It has not been any secret that Morey's plan is to have major cap space in the summer of 2010 when McGrady's deal is up. The question then becomes how much salary is the team willing to commit to and how do you strike a balance between the future and remaining competitive in the present. For example, if Kirk Hinrich were on the table, a player who I feel is the ideal fit and could put us over the top, but who has a contract running past 2010, would they hold off pulling the trigger? Along those same lines, and this is a very important question - wouldn't any player we received for Bobby Jackson most likely have a deal running past 2010? Teams only trade for expiring deals if the player is a malcontent or to cut costs - hard to see anyone trading a player of any worth with 2 years left on their deal for Jackson (1 year left on his deal)...that really doesn't accomplish much financially. Which leads me to wonder, keeping all of this in mind, while I definitely think high lotto pick is not the way to go, if a #5+Cardinal (2 years left on his deal) were available for BJ, might that not be the best option for this team taking into account our long term planning? The broader question is a critique of the plan itself. Is it a good idea? From the perspective of keeping McGrady rather than trading him for some garbage package like Michael Redd (which ironically 1/2 the board seems to support), I definitely think it's a smart plan. Take two more shots at it with T-Mac and then hope to rebuild in '10. The question however is how realistic is this plan? When was the last time, other than PHX already having a background with Nash, that a team was able to land a big free agent via cap room? What other teams look to be in position to have space in '10?
You have a lot of questions there. I'll answer one thing. A player who is "malcontent" often means he is merely requesting a trade. Doesn't mean he is a bad seed for all teams. I would not de-value expiring contracts by saying the other team is just giving you garbage back or troubled players.
every team wants to be under the cap in 2010 because labron, bosh, wade, and melo... among many more... will be available. there will be a lot of teams looking to dump talent for cap space, and i for one would rather be receiving the talent while we are still in the realm of contention. besides, lebron will most likely stay, melo gets arrested every summer and doesn't play defense, and wade will be as injury prone as tmac by then. the only player i would want is bosh, but i bet he stays there since colangelo is doing a great job of building that team.
I don't think one can say players can become available at any time citing the Gasol thing, because they had been shopping him for a while. It was just the aspect of giving him for nothing that was a surprise. With that said, we have a good idea of who is out there this year on the trade market. The top names would be Brand, Arenas, Baron Davis, Artest, Michael Redd, Richard Jefferson. Completely disregarding the fact that we wouldn't be willing to give up enough in addition to Jackson to deal for any of these guys, and that there are atleast a half dozen other teams with an expiring contract as big or bigger than Bobby Jackson's, Elton Brand is the only name on that list who I would say would be worth abandoning that long term 2010 plan. So I ask you how realistic is it to expect anything of any fruit from BJ?
Years ago when Grant Hill, Tracy McGrady and Tim Duncan were going to be Free Agents, Orlando positioned themselves to have significant cap space. Duncan stayed with the Spurs. Hill took a Sign-n-Trade (Atkins & Wallace) deal. To get McGrady, Orlando had to send a First Round pick in a Sign-n-Trade deal. Even though the prospect of having so many potential Free Agents on the market in 2010 looks enticing, many people seem to overlook the Bonus for the the Free Agent to go in a Sign-n-Trade scenario rather than as a straight Free Agent. If Tracy retires or leaves the Rockets as a complete Free Agent, then the Cap Space would be there, but it would be back to the current scenario of Yao + a Big Time Star + other players. I haven't put the salary numbers in a spreadsheet to see how much Cap Space would be available in the most extreme scenario which would mean letting Jackson's contract fade away rather than utilize it. An alternate scenario is that in Winter 2010 the Rockets are really struggling and another team would be interested in gaining Cap Space and would trade valuable assets to gain the Cap Space from Tracy's ending contract. Since the Rockets wouldn't be an appealing situation for Summer 2010 Free Agents in that scenario, then they might be better off taking the offered trade at the Trade Deadline in February. Why would teams or players want to do a sign-and-trade? 78. Why would teams or players want to do a sign-and-trade? Teams benefit because it allows them to get something in return for players they would otherwise lose to free agency. Players benefit because they can get a richer contract, and/or play for a team that is over the salary cap and otherwise wouldn't be able to afford them. Unlike the new team, the player's original team can use the various Bird exceptions (as long as the player qualifies) to sign the player without regard to the cap. Also, if the player's original team has full Bird rights, they can offer the player larger raises (10.5%, as opposed to 8%) and more seasons (six, as opposed to five -- see question number 46 for more information). So sign-and-trade is a useful tool for teams that are capped-out and unable to offer players large contracts. The Cap Space that is being projected for 2010 is based on Tracy McGrady being a Free Agent. No idea if McGrady will be interested in playing beyond 2010, but his future potential salary will still count against the Rockets until his situation is resolved. As far as Tracy signing & playing with the Rockets for a lowball amount to still preserve Cap Space, my guess is that he wouldn't be interested. Free Agents counting against the Salary Cap 30. How much do free agents count against their team's salary cap? The free agent amount depends on the player's previous salary and what kind of free agent he is: (Detailed Table available at the the link above.) 