The inevitable Feigen fluff article

Agree with you on #1, and it's not like Rosas could've expected to be promoted to Morey's seat anytime soon. Aren't others at a lower level fleeing too though? And to lateral positions, not the clear promotion Rosas received? Thought I'd read that here, during the defensive coaching staff purge.

Disagree with you on #2. The trade is salary neutral up to the final year, and this is exactly the kind of flashy, mortgage-the-future acquisition that many owners would make, because it allows them to hype this season further than before, and thereby get away with raising prices and revenue.

 

Not to my knowledge. Maybe someone can link me.

It's only salary neutral because they maxed out Chris Paul at $40 million per season! How many owners do you think would have paid that to a 33-year-old CP, coming off a season in which he missed 25 games and at a point in his career where decline is inevitable? They absolutely could have traded Paul to, say, Miami for expirings (Dragic, Olynyk, etc.) had they offered the 2024 and 2026 1sts like they did to OKC.

Fertitta, however, chose to invest in Paul in 2018 when I'm confident others would not have... and then he doubled down on that investment this summer by selling off Paul for a guy with an identical current salary and even one extra year added to it!

If you think 27 of 30 owners or ownership groups would do the same thing, I think you're wrong. That's all I know to say.

 

People are mentioning this "Deadline" for WB deal. What deadline? did I miss a deadline between OKC and Houston where they gave us a certain amount of time to expand the deal? If so, that would be tricky finding trade partners this time of the year I would imagine.

 

On the plane, consider this post http://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php...ilman-still-cheap.300438/page-2#post-12534549

I am not an airplane broker. But it wouldn't surprise me, given this aircraft's public history, that this was about the cheapest 767 available. Again, I really hope the Rockets don't cheap out on the aircraft refurbishment, maintenance inspections, and overhaul if need be.

Cheaping out on running a basketball team might cost you a championship; cheaping out in aviation might cost you your life.

 

1. This team is not good enough as currently constructed to win a championship.

It is actually quite easy to make a good case that we are worse than last year. I won't bother with that. But we definitely have not addressed our problems that prevented us from winning a title last season and in moving a core piece we may have created greater deficits yet to be discovered/ proven.

All you have to do is look at the matchups. Denver, Portland, and Utah substantially all improved. Lakers and Clippers have put together substantial upgrades.

We've exchanged an aging basketball genius for a younger player who forces the action just like Harden with the same turnover issues Harden has without the efficient scoring ability that Harden has and without the defensive moxy that Paul has. But he's fast; and man can he dunk!

So we ain't good enough and we just folded on a prime opportunity here to add a major piece to this deal super cheap by throwing in a couple seconds and a coiple smaller salaries.

(Nene signed and traded and Deyonte would have been enough salary to take back Iggy And Memphis would have probably done that... especially if they could have thrown one of the seconds elsewhere and sent us Rabb and garnered a $17 million TPE out of the deal.)

I have to wonder if this was the plan all along. Fool the fans with the shiny new toy while ducking the tax and topping out. Thanks #twochoppers and #twochoppersjr.

2. We overpaid for Westbrook.

Miami was offering $30 million in expiring salary and Winslow at $13 million. So one asset for Westbrook. But increasing OKC's salary by another $5 million which would have cost OKC further to get out.

We came along and handed them 2 picks and a very good player that further enables them to get out of the tax and do it cheaper.

I can't help but feel that at the very LEAST.... we could have taken back Roberson and saved a pick or added a second or a couple seconds back our way. And we could have used Roberson's salary later in the same manner that we talked about using Shump.

So the asset management aspect of this trade is not very Morey-esque at all.

Unless... unless there's a substantial buyout of Iggy coming and we know he's coming here through free agent signing to a multi year deal for some portion of the mle. (Doubtful)

3. We are not being smart about the luxury tax if we are planning a 3- year run in the luxury tax.

To avoid the dreaded repeater luxury tax which just spelled the end of the Thunders championship hopes you have to be out of the tax 2 consecutive years if you are in it for 3 straight years. The repeater tax hits if you are in the luxury tax 4 times in 5 years. The smarter thing to do is stagger the tax. Go in it to build out the team and compete for a title. Step out the next season. Go back in for a couple seasons. Step out of it again. Go in another season.

You keep stepping out of the tax every couple years. But to do that you've got to rotate the roster right with the proper mix of old contracts and young contracts. The way we're set up is not optimal. Two guys on super max deals for 4 years. No stagger. Combined with a third guy on a mid salary deal running the same number of years. With Paul we had that 4th year to clear out his big cap hit. No longer. And we've got another player wanting a big extension.

Harden, RW, Ego ($20 million per re-signed or extended), Capela, Tucker (aging expiring), House jr is $230 million in 2020-21 without anybody else with the tax line around 140 million.

Does anybody think it really makes sense to extend EGo now in light of our tax situation?

4. This is not the way Morey does things. It's so obvious he was overridden.

IT HAD BETTER WORK!

 

I think all of them, save those like Sarver who could care less if a FA comes there or not, would've given CP3 that extension, provided it was promised to CP3 to induce him to come here in the first place. Which I think it was. And if it was, how many FAs would ever come here if it came out that ownership reneged on a promise with the Head Of The NBA Players' Union?

