If somehow we could get a 3rd team involved so we could keep T-will...only then would I consider it....
Why are we talking about getting Howard? He's not coming to Houston. We wants to go to a big market. With NJ moving to Brooklyn, he will land there or end up staying in Orlando. Howard going to Houston would be the surprise headline of the year. I could be wrong, but I highly doubt he will be wearing a Rockets jersey.
If the Nets strike out on Dwight and the risk of losing D-Will to free agency... Plus the Lakers wanting Lowry... And Morey's infatuation with Pau... http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6n8v26m Fine then!
Generally, I agree with what you are saying, you have to give to receive. However, this situation has happened in the past and 2 fairly recent trades come to mind: Pau to LAL for young Gasol ( who at the time was a relative unknown), Crittendon and 2 low 1st rd picks Rasheed Wallace to Det for chump change... I can't even remember. I also don't remember us giving up all that much for Artest or KMart. So, it's not unheard of, trading a star for good but lesser players
I like how people clamor for a "game changing superstar" and their list of such players amounts to 2-3 guys. Impossible expectations = inevitable disappointment.
I'm sick of players including this in their list of necessities. But Houston is a top 10 media market, and the difference between us and other top 10 markets is relatively slim until you reach the top 4 mega-markets. So basically Dwight has to go to NY, LA, CHI, NJ or bust. I'm trying to remind myself why I still muster interest in the NBA... http://www.tvjobs.com/cgi-bin/markets/market2.cgi
Boston is actively trying 2 trade rondo!!! Get er done morey I love Lowry but I give rondo the edge bcuz of his championship experience nobody on out roster has dat but our coach
Stevel, please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. In the examples you're giving, the team that received the STAR for the passel full of NON STARS came out on top. The successful franchises know this to be true. So when they trade a STAR they insist on receiving a STAR in return. But they're also happy to accept a STAR whilst returning a package of NON STARS. So the Lakers would be happy to give Houston three players like Steve Blake, Meta World Peace, Josh McRoberts and a number one draft choice for your star power player, Kyle Lowry. And someone I'm sure could make the case that that pile of assets or something thereabouts anyway ought to be value enough for Lowry. Some idiot Laker fan somewhere no doubt has already said it. While the Lakers would be happy to receive Houston's star player that way, they don't deal their star players to other teams that way. Because when you do that you come out the loser more often than not. So you're right it's not unheard of for those deals to go down that way. What's unheard of is for a team who trades away their stars in deals like that, to come out on top when all is said and done. Pau Gasol from Memphis to the Lakers was a fleece job other than the fact that he may have been insisting on a trade. I don't recall anymore. So also was the Rahseed Wallace deal. Teams who receive stars in exchange for a package of non stars come out on top.
Lowry Scola Flynn Thabeet Williams for Pierce Rondo Rondo / Dragic Martin / Lee Pierce / Parsons / Bud Patterson / Hill Dalembert / Smith
Man this is going to be the longest two weeks of our lives. Trade deadline can't come any sooner. Our roster is screaming trade! Gotta keep playing well so they'd have good trade value.
In most situations, this is completely correct. But the particulars of the situation mean we might have a chance at Dwight. Most other teams aren't willing to trade for him because it means he hasn't signed an extension. Assuming nobody else is crazy enough to try to shoot the moon (admittedly a big assumption) that leaves the destinations he's listed. Keep in mind, if Orlando decides to trade him, they don't give a damn if he signs the extension or not. At the deadline, all that matters to Smith is who offers the best package and is willing to take back Turkoglu. Of the teams he's listed, we can make a better offer than Dallas. I assume our offer will look something like Martin, Scola, Patterson, Dragic, Knicks pick, and Beaubois is the only valuable piece they have to trade. The Nets could make an offer centered around Lopez, and if your goal is to rebuild, that beats our offer. But Smith and DeVos have at least been making noises that they want developed players, not prospects, and if that is the case, we have a better package than NJ. That leaves LA. If they offer Bynum and Gasol for Howard and Turk, that beats any package we have. The thing is, I don't know if LA makes that offer for the simple reason that Dwight might not sign with them. If they do the deal, they are capped out with Kobe, Turk, MWP and Howard to go with a bunch of scrubs, and that team is not a contender, nor will it be till it rebuilds. If you were Howard, would you commit the prime of your career to a team that might not be good again for 3 or 4 years? I understand that it's an extreme longshot, and if we can't swing a deal for Williams, we probably lose Howard to the Nets as a free agent anyways. Still, it's not like we're completely out of the picture if we're willing to risk trading for Howard without an extension.
