Hang on, there's a reasonable chance they don't even extend him. I believe they might have to extend him twice before getting him into a summer camp (due to the lockout), and they might not want to take the chance. The trade was for the first-round pick, and to take a shot at Thabeet. They knew all along that he might not make it. They gave up a player that didn't have a long-term future with the team. Thabeet is worth while if you have a spot on the team to spare, and he fills a need at the moment, but right now, he looks more like an end-of-the-bench guy than a player with exciting potential.
The reason we're so good defensively these last few games is because our BACKUP bigs are playing D. Our starters have always been a good unit but we've lacked good bench play. If Hill keeps this up, he's lessened our need for a big somewhat.
I say a quick fix for us would be for us to use one of our exceptions to obtain Maurice Speights. I heard we almost got him at the last trade deadline so I know we have interest in him. The real question is, if we obtain a center then what do we do with the 4, 5 rotation? Even when Scola comes back someone isn't getting minutes. It even seems that with consistent minutes Hill has shown improvement. I love Scola, I really do, but I think we should deal him, Williams, and Bud for Granger in the offseason. I'm convinced Granger will be obtainable this summer and I think it would be hard for Indiana to pass on a deal like that. Lowry/Dragic Martin/Lee Granger/Martin Hayes/Patterson/Hill Speights/Miller/Yao/Thabeet Remember, we still need to make room for Yao if he's willing to take a vet minimum contract and we also may need to make room a 2011 rookie and possibly even Sergio Lull.
You know, I imagine if the OP were to present this idea to Les Alexander, the resulting scene would be something like this: Spoiler <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7ffj8SHrbk0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I have always said that this team will never be a contestant while Chuck Hayes and Battier are starters!! We got one of the problems solved and hopefully we can address the other soon. Hayes is a hassle player and deserves praise, but he should at most be a backup and if things work better for this team, he should be a situational kind of player for defensive purposes.
As much as i like Chuck he is not a center, and neither is Patterson. I would not mind moving Scola for a center and letting them get all the minutes at PF.
Size will eventually matter. Chuck can get you so far. Unless Patterson and chuck turn out to be both elite defenders which is possible. Then it will matter. We know Adelman will start Scola again when he comes back and Patterson will get significantly reduced minutes. Therfore this illusion of Chuck playing better defense? When its actually just easier now that Patterson is playing defense and rebounding along side him will disapear slightly in the playoffs. Against bigger teams and with Scola playing more minutes and Patterson playing less. So we need size.
If we had a pau or a duncan playing the 4, then I would say no we don't need a center. We have plenty of up and coming power fowards, getting a center that can change shots and clog the lane would make the most sense.
The Rockets need a big center. But the main priority is a superstar. Superstar should be the first thing on the list and then a good center. The sad thing is, even if the Rockets acquire a center, the center wouldn't be as productive as Hayes because of all the weak centers in the Nba today.
