Great. I'm happy this is finally resolved and Harrell also got a fair contract. Sick and tired of the Hinkie's that take advantage of the players.
With DMo hurt, Harrell looks to be in the rotation to start the season for better or worse. I'm not a big Harrell fan though I hope he wins me over with good play. I think Hayes is a center only at this point in his career, which would be helpful in the first game of the season.
Freudian slip? I'm struggling with the concept here of how the Rockets could increase their flexibility by hard capping themselves. First, I think it's unlikely he's signing for the minimum. If we're handcuffing him for 3 years on the contract, I'm betting we pay a premium to make it worth his while. Every extra dollar he takes is one less dollar we can give to someone else. But secondly, if we didn't hardcap ourselves, we could still sign 2 vets for the minimum now. Or 3 or 4 or 5. We would not have been hardcapped. We could also make trades that take back more salary than we send out, making more trades possible. With Harrell signed with the MLE, maybe not signing Hayes gives us some flexibility going into the season than keeping Hayes. But, not signing Harrell would have given us more flexibility. Hayes' contract would not have triggered a hard cap like Harrell's does.
These are my thoughts on the situation as well. The moment they traded for Lawson the roster for this season was pretty much set. They seem to still have some minor wiggle room for something in season if it comes up, but nothing substantial was most likely going to happen anyway because the major move (trade for Lawson) already occurred. So I'm not too worried about our ability to make trades this season being affected. Now, near the deadline, it is likely that some salary will be sent out for picks, as is the case every season. We already have a strong roster in most every aspect. And if there is a deficiency we have some money to play around with. The 15th roster spot is likely to have little if any impact on this season, so why not take a chance on locking up a rookie with good potential? At the same time we will likely still be players in the 2016 FA. Seems like the right thing to do all the way around.
VERY happy that Montrezl HERO is officially a Rocket!!! Who cares about the Clippers or Warriors when the HERO has no fear of burning cars?
It wasn't an issue of not having him this year, but what signing him longterm does to our flexibility.
Except, for Durant, moves would still have to be made and one of DMo/Jones' cap holds could be held and still make it fit. Plus, with the 1 year deal, you would still keep his RFA rights on a miniscule RFA hold, which probably will be the same or less than his Year 2 salary anyway. This really doesn't give you anymore flexibility for free agency than the Rockets would have had if he signed the 1 year deal.
My biggest concern on the trade front is that I anticipate a trade to unload Motie or Jones at the deadline. They both enter free agency next summer and there's no way we pony up for both of them. A midseason trade recoups some of their value. But neither of those guys make much money and we have to take less than that back, so a trade will have to either include another player off our roster to make salaries match or else we'll have a small salary guy coming back (likely a simple draft pick).
1. Rockets invented that whole multi-year deal where latter years are unguaranteed. Hinkie just continued to use it after he left. Beverley, Parsons, Taylor, Budinger, Covington, etc. etc. etc. That's not the Hinkie special. It's the Morey special. 2. Players sign it because it gives them more financial security than the typical rookie contract BEFORE this came in vogue, which was generally a 2-year deal at the minimum salary. The contract structure, like the one Parsons signed, guaranteed him double what normal 2nd rounders get. I don't think I need to explain the marginal value of money for people who don't have it. Furthermore, for players like Beverley or undrafted FAs like Covington, having ANY guaranteed money to play in the NBA in of itself is possibly more than they can hope for. Again, marginal value of money. For a player like Beverley, what should he have told Morey? "No, I don't want that crappy contract and I'll just play out the rest of my career in Russia." That seems like a pretty stupid decision, doesn't it?
Yes I agree with you that this scenario will happen. I'm thinking back to past precedent of how Morey traded his mid first round PF's. Morris - to the Suns for a second round draft pick Patterson - along with salary filler (Douglas and Aldrich) to the Kings for Robinson (basically a draft pick) and Garcia (a vet who contributed to our playoff run that year) In the second case we needed to take back more salary than we sent out. So in that sort of situation we'd be stuck now. But the first seems like an ideal situation to happen again. Of course those were different because we were not in "win now" mode at that time. Also, obviously Jones and D-Mo are better players than Morris so they are worth more than a second round pick (which of course is easier to acquire than a first). It's debatable if they are better than Patterson. Overall, based on history, I do not think this hinders Morey's ability to pull off a solid trade at the deadline.
I didn't mean to say there wasn't a cost (ie hard cap). Signing Harrell and passing on Hayes was a middle ground between long term and short term flexibility. Signing Harrell to a 3 year deal puts us in a better position for 2016 free agency. It gives us leverage, both now and next summer, in working through TJones and DMos contract situations. IMO, going into next summer with Dwight, TJones, DMo, and Harrell as free agents could've been disastrous and actually hampers us in current trade negotiations. As you pointed out, signing Harrell meant accepting the hard cap, and having guarantees out to Hayes and Wood could have prevented us from making future moves. While I like Hayes, he is not the type of guy you sign if there's any chance a Josh Smith type player could shake loose in waivers/buyouts. If you are going to be hard capped, every roster spot is precious. I'm even somewhat skeptical of Terry, as Thornton is younger and will likely command all of the minutes Terry got last year (though I can see the need for vet leadership and all the bench shooting you can get). That last roster spot will go to fill a need, and we don't know what that need is yet. It could also be used to bring back 1 extra player in a trade.
Corrected. I mean, we don't want to add an arsonist to the roster. :grin: I think Juan Valdez was joking about how Nick_713 spelled "parody" when he probably meant "parity"....or was it, indeed, a Freudian slip?
It takes two to tango. The GM isn't running a charity. His job is to build the best basketball team possible. He's trying to get the best talent at the lowest price. The player is looking for the most money possible. The player doesn't have to sign that contract. But if the player signs it, and turns into a rotation player, then yeah, he'll be underpaid relative to other players for a few years. But he'll have a big pay day coming up. It was like Chandler Parsons or Patrick Beverley. Yeah, they were underpaid for a few years when they were out-producing their contract. But now they are making millions. For some rookies it's just about getting your foot in the door and proving you belong in the league and you will cash in later. A contract is a mutual agreement.