If Fertitta traded CP3 off for expirings, which I, unlike you, don't think Miami would have been so keen to do, or at least Riley would've demanded more than OKC got, then Fertitta couldn't have sold this as an improvement to the team. I mean, is Paul still with OKC? If he were that easy to move, wouldn't he have been gone already? Anyway, Fertitta'd be pilloried for a naked salary dump, wasting Harden's prime, and he definitely couldn't have raised projected revenue as much as he will with this deal.

Aside, what is your Twitter handle? I read in another thread that your reaction on Twitter to the trade being finalized, was worth reading.

 

I think the poster is confused on this one. Rosas hired former Rocket guys from other organizations, he didn't steal the guys under Morey. Morey's team is still in tact minus Rosas.

This part I disagree with. Most teams end up spending over the cap. Hell, even the Wizards owner who has been open about wanting to not spend luxury tax dollars has given out dumb max contracts to try to keep the team "competitive" to sell tickets.

The real test of willingness to spend would be adding salary that takes you "deep into the tax" like they've said they would do. If they are willing to do that then that would put him in a noteworthy class of owners as MOST don't want to spend the tax.

With that said, it doesn't make him a "bad" owner if he doesn't want to spend deep into the tax. Most owners in the NBA don't want to. And FWIW, there are reasons beyond simply the dollars why the owners don't. The owners collectively have a collusive interest not to make it look like they are all just flush with so much cash that the luxury tax is no impediment. If mid market teams are like "what's an extra $60 million???" then the CBA negotiations suddenly get more complex.

Now, if he's completely unwilling to spend into the tax AT ALL then yes, he's a terrible owner.

 

Nope. With the trade being finalized, it means he (or Capela or Tucker) or Shumpert are your sole remaining ways to significantly improve this team. It'll likely be an existing contract over Shumpert, as that can be done without taking on significant salary and going into the tax. It does mean you lose out on Gordon's (or Capela's, etc) services.

Great post.

 

This piece will 100% reference a signing of a former #1 overall pick as something to be excited about.

 

Fair enough on Rosas. There was a lot of turnover involving former Rockets personnel and I misunderstood who went where and for why.

For tax spending willingness, I'll counter that most NBA teams realistically have no shot at a championship each year, and that those teams are aware of it. They shouldn't spend unnecessarily. (There are the Wizards of the league that hilariously do, of course.)

Teams that do have a shot at a ring, are willing to spend. Or at least, they should be. The Warriors, OKC, Cleveland when LeBron was there. Etc... Like them, the Rockets do have a shot at a ring too. Moreover, it's not like these chances come along every year. We all remember how bad the team was before the Harden trade. Or before the Rockets got the ping pong ball that turned into Yao.

I don't think any of the nay-sayers are expecting Fertitta to take on an OKC or Warriors-esque tax bill. But don't go 90 percent of the way to building a champion and wimp out at the end over an additional 10 million dollar contract that might cost the team 20-25 million.

 

Here’s what you “Do something” crowd don’t get. They aren’t going to add someone just to add someone. Bima said adding Iggy would cost 47-53 million! They arent going to add a role player just to get slightly better. If they get a true difference maker then they will pay the tax.

 

100%

i'm worried this had nothing to do with fit or winning. all to do with hyping the season, increasing prices, getting national tv games, etc...

the thunder are trying to lower costs. they would want us to take the 25% salary. they might've offered roberson or patterson in order to save taxes, and if we took one we probably could've kept one of the pick swaps.

just like at the deadline last year. spend picks to avoid the tax. these aren't winning moves unless you're tilman's accountant.

 

"Shut up and listen to me" or "I'll slit your throat"

- Lil Uzi Fert TM

These are actual quotes from our trashy owner and no journalist in Houston gives a damn as long as they have access to the team.

 

What are you even talking about? We have the 5th highest payroll right now. Of the 4 ahead of us Maybe only the Warriors are contenders (and they are cutting payroll)

I feel confident they will make a move FOR the right player but I don’t blame the owner as of right now for being judicious.

 

The Bucks are a title team and they just built an entire offseason around trying to stay good but not go deep into the tax. They let Brogdon go for nothing because of it. Ask @malakas about their spending.

The Blazers tried to get under the tax. The Spurs were in playoff contention last year and didn't want to end up over the tax. The Nuggets are a title team this year and want to stay under the tax.

I think you'd be surprised how many teams shy away from the tax as much as they can.

 

The Warriors aren't cutting payroll. They had to dump some guys because they got hardcapped, but they are currently set to be a tax team again this year and will hit repeater status.

They may end up getting under if they ultimately deal DLo for some package of players, but they aren't worried about the tax.

 

It's one thing to spend over the cap, and it's another to max out guys for 4 or 5 years in their 30s.

Agree with all the rest of your points, though.

 

It's because of that payroll that they don't have many opportunities to improve the club without giving up valuable players like EGo or Capela. Taking back salary in this trade was one of those two opportunities this year and it's gone. (The other being a SnT with Shumpert, that increasingly looks like will never happen.)

You're telling me that not one of the other 28 teams in the NBA had any onerous financial obligations attached to a talented player that the Rockets would've found useful? I don't believe that. Occam suggests the far more likely reason is that the Rockets simply don't want to go into the tax this year. As they didn't want to last year.