Let me help you -- you wouldn't trade Patrick Patterson unless you're getting a superstar back? The same Patrick Patterson that couldn't even make the first or second all-rookie team? I like Patrick and I think he has potential, but it's downright ridiculous to suggest that you shouldn't trade him unless you're getting a superstar back. He has no where near that type of value -- you have to come back down to reality here. Based on this Patterson comment, you are 100% one of those fans who overvalues players because they are on their team.
Come on dude, way to dodge the main argument(selling high on Kmart) and blow one way out of context with an amazingly short sighted argument. First off its not Pat's fault he was passed up by several teams that SHOULD have taken him and instead was drafted to a team where he didn't get the play time early in the season. If he would have played more at the output he was giving he would have easily made one of these oh so important all rookie teams. He had the 3rd highest player efficiency rating of any rookie, 2nd best of all players drafted last year. Secondly my exact statement was... Martin, Lowry, and Patterson AREN'T going anywhere unless a superstar comes back in return. Not that we absolutely shouldn't ever even consider it, or that Patterson is the greatest player ever and we should never trade him. What I am trying to say is that I believe these 3 pieces are something you can build on. I also think Morey believes the same thing, I have no inside source no real evidence to support that he thinks it, just a feeling. To me it makes no sense to move them for someone who isn't a substantial upgrade. That trio is young and can still improve, trading them for minor upgrades just doesn't really seem wise in my opinion....
I'm really sold on selling high on Kevin Martin -- however, looking at the teams drafting in the top 8, I don't see a team who would give up their pick for Martin.
Martin's the one player I'd like the team to hold onto most. He's a perfect, efficient second scoring option. We should consider that job filled and continue waiting for a number one option to "shake loose." I still see some good years ahead for Martin. I don't think he's an Aaron Brooks who stepped into fill a scoring void when the team's superstar went down and inflated his value in the process. I don't think we'd be selling high with Martin, and I don't think once he was gone, he'd be easy to replace. It's important to have a good Robin to complement your Batman.
^although that trade sounds good in theory, I'm not so sure OKC would let go of Harden, let's not forget they passed on Evans to draft Harden, which leads me to believe they see a future.
yeah and tonight he had like 3 free throws.Its generally understood that the tickey tack fouls aren't called in the playoffs and it is more physical. But don't take my word for it: http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/04/15/3004576/nba-playoffs-mean-fewer-whistles.html martins game is even more designed to draw contact, and fouls he simply won't get in the playoffs. So basically martins game is better for regular season. Not making it to the line as much in the playoffs therefore negates his main strength. I don't mind martin as a number 2 scorer ( which is what he was supposed to be) but the moment of selling high is probably here, and we need to look at it. If we arent going to make the playoffs or compete anytime soon, then martin is a good regular season guy to keep around... minute eater, quaint bobble head night fare... on the other hand, if we are going to be in the playoffs - we don't need a flopping guy when getting the flopping calls is not going to happen as much in playoffs. His value is the highest now it will ever be, and we aren't going anywhere with his style of play in the playoffs. SELL
While I still don't believe that we are or that we should move to a complete youth movement, but IF that's the way morey chooses to go I could get behind a deal for harden and one of their young big guys for martin. I'm not sure how much I like any of the young guys we could realistically expect to get back in the deal, but I do like what Harden has shown and at only 21 has plenty of room to improve. Probably why OKC wouldn't have much interest in the deal seeing as how they are still alive in the WCF. Maybe if this were a few years down the line and Harden was older and ready for his pay day and opportunity to lead we would be in better position to make the deal.
Some people base their analysis on actually, you know, watching the game. Unlike you who bases his analysis of a player based on what a panel of 117 media members think, lmao.
I think the lack of making the rookie team was due to his lack of playing time during most of the season. He had the third best PER of all the rookies this season, so though his value may be low now, it is likely to increase with more playing time next season and more exposure of his ability to all the other teams. It might be wiser to hold on to him and allow his value to reach its potential before letting him go rather than selling him now while his value isn't necessarily that great.
kevin martin's season in houston is nearly identical to his season in sacromento. losing seasons. coach aldeman leaving/fired twice. so now his career in houston is ending like the way it did in sac-town by getting traded again.
LTF I don't think I've ever interacted with another poster who's more diametrically oppposed to my views as you. You already admitted that OVERALL KM is better than Lee. However by taking out KM and putting in the OVERALL inferior Lee the team is supposed to be better overall? I talked about offense because that's what makes KM elite-his offense. If you have him on the team the team's offense will be elite as well. Sure the defense takes a hit, however getting a shot-blocking big man does more for the D than putting Lee in KM's spot. You get that big man and you an elite offensive team and an average defensive one. That's better than Lee and that shot-blocking big, in which you have a team average on both offense and defense.
Thing is Lowry and Patterson have potential and Martin does not. You hang onto Lowry and Patterson because if Lowry can continue to play how he did post all-star break. He's a borderline all-star player already (like Martin is now) and Patterson can only get better. Martin is what he is, not getting better...getting older. If we still had Yao healthy and Artest or something...then sure keep him around and hope to contend...but obviously we are nowhere near that so you sell high on a few of your best veterans.
