Missing: Luis Scola in 4th Q

by grungedave on Nov 7, 2008 10:41 AM CST in Whimsical Posts

This is a public service announcement...

Milk_carton_medium

please contact Daryl Morey (NOT Rick Adelman) if you have any information or can be of any assistance.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

While Hayes is valuable

It’s pretty disturbing that your 3rd string PF gets more minutes than your starter.

by goingforthecorner on Nov 7, 2008 12:48 PM CST reply actions

Chuckwagon is EXCELLENT at what he does. Not good. Not very good. Excellent. He completely took soft LaMarcus out of the game just like he did to soft, whiny, flopping, dirty, Dirk in the 4th against Dallas. We aren’t in a position to steal that game if Chuck doesn’t play. I love Luis but he was getting wrecked on D. He doesn’t have the strngth or lower body of Chuckwagon so he couldn’t muscle charmin sof LaMarcus around and thereofre throw him off. Luis let heim get all othe shots he wanted. Yes, he put a hand in is face but no he did not take away LaMarcus’s first option like Chuck did every single time. Chuck should have palyed as much as he did. If not more. No one seems to appreciate him for what he does. He is fantastic on the defensive side of the ball. It was obvious.

by clutchcity on Nov 7, 2008 4:10 PM CST reply actions

yes, but

Chuck is great on D.
the problem is that basketball requires defense AND offense. Chuck is one of the worst offensive players I’ve seen in a while. For all he does on D, Chuck costs us bigtime on offense.

by grungedave on Nov 7, 2008 4:18 PM CST up reply actions

chuck shouldn't have to score

Chuck Hayes should not have to score with Ron, Yao, Tracy, and Aaron on the floor. The reasons we got back in that game were:

1. Tracy got hot
2. We FINALLY strung together some stops. That doesn’t happen if Luis is allowing LaMarcus to score everytime he touches the ball. Without Chuck we aren’t in position to steal that one.

Tracy and Luis could have made every shot they took but without getting stops it would not have mattered. Chuck got us stops.

by clutchcity on Nov 7, 2008 4:27 PM CST up reply actions

The major point I have is that Luis Scola's offense was neutralizing LAM's offense, so it didn't matter

by UofTOrange on Nov 7, 2008 4:34 PM CST up reply actions

It did matter. We could not get stops until Chuck was loacking up LaMarcus. There is no way to win or make up a deficit if you cannot get stops.

by clutchcity on Nov 7, 2008 4:38 PM CST up reply actions

locking not loacking. stupid.

by clutchcity on Nov 7, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions

that is a huge problem though

Every time Chuck is on the court, T-Mac, Artest and Yao have to fight through an extra defender or three becuase no one bothers to guard Chuck. THAT makes it infinitely harder to get good shots and easy buckets.

by grungedave on Nov 7, 2008 4:56 PM CST up reply actions

bad spelling

sorry. i typed that in a hurry and should have proof read.

by clutchcity on Nov 7, 2008 4:11 PM CST reply actions

I am with clutchcity on this one. Luis was getting owned and while I may have an unhealthy man crush on him and CARL, I think they needed to sit that one out. Aldridge is their second option and sometimes first option on offense. Luis, Carl, and Chuck are always going to be the fifth options whenever they are on the court with the rest of the starters.

by amaar on Nov 7, 2008 6:38 PM CST reply actions