1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

A Thoughtful Defense of NOT Expanding the trade

Discussion in 'Houston Rockets: Game Action & Roster Moves' started by finsraider, Jul 18, 2019.

  1. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    39,324
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    @finsraider

    I appreciate the effort and I understand the logic. The biggest issue with not expanding the trade is NOT that you didn't bring back a rotation player, it's that you didn't bring back salary.

    Every year, useful players are dumped for expiring contracts. This past year we had a real crazy situation where Kristaps was dumped for expirings!

    Whether it is Iggy, Covington, Crowder, Otto Porter, Kevin Love, Draymond Green, the list of potential names is endless. We don't know who will decide they want to clear a guy out but only want expiring deals back. We don't know if we will have injuries. What if Capela is hurt for the year? What if Gordon goes down for the year, or House?

    We need to have the ability to bring back players WITHOUT trading a key rotation guy. You can't ADD to your team if you don't have mid range salaries to deal out. If you have to deal Gordon or Capela for a starter at the 3 for example, you didn't add you just swapped.

    That's my complaint. You had a great opportunity to put yourself in a position absorb salary in the season.
     
  2. sirbaihu

    sirbaihu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Messages:
    7,562
    Likes Received:
    1,747
    I'm baffled why all the emo posters haven't started a Gofundme page with their own cash to pay for the players they want.
     
  3. dachuda86

    dachuda86 Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2008
    Messages:
    11,058
    Likes Received:
    1,763
    Well, this could have gone in the expand the trade thread...

    and I don't think it will happen. So... carry on?
     
  4. steddinotayto

    steddinotayto Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2001
    Messages:
    13,497
    Likes Received:
    7,481
    My issue with not expanding the trade is the thought that signing Shumpert to a sizable contract just to hold onto him and trade him later is what the Rockets pretty much avoided when they didn’t bring back Ariza. So why do it now? Signing Shumpert to a sizable deal to bank on the hope that:

    1. A player signed this summer will be available for trade in December, waiting almost 2 months into the season when we could have gotten a player into training camp to start the season with the rest of the team.

    2. There is a player that a team would trade (eg Ariza for Oubre). Just like how I felt last year when the Suns got Oubre, we didn’t even know Oubre was on the trading block so it would have been a financially risky move to sign a player to a sizable contract ONLY to hope that you can flip him for something better.

    I don’t know if any of the 3&D players mentioned would have cost us 2 1sts and if they did then yea I wouldn’t have done that trade either. But would we have drawn the line at, say, a 1st and a 2nd or a 1st and 2 2nds? At worst Iggy would have cost us one 1st in terms of outgoing assets. This is the same guy that Morey made priority #1 a few years ago and now he’s not worth a #1 in an upcoming NBA season that is extremely wide open? The only thing that roadblocked that trade IMO deals with the financials and not with Iggy’s age/talent or the 1st we send out. Maybe it’s also because Morey wants a player with a longer contract to be our stabilizing SF after next season and Iggy’s expiring scared him away? Could be but the deal was there to be completed. Waiting for Iggy to be bought out and hoping that he picks us over the Lakers, Clippers or any other team with championship aspirations is not conducive to building a championship team no?

    The expansion of the trade would have been a very Morey-esque move IMO. That kind of outside the box thinking is how Morey gained his reputation.
     
    joshuaao, jch1911, luckyman76 and 3 others like this.
  5. TimV

    TimV Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    81
    Yeah, I have no problem with a used plane. A new one would be stupid. My curiosity was peaked by his description of it as “brand new”. Boeing hasn’t rolled a 767 in passenger configs off the line in sometime. It’s an old, inefficient plane and was only useful as a passenger plane in long hauls. So that would mean he bought a $110m cargo plane and converted to passenger. The cost of that, along with airworthiness certification, would have to approach just buying a 787 or new Airbus. That would be dumb.

    At most, he paid around $10m for a very old plane that’s been used for the past 15 years in charter services in South America and SE Asia. That’s still a big expense, but he pulled a classic nouveau riche move of bragging up his conquest and therefore looked like a putz to anyone who knows better. It’s the equivalent of some schmuck bragging about his brand new Ferrari he bought with his bonus, and you find out it was really a salvage he bought for $25k from some knobhead that flipped it into a lake the first day he owned it.
     
  6. Rox>Mavs

    Rox>Mavs Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Messages:
    2,420
    Likes Received:
    908
    I hear you on this and would whole heartedly agree but to Finsraiders point, we’d all be in agreement if they decide not to sign Shump using bird rights. In that scenario it makes sense because we don’t have to spend anything to use him as a contract. Unless you’re thinking of having two midrange salaries to use for two potential trades or one big one?

