I'l be mad if they give up a draft pick ind a deep draft just so they don't have to pay 2 mill. They should be forcing people to take on Scola's contract for one of the picks if nothing else.
Why would we amnesty a proven winner who plays with a heart bigger than Texas and a team first mindset? IMO, there are very few players for whom I would trade for him.
We need to be more future oriented for this team and unfortunately, he probably isn't in it. I'm not saying we amnesty for no reason. But when a predicament arises in which amnestying him is the best move to make our team better, you do it.
Why do people keep throwing this idea out there? People act like the Rockets couldn't find a taker for Scola in trades. If Daryl Morey called up Geoff Petrie (Sacramento) or Bryan Colangelo (Toronto) and offered either of them Scola for a future top-55 protected second round pick (which would have the same cap effect as amnestying Scola), they would reach through the phone and kiss him. But even that scenario is ridiculous. Scola is too good a player to get dumped like that. If absolutely necessary, the Rockets could find a taker for him and probably get (most of) that cap room plus additional value for him. Oh, and the Rockets aren't going to pay Luis Scola $20-30 million to not play basketball for them.
I generally agree. There will be a significant number of teams who have cap room and probably don't have a much better way to spend it than to take on Scola. Specifically, for some of these rebuilding/small market teams, free agents who are worth the money probably are not looking to join their squads. On the other hand, the recent experience teams have had with Turkoglu (Toronto), Ben Gordon and Charlie V. (Detroit) and Johan Petro and Travis Outlaw (Nets) should teach teams that you shouldn't sign free agents to long term contracts just because you have cap room. You can do a lot worse than using your cap room to essentially acquire Scola on a 2 year, $20 million deal (which is what Indiana gave to David West coming off of an ACL surgery) with a 3rd non-guaranteed year. I think, however, that the amnesty is something good to have in your back pocket in a pinch. Specifically, if the Rockets have a sudden need to clear cap room VERY quickly (let say Deron Williams agrees to sign with Houston on July 9, 2012 but the team only has $10 million cap room at that point) and teams, knowing this, try to take advantage of Houston's situation and demand too much for taking salary off its hands. It's useful to be able to tell them, "Oh yeah? I don't need your help."
I look at the Scola situation like this. Do the absolutely need the cap space right now because they have an all-star who is chomping at the bit to sign in Houston in July? No. So do they NEED to amnesty him? NO Scola is the last sizeable contract they have left under the old CBA that is amnestieable, unless they decide to waste it on Martin which would be stupid as well. At his age you might as well keep the amnesty in your back pocket as insurance if Scola is to come down with a chronic injury or multiple players win enough minutes to keep him on the bench in the coming seasons. Not to mention someone would probably still trade for him as mentioned earlier. There is just literally no point to using the amnesty on Scola now. Now, should someone on this roster be kicking their butt in to high gear this Summer to try and beat him out... Yes. I sure hope thats the case. This team would be much better off if that was the case, but its not.
With that mindset the Rockets wouldn't go anywhere. I could probably list 100 players I would trade Scola for.
don't know how reliable the source is... https://twitter.com/#!/LBeasley313 Source: Rockets have the #16th pick & have put the pick on the trade block. Teams interested: Cavs, Pistons, Nets, Blazers, Jazz & Lakers Per source, Rockets won't use both of their first-round picks in the draft (#14 and #16) now looking to trade down. Nets & Lakers interested
Trading down better not be the only move Morey is thinking of doing with his money ball stuff again. Better be some kind of player or moving up involved too. I am getting tired of that mans moneyball moves.
I generally agree with you. However, I was referring to the poster I had quoted. He was advocating trading one of our picks with Scola just so that another team would eat his contract. I was saying that if it came to that, why wouldn't we just amnesty him? Granted, I understand Scola's value isn't that low.
What do you mean by "money ball moves" and how does it differ from draft day moves that every other team makes?
Come on! Trading down when we dont need role players anymore? This team needs to move up in order to get players to surround talent with. Not surrounding this team with role players around no stars.
Its move backwards and everyone knows it. Who is he gonna get for that move backwards? A role player unless its Noah. So moving backwards is a bad idea. WE ARE NOT IN THE MOVNG BACKWARDS PHASE of rebuilding. They have to move up to get guys here that matter.
Some of you still assume wrongly that we are close to contending and in the playoffs! Get that out of your heads. That is how we got to this position in the first place.
He could get a future first round pick for. Getting a future first round pick instead of taking on two rookies is still a move that is good for the future.
Uh, that's not the implication of trading down for the Rockets at all. We have a rookie coming in with virtual certainty, and don't want to have 3 of them on the roster. Trading down likely means trading out (for future picks), or trading further down to pick up a player that can be stashed overseas. DraftExpress doesn't have any international players picked until #25, so it would make sense to move down if the plan is to draft one of those types.
