Uhh yeah and the pumpkin turned into a carriage... The point is Denver doesn't have Harden, and Lawson is making big money and Iggy will soon be a 30 year old free agent.
The Rockets really didn't go into true rebuilding mode until last summer. It sounds like you expect us to already be contending for a championship. The Rockets finished last season one game over .500, and this year we are already four games over .500 and have a good chance to improve on that. What Morey has accomplished with the Rockets is nothing short of amazing. What Morey has done has already translated into wins, and the rebuild is only half way complete. I think that at some point during the next 15 months the Rockets rebuild will be complete and the Rockets will be a legitimate championship contender, not just a team that barely makes the playoffs. The Rockets blew up the team last summer when they got rid of Lowry, Scola, Budinger, Lee, etc. I think Morey deserves more than nine months before fans start complaining about the lack of playoff victories. I suppose you can make the argument that Morey should have blown the team up earlier, but the Rockets were kind of committed to make a go of it with Yao, Scola, and Martin and I understand that. If you look at where the Rockets were 12 months ago, and then look at the Rockets today, the metamorphosis has been startling. Rockets fans just need a little patience.
First Morey didn't invent the term, it was used prior to Morey to describe a teams situation and is still used today by others. The reason to not just use "players" is that assets is more than just players on the roster, it is draft picks, contract terms, etc. I have noticed Morey doesn't use the term as often, but I found the whole thing over blown.
They have Brewer, Faried, WiChandler and Gallo who are not old. Those are pretty good players and even Javale is a good player sometimes
At least the Rockets publicly label ALL of the players are "assets." A truly honest system would have to call some guys "liabilities."
I remember in a recent player interview, the player said something like he'll work hard to be an valuable asset of the team. So my understanding is players don't always think of the word 'asset' as a negative thing either.
Even though every team in the NBA would love to have any of those players, look at their contracts with the exception of Brewer & Faried. If someone trades for either of the other players, they are penciling them in as their 2nd all-star type of building block. Denver wont find great value for any of those guys in a trade better than just retaining them to win by commitee. Faried is the main asset they have in a trade to bring in a star player... if they even care to do so which I dont think they do. Denver seems to be setup pretty well for the future as a win-by-committee & system model. They might never be a true contender to the likes of a Miami, OKC, or even SA, but they will be profitable, have an excellent turnout for their homegames, and consistently make the playoffs. Houston, is being built differently. They are being built to go for the big fish to win it all. Put all the chips on the table, and swing for the fences. Even though they are stocked with good young players, on great contracts, make no mistake about it... they are playing cards that could be dealt at any time to bring in that player that truly makes the Rockets a championship contender overnight. The Rockets assets are priced to sell. Denver's assets are not. They are priced to sustain.
Who really cares? The players dont like being referred to as assets or playing chips, but lets face it... If my bosses boss refered to me as an asset in my role, and other employers were chomping at the bit for my services would it be such a terrible thing for me, and what does it say about my value as a professional in my role? After Morey made the Harden trade, I think everyone(players, media, fans, etc) sort of woke up and realized the direction the team was headed, and the whole asset thing was forgiven. Morey is doing what he has to do to make this team a contending team. It requires leaving sentiment, and feelings at the door. I also think that NBA players are realizing that in this salary cap era of NBA basketball, being traded doesn't mean you are a bad player by any stretch... its quite the opposite now.
This is true, some superstars don't win championships. They lose in the conference finals or the finals to other superstars on their way to the title.
Not quite the same because I doubt you'd have as much invested in staying a part of your current team as an NBA player would, that you'd want to stay with your team + there isn't a real threat that your boss is going to trade you to a worse team in order to get an upgrade at your position. But I agree with the sentiment in that, who really cares? That's part of the NBA business. If you're not a legit supermax player or a guaranteed superstar player in a top 3 pick (meaning that you are far and away outperforming your contract and there'd be no way to get equal or better value back), then you can always be traded for an upgrade if it suits the team.
Lin Harden Parsons Smith Asik It's not unreasonable to think everyone except Smith will improve as well. This team is good enough to be up there in the West!
But Iggy and Lawson ISN'T Harden. You can combine those two in a trade and they still wouldn't be worth Harden. Sorry We also have the most important asset: max cap room.
