In other words, the Rockets are trading McGrady and Scola for the Nets' 1st Rounder and cap relief because I don't see how any of those players (sans Boone) are going to be in the Rockets' long-term plan.
How about something like: McGrady + Houston's first round pick for Kirilenko + Korver (or Boozer, if they prefer) + the higher of Utah's two current picks (between their own and NYK's). Utah saves massive amount of money next season, and maybe some this season, too, if they include Booz instead of Korver. In exchange, they trade down on the higher of their two picks. Basically, the teams are gambling over how well each of Utah, Houston, and New York will finish the season. The Rockets make a $16 million bet next year that the pick difference, plus the contribution of Kirilenko, who is actually a pretty decent player, will be worth it.
yeah, you don't get. when you ask those questions, the choice is pretty obvious. try to understand the logic. improvement of team from cp3 to brooks, that big----> l l improvement of team obtaining legit back-up big or scoring wing WHILE retaining brooks at pg, that big ----> l l
And I think you are really undervaluing the benefits that a guard like Paul brings to the table. Paul is a better closer than KMart or another available wing that you can think of. He is a better % shooter than them too. A better passer than Brooks. A better defender than both. Also a much better fit when Yao comes back. He is also relatively healthy and younger than Martin (just using him as an example). You are severly discounting how a great passing PG makes things easier for others (i.e the Nash effect).
You are underrating Chris Paul badly, the last thing this team needs is more role players, and besides, CP3 will be the better perimeter scorer than anyone else you can realistically get. You know how much easier it gets for other players if we had CP3? If you don't collapse on him when he drives you are giving up an easy 2, if you do collapse on him he WILL find the open man, and on the other end CP3 is WAY ahead of AB. Most importantly you get that guy you can go to when the game is on the line, who will probably get to the line more often than not. Oh and CP3 + Landry is going to give team nightmares.
What it does is give the nets more cap flexibility by getting 26m in expiring and getting rid of a 3.5m in najera. For the rockets, they get the contract broken down and a pick. The guys coming in can still play and play this year. It also gives landry big minutes and legit backups in battie,and najera and boone is a shot blocking/rebounding 7ft er for this year. Also, simmons,najera,or battie all have contracts that can be combined with battier or ariza to get another really good player this year before the dealine. The team trading for this combo of players dont have to gut the team as they would trying to trade for 23m in mcgrday's deal.If none of the players mentioned are not moved, the rockets decreased their possible space by najera's 3.5, but his 3.5 and shane's 10m are expiring. Ariza's 5.5 also comes off byc and can be used if they think he's not what they thought.
Fair enough.....I look forward to CP3 leading his team to the playoffs this year like Brooks is doing. DD
If we get a center and a scoring wing, we become a very good team. If we get CP3, we become contenders, just look at that Hornets roster, apart from David West they hardly have any threats, and Landry is arguabally as good as West on the offensive end. But what the hell we won't get CP3 unless Morey drugs the Hornets GM or something, ticket sales and national coverage will plummet if they get rid of CP3, a superstar of the league.
all i am saying is that, i rather have a team that's solid at every position. rather than just a superb pg and average role players aka the hornets right now. if you have shoes already and no shirt, you don't go out and get hyperdunks. you get a shirt first. if that even makes any sense.
1. Wouldn't Scola's contract have a cap hold on the Nets' cap just like how he would have a cap hold on the Rockets' cap after this season? This doesn't afford them an expiring deal in terms of Scola's contract. 2. As for guys that can come in "and play", the Nets haven't found Simmons' pulse all year, Battie could be serviceable, and Najera is quite honestly redundant. If it's guys that can "come in and play" that you want, I'm sure you've thought of better scenarios before, leebigez. 3. The theory that it's easier to move smaller chunks of salary vs. McGrady's massive contract is plausible but, as much as he is a shell of his former self, McGrady can still give some kind of production whereas Battie/Simmons/Najera are just completely dead weight. At least the team receiving McGrady would know that they're getting a name player. 4. Combining any of those expiring contracts with Battier and Ariza would further gut the team. The positive of trading McGrady and Scola would be (at least I hope so) the Rockets would get talent in return because we're not only sending the biggest cap burden away, but we're also sending our 2nd best player this season away. They do the trade you mention, not only are they stuck with players (sans Boone) that can't contribute much, if any, to the team this year but then we would have to package them with Battier or Ariza (despite what people want to believe, they are still our two best defenders) near the trade deadline for something else? I don't think making multiple moves like that are going to be good for a team that has been relying on team chemistry and unity to get over the BS schedule they've faced this season.
How many teams ARE solid at EVERY position? Aside from the Celtics and maybe the Hawks, I don't see any team that can say "from starting point guard to center, we have no weaknesses" (I'm not going to include the Lakers because opposing point guards feast on Derek Fisher on a nightly basis) You make moves to make the team better, which may or may not mean spreading the talent around. Subtracting Brooks and McGrady and adding Paul and, say, Peja and Posey makes the Rockets a deeper team for the long haul. Yao/Hayes Scola/Landry Peja/Battier Ariza/Budinger/Posey Paul/Lowry Unless there's a 20/5/5 shooting guard that's relatively young, not injury prone, and affordable that I don't know about....
13 ppg look enough to me and he would be like the 9 to 12 player in the rotation and can make a decent avg in fg % and 3pt tooo and know how to steal the ball is not the next star here but would give us deep
I don't understand why so many people spending time arguing with a guy who just slapped himeself in the face: "A outplays B", then "B is better than A". Let's talk about more interesting stuff, unless you guys enjoy bashing an idiot.
The original premise was that McGrady and Brooks could theoretically get it done. Of course, if the Hornets are going to ask for both AND either Scola or Landry then all bets are off IMO.
YOU MEAN ALL THE G.M.'S IN THE NBA ARE JUST LINING UP OUTSIDE MOREYS OFFICE ASKING HOW MUCH 4 MAGRADY NOT GONNA HAPPEN SOON LOOK 4 IT AT THE TRADE DEADLINE IF AT ALL HEY LEBRON IS ON AN EXPIRING CONTRACT WHAT IF CAVS GO INSANE THEN WILL HAVE IT GOING ON
the bulls actually seem interesting i read on hoopshype that there was a trade on the table of tmac and landry or scola for salmons+thomas+miller+james. i think it would improve our team mille can play the 5 in this system and thomas is young and is still developing salmonscould also start next to ariza. although i would only do this trade if it included scola not landry.since scola expires this summer and we might lose him anyway plus it will give landry a chance to start Brooks/lowry salmons/cbud/taylor ariza/battier/harris landry/thomas miller/hayes/anderson we would receive to starters and essentially one for the future....
