[BimaThug Memorial Thread] The Myth of the Rockets and the McGrady Trade

Yeah... that's why I said it was a "great read" an "interesting discussion" and said "keep it up!" (it's not like my post was seething with negativity).

My point is that you cannot get too bogged down in numbers as if they are absolutes especially when all the numbers are guesses (the cap, Lowry and Scola's value, etc). I don't mind people speculating, because it's fun, but lets remember that it's speculation and not facts because even if we have "info" from the mouths of Morey and Les, it's most likely out there for a reason. They're never going to show us all the cards.

In fact, Morey just said today that they are willing to take bad contracts for the right player, which kind of contradicts the OP and adds a new wrinkle into all of the speculation.

I for one am happy to hear that we are willing to spend and take the hit for the right guy. Iggy makes great sense for us (I'd love to see what he could do in Rick's system with an actual team surrounding him... great go to guy in the 4th along with Brooks and Yao). One year of Dalembert's contract and then done with it for multiple years of Iggy in his prime? (Moneyball may see that trade off as worth it). Then we have a star-studded supporting cast to surround Yao and the makings of a championship team next season.

Option A- Yao
Option B1 & B2- Brooks/ Igodala
Option C- Scola
Option D- Battier camped in the corner

Firepower off the Bench: Landry, Lowry, Ariza, Budinger, Hayes

Stacked!

 

No what I'm saying is that a lot of teams didn't have to pay the tax but also managed to make the playoffs. And the past two champions on the list weren't the highest tax payers, meaning there is NO statistical correlation that shows that more tax=championship, which is what you seem to say over and over again. The evidence is right there man, all you have to do is look it up.

Huh? Your last statement in your previous post said "I clearly think you HAVE to overspend." So you're backtracking now?

I think you don't need experiments to prove this. Generally teams that win are those who are committed to winning, and if you're committed to winnning you'll be spending a lot more than teams out to make a buck. However, the "spending" is usually not cap related which is what you seem to be fixated on. I don't know what statistical experiments you made but the fact is the New York Knicks, the Dallas Mavs and the Trailblazers are gonna be the biggest tax contributors the past decade and they have 0 championships between the 3 of them. Again there is no statistical study you can do that will show the higher your payroll is, the more likely you will be champion. The evidence will show that is not necessarily the case.

Huh? The Spurs have won more championships in recent memory than the Celtics, and the Cavs haven't won anything. In fact, the Spurs are the winningest American professional sports franchise in history, counting soccer, football and baseball. If anything, apart from the Lakers its the other big spenders (Cavs, Celtics etc.) who need to catch up to San Antonio. Citing how the Spurs' payroll increased significantly is irrelevant because their salary is still under the luxury tax line, meaning they didn't OVERSPEND for their success.

I agree with you on this, and if you look at Alexander's comments he's saying he's willing to pay the tax for a special player. However, what I'm saying is you seem to think that this team needs to go into the lux tax in order to be competitive, and your little rant about how Alexander isn't committed to winning because he doesn't want to spend seems to me to be poorly thought out and juvenile. Alexander is reluctant to go into the tax because it hasn't been proven that going into the tax line will make your team a champion, and I agree with him. Going into the tax line can screw your team up for DECADES, which is why if you're going there you need to be sure you know what you're doing.

 

Looking at it long term, I think that Morey wouldn't hesitate on Bosh if it is a fair deal. There is no doubt with his history that he'll be able to find undervalued pieces for cheap (via trade and the draft) that can fill the roster and perform- so even if we lose a chunk of our roster for Bosh, we can make Kyle Lowry type deals and Budinger/Landry/Brooks type draft picks and have just as good a supporting cast as we do now within a year or two to go along with Bosh/Yao and possibly another star via a Mcgrady trade.

If there's something we're better than anybody in the league at, it's finding cheap talent and getting them to overachieve.

Let's not forget, despite our success this season, this is still a rebuilding year of sorts. We knew going into this season that it was important to set up the future of the franchise by any means necessary. Team chemistry is nice, but it's worth a temporary disruption for the good of the long-term.