31. Why do free agents continue to count against a team's cap? It closes another loophole. Teams otherwise would be able to sign other teams' free agents using their cap room, and then turn their attention to their own free agents using the Bird exceptions. This rule restricts their ability to do that. It doesn't close this loophole completely -- for example, in 2005 Michael Redd's free agent amount was $6 million, even though the Bucks intended to re-sign him for the maximum salary. By waiting to sign Redd last, the Bucks were able to take advantage of the difference by signing Bobby Simmons. Had they signed Redd first, they would have had no cap room to sign Simmons. 32. When do free agents stop counting against the team's cap? When any one of the following three things happen: * The player signs a new contract with the same team. When this happens, the player's effect on his team's team salary is based on his new salary. * The player signs with a different team. As soon as this happens, the player becomes the new team's problem, and his salary no longer counts against his old team. * The team renounces the player. (See question number 33) 33. What does renouncing a player mean? As detailed in question number 30, free agents continue to be included in team salary. By renouncing a player, a team gives up its right until the following June 30 to use the Larry Bird, Early Bird, or Non-Bird exceptions (see question number 19) to re-sign that player. A renounced player no longer counts toward team salary, so teams use renouncement to gain additional cap room. After renouncing a player, the team is still permitted to re-sign that player, but they must either have enough cap room to fit the salary, or sign the player using the Minimum Salary exception. The exception to this is in the case of an Early Bird free agent who is coming off the second season of his rookie scale contract. Such players, when renounced, are treated as Non-Bird free agents. After renouncing a player, a team can still trade the player in a sign-and-trade agreement (see question number 76). My inclination is to be aggressive and field the best team possible over the next two years and not push that strongly to have significant Cap Space in 2010. Are the Rockets currently able to be a legit contender for the NBA title? Not without tweaking the roster some more, but I would rather they keep trying to achieve greatness. Letting events two years into the future hamstring your potential over the next two seasons is playing with a handicap that Houston (or any team trying to challenge for the NBA Title) doesn't need. Que Sera, Sera, Whatever will be, will be The future's not ours, to see Que Sera, Sera What will be, will be.
I think it's a good plan. 2 more shots then assess. currently the salary we have committed in '10 is around $30million (Assuming Landry doesn't sign past then). If we were to add Hinrich (or someone with a similar deal) then we'd be looking at another $9million 6 players at $39million (Ming, Hinrich?, Battier, Hayes?, Brooks, #25) Let's say we're now at around $40-45million (throw an MLE and 3 minimum deals here and there...) for 10ish players. If the salary cap is around $60million in '10/'11 then we'd be in a position to make a decent offer to a big name free agent. Option B might be to see how it goes THIS season, and if we don't hit paydirt (ie: conference finals?) then deal McGrady in '09/'10 (at only 30 years old) with his $23million expiring and use that to re-tool. Bring in a disgruntled superstar or a package of young talent + big contracts + picks etc.
To be honest, I think everything that happens in this upcoming season will effect how this team will be from 2010 and beyond. Any trade, draft pick or signings that the Rockets (namely Morey) do this offseason is definitely going to effect everything else moreso than any other season.
Tracy's contract will either come off the books and give us huge cap relief, or be a nice expiring contract. T-Mac will be 32 his contract season.
I think that depends if the player in question could be a piece past 2010. A guy like Hinrich would be 29. He would theoretically still have some game in him at that time, and could be a piece for a reloaded team. On the other hand, take a guy like Vince Carter. He's got 3 years left plus an option (I've seen it both team and player, so not sure). However, he's 31 already, and he's had a lot of injuries. A 33 or 34 year old Carter is not a sure bet to be a significant player, especially at a major salary. I would say the same thing about a 32 year old Chauncey Billups -- if you go after him, you better go for broke the next 2 years.
any chance Tmac to take a huge pay cut to fit in the 3rd player? If tmac is willing to drop his salary to say 5m, cap space of around 13-15m to sign that 3rd player is possible. That 3rd superstar may not get as much money, but he comes to an establish team that have both tmac and yao.
Factoring in Yao, Battier's salary slot (Battier or his equivalent in trade), Landry, Scola, and Hinrich, how much would we have left to play with? There is probably a better chance of me being that 3rd superstar than T-Mac taking a pay cut for $5million.