    Either way I agree with finsraider, a lot will be told by what the FO does with Shump.
     
    finsraider likes this.
  7. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    39,324
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Yes, I would have wanted more than just relying on Shump's salary to be enough. Again, it tells you sort of what the limits are. They are probably willing to go into the tax, but:
    A) They want to be flexible to stay under it each year if they can
    B) They don't want to go deep into it. My guess would be $10M or so into the tax is kind of their limit
    C) They'd rather swap out existing big salaries (like Gordon) than add big salaries

    Those are understandable business moves but they are annoying AF and I wish they would stop saying things about "bust the budget" "authorized to go deep into the tax" and stuff like that.
     
  8. DieHard Rocket

    DieHard Rocket Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2000
    Messages:
    9,206
    Likes Received:
    766
    It's frustrating as a fan but I get it and willing to give Tilman the benefit of the doubt. I don't think he was bluffing when he initally said we'd be in the tax (before the Westbrook trade). I DO think he wants to avoid that repeater tax at all costs, which if I'm not mistaken means that we now need to stay under the tax this year, otherwise things could get really dicey in that 3rd and 4th year of the Westbrook/Harden deals.

    With that in mind I think any other moves for more than a minimum contract would have to be for a deal that is just too good to pass up, because going into the tax this year could mean in 2-3 years that we're having to make some very painful decisions.

    I'm sure they also want to see how this is going to work and how House is going to develop, so they could be deferring to the trade deadline before considering going into the tax. And lastly there is EG's contract situation, I'm sure they are in negotiations with him right now.
     
  9. Gray_Jay

    Gray_Jay Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    538
    Sure it could've, though maybe not to a third team. Add a small salary---maybe Hartenstein's still mysteriously uncompleted contract---to the trade, and the Rockets could have taken back Roberson. Decent defender and a 10+ million expiring contract that OKC still would have wanted to shed. Maybe to the extent of removing one of the pick swaps or taking a 2nd over a 1st?

    The advantages of having such a tradable deal are well stated by @justtxyank above.

    It might have cost the Rockets some extra money, is all. Evidently, that's enough.
     
    jch1911 and justtxyank like this.
  10. J Sizzle

    J Sizzle Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2012
    Messages:
    38,317
    Likes Received:
    19,084
    If you want to see the Rockets win a ring, there’s not much defense for it. It was a golden opportunity to add salary for future trades. No reason not to do it, but Tilman lies once again about the tax and here we are looking like we’ll duck it again.

    I’m glad he’ll save some money though!
     
    jch1911 and luckyman76 like this.
  11. justtxyank

    justtxyank Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2005
    Messages:
    39,324
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Roberson's contract could have come back with one minimum added
    2Pat could have come back with nothing added

    That's just "expanding" it with the Thunder. A third team could have been added as well, but not necessary and definitely didn't need to move CP3 out to "expand" it.
     
  12. Derp McFlopsky

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    4,064
    Likes Received:
    3,871
    Exactly. We should thank OKC for doing right by Westbrook and letting him pick his team because they ended up with the player we were certain nobody wanted (including 90% of CF.net). Now it’s Tillman’s fault nobody wanted CP lol...I’m sorry, that’s revisionist history and shoe-horning a completely unrelated situation into what is now just a senseless gripe. Without LT we have one of if not the best rosters in the league. He won’t pay extra taxes for Melo, ennis and seemingly isn’t interested in broken down Igoudala for 40 million? Shocking I suppose.
     
    hakeem94 likes this.
  13. Gray_Jay

    Gray_Jay Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    538
    I had no idea of the economics of the deal, or what used airliners go for. Thanks for adding some needed light to what the deal actually entailed. I just thought it was silly for people to compare the 2 Patriots jets---lengthy service with AA, then purchased by the Pats---to a plane that was used by United, then by Avianca and others, then by some fly-by-night, whatever the equivalent of Part 135 in Thailand is, charter operator.

    I like the salvage Ferrari analogy. Still, people can restore Ferraris, like I'm sure that Veyron that went into the drink near Galveston is being restored. They can restore airliners too. I'm sure the wide body makes it convenient to move oversized, self-cleaning cargo like NFL and NBA players.
     
