Had not thought about a simultaneous trade with the TPE and other contracts. Makes a lot more sense now. If we were to go that route, I think we would want more back in return than just Dragic, which is probably why we would try to get a 3rd team involved. Also, if we add a PG I think Beverley will be gone. His value is likely at a high point coming off a 2nd team all-nba defense appearance. I could easily see someone like Cleveland giving up something of value for him. He would be a great backup for no-defense Kyrie Irving.
Why wouldn't he be great value for the no-defense Houston Rockets then??? Beverley is going into free agency next Summer as well. There are very few teams that need him more than the Rockets do even if they are using him as a backup for 25 minutes a night (which he's probably more effective at anyways). I have no idea why people here are throwing him into random trade ideas when A. his value is higher than in Houston vs anywhere else, and B. They are operating under the assumption that Morey can fool other GM's into thinking he is a superstar trade asset... which he's probably not. So why try and trade him? It would be like the Rockets trying to trade Chuck Hayes when he was a key contributor for the Rockets as the perfect 5th wheel on a value contract. His value was that he was a perfect fit in that role. Other team's GM's aren't dumb anymore. They know who Beverley is, and aren't going to be fooled into thinking he's a superstar trade asset. For them... He's a throw in. For the Rockets.... he's very important.
thanks, that's helpful. as an alt/history scenario, if we had traded Aski, but NOT traded Lin, what additional options would the rockets have had to upgrade. assume we did not match parsons, or, even better, didn't make him a RFA.
I didn't call him a superstar trade asset. But he is a good asset. As for why would we trade him......PG has been a revolving door on this team. Rafer, Brooks, Lowry, Dragic, Lin, Beverley. Despite this, we've been able to generate good returns out of the position. If you're trading Beverley for a guy like Dragic, not only are you upgrading the position, but you're also showing confidence in Canaan and to a lesser degree Johnson. Who would want Beverley? Someone in a similar position as us....ie a contender or near contender. Also, don't forget that whichever team trades for him gets both his bird rights and restricted free agency next year, in addition to paying him penuts this year. Cleveland makes the most sense considering their needs, and they might be willing to part with that top 10 protected Miami pick to get him. Gives them a nice rotation after they trade Wiggins, Thompson and Bennett for Love: Irving / Beverley Waiters / (Allen) Lebron / Miller Love / ? Varejao / Haywood They may even stick Waiters on the 2nd team, letting Bev start at PG and playing Irving as more of a 2 guard (which he is anyway).
So is there a certain time-frame during which we can expect the Rockets to use one the TPE, BAE, or MLE?
I would rather sign Bev to 3-4m for the next 3 years. He shouldn't be traded at all. We don't need a playmaker, we need a defender.
I honestly thought your first post wasn't that big of a deal, however your posts after that were unnecessary including this one. No one is trying to kiss Bima's, it has to do more with him doing good work for this website. Although all the information he posted is out there, not every person wants to go through the trouble of finding the information and thinking about it. Others just don't understand how the cap works and even have a hard time interpreting simple concepts. Bimas article is more than just numbers since he is also informing the reader about certain rules in the cap. I don't think its necessary to hate on the guy for that.
Avery Bradley just signed a 4 year $32 million contract. Bradley is a better shooter, Beverley is a better defender. They likely have similar value around the league. We aren't going to pay Beverley 4 years $32 million if we have Dragic, Canaan, Johnson, and the rights to Llull.
Excellent point, and one that the Rockets no doubt are concerned about. However, given the (narrowing) championship window, the Rockets may be willing to just go into the season with [High Caliber PG Trade Acquisition] and Beverley at the PG spot and then take their chances next summer with Beverley. Beverley will be a RESTRICTED free agent next summer and (much like Bledsoe this summer) will likely not receive a substantial offer sheet right away. The Rockets might be able to either re-sign Beverley for less than what Bradley got, or they might even be able to facilitate a sign-and-trade of Beverley to another team, gaining another asset in the process. (Also, if the Rockets got Dragic or another PG entering the last year of his contract, having Beverley as both leverage and insurance in case they lose that other PG.) Bottom line: I think there's a good chance the Rockets keep Beverley for next season even if they get themselves a new starting PG. His value to the team this season (and potential value next summer as a restricted free agent) may outweigh the risk of eventually losing him.
