore ones like clutchfans members) hate McGrady. Not because of his playoff failures but because of the bitch move he pulled in 2009. Houston was going to trade McGrady for Vince Carter. McGrady knew this and announced on his website that he was sitting out the rest of the season. He didn't consult the team doctor before-wards, nor did he talk to the coaching staff about his decision. Adelman made a big fuss about this. Seriously, look it up. Once again though (and I know this doesn't really concern you), Houston being better off without McGrady in 2009 doesn't necessarily translate to McGrady being cancerous or detrimental to the team in previous years. That's something those 2 previous posters were trying to argue, and I'm saying that's a logical fallacy.

This is how they see it: Houston was better off without McGrady.
This is how I see it: Houston was better off without injured one legged McGrady.

Therein lies the dilemma.

[CLTHornets4eva]

Do y'all think if TMac had played for a college coach like Dean Smith or Coach K, he would have grown up/ become more focused on winning?

I don't think he was pushed enough early on and never had the work ethic/ drive to succeed in the playoffs.

[Lebron23]

It sucks that Mcgrady was plagued by back injuries. This guy was one of the best perimeter scorer that I have ever seen.

[WockaVodka]

I can't really understand how one would choose Battier over a healthy McGrady though. I simply can't grasp it. What's your take on this if I may ask?
I believe it is understandable. Mcgrady was and wanted max contract type money while Battier did not.

Would you rather pay a player the max only to know that you aren't going to get very far with him as your leader or would you rather pay a player the mle or something of that nature for a great complimentary role player that will help you, your team, and your stars win?

I understand why they think that, they just didn't explain it very well or at all.


Why is that? I believe Houston would have traded Alston regardless if McGrady were hurt or not. The Alston trade happened shortly after McGrady was officially ruled out for the season
Well we will never know because Mcgrady was ruled out for the season. I'm just saying that there is a possibility that Rafer stays if Mcgrady stays. Rafer wasn't even on the trade block which surprised me, the Rockets fan, and the rest of the city in Houston.


As for the rest of your post, they are right in terms of empirical evidence that the Rockets were better without McGrady in 2009. Now does that necessarily mean they were better without McGrady this whole time like in 2007 or any other time? No, but it does mean that McGrady doesn't necessarily get past the 1st round in 2009 or any other season with that 2009 supporting cast.

Again, the empirical evidence and data proves that to be true.

You can obviously have your opinion but once again we will never know because it never happened. We can only go by what did happen and what is the closest thing to judge it by and that is the stat that has been repeated for the last 5 or something pages about the Rockets record with and without Mcgrady in 2009.

The empirical data shows that the Rockets in 2009 were better without Mcgrady then with him. Like I said, I don't care if he is one legged, I don't care how hurt he was because he was obviously healthy enough to play games and that's all I care about. If you play, you play, there is no excuses.

The Rockets were not successful with him playing those games in 2009 and the stats show it to be true.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Now I understand why one would take Battier over McGrady. Not for basketball reasons but for financial reasons.

What I still don't understand is how McGrady being inured or not correlates to the Lowry-Alston trade that went down. There's absolutely no correlation.

Here's the thing, we look at the records differently. This is how I see it:The only data available doesn't support the claim that Houston was better off without healthy McGrady. It supports the argument that Houston was better off without an injured McGrady. We're hitting a wall, different points of view. I go back to one of my earlier points: it depends on how much merit you want to put on the injury. In your opinion, if McGrady is healthy enough to play, then injuries aren't an excuse. Again, Tracy called it quits and had to have microfracture surgery that same year. Why is it that you can't take injury into consideration? It wasn't some bullshit injury, shit was serious.

There's no evidence proving Houston would have played better with healthy McGrady, just like there's no evidence proving Houston played worse with healthy McGrady. The closest thing you have is Houston's 35 game stretch with McGrady at (IMO) 50%...... ..that's it. And that, to me, is a very very weak argument.

[WockaVodka]

In your opinion, if McGrady is healthy enough to play, then injuries aren't an excuse. Again, Tracy called it quits and had to have microfracture surgery that same year. Why is it that you can't take injury into consideration? It wasn't some bullshit injury, shit was serious.
You already answered your own question. He was healthy enough to play so the injuries aren't an excuse, if you play, you play.

Mcgrady was always injury prone anyways so can't we talk about how he was injured in 2005, 2007, and 2008 too? This healthy McGrady thing is kind of a imaginary creature if you think about it. I work with empirical evidence and empirical evidence shows that Mcgrady was healthy enough to play in 2009 and play in 35 games in 2009. The empirical evidence also shows that the Rockets were better without him in 2009 than with him.




