I like House and am glad we got him but honestly is there a fear within the media scrum that the team could pull any of your passes at any time? I can understand that, MacMahon had his pulled in Dallas and he has Disney backing him. I think the ruling against the Knicks (I think in regards to the post) should give you all some precedence that the team cannot do that. I appreciate your positivity but goodness I’ve had it with Tilman.
I've never felt that way (regarding press passes). Seriously, the guy I quoted (regarding House) listed like 10 complaints. I took issue with 1 of them. I really don't think what I said was overwhelmingly positive regarding Tilman, nor was I intending it to be. All I was doing was using it as an example of piling on. There's enough to be legitimately critical of without trying to spin other stuff for the sake of a narrative.
That's good to know. IF for whatever you or anyone else do feel pressured please let us all know. There are plenty of people here who would be willing to fight for your right to proper access to the team. You're doing really good work and I truly am glad you feel free to say whatever you want.
I appreciate that. My main point: I just wish people would pick their battles better. If folks start spinning everything negative for the sake of a narrative, it takes away from the legitimate criticism because they just come off as biased. (And yes, it applies in the other direction as well.) For example, this summer: If they don't do anything with Shumpert's Bird rights after not expanding the Russ trade, Tilman should be criticized for that. (I promise I will.) But I wouldn't lump it in with the T-MLE issue, because honestly, they did spend most of it... it just doesn't feel like it because the guy that got most of the money was already technically here.
Oh, I had no idea The Cat was Ben DuBose. LOL. Guess I missed the little red "twitter" tag under his name. I've considered his Twitter a follow for some time. Weirdly, and it's probably just me, but you come off here as much more pro-Rockets management than you do on your Twitter timeline. I agree with you on the wisdom of re-signing Ariza for 15 million/yr; disagree with your comments on the nitty-gritty of the House negotiations in 2018. I doubt anyone who allegedly first offered either a completely non-guaranteed or partially guaranteed 3 yr deal to House, at the minimum salary---as was leaked at the time, I believe by his agent---would have been willing to dip into the T-MLE to offer him 11/3. At the time, I advocated here for doing just that, tax be damned, or something similar like 10/3. Something that would have preserved all of this year's T-MLE or NT-MLE for someone else. Of course, if House wanted something like all of the MLE or another contract manipulation to receive yet more money, then LOL at House. I don't believe House's team either received an offer like that during the standoff, or turned it down, otherwise I think it would have been leaked by the Rockets. Perhaps you know differently.
I agree with you that I don't believe the Rockets offered the leftover T-MLE back then. However, I'm also skeptical that House would have accepted it. Does that make sense? I do agree that it was a mistake not to try. With that said, the only public request from House's agent was for a 1-year minimum conversion, and I think in mid-January they were hopeful of getting more than the 3 years/$11 million that they ultimately got (and that was roughly equivalent to what the leftover T-MLE was, coincidentally). IMO, that price came down because House never fully re-established his footing after coming back from the two-month departure (and his playoff performance underwhelmed). In hindsight, though, I do still think the Rockets should have offered it. We'll never know if he'd have accepted, but it was worthy of the effort. As for me, I appreciate the kind words, and I think some of the "difference" between here and Twitter is contextual. People on Twitter (within the Rockets-specific community) tend to be a little too positive, so I try to keep that balanced. At times on here, I think the opposite is the case, in that some are excessively harsh. And I get why, because CF is the true diehards, and we all want them to maximize their chances of winning a title. I 100% get it. But the best way to describe it... there's less reason for me to tweet/post if I already agree with the general thought. I try to add perspective when I think my view is less represented, if that makes sense.
Fair enough. I think that explains the dichotomy I thought I noticed between your Twitter and here. I'm surprised if House's team really thought he was going to get more than 11 over 3 last year, or that Morey was simply going to renounce the Rockets RFA rights over him. That just seems a bit ambitious on the part of a guy who frankly wasn't very good in the league until he started playing next to James Harden. OTOH, I could easily someone whose stereotype was that he was deficient in the human element of negotiation, offering something as tone deaf as a partially non-guaranteed contract for three years at minimum salary, to a guy who was doing very well for the Rockets right until his hiatus. I guess we won't know what really happened for some time, but I'm glad House is here now, and I hope fervently that his shot returns to that 45-49 percent from 3 that he was shooting before he got yanked. Do you think the Rockets need another piece to seriously contend for a title? Or are they in the position of most of the top 6 or so teams: competitive, but needing to roll a 20 on that dice to win it all?