  14. Gray_Jay

    Gray_Jay Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    Messages:
    673
    Likes Received:
    538
    Agree. I thought it was strange to invoke having to move CP3, hence my post. I imagine OKC was disappointed to not have the opportunity to jettison yet more salary.
     
    justtxyank likes this.
  15. smoothie

    smoothie Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2001
    Messages:
    19,417
    Likes Received:
    3,944
    its more like we asked a friend to ask a girl out for us and he asked her out himself and she said yes. that's what's making people so mad. its the not knowing if it would've worked out, and a bit of betrayal on top.

    tilman is the friend we asked to approach the girl for us. a contending roster is the girl we want. planning to cash in on tax savings is like asking her out himself since he's putting himself before his friends (the fans who trusted him).

    we will never know if the girl we want (a contending roster) would have wanted us back (actually been able to win) because our friend (tilman) was was selfish and betrayed our trust.

    i know we disagree on this point and we don't have to discuss it anymore than we already have, but i thought i'd have a bit of fun with your analogy :)
     
    hakeem94 and Kim like this.
  16. TimV

    TimV Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    81
    The wide body will allow them to do really good wide and long lie-flat seating, practically beds (even a few private cabins) and have a conference room. This is pretty common in the 767 business jet setting. 767 is a good airframe for this and you don't have to worry about it being a fuel hog if you're not flying it in any kind of extended range configuration and flying multiple routes a day. I hate flying overseas on them, but only because their business class seats sucked compared to newer planes.

    This will be a great plane for the team and a really great asset for the players. But let's put it in the proper perspective, Atlanta paid more last year to buy out Carmelo than likely will have been spent to buy and refurbish this thing ($10M for the jet and $15M for complete refurbishment into luxury jet). Heck, Drake just did this for his own private jet (he was gifted the airframe).
     
    jch1911, don grahamleone and Gray_Jay like this.
  17. BeardNation13

    BeardNation13 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2019
    Messages:
    932
    Likes Received:
    2,029
    My issue is everything TIlman has done comes off as cheap and $$$ savings which is not a good precedent for the future
     
    J Sizzle and J.R. like this.
  18. smoothie

    smoothie Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2001
    Messages:
    19,417
    Likes Received:
    3,944
    a couple reasons why i disagree.

    1. house's success will not negate the fact that we need an additional player. we need more than house/rivers on the bench. judging by last year's minutes for the starters, rivers, house, and chandler, we still have about 22 mpg remaining. unless you want that going to green or you're really sure about clark, we need to add another player. then there's the 12 minutes chandler plays being free every other game since he only plays about half the games. and it would be nice not to ask tucker to play 34mpg again, and to lower james and ego's minutes a bit as well so they're fresh late in the playoffs. you see how its easy to fit someone in the rotation for minutes into the 30s.

    2. to be clear this was a way easier and more likely way to add another piece than it will be to S&T shumpert. letting your best shot go by and hinging your hopes on something much less probable doesn't make sense. the other team will have to want to overpay shumpert and be hard capped. even if that works out we will have to attach a valuable asset to get it done. whereas here we could just absorb salary, sending no players back, and probably attach a less valuable asset. if course had we just used the rest of the NTMLE after signing house we could've added another piece without giving up any assets. but that's another argument.

    3. waiting until midseason to acquire another piece is less desirable than having one from day 1, for all 82 games. last year we finished with the 4th seed, and were only 4 games out of 1st. that was the difference between a second round elimination to a full strength warriors team vs meeting a depleted warriors team in the WCF and probably beating them. every game counts.

    in summary, we need another piece with even with house/rivers, its beneficial to have that piece from day 1, we had the best chance we're gonna have all year to add that piece and passed on it. yup. that's upsetting.

    its not a strategic basketball move. its a tax savings move. that's what's so frustrating.
     
    #38 smoothie, Jul 18, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  19. basketballholic

    basketballholic Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Messages:
    17,516
    Likes Received:
    4,150
    Thanks @finsraider for the good post and thread. Good stuff.

    I've been thinking about where we are headed in light of the trade not being expanded as well. I really thought our advantage was to stay above the tax line and take on salary. But....I'm starting to wonder too. Morey always sets us up so we can go either way.

    I can now see us going hard cap and using the full mle and the bae as well. There's some good Euro's available and Anthony Randolph is still out there too.

    I can also see salary stepdown trades involving either or both of EGo/Capela.
     
  20. finsraider

    finsraider Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    5,549
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Which is why what they do with Shumpert will tell us a lot about what the FO/ownership is planning.

    Yes...they undoubtably need salary, and trading Gordon, PJ or Capela just looks like good-in-good-out, ie not maximizing for talent on the roster.

    I’d also argue that a resigned Shumpert isn’t JUST a contract...he’s a useful player while you have him. He actually does fortify your depth for the beginning part of the season, even if his main purpose is as a contract filler. Many of the “just add salary” moves are just that...they don’t actually add a useful player.

    There is no advantage to letting Shump walk outside of luxury tax savings...none. If we let him walk, without Iggy bought out and committed to a minimum contract, I will be irate.
     
    don grahamleone likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now