Landry is drafted, shows promise, gone. Brooks is drafted, shows promise, gone. Anderson, Jefferies, Miller come aboard, show little, gone. And so it goes, many come, many leave and what is the result? Not much, a "team" that appears to be in constant flux. Hayes and Scola are probably the next to go. The Rockets are a revolving door. What it is the driving force behind all this? Is there a master plan? I wonder, most of it appears to financial. When we had "superstars" to build around, we couldn't seem to get the right supporting cast even though players were coming and going. Now that we have no "superstars" the supporting cast is really first rate, but players are still coming and going. Do any of you see a "design" in all this. Are be getting somewhere, or wandering aimlessly? We have an excess of the same type of player. Why? More assets to move? Bottomline, are the Rockets progressing, are we building a team, or just shuffling the deck?
We just need stars. Not roleplayers. Stars. And if we can't get that star the cast will continue shuffling.
Every team has turnover with its role players. When the Rockets had stars (Yao, Tracy), they hung on too long according to many fans.
If you closely observe the way the team has been built and throw away your bias the reason for this 'deck shuffling' will become apparent. For example, this deck shuffling has resulted in; cash -> 2007 31st pick -> Carl Landry -> Kevin martin (currently worth a lottery pick) or 27th 2007 pick -> aaron brooks -> goran dragic + 23rd 2011 pick -> D.Motijunas + Goran Dragic (probally also worth a late 1st rounder) etc. Wether you choose to see it or not, this 'deck shuffling' works, and in my opinion is ingenious. The ability to consistently enhance team talent/value on a yearly basis WILL eventually pay off, we as fans however simply need to be patient.
Morey is an interesting guy. I think he's a shrewd GM, but I think his plan is flawed. I'd prefer (assuming the lockout ends) to see Kevin and Luis traded before the season begins and start counting those ping pong balls, but I suspect Morey will hold onto the vets until the trade deadline, which would be a mistake, because if you want a top three pick, you need to start losing early and start losing often.
While the Rockets plan is to rebuild without becoming a bad team, it appears that it is the owner who is insisting on this. Morey is just following orders.
Of course it depends on which era you are referring to, but in general they built a core of stars and a supporting cast and succeeded over time. For example, the Spurs built a core of Duncan, Ginobbli, and Parker and surrounded them with role players. The core has been together for several years.
You don't really need advanced statistics if all you're gonna do is tank. In fact retaining Morey is bad for tanking, as good GMs continually get good players, which leads to wins. Telling a GM to purposely tank is like telling Kobe Bryant to only average 5 pts a season so the Lakers will have more ping pong balls.
Were the Rockets shuffling assets or building a team from 1986 to 1992, when they won 42, 46, 45, 41, 52, 42 games?
If Brooks, Landry, etc. are as good as Duncan, Ginobli, or Parker, they'd be retained and given fat extensions. Morey's shuffling because while his drafts were good, these players aren't worth paying $10+ mil for to be the cornerstone of your team. The idea is that you don't overpay for average players, so you can save your money to overpay for star players.
If Morey had drafted Kevin Durant and Derrick Rose, he would've kept them like his life depended on it. He'd have given them max extensions and make them think they should forever be Rockets. It's not that Morey likes to shuffle, but rather he lacks the players that make him want to stop shuffling.
Morey's plan is dependent on other general managers cooperating, rebuilding through the draft is the most obvious path to a championship, and the worse your record is, the better your chances of getting a superstar.
Can the right mix of soild role players win it all? If there are no real weak spots on the team one would think it would work. ALL teams have a weak spot or two to them; a soild team of better than average role players would not though. Players that are not the best at their position but top 10 in the NBA at every spot should/would win and win big. Thoughts??
And they have done it with their franchis eplayers intact. The teams Morey has assembled are championship-caliber teams. Health has been the main problem. And, more importantly, health to salary hogs. The team that took the Lakers to 7 games had lost it's starting center (Yao) and its backup center (Mutombo) in that playoffs. That team was built to wwin it all, and in my opinion, they could have. The difference is that those teams shuffled players around superstars (or added superstars to their existing players/superstars). The Rockets haven't had that fortune, They have had misfortune. Take the two best players (or 60% of the salary) off any team in the last 30 years and tell me which one would have finished over .500.
I wasn't going to get into this thread until I saw that it was started by solid. All are fair questions so here is my take. - Keep the team stocked with talent. - Keep the talent young. - Trade the aging talent before its too late (if we are not a contender) - Upgrade the talent when ever possible. - Try to develope what you have into a superstar and continue to take chances on young talent with superstar potential. - Don't keep any player past his usefulness. - Have enough talent to be ready compete for a play-off spot or to trade for a superstar should one come available. I think DM has done a great job of stocking the team with talent just not a superstar. There is lots of young talent on the team (some possibly with superstar potential or maybe not). I think the Landry trade falls under the catagory of upgrading talent. There is no question in my mind that Kevin Martin was an upgrade. Trading Battier falls under the catagory of trading away aging talent while you can still get some value for him. TWill, Thabeet, Hill etc represent trading a little for a chance at a high potential player that is still very young. The team IMO is stocked with enough talent that we can trade several peices as part of a deal for a superstar and still have a lot of peices left. We have a lot of developing youth with all star potential and the team as it stands can compete for a play-off spot.