Battier+Yao make 25 million. Hinrich makes 9. That brings you to 34. Scola will no longer be under contract. Let's say Scola+Landry are making 12m combined by then -- 46. Depending on how much the salary cap rises, you've got 10-15m to play with. Less 2m if you take the team option on Brooks. Granted, salary cap space is sexy -- but you still need to fill out the roster with players who can play. Even if you don't get Hinrich, you still need a point guard. Unless you want to bank on Aaron Brooks developing into a starter by then, point guards are expensive. Your run of the mill Rafer Alston is going to run you 5-6m. If Hinrich is even a marginal starting point guard, he's probably worth 6m. Look at what Steve Blake got. Paying him 9 may be less than ideal, but if you think he's a guy who gives you a shot to win in the next 2 years, it's worth it. It's different with a Vince Carter -- 2-3 years time, there's a decent chance he's only worth 7-8m. Maybe less if you consider the time he misses. 10m dead weight is a lot different than 2m in dead weight. Just how I see it.
I think what happens to the Rockets beyond 2010 will have a ton to do with what Tracy wants. Does he really want to be a winner like he has said? Or will he take the majority road and the one his cousin has taken, going with the highest offer? I'm not saying that he should be looking to play for a championship team for the minimum like most almost-washed-up veterans do, but I'm saying that he should be thinking like Tim Duncan. Duncan has been able to win championships in part because he has never been at the max in his career. He has still made a good bit but has always left room on his team for other big contracts to be inked. If I were Morey--and mind you this is all dependent on Tracy's health/performance remaining consistent the next two years--I would offer a contract in the range of 4 years, 10-12 million. He's obviously not going to be pulling his monetary weight by the last year of the deal, but if it allows us to go out and acquire another star for 15 million a year or so, that would extend our window another couple of years and possibly even improve our chances. As people have said recently, T-Mac as a facilitator around other stars would be absolutely nasty. We'll see if he has it in him to put winning above an extra 5 mill a year or so.
Great thread topic Cab man. My thinking is that since we have basically committed to winning it all with Yao and Tmac, that you go all out to make it happen, BUT, you keep everything in consideration. I am not a big fan of having lots of cap room, you rarely see the big named players switch hands, sometimes you get secondary stars leaving like Lewis with Orlando, but for the most part the better players stay put. Therefore, I doubt having cap room is all that great in that in order to get a couple of players you really like you may end up over paying for production, like Lewis.... So, I would take on a Hinrich contract and try to win this year, and next year....my belief is you plan, but you are open to opportunity and are smart enough and agile enough to adjust that plan as opportunity arises. So, I would take on the RIGHT contract, if I felt it would make us a contender, now...and in the near future. For instance, I would take on Cardinal's contract for the number 5 pick, especially if Beasley slips....but other than that....I would probably not take on his contract for that pick.... DD
Yao will turn 30 in September 2010 and he will be at least to the halfway point of his NBA career. Deke is still going strong, but my guess is that Yao will be wrapping up by his late 30's. Dream was in his early 30's when the Rockets won titles in the 90's. If an optimistic scenario has Yao still playing at a high level in his early 30's with a decline as he nears 35, then it will be a small window of time that will be left from 2010 onward for the Rockets to get to the Top with Yao as a key component. Sitting on their hands for the next two years and having a conservative approach in going for a Championship means that they are banking on a small window of time from 2010 to 2012 - 2013. Yes, Boston had everything fall into place for them this season, but things did not fall into place when Orlando tried their strategy for garnering Free Agents years ago.
I've been saying this for awhile now regarding Trcay and Yao. If the Rox want to get James, the team has to be good enough, plus they have to have salary room. It seems daunting, but management has to have a clear plan. That's why I have suggested a couple of scenerios with all in mind. Jackson, Francis, and next yrs 1st rd pick for Harrington. This gives the Warriors the chance to get wright on the floor. It gives the Rox a combo forward to play the 3 now and move shane to the bench. He has 2 yrs and 19m left on his deal. Rafer and Head for Tim Thomas. Since the clipps didn't extend Livingston they need a hold the fort pg. Head is the throw is shooter. Tim Thomas gives the rox another combo forward. He has 2 yr and 10m left. Draft thompson or mcgee and sign Dooling for 3 yrs and 3m per. This gives the rox the ability to win now and gives the Tracy 23m, Harrington 10m, Thomas 5m, and Scola 3m the same yr Lebron is free. Brooks would be 2 yr on his development and Yao and Battier is still on the roster. The Rox could renounce the rights of tracy, harrington,thomas or scola and sign james and roll. If tracy is still a good player and capable 3rd guy, resign him at a 7m rate or so. Hopefully Mcgee or Thompson develops at the 4 and Brooks should be solid by then.
Re: lebron, that's the exact opposite of what I've heard. I think one of the talking heads on ESPN said James is almost guaranteed to bail on Cleveland to try and hook up with a team that can win it all. Don't know how good of a chance Houston has of landing him though.