There's no evidence proving Houston would have played better with healthy McGrady, just like there's no evidence proving Houston played worse with healthy McGrady. The closest thing you have is Houston's 35 game stretch with McGrady at (IMO) 50%...... ..that's it. And that, to me, is a very very weak argument.

It's the closest evidence we have about how the Rockets would have done in 2009 with him and without him, so you mind as well work with than to work with nothing and just pure speculate.

If you want to just speculate which is what you are doing right now then go right ahead. However, working with stats and with empirical data though? It pretty much shows the Rockets in 2009 were better without him than with him.

I'm not sure what else you want me to elaborate on.

You have your opinion what would have happened and what could have happened, I have my facts about what happened and what probably would have ended up happening.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Mcgrady was always injury prone anyways so can't we talk about how he was injured in 2005, 2007, and 2008 too? This healthy McGrady thing is kind of a imaginary creature if you think about it.

That's the problem. You don't realize how bad McGrady was hurting in 2009. Was McGrady able to play in April in 05, 07, and 08? Yes. The 2009 season doesn't compare. For you to claim McGrady was basically the same in 07 and 08 as in 09 just proves what I've speculated all along. You don't fully understand how much injures had taken a toll on McGrady that year. And for you to comprehend my argument, that's something you really have to understand. You can't just dismiss the injury. If you're going to point at the records you have to take McGrady's healthiness into consideration. The 07 and 09 McGradys aren't even remotely close.



I work with empirical evidence and empirical evidence shows that Mcgrady was healthy enough to play in 2009 and play in 35 games in 2009. The empirical evidence also shows that the Rockets were better without him in 2009 than with him.

Different point of view. To me, the evidence shows Houston was better off without an injured McGrady @ 50%. You refuse to acknowledge that. Any Rockets fan who watched the team would agree he was not the same that year.



It's the closest evidence we have about how the Rockets would have done in 2009 with him and without him, so you mind as well work with than to work with nothing and just pure speculate.


Go right ahead. But like I said, we look at the evidence differently. The data doesn't support your argument that Houston played better without a healthy McGrady. It supports the claim that Houston played worse with an injured one legged McGrady. That's a major hole in your argument. Healthiness doesn't matter anymore? Health is not important anymore? Health doesn't change how or what a player contributes to the team? You're dismissing that part of my argument.


If you want to just speculate which is what you are doing right now then go right ahead. However, working with stats and with empirical data though? It pretty much shows the Rockets in 2009 were better without him than with him.


Houston in 2009 was better without an injured McGrady, that I can agree with. I agreed about 7 pages ago. The only data you have is a 35 game stretch (McGrady was in a day-to-day status btw, the games weren't consecutively played. Sometimes he was out, sometimes he wasn't...which goes back to my point, the injury was some serious shit), one in which healthy McGrady is not even part of. That is a very very weak argument.



You have your opinion what would have happened and what could have happened, I have my facts about what happened and what probably would have ended up happening.


It is a fact Houston was better off without injured McGrady. It is not a fact Houston was better off without healthy McGrady. We just have a different point of view. You're ignoring the fact that McGrady had to sit out the rest of the season (which further proves my point of how bad he was physically speaking that year). That is a big hole in your already weak argument.

At least you brought up some valid and important points. You're also very good at elaborating and getting your point across. These other two posters just spewed nonsense like "0-7 though" "He is still a choking loser p*ssy". Stuff like that.

[WockaVodka]

That's the problem. You don't realize how bad McGrady was hurting in 2009.
Mcgrady has some sort of injury every year, he never played all 82 or even 80+ games in his career.

If you want to make an excuse for his 2009 play then go right ahead and also make an excuse for his 2005, 2007, 2008, etc. play.

I don't get why 2009 is some special year where he was just flat out injured but not in another. This would actually help you in this case as well if you were to bring up the injuries in 2005, 2007, 2008, but of course we would have no way of judging him in the first place.

He suffered back spasms and serious back spasms in 2007. I think he said something about possibly retiring soon back then as well.

In 2008, he had both knee and shoulder injuries. He had both surgeries in the off-season. This is pretty similar to 2009 except he had the surgery during the middle of the season instead.

So pretty much Mcgrady was never healthy all of this time then? So how are we even suppose to judge him?

If he plays, he plays. End of discussion. I don't care how hurt he supposedly was that season compared to any other. He played in those 35 games and he was not effective and it showed as the team was worse with him than without him.

You are just speculating at this point because as stated. The evidence points how the Rockets were better without him in 2009 opposed to with him. Was he injured that season? Yeah he probably was but he was also hurt in 2007, 2008, and many other seasons as well.

