If the Rockets org really wanted to trade Lin, couldnt some $$$ be part of the deal? He's been making $5M a year for a cap hit of $8.3M the first 2 years. So if he were to be traded now, he could come with a $3M dowry, so to speak. Then it would work out to be $8.3M per year, just like his cap. Wouldnt that work out? Or if he gets traded next year, he'd come with a $6M dowry then. Yes?
Lin will be really hard to deal this season. He won't be gone until next season where a team desperately needing to dump some cap will go after him.
I think next year would be even harder. ie. the cap hit is only $8.3M but the actual payments are $15M. ie. if one is acquiring him for cap dumping, his cap hit is less than 60% of what he will be paid. But from a business point of view (ie not on court), it would make sense to get Lin based on his appeal in Asia, specifically China. vis-a-vis this article from July 2012. """Jeremy Lin Signed With Houston, MSG Stock Plummets $93 Million""" http://www.forbes.com/sites/lancema...d-with-houston-msg-stock-plummets-93-million/ And I dont think it plummeted that much cos of his on-court bball skills.
Lin is worthless in many CF's view. But in terms of trade value, fans here think he can get us a star.
Right, historically we have improved our point guards sooo much. We are like the Spurs in terms of player development of our point guards.
Haha, you actually believed this? The writer of that article needed some page hits. It's called a market correction, and the stock shot up 17% to an all time high when he actually signed in Houston. The stock also took a dive when they waived JR Smiths brother. Coincidence?! :grin:
Over the last twenty years, Rockets have had dozens of top 10 point guards. I call them "The Dozen." "The Dozen" were certainly better than the rest of our point guards, so we played "The Dozen" significantly more minutes. That's the reason why we couldn't develop some other point guards into better players.
Haha, to be honest, you're right. I never watched a game before 2012. That's why I actually believed that we never developed our point guards. If I had watched any games, I'd probably know all the Superb Rockets Point Guards of the last 20 years.
AB, Lowry, and Dragic all flourished while they were here, and so did Patrick Beverley, who receives even less playing time and usage. Are you trying to say Lin is the only one that hasn't improved his game? A lot of his stats (shooting %'s, turnovers, and defense) has shown he's improved this year. I think you're just upset he isn't at the forefront of our offense, and want someone to lash out at.
No, I don't think Lin should be at the forefront of our offense. I believe that Lin should be traded for someone that we can develop. If we cannot develop point guards, then we should not care about point guards. We're wasting our money and our time. Instead, we can get a PF that can shoot and we'll improve our team drastically. That's a quick fix that we can make happen now.
First, if you never watched the Rockets prior to Lin, just don't post... seriously, don't. It makes you look really stupid, because you have no freaking idea what you are talking about. Secondly, I am not sure what failed point you are trying to make here as each and everyone of our PG's have flourished in our system. AB had his best seasons in Houston and that's why he came back for a 2nd ride. We saved Lowry from rotting on the bench behind Conley and he flourished in Houston after AB was downed by injury and then pouted his way off the team. Dragic flourished as well after having a down year in Phoenix. Since you didn't start watching the Rockets until Lin came over, that is actually how we got him in the first place. Bev also flourished on our team. Hell, he was playing in RUSSIAN for crying out loud and now he is starting in the NBA. I call that good development IMO. Again, I am not sure what you are trying to argue considering: 1. Every PG has improved when playing for the Rockets. Yes, I would assert that Lin has improved as a PG overall. 2. Morey has found solid PG's that have consistently overachieved expectations when they played for us, except maybe Lin.
This thread is about selling high. Lin and Asik can be sold high. We don't want to receive crap for them in the future. If we trade now, as in This Week, our team can be looking insane. I would like to see that happen. We can get ripped off if someone knows something that we don't know. That something they may know, that we may not know, is the true capability of a point guard. That means they take our guy, develop him, and then suddenly Lin is a 20/8 guy. We have to make sure we know what we're doing when we trade him. Our team might have a guard problem. That's going to take a long time to fix maybe. The easier thing to do is forget about it and upgrade our other positions.
I would never say that any of these players "Flourished" while here. Maybe you could say that had good moments. Maybe if we decided what we meant by "flourished" we could be in agreement.
So what is YOUR definition of "flourished" then, become superstars? Most of our PG's were castaways or low picks unless we go all the way back to to Francis. The ones that were not were usually old by the time we got them. Here are a list of PG's that we have had since Francis: Jeremy Lin - Undrafted Patrick Beverley - 2nd Round Goran Dragic - 2nd Round Kyle Lowry - 24th Overall Aaron Brooks - 26th Overall Rafter Alston - 2nd Round Mike James - Undrafted Bob Sura - 17th Overall David Wesley - Undrafted To put it in perspective, in a league where PG is one of the most populated (therefore easiest to replace) positions, we had basically nothing but crap from a drafting perspective and yet, they not only did NOT perform like crap, but flourished as very solid PG's on our team. To me, if a PG performs above expectations, I consider them flourishing, especially when they get big contracts after they live us.
Morey will never hear the end of it from Les in two years if we trade Lin+Asik to LAL for Gasol and change.
If that's your definition of flourishing, that they perform better than their draft level expectations, then I'll agree for the most part. But for comparison, you still have players like Tony Parker drafted 28.
Tony Parker was a diamond found in the rough. Please tell me you don't expect most or even some PG's found in that draft range to be the same way. For every Parker the NBA uncovers, there are tons more that simply flunk out. For any low draft pick to pan out into a solid NBA player, you should be ecstatic honestly.
