That's not really any different from what I said, either way it had nothing to do with the hypotheis that the Rockets were "trading" splitter for scola.
I haven't made an analogy so I don't know what you're talking about. Look, here's what I know of the trade: 1) The Rockets and the Spurs wanted Splitter 2) The Rockets also wanted Scola and had a deal with the Spurs to get Scola in exchange for Spanoulis 3) Spurs threatened to back out of the Scola deal if the Rockets drafted Splitter The rest is history. That the Scola trade was a salary dump in the Spurs' POV doesn't matter. The point is that the Spurs used it to prevent the Rockets from drafting Splitter. Of course, as I said earlier, I just read it somewhere. I don't know if it's real but I didn't make it up.
Yes. If you read it somewhere, then provide a link. There is no logic for this. If 1) was the case, they would've just drafted him. If 3) is true, they could have made the trade on the spot. It would be stupid for the Rockets to pass on the guy they wanted based on a "wink wink" trade with a rival. You don't do that with anyone, let alone a rival. Possibly, the drafting of Splitter is what caused the Spurs to get comfortable with trading Scola. So MAYBE, in that sense, Splitter allowed us to get Scola. The whole concept is just absurd. If you're right, what would've happened if someone else drafted Splitter? -- The Rockets would've passed on the guy they wanted, and the Spurs wouldn't have gotten Splitter either. What you're suggesting makes no rational sense, nor was it widely reported. So people have asked for either a link or stop repeating it. From what I recall, the Spurs were up against luxury tax constraints, and had to decided between Ian Mahinmi and Scola. Oops.
What you said was the Scola trade was all about Jackie Butler and cash. What I'm trying to point out to you is that if the Rockets had drafted Splitter, then they probably wouldn't have done the Scola trade. In fact, since they had no backup to Duncan they might have bit the bullet and brought him here anyway. 3M a year for 3 years (Scola's contract) isn't really all that expensive for a vet big man.
Can't even remember where nor when I read it. If you think it doesn't have value this way, be my guest. I'm thinking: 1) Rockets wanted Scola more so they didn't draft Splitter. 3) Trades have process; it wasn't at that point, yet. MAYBE. GMs try to know who's taking who, you know. Well, if you think it's not worth considering because there isn't a link, then don't but if you're gonna criticize it for its sensibility, I'll also make points. So they decided to unload Scola. Don't see how that matters.
exactly, but Splitter offensive game is starting come around slowly,especially his post game, it's a little ugly sometimes, but he gets so deep in the paint if he becomes a great post player that would be something to watch, but he is best of course on the pick n roll, because he is so big and moves so well, and smart for a big man. Also he needs to work on his free throws and outside shot he has an ugly form but Spurs coaches said they will work with him this summer, like they have worked with alot of the guys who weren't great shooters on the team. His rebounding has improved alot also. Defensively, is where he is at his best, he moves his feet well, he could be very foul prone, but he is not a great shot blocker because he doesn't have great timing but he does alter alot of shots. One thing though I have noticed, and Sean Elliot has got on him alot during the broadcast is that he doesn't put his hands up which makes him longer, and tougher to shoot over. I hope he plays in the playoffs, with Duncan especially against the Lakers, they could match up with them size wise with them, but of course not talent wise. Teams could have troubles scoring in the paint, hopefully pop's love for Bonner doesn't grow, all our big man can bring something but depends who were playing but Splitter needs to play more, and he could be a good player in this league.
Happy in Houston Argentina's Scola about to make his mark on NBA <i> That's not to say there wasn't interest in Scola from other teams. With the Spurs again passing on signing Scola this summer, they opened the bidding to other teams interested in vying for his draft rights. Detroit, Seattle and Cleveland all expressed interest but it was Houston who emerged the winner, dealing Vassilis Spanoulis (who later bolted for Europe), a second-round draft pick and cash considerations for a man who has been touted as Europe's top player. "As an organization, we felt responsible to allow Luis to pursue his dream of the NBA," Spurs general manager R.C. Buford said at the time, "and this was the best opportunity to realize his value." The Rockets immediately signed Scola to a three-year, $9.3 million contract and paid $500,000 toward his buyout.</i> Bibby-to-Cleveland Will Never Die <i> A deal almost got done on Trade Deadline Eve last year, and another one fell apart just as San Antonio dealt Luis Scola to Houston over the summer. The hold-ups have been varying -- Sacramento's reportedly looking for cap relief, which could either come in the form of either expiring contracts or the assumption of the Kings' own ornery deals. Cleveland's stipulation over the summer was the added acquisition of a scoring power forward (hence Scola) and now Danny Ferry would like to shed some payroll of his own.</i> Windhorst Beat Blog: Smith makes the most sense <i>A couple of years ago as I was trying to get details on a three-way trade that would've sent both Mike Bibby and Luis Scola to Cleveland, Drew showed up at a summer league game in Vegas with the Maloof brothers who own the Kings and I thought it was a done deal.</i> Hitting the jackpot. Rockets land Scola. <i>The Rockets might have gotten lucky for more than the obvious reasons. The Spurs were working on a three-way deal with the Kings and Cavaliers that could have included Scola. When they fell through, they moved to the Rockets deal, dropping the Jackie Butler salary. They could still get in on that, having moved further from the luxury tax. Or the Cavaliers and Kings could make it work without the Spurs, presumably involving Mike Bibby. But the Rockets got in and out before Scola's deadline with Tau Ceramica. And in a way, it did not cost them anyone that was going to contribute next season.</i> <hr> Did other teams such as Cleveland (maybe Detroit & Seattle also) also have <i>wink-wink</i> agreements with the Spurs not to draft Splitter so they could trade for Scola?
