With the way things have been going around here lately, it only makes sense to assume that CD and JVG are in line to pull an act of desperation. We can assume that Mac and Yao are safe. But I fear that they would move our 2007 first and second round picks in order to save face especially if plan B and C fails (whatever they are). Some of you are already saying no way - but remember not many believed we would not keep Gay or land Mike James. Don't be surprised they make things worse and trade 2007 first round pick unprotected. Yeah, go ahead, say no way. As we have learnt, it is impossible to change "done deals" no matter how much we vent or vow to sponsor ads on the local papers. We have to find a way to start sending messages to the front office against such future moves.
Fegwu you are correct. I can see this being a repeat of the Great Bobby Sura Panic of 2005 in which idiotically gave away James for a doghouse player nobody wanted. So we ditch the 07 first rounder, suffer through another season where we're a back spasm/personal crisis away from the lottery and have absolutely no depth whatsoever...and end up with a useless piece that could have been had for free, like Alston, by giving up a potentially valuable commodity.
What about like Howard/20071st rounder and some scrub to match salaries for Francis =P. Then we sign Cato so it's like the old Rockets but instead of Mobley we have T-mac to take his place Alston Francis T-Mac Cato Yao That would be sick
True thanks. http://www.n-c-systems.com/hoops/DraftTrades/2007.html Maybe they trade 2008 second rounder.
in the original Mike James acquisition I might add. That is supposed to be the deep draft. I hope Les puts CD and JVG on a short leash because neither of them is under contract beyond the coming season and could unleash some desperate measures with which they might not have to live.
I mean what else can the Rockets use in trade talks? They literally have nothing. You could get lucky to find a team that needs to create cap space, but the TE usually gets you someone that teams don't want. Rafer Alston? Unless there is another CD/Van Gundy out there, I don't know who would give up value for him. The only "asset" I can think of is a willingness to take on a bad contract to get someone of worth, but if they won't give Mike James a frickin' player option, then that's not happening. I think people who say losing James is no big deal are absolutely kidding themselves. The Rockets need a starting point guard, a starting four or two (depending on where you put Battier and McGrady), a dependable third scorer, an efficient shooter, tough/fiery players, and depth absolutely everywhere. How many of those roles were filled by one guy in James? He filled the third scorer role, the starting one role, the toughness role, the efficient shooter role AND gave them options at the two-guard. Yeah, people will think I'm overreacting, but in my book, this is a massive blunder by the organization.
I am really fed up with the Rockets organization. I would say lets trade McGrady at this point, but right now we wouldn't even get fair value because of his back.
Three years Three years Three years. What is magic about three years? The Rox must think they'll be big FA players in three years. What about this year? The TE can bring someone of reasonable quality but using it would be a virtual new deal, and new deals we ain't seeing coming from the Toy Shop. James = Sammy for Garnett and their WCF team? What teams do we think we can beat out for a 1st round defeat? Three years? How 'bout eight years? That's the age difference between our 'pair of 1st rounders'. Get Damon Jones, Cavs don't want him. Maybe convince them that Rox'll only take him with an SnT for the young, lively but good'n flawed Drew Gooden. Then please use the MLE on two good role players, like Butler or Jones and someone very tall, like JButler or tall enough like TA or or or...or it's gonna be a long cold season in the Tundra Zone.
In retrospect, I can agree that the James fiasco really backfired. If your offseason plan is sort of built around him, why not go down with the ship and offer the extra option and the trade clause? It will be interesting to see what happens from here. Regardless, I know the drama queens will be out in full force tonight.
It's unreal. Every time I criticize management on one of their moves in any sport, in the back of my mind, I know in my heart I am just b*tching and they probably know what they're doing. The scary thing is, in this instance, I have the feeling they have absolutely no idea what they are doing. I almost got over the Battier deal when I convinced myself we are gearing up for a title run this year and going for broke. I would have forgiven them. Losing out on Mike James however is completely inexcusable. Those of you downplaying this are completely fooling yourselves and taking things out of perspective. Noone said he was the Messiah. But he would have been a huge peice and filled alot of needs. It just makes no sense to be stingy over one extra year when you've already dealt away the future. I'm absolutely stunned right now. What's worse, as Clutch pointed out, is that there really is no plan B. The remaining free agents are vastly inferior and none really can serve as a 3rd option. We have no trade assets to speak of. In a horrific twist of irony, the Rockets have mortgaged the future only to turn miser in the present. We're stuck in "no man's land". The worst place in sports.
I disagree. Mike James as our starting PG would be disasterous. Frankly, I have mixed emotions about losing Mike James. He's better than most of the remaining options, but I didn't like him as anything but our 6th man. I wish we had signed him because of the lack of other options, but I'm not heartbroken like the rest of the board. James was an example of the good player on a bad team. Not a classic example, because his shooting percentages remained very good, but, nonetheless, a good player on a bad team. He dominated the ball Steve Francis-style to get those percentages(From what I saw, at least). I don't think Toronto media exactly fawned over James, and there is a reason. We don't have many options, but shrewd management(Likely? Who knows...) of our MLE, TE, and vet minimums could somewhat salvage this offseason. The 2007 #1 could be very valuable as some may be willing to gamble on the team's having another injury-riddled season, but it would be extremely short-sighted to trade it for anything less than a sure-fire starter, as a lotto(I'm not predicting this happening, but you never know) pick in this coming draft could be huge.
Panic mode over Mike James, Rudy Gay and Stromile Swift? Please. No prima donnas, no idiots and no bad contracts. I would have signed James to four years, but a no trade kicker clause is stupid. He had a contract year on a crappy team and has the emotional maturity of Crispin Glover in the 80's. Banks can give you comparable production without all of the drama queen BS. I'll wait until November to judge the off-season.
I am upset we did not get MJ too but as I said after the Battier trade, this team was not going anywhere. MJ was not the solution and there is no way this team was going to compete this year. That is why I am still very upset about the Battier trade. That really mortgaged the future of this organization. We should have gone with Guy and wait for a year or two and then make a move to try to contend.
