The Warriors want to trade Biedrins because he plays like ass and balls, and he has a large contract. A. He sucks Jupiter's balls when he does play B. He rarely ever plays because of his injuries C. He has a contract that could kill a small horse 1. Chuck Hayes is a better starting Center, Offensively and Defensively 2. He can be had for less than half the price of Biedrins 3. Martin, Chase and Scola are the single worst defenders at their own positions, and we gripe about Chuck Hayes, who covers for everyone's ass.
Hayes is better at moving his feet and taking charges -- I'm not sure that makes him better defensively though. Chuck is probably better at guarding PFs, Biedrins better at guarding true centers due to his height/length. Our overall defense would improve with Biedrins protecting the rim vs. Hayes.
Tyson Chandler averaged 6pts 6rebs in 23 minutes in Charlotte the year before he got to Dallas. He played 96 total games the 2 years before he got to Dallas. Chandler gets paid $12M a year. One could say he sucked Jupiter balls when he did play, and he rarely played because he was injured. By comparison, Biedrins played 92 games the past 2 years. And as you guys already know, gets paid $9M a year. Like I said, definitely overpaid for his current production, but IMO worth the risk if he can regain his form. Oh, and one big difference between Chandler and Biedrins: Chandler was 28 years old when he averaged 6 and 6 a year ago.
All you people scared at paying centers need to abstain from b****ing when Morey signs Aaron Gray. Aaron Gray is all you stingy bastards deserve as your center.
How has the Warriors defense been the last couple years? Spoiler Chuck Hayes would greatly improve the Warriors defense in place for Biedrins...
Also comparing Chuck with Biedrins: Biedrins is the better rebounder, even in his current decrepit form. Biedrins is the better shot blocker and rim protector, even in his current decrepit form. What might surprise some people is that Biedrins is a similar caliber passer as Chuck. And I would call Chuck an elite passer at the C position. I believe we could run the high post through Biedrins without missing a beat. Finally, what Chuck does do better is 1-on-1 defense. But really, with the current crop of centers, that isn't even that important. I would still sign Chuck as the backup, and especially play him against the Amares and KGs.
knote32 -- I see you're against the Biedrins idea. Do you have any suggestions as to how we can improve the five spot?
How has the Rockets defense been the last couple years? Spoiler I don't think one man is the answer to any team's defense.
I am not against Biedrins, I am against the notion that he is better than Chuck Hayes, which he is absolutely not, at any aspect of defense. Chuck Hayes creates far more misses with his defensive rotations, and he is actually responsible for far more Rocket rebounds than he gets statistical credit for, because of his positioning. If you have been to a Rocket game and watched Chuck live, you know exactly what I speak of. Chuck is a better player than Biedrins in every single way, and he is reliable and improving every single year.
One last point: Unless we are plugging Yao Ming or Dwight Howard into the middle, I doubt we will all of a sudden be vaulting to the top of the league in defense. And that wouldn't even be necessary to contend. All we need is top 10. Like Dallas this year. While we were one of the worst teams defensively the first half of the year, we actually improved to the middle of the pack after the trade deadline. Amazing what getting rid of your biggest defensive liability, and at the same time playing Patterson ahead of Hill can do. I think if you add a legitimate shot blocker like Biedrins to that group, and replace Budinger with Morris in the starting lineup, we can bump that defensive efficiency up a few more spots, possibly to top 10. If we do that and maintain our elite offense, we should be fine.
I don't think if we get Biedrins it means we have to kill Chuck, or something. In fact, I'd still have Chuck start at the beginning of the year.
Yep You're not going to get a C that can play. Unless he's had issues. (Injury,drug,headcase etc...) They are too valuable. You have to take a risk and overpay to get a C like that. See Dallas and Chandler
Unlikely. Biedrins is just a better fit for our C needs than Hayes. Chuck is a good 1-on-1 defender, but at 6'6 he's just outmatched for the C position. He offers no rim protection and isn't a great rebounder (let's save the Battier-esque "improves the team without you knowing it!" comments). He's an undersized, great defensive PF that's played admirably guarding a position (C) he has no business guarding. Offensively, with the strides Hayes took under Adelman, you are right in saying that he's better than Biedrins. Defensively? I think given the option between the two, the Rockets would rather have Biedrins. If they traded for Biedrins big contract, I'm not sure how high on the priority list re-signing Chuck Hayes would be.
No, . . . see Dallas and Brendan Haywood. The Tyson Chandler situation is totally different. Hell, the Rockets were THIS close to getting Chandler last summer before a complicated four-team deal fell through, only after which did Dallas make a move to acquire Chandler using Erick Dampier's voidable contract. The Rockets almost had him for a package of Jared Jeffries, Jordan Hill and David Andersen! If almost ANY team looking for a quality athletic center was confronted with the chance to obtain a player like Tyson Chandler for what essentially amounted to a ONE-YEAR, $12M DEAL, I bet they'd take it. There's just so little downside (other than a one-year financial hit). It can't kill your chances of improving the roster in the future.
I think the problem for Chandler was most people, and many teams, just felt he wasn't very good. Much like how people view Biedrins now. Obviously the difference between their contract is what makes Biedrins the big risk. But as players, I see a lot of similarities to their situations.
I remember Chandler looking pretty good when he played with CP3 in New Orleans, who fed him the ally-oops. I don't think it's a coincidence that his career was "revived" playing with Jason Kidd in Dallas, who did the exact same thing. Although, I will say that I'm not entirely convinced he would be as effective in Houston, just because I don't put Lowry in the same passing tier as the two aforementioned PGs. Still, obviously he would've been a big upgrade for our C position.