This healthy McGrady barely exists in the first place so why talk or argue against or about it?

If you want to argue about how the 2009 Rockets would be better with this mythical creature than go right ahead. I prefer talking about reality though.

[ImmortalNemesis]

If he plays, he plays. End of discussion. I don't care how hurt he supposedly was that season compared to any other. He played in those 35 games and he was not effective and it showed as the team was worse with him than without him.

You are just speculating at this point because as stated. The evidence points how the Rockets were better without him in 2009 opposed to with him. Was he injured that season? Yeah he probably was but he was also hurt in 2007, 2008, and many other seasons as well.

This healthy McGrady barely exists in the first place so why talk or argue against or about it?

If you want to argue about how the 2009 Rockets would be better with this mythical creature than go right ahead. I prefer talking about reality though.

OK. Is clear you think 09 McGrady isn't any different from 08 or 07 McGrady. If that's the case, then I have nothing else to say to you. For the record, McGrady had those major surgeries after the 07-08 season. That's when injured started to take a toll. Nice try though. It is quite mind boggling to me how far one is willing to go just to support your own argument; even if the logic makes 0 sense. McGrady wasn't the same in 09. How many games he played in 09? How many games he played in 05? How many games he played in 07? How many games he played in 08? Was McGrady able to play in the playoffs in 05, 07, and 08? Yes. Was McGrady able to play in 09? No. He barely played 35 games. And yet.....

:facepalm McGrady wasn't any different in 09 compared to his previous years? Really?

@ your 'empirical data' argument:

I consider the 07 and 08 McGrady a 'healthy' McGrady. The data doesn't prove Houston was better off without healthy McGrady. The data proves Houston was better off without injured one legged McGrady. And for you to understand that, you first have to realize and truly understand the difference in 07 and 08 McGrady from 09 McGrady. But you aren't willing to do that. I thought you were a pretty level headed poster. McGrady wasn't the same that year.

Like I said, if you aren't willing to acknowledge that then I have nothing else to say to you. There's no point in continuing this discussion. Let me end by posting this: 07 and 09 McGrady aren't significantly different? :oldlol:

No bullshit, I did laugh when I read that sentence. No offense of course. Have a good day sir.

[WockaVodka]

McGrady wasn't the same in 09. How many games he played in 09? How many games he played in 05? How many games he played in 07? How many games he played in 08? Was McGrady able to play in the playoffs in 05, 07, and 08? Yes. Was McGrady able to play in 09? No. He barely played 35 games. And yet.....

I consider the 07 and 08 McGrady a 'healthy' McGrady. The data doesn't prove Houston was better off without healthy McGrady. The data proves Houston was better off without injured one legged McGrady. And for you to understand that, you first have to realize and truly understand the difference in 07 and 08 McGrady from 09 McGrady. But you aren't willing to do that. I thought you were a pretty level headed poster. McGrady wasn't the same that year.
So now we are determining health on how many games a player played now? So if Mcgrady played through the entire 09 season opposed to getting the knee surgery, that would be consider a healthy version of him now?

I suggest you stick to a consistent definition of what healthy or injured or whatever means.

I'll take the evidence of what I can get from Mcgrady in 2009 and what I can get from him was 35 games in 2009 and in those 35 games they were worse with Mcgrady than without him.


Like I said, if he plays, he plays, no excuses and he played in 35 of those games for Houston in 09. Those 09 stats are apart of the empirical evidence that the Rockets in 2009 were better without him.

You on the other hand refuse to acknowledge that because you know that all of the 09 stats Mcgrady posted completely hurt him in this argument. If it did help him then you would be posting those stats all day right?

It seems like you are just doing whatever you can do to your power to deflect the stats that the Rockets were better without McGrady in 09.

Facts are facts though so if you want to deny them and avoid them all you want, go for it, I won't stop you. It's hard to take someone seriously when they do that though. It would answer my question on why everybody in this thread kept posting those stats in your face though. You just refused to acknowledge it because it hurts your argument.

[Fuhrer Hubbs]

Good posts WackaVodka, summed up our argument perfectly :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:


Do y'all think if TMac had played for a college coach like Dean Smith or Coach K, he would have grown up/ become more focused on winning?

I don't think he was pushed enough early on and never had the work ethic/ drive to succeed in the playoffs.

Perhaps it could have. He was one of the first NBA players to have that AAU mindset when approaching the game and I think it really does show that he skipped that level. Then again you wouldn't be able to tell at all with a guy like Kobe so tough to say. It's honestly probably just his mindset. Hard to change a guys outlook on the game. It's why most of those character flawed guys always do the same thing no matter who their coach is.