Just remember this: Until Kevin Love is traded elsewhere we are still trying to acquire him. Our plethora of options at PG are there to help us acquire Love. If we have to move ALL of them out (including whomever we trade for) we will if it gets us Love.
You mentioned getting "something of value" in return for Beverley. I just want to know what the purpose is? To flip an asset? Maybe... but there is no indication that Beverley is going to net a "Lowry Pick" type of asset that can be used to compete in the market. The Rockets have substitute assets (2nd rounders, 2017 1st rounder, etc.) they can use instead of giving up a player that is a perfect fit for their team, and is irreplaceable with a pick that Beverley would net. Would any team love to have Beverley... Sure.... but my point is whether starting or coming off the bench, Beverley is worth more to the Rockets than he is to probably 27 to 29 other teams in the NBA. I just dont see the point in the Rockets really bringing him into trade discussions unless he's going to be the linchpin that brings back a 3rd core player (which I doubt he is). If Flip Saunders says we gotta have Beverley to get Love to Houston than F-Yes... send him, but my point is in that type of scenario, you have the ability typically to send out substitute assets that make more sense in a trade like that to begin with.
I don't necessarily disagree. The question is: 1) Would you trade him to get Dragic (even if going to a 3rd team)? 2) Would you trade him for an upgrade at the 4 (assuming that's what the incoming asset could help you get)? Beverley is perfect for this team, even if he's coming off the bench. A 4 guard rotation of Dragic, Harden, Beverley, and Daniels is about as close to perfect as you can get. But if you're in January and the 4 is still a question mark, you have to make that trade.
Is this a question? I would like to know how can we get Dragic with the current cap? If someone knows.
You'd do it with separate trades. Trade #1 - Lin TPE to absorb Dragic Trade #2 - TJones, Beverley, etc for expiring contract
Yes, we do it, why would the Suns do it? You think Jones, Beverley, and expiring contact can result in Dragic? The rockets can pass the first round with Dragic.
Rockets werent going to win anything with Bosh Spice and Justin Timberlake. Rockets needed to address their defense. You cant outscore teams in the playoffs as they learned against OKC and Portland. You need to be able to get stops. All the signings so far seem to indicate this, even Nick Johnson appears to be a tougher J Lin. Lin and Parsons are in better spots for their careers and this clears the way for Harden to accept the challenge he claims he wants. The "sort of" stars are gone, now its just him and Howard...put up or shut up
I am with You. I want to have Lowry, keep Parsons,and get a good coach during this off season rather than going for the soft, overpaid Bosh. After having Bosh, the team almost has nothing left in the bench.
1. Of course (However I just don't think its going to be necessary) 2. ?.... again... it all depends If you've already upgraded the PG position than possibly, but again.. if the Rockets have substitute assets I see that as having a higher likelihood of A. Being attractive that type of buyer and B. that being offered over Beverley by Morey. I'm not opposed to moving Beverley if needed (has to be special situation from buyers perspective), but the whole point of what I'm saying is I dont see a need to move him under pretty much any circumstance I can fathom. -I dont think this applies to you, but the conversation really started with certain folks on here severely overvaluing Bev, Canaan, etc. as a trade assets & coming up with wild multi-level trades that are more complex than they really need to be. If you are overvaluing Beverley as a player that can get you a "Lowry type" of pick that can be flipped than sure. I can see Morey moving him to a 3rd team to make his primary offer for a 3rd core player more palatable to the buyer.... However I think that's overvaluing Beverley's market. The point at the end of the day really has to be why in the world would the Rockets trade Beverley if they have substitute assets to pass along in a deal instead that are potentially more valuable in trades anyways? You can talk about teams that would love to have Bev all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that those aren't the teams trading someone like Kevin Love, Rajon Rondo, or Goran Dragic. Those are the teams that would probably rather have a 2nd round pick or a young/cheap player. However if a GM or coach that is involved in the trade just really loves Beverley and demands him to get the deal done, sure. I just don't see it especially going into a contract year where he can bounce or get overpaid as a RFA.
That's my take, too. My only complaint about the Parsons situation was the Rockets didn't get any kind of asset, not even a 2nd round pick, for losing him. Battier, Brooks, and Lowry each netted a first round pick, for example. Different situations, I know.