good memory! to clarify I was ok letting ariza walk because I assumed we would replace him. we had the MLE and possible trade scenarios. I was never advocating for letting him go, not replacing him, and then celebrating our tax savings. I believe my thought progression last summer was: 1) its ok to let ariza walk if he wants to much, we'll replace him with the MLE 2) ok we didn't get anyone for the MLE but we can trade ryno/melton/pick for a defensive forward 3) ok we didn't trade for anyone good but at the deadline knight/pick will be a better package than anything with Ryno 4) oh, well we spent more assets moving knight but it was for tax savings only. we should've just kept ariza on a 1yr deal and payed tax. then this summer the pattern of profit over winning started to emerge 5) now that we ducked the tax last year I'm sure we can replace ariza with the MLE this year. 6) oh no, we're not spending the MLE. is this more tax avoidance instead of building a contender? 7) ok, maybe acquiring rus will be enough incentive to go all-in and acquire another piece in trade 8) damnit the deal is closed and we didn't trade for anyone else. I'm on to you tilman!
it is possible house ends up outplaying his contract. and I hope he does! it is equally possible that he doesn't. a risk we wouldn't have had to take if we spent on proven, likely better, players. also, the two ideas are not mutually exclusive. we could've given house his contract and used the rest of the NTMLE to bring in another decent player. everyone was mad at me for suggesting we hard cap ourselves, but little did everyone know tilman won't even pay the tax, let alone go over the apron. so here we are with all our flexibility and tax savings again. not that that's what you were advocating for, just still gets me mad when I bring it up! also I didn't mean to create a checklist of everything that needed to be done. I think if he added 1 more player using any of those methods we'd be fine. for example I wouldn't say we should've used the MLE and expanded the Westbrook trade. either one would be great. doing neither is just putting profits over winning.
Keep in mind that in House's case, the RFA rights only really extended to Houston's mid-level. The Rockets couldn't match offers beyond that without creating cap space, which was always pretty much impossible. So that's why I think at one point, House's agent was hopeful they could get more. But yeah, he was never quite the same after coming back. Ended up working out, but I'm with you in that it obviously would have been preferable had he basically gotten this same deal in January. I think they're a legitimate contender right now, but more always helps. IMO, the piece of the calculus that I some are underrating is how much giving two FRPs in the Russ trade makes their other tradable FRPs (2020, 2022) precious commodities. It was easy to endorse (and I did, prior to the Russ trade) giving up the 2020 1st for Iggy, since you'd still have 2022/2024/2026 for upgrades later on. But now that 2020 and 2022 are literally all you have... you have to be a little more selective in what deals you give those up for. Maybe a 35-year-old Iggy isn't it, if you think you can get 75% of his production with one of the wings currently on the market. I would like more wing defense, but what they had to give up in the Russ trade makes me a little more cautious. Depending how results go early in the season, that might change by December when trading season unofficially kicks off.
Yes, if they don't pay the tax at all, then not using NT-MLE would be very frustrating. I agree there.
If this team manages to win it’ll be in spite of a terrible owner. Tillman must take the fans as morons ready to slurp up whatever BS he’s feeding us
exactly. at the start of free agency I was advocating for using the full NTMLE because I think its easier to get a good player to sign with you rather than try to trade for one. it also doesn't cost you a pick to add a player using the NTMLE but it sure does when you trade. but ok, that went by and so I held out hope that maybe the delay in closing the Westbrook deal was because they were looking to expand it but when they didn't I really lost hope of ever paying the tax. its extremely frustrating when the championship is within our grasp. last year we were 4 games back from 1st place. using the MLE on a player, keeping ariza on a 1 year overpay, or trading assets for a player instead of tax savings, all could've won us 4 more games over an 82 game injury riddled season where depth was scarce. the difference the first seed makes? we face a depleted warriors team in the WCF and go on to face the raptors in the finals, instead of facing a full strength warriors team in the second round without HCA. 2018 taxes might have cost us the championship. now the NBA is as wide open as it has been in at least 5 years. we have a big 2 after the Westbrook trade that puts us in the mix with the LA teams and warriors. once again, the difference between 1st seed and 4th will likely come down to a handful of games. and again that one extra crowder / iggy / morris / carroll type guy off the bench will have made all the difference. once more tax savings may be the deciding factor between a second round loss or a finals/championship run.
Must be one of Tillman’s relatives. Tillman promised him half off a steak dinner if he defends his honor.
Certainly has the crassness down. But, given how many gays and lesbians work in hospitality---a much higher percentage, in my ten years of experience in the industry, than in anything outside of show business or art---I doubt Fertitta or his relatives would make the kind of homophobic comments he's made here.
Frankly, I wouldn't blame the Rockets if they don't do anything with Shumpert's bird rights because I doubt many teams are going to be interested in trading a rotation-worthy player to Houston for an expiring contract without exacting a premium. That is why I am so irritated that the Rockets failed to take advantage of expanding the trade. A Shumpert deal will not return the same sort of value as the savings from an expanded trade. I think the Rockets have missed the boat now on adding quality depth, but I hope I'm wrong.
