From other posts about CD saying that Battier trade was a good trade, I have to ask. Now that the season is over was the Battier trade a good trade?
I thought when they made the trade that we needed a second round pick. Either last years, or next. This year's is already spoken for.
Was Battier a good trade? What is the meaning of life? Are we alone in the universe? These are the questions that plague me and I intend to find the answers as soon as I am dead.
I voted yes, but I don't appreciate the fact there isn't just a simple 'yes'. I don't actually know that I'd say Battier is the best intangibles guy in Rockets history. He's up there, but we've had some pretty great ones over the years. However, if I have any gripe with the Battier trade it's that we traded two NBA quality players for one. Stromile Swift was a disappointment but he can still contribute and give some quality minutes. When our biggest problem seems to be depth, it hurts to see these two for ones and three for twos over and over and over again.
We were in "win-now" mode last offseason. On that basis, it was a good trade. I don't think we would have won close to 50 games if we had Swift/rookie instead of Battier. Long term, it remains to be seen. I think Gay will turn out pretty good. Swift appears to be a lost cause.
Bad Trade. 1) Rockets are not even a second round team let alone a contender so I don't get the whole "win now" thinking. 2) "win now" means you trade for a guy that will definitely get you to the next level not a marginal role player who is a defensive specialist. 3) Look at it this way Rudy Gay will take 3 years to pan out and see if he is good. Rockets have already wasted 1 year and so if we don't win a championship in the next 2 years then this trade was never worth much. 4) We needed offensive help and scoring instead we got a defense first occasional 3 point shooter. If Rockets were smart enough they would have demand someone like Mike Miller along too. Don't think too highly of Jerry West, he is the same guy who traded Jason Williams and James Posey for a bad contract over the hump Eddie Jones. So I think the Rockets could have done better. 5) You never give up youth and future of your franchise. Yes he may become a bust but that is a risk you take and not let someone take it for you to reap the rewards. Anyway I'm glad both architects of this trade are gone and will never be heard from again.
Bad trade. Gay would have afforded us some economical talent to develop internally. I like & respect Battier-but he did not show up in the playoffs. His physical play will takes it's toll on his health later.
I have to agree with this. I like Battier and all, but winning now didn't pan out too well this season. We still have time to redeem the decision, but we sacrificed future benefits for immediate success that didn't come. That throws a bad light on the trade. Gay may or may not have been the answer, but you could have at least gotten a little something better for #8 than that. As for Swift, he's worthless.
maybe. i don't know. but i didn't think the rockets were one battier away from being a championship contender, anyway. there were some here trying to pretend that shane was a legit 3rd scoring option. i don't think shane is a legit 3rd scoring option on a team that has it sights set as high as the Rockets' were.
Well Battier falls into the delusion set by JVG , LES and CD that we were in the win now mode. This delusion caused us to do things which were considered good at the time but mistakenly neglected common basketball sense that we are always a team building for our continued future. The present team with only two players who can put the ball in the basket with any regularity it seems to me that Battier is a luxury that the Rockets can't afford and couldn't afford last season. Battier does a lot of thinks and speaks good english but is a hidden contibutor to the team effort and in my book it's not enough. So I have always considered that the Rockets in giving away Gaye and Swift for Battier got taken by Memphis!! We mortgaged our future for a role player, without any aditional compensation. In my opinion, considering the difficult position that Les JVG and CD have placed the Rockets in we need to develop our assets including a trade of Battier for at least two good young athletic players who can score etc. and be with the team for 4-10 years or a big move up in the draft.
I wans't sure at the beggining of the season but now I can say it with a confidence: Yes that was a good trade. Battier is pretty good shooter from the corners, he can post up but his best weapon is defense. Even if he doesn't play well at the offensive end he still plays great defense. That's what I like
The yes, good trade option carries a slant with it appearing to deter folks from selecting it. Judging by the poll options, the OP seems to think it was a bad trade. Yes it was a good trade, the reason the Rockets aren't in the WCF right now is the role players not named shane Battier couldn't hit a shot to save their life in the series....
Agree with this. But keep in mind the timing -- the draft is before free agency. However, I think the Rockets do too. We seemed so sure we were going to get Mike James in the offseason (and nearly did), and he would've been that third option. Then came Bonzi Wells...and he would've been that 3rd option. I have high hopes that Shane/Rafer will not be the best offensive weapon behind Tmac and Yao next year.
It will all depend on who we get for him when he is traded this offseason. The promises of Battier not realized: Not good enough to play major minutes at either the 2 or 4. Not a third or fourth scoring option. Gets most of his minutes at the position best suited for TMac.
Well put. It sure would have been nice to be able to add a Bruce Bowen type of guy via free agency, like the Spurs did. Instead we get an upgraded version, but it cost us a 1st and an athletic 4. Not worth the cost to me.
My very minority opinion...bad, bad, BAD trade. 1) Yao plays 12 months per year and wants to win the Gold in 2008 in Beijing. 2) Yao is close to establishing a track record of injury. #1 accelerates that. 3) McGrady is very NBA high-mileaged for his age. 4) McGrady's back was a mystery last summer. Forget the 2006-07 season...no one could with any degree of certainty predict how McGrady's back will respond LONG TERM. 5) Yao is the slowest Center in the NBA. Surrounding him with slow players who can't motor in transition is/was a bad idea. Especially on a team that struggles to get easy points. 6) The Rockets were the least athletic team in the NBA. The trade emphasized this to the wrong end of what the NBA/Stern are wanting to do. 7) The Utah Jazz have more athletes. It showed. 8) If you think the Spurs are the model for the Rockets...ask yourself how many one-dimensional players who can't get their own shot reside on the Spurs' roster. 9) If you think the Spurs are the model for the Rockets...ask yourself who would win a back yard track and field meet between SA and HOU. Speed, agility, endurance, strength...advantage (unfortunately) Spurs. Here's hoping Morey has realized that there is NBA life beyond $Ball and that Adelman's feedback is asked for in personnel decisions.
does anyone else see the paradox in Aggie's ranking players in terms of their intangibles? Intangibles being the aspects that one cannot definitively grasp or more importantly quantify? Did I miss something? The thought that there could be a intangible statistic could start a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe! Granted, that's a worse case scenario.