I think all of that is true. Same goes for Lowry who, while he had much more opportunity than Patterson, has more room to grow as well. That is why no one is making "Sell High on Patterson" or "Sell High on Lowry" threads. However, just because I wouldn't actively shop them doesn't mean I would ONLY trade them for a superstar like someone here suggested. That is a huge divide where there is plenty of wiggle room in between where a deal would be too good to be true. For instance, if someone offered us the #2 pick for either of those players, it would be crazy to pass up, EVEN though there is no guarantee that the #2 would be anything close to a superstar AND Lowry and Patterson both have yet to maximize their value. The reason is because even after they maximized their value it would be less than the potential of a high pick like that. You would have to be blind to see superstar potential in those two players, and only trading them for one means you will be holding on to them for a very long time, since no team will be willing any time soon. Or ever.
I think this bears repeating because some people think when we want to "sell high" on someone, we would do the same for anyone in any situation. Sell high on Kobe Bryant. Sell high on Kevin Durant. Sell high on Lebron James. That isn't the case at all. The OP makes it very clear that we are not selling high on Martin simply because his value is high. It is the surrounding circumstance of the team- rebuilding/let go of a coach perfect for him, and of himself- just had the healthiest year of his career, that makes selling high make sense. If the team was in a different circumstance, like contending for a title, then it would make little sense to take such a big risk in taking a step back for two steps forward in the future. However that is not the case. A lot of people who think it would be too risky to trade Martin for a high pick are stuck in that box. That it is too all or nothing, sell high on everyone or no one at all. Instead of situational like it is in real life. Understand that the NBA rewards reckless risk taking like no other when the situation calls for it- when you are stuck in mediocrity. If you take the biggest risk with the biggest potential reward, you either hit big and strike gold, or you crap out and get rewarded with a high enough pick to draft your golden boy anyways. It is WIN WIN. The upstanding folks here might have too much integrity for something like that, but I didn't make the rules. The NBA did and it is best to play by them, and take advantage of them.
Didn’t you make a thread about Rudy Gay bringing down Grizzlies and they got better without him? http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=6124376 So by your own thinking, a team CAN get better by replacing an overall superior player with an inferior one. In Rockets case, I think people are saying whoever we choose with the draft pick (D. Williams, Kanter) plus moving Lee to shooting guard may make us a better team. We get better defensively and probably do not lose too much on offense. A player like Williams or Kanter can become a star when we already know Kevin Martin will never be. For this same reason, if a trade for a superstar comes along, a recent #2 or #3 picked player is also a much more valuable asset than Kevin Martin.
For this same reason, if a trade for a superstar comes along, a recent #2 or #3 picked player is also a much more valuable asset than Kevin Martin.[/QUOTE Unless is name is Thabeet. Just because someone is picked at the top of the draft it doesn't make them valuable. If Morey thinks Kanter is really a future near all-star center than trading Martin would make sense. if it's a gamble you would be giving up a valuable asset (especially at next year's trade deadline) for a possible stiff like Thabeet.
I think the PER stat is meaningless and relying on that to make your case is silly. Rudy Fernandez had a higher PER his rookie year than Derrick Rose -- how did that turn out? I wasn't using all-rookie team to show what I think of Patterson (I mentioned I liked him and he has potential); I mentioned it to show how OTHER teams value our players. Obviously he didn't show enough in those minutes to make people vote for him over other rookies. And if you went through the all-rookie team, you'd see that you could make cases for several of those players over Patterson (D Favors/G Monroe on all-rookie 2nd team). Thanks for the shout out. Now go back to thinking one stat can tell you all you need to know about a player, like PPP (lol). I guess you would take Martin in isolation sets over LBJ, since Martin has a much higher PPP. You'd make a great coach! Well quit arguing with me and get on board with the right thought process! Again, you're failing to pick up on the simple formula I laid out for you. I think we'd be a better overall team with (Rockets - Martin + Lee + T5 draft pick). That doesn't mean that Lee is better than Martin, it means that Lee can make up for some of Martin's contribution + we'd be getting a high draft pick in the rotation as well. I can't even call Martin an elite offensive player. He's not a complete offensive player. He's good in spot up situations, but he's not great off pick-and-rolls, doesn't create for others, you can't give him the ball when the game's on the line and his game shrinks in the clutch. Carmelo Anthony is a one-way player who is elite offensively. Kevin Martin is a one-way player who is an upgraded Corey Maggette.
You won't believe how many people struggle with this. All they see is the shot. They don't understand all the work that goes into getting Martin that shot. With the elite offensive players like Lebron, Wade, Dirk, Kobe etc you can just dump the ball off to them at the beginning of a possession and trust they can make a play for either them self or their teammates.
Yeah, but in the Grizzlies case they got better because the shots went from Gay (inferior player) to Z. Bo and Marc Gasol (superior players). Its not like the 16 shots Gay took all went to Shane Battier. Moving Lee to shooting guard puts undue pressure on Kyle Lowry as he would be the only one who can reliably create shots on the perimeter. I get what you and LTF are about moving KM, however we dont' have a crystal ball, how do you know Derrick Williams won't be Beasley 2.0? KM right now is a solid second option to a superstar, I'd rather keep him so that when we do get that guy we're ready to roll. If not, he can keep the offense elite while we plug the hole in the middle.