 

Carl,

I am looking at something like Bosh AND Calderon for TMAC/Landry/Brooks, that would be about 26 million under contract for next season assuming Bosh's max deal would be for about the amount of his player option, Lowry is signed for about 3 mill and Scola 6 mill along with a 1st rd pick for about 1.5 million which should ROUGHLY put the squad at about 67.5 million. Now with the LT set around 65 million are the Rox basically done with no possible additions to be made or could they still get a LLE guy and are these numbers accurate or roughly accurate at least?

 

Toronto isn't taking McGrady back.

 

I think the development of Landry so far makes things really interesting.

What is Landry's ceiling? Can he be better than players like Amare and Bosh? A couple of months ago, people would laugh at this question. But I think fewer and fewer people are laughing now. Landry's emerging is just astounding.

Why is Landry so important in this talk? Because if Landry is the real deal, do you still want to blow up our core (and pay lux tax) to trade for Bosh?

To me, if we are going to get a second tier guy, I'd take a wing player. I am willing to give up two of these four assets, Scola, Battier, Ariza, Brooks, to get that player. And let TMac expire to sign another good player.

 

I want Iguodala.

For the hell of it, I started a new 2K10 association and traded McGrady, Ariza, and a first rounder for Iguodala, two second rounders, and Dalembert (who I shipped to the Thunder for a 2nd rounder... if only it were that easy in real life!).

I was down 15 with 6:02 left in the game, I put Iggy back in and he carried the team on his back. He hit the game winner and we won 91-90.

Videogames aside, we need a wing player who can take over, finish games, and create his own shot. Battier and Ariza are not that guy. Budinger is too raw. Bosh would be nice (though I'm not 100% sold on him and feel he's less needed with Yao-Landry-Scola) but I am REALLY hoping for one of the following (in order)...

1. Granger (I know... not going to happen)
2. Iguodala
3. Martin

These guys would get me more excited than Bosh because they address a bigger need, even though Bosh is a bigger "name".

I can't wait for February!

 

Great stuff as usual, Carl/Bima.

I think the most likely scenario in a Bosh deal would include McGrady. The connotation in that Stein piece seemed to convey, not that a deal wouldn't include McGrady, but only that there's a possibility that one could be reached without him. I think a lot of people are missing this subtlety.

As has been stated, a 3-way sending parts from a McGrady deal to Toronto, in addition with a piece of our own, makes a ton of sense.

The real shock value, however, comes with the 'Bosh-McGrady Two Step', as discussed by Carl earlier, sending parts to Toronto for Bosh, and sending McGrady elsewhere for the elusive 'third star.' It would be difficult to swallow from an emotional standpoint as the roster would be left completely gutted, but with Morey's knack for reloading assets in his sleep, it would obviously be in the best interests of the team.

Even more fascinating would be the implications from an outsider perspective. To my knowledge, such incremental maneuvering hasn't even been attempted in NBA history. This would be the latest step in the fusion between baseball and basketball. It's unprecedented in our sport to completely rebuild through the development, value inflation, and subsequent trading of one's own 'farm system', especially in one swoop.

But I'm getting ahead of myself as this is the unlikeliest of possibilities. I think Chris Bosh is a player for whom Les Alexander would most certainly swallow the tax. He's not in the 'all-generational' Kobe/Lebron/Paul tier, but standards should be lowered - those types are rarely dealt.

My impression watching Bosh in the first meeting was that, skillwise, he's scary good. There really isn't anything he can't do, and what comes as most intriguing is the defensive potential he exhibited in the Olympics. His problems stem from a lack of intensity. Troubling, yes, but one cannot expect to garner Elgin Baylor through trade.

 

IF Yao comes back, and its a big IF, I doubt he'll be a #1 option again.

 

I'll give it up to you for that, very impressive.

 

It's almost as late as I am lazy... so will we qualify for the MLE or not (if this trade goes down, or course)?

 

It looks like the Rockets are in scenario 2 or 3 at the moment adding Martin and losing Landry and Dorsey. I think Hilton is gone. If Sergio is kept above 2 mil, he'll put Rockets in Scenario 3.

 

I think we're going to try to retain all of our players and add people through the draft and MLE. Hopefully that's the case, or we swing a deal in the offseason.