It's ludicrous to argue about this because it's all based around the fiction that the Rockets wanted to draft Splitter in 2007, and had some prearranged deal to get him. . They did not, they wanted Aaron Brooks and Carl Landry, who they got by trading down. End of story. If they'd wanted Splitter, they could have drafted him. As could any other team. It had nothing to do with Scola. But anyway, it wasn't the amount of Scola's contract, Jacky Butler's was only 2 years at 6 million left at the time - it was the fact that the SPurs couldn't fit Scola's in without paying a lot of luxury tax (since they aren't able to move Butler eitehr in this scenario, so probably $10 to $15mm), somethign they were not willing to do.
Very good team defender. Good man defender. Solid low post defender. Excellent defender on the pick and roll and at guarding mobile bigs in the high post or on the perimeter. Good finisher off set ups from guards for layups and dunks. Solid rebounder. Good passer. Just about zero individual offensive scoring game though. His individual scoring ability is extremely limited.
Scola was never the Euroleague MVP. This is an untrue myth amongst the Rockets fan base. He never won a Euro MVP.
IIRC, the Spurs did not sign Scola earlier because they felt that Duncan was still going to play at a high level for some years, and Scola would not be able to have much PT behind Duncan. What they decided to do was draft a younger PF in Splitter and trade Scola. I remember reading somewhere that the Spurs were banking on Splitter's potential that he would develop into a player as good as or maybe even better than Scola. Anyway, I don't think not taking Splitter had anything to do with the Scola deal for the Rockets. It probably did affect the Spurs' resolve to let go of Scola.
Dei, Your statement makes no rational sense as NIKEstrad said. No way you pass on Splitter if you want him based on a wink wink deal to let the Spurs pick him. How does that work? There is no guarantee Splitter even stays on the draft board all the way to the Spurs selection. No GM would do that. Back up and think clearly, man. Simplify. Ockham's Razor. If you wanted Scola, and you liked Splitter, then the Rockets should just take Splitter and work on the trade with the Spurs for Scola. Instead the Rockets passed on Splitter, because they weren't interested.
They weren't interested because they wanted Carl Landry in that spot, which is why they traded to get him 4 picks later.
Spurs did it to get under LT. Someone posted, perhaps not in this thread, that the Spurs did not get under the tax that year (Scola trade), but they did. Up until last season, or was it the previous?, the Spurs had never in their franchise history paid LT.
I don't know. Again, from what I read the Spurs had a deal with Houston, which they would've backed out of if Houston drafted Splitter. Like I also said, what I read made sense to me because it's plausible that Buford knew who the teams between the Houston and SA would pick. I don't know how it's a "wink, wink" deal. They had a deal in place. Draft day comes, Splitter falls all the way through to Houston's pick, Morey wants him, Buford found out, told Morey they'd just trade Scola somewhere else if Morey drafted Splitter and voila. I'm gonna repeat again, that Houston agreed not to draft Splitter for Scola was something I read. I didn't make it up. I'm not trying to push some theory. Saying I don't have a source to back it up is different from saying it doesn't make sense because it did to me and I'm willing to explain how.
Did you read it in a print publication or on the Internet? If it was on the Internet, why is it so difficult for you to provide a viable link?* How can it be a <i>Deal</i> until it is sent into the NBA office for approval & completion? If it is an <i>Understanding</i>, then it is a <i>wink-wink</i> deal until it is consummated with the NBA. In the links that I provided earlier, Cleveland was very close to trading for Bibby and Scola. If the Rockets and the Spurs had a <i>Deal</i> (not draft Splitter and be able to trade for Scola) as you have been saying, then explain why the Spurs were on the verge of voiding it and trading Scola to Cleveland. If Scola would have ended up in Cleveland instead of Houston, then the Rockets would have been able to file a breech of contract suit against San Antonio? <hr> * I search through <i>Google</i> as well as anybody on this site and I have been unable to find the <i>Deal</i> that you have been suggesting.
FWIW, John Lopez's blog explained the deal from the Spurs perspective in 2007: http://blogs.chron.com/lopezblog/archives/2007/07/why_the_spurs_d.html
