Hayes has worked himself from a marginal NBA player to being a very good player. He has earned the respect of his teammates, adversaries, the zebras, and the fans. Pay the man, and sign him to a 4-year contract. Some posters talk about the need to play and develop the young players. Well, having a hard-nosed, hard-working player like Hayes to teach them how to be a true professional could do wonders for some of these guys, like Hill and Thabust. In fact, one could see how Hill has become a player defensive player (his one-on-one D is pretty good) by just watching and practicing with Hayes.
Asset? We talkin bout asset? not real player... we talkin bout asset...:grin: Seriously, I don't get the logic of the two arguments about not keeping Hayes: 1. We need to develop the young players. Others have effectively pointed out that Chuck's presence did not impede development of GOOD young players. Those who did not develop have nothing to do with Chuck. In fact, the young players need a guy like Chuck as mentor. 2. We won't be contending for a long time. Why would Hayes want to stick around? Well, you can say that about any FA not on a contender. But players still sign with non-contenders. The fact is, there are only a few teams who have a shot at winning a championship in the near future. Players have other considerations besides winning a ring.
Really? Everything you said about Hayes is true, BUT come on Hill is better only by working only with Hayes and Hayes alone. -No need for any coaches ( new or old ), -No need for personal growth by Hill The ansewr to Jorden Hill is MORE Chuck Hayes. Really? By the way I saw the same thing ( Hill getting better over the season, too but on both sides of the court not just the defensive side )... -with KMH ( one of the best postmen ever and HIS COACH ) -him getting his personal life right -& more time... We my just have a close 7ft something or not. It really has little to do with Hayes IMO. give time , time
Quick question, You tlk about Chuck having no need on a rebuilding team, but wht excatly are we rebuilding? We already have one of the most lethal offenses in the NBA, so basically we are rebuilding our defense. Now, when rebuilding something, you go back to a point and began to build. Chuck Hayes is that Point. He is the cornerstone tht we want to build our defensivve from. He is one of only two plyers that was around when we were considered one of the top defensive teams. The most important factor of defending is footwork and feet placement. This is something that CMH knows and something that Chuck embodies. If Thabeet had the footwork of Hayes, he would be DPoY or at least in the running. But wait, he can develop it with Chuck on the roster, the same goes for Hill, Pat and the other bigs. You constantly say tht you wants best for the team, but you are willing to let a top five low post defender walk because our team is in a rebuilding state where our defensive needs the most improving. There's is completly no Logic in that. The most logical thing to do, is offer a 4yr contract something similar to kyles. He will play as a situtional defender/enforcer. He will still recieve sixth man mins, until someone else earns the time. He will remain a Captin and mentor the other bigs like they were his own children. I can promise you that any player that practices with Hayes for two years will become a better defenive player. All in all, Chuck will be back, AB is gone. I wouldn't be surprised if Chuck has his number retired in Houston
^^^^^^ I can't and WILL NOT talk for DD. -Chuck Hayes is NOT part of the COACHING STAFF -He is a 6ft 6in Power Forward that filled in at center as a "band aid" that playes with heart -He is not the answer at center long term -to build around a "band aid" no matter how good the "band aid" to stop the bleeding - the "cut" needs "stitches" to "heal" long term -We all have "MAD MAN LOVE" for C. Hayes but he is what he is -Lowry is making starters money for being a STARTER - Hayes should not start at center in the NBA @ 6ft 6in, IMO Sorry -At the right price ( cheap )keep him as long as we can. IMO Sad but true. -I think he is worth more than the ROCKETS should give with a log jam at the 4. GOOD BYE, GOOD LUCK, & most of all THANK YOU Chuck
You do realize that there's this thing called the salary cap, right? Yes, in a world with an no cap and your owner has unlimited pocket, you can have every luxury in the world, which would include Chuck Hayes. But in real life, having one thing means you have to pay the opportunity cost. And the NBA doesn't reward teams that give big money for the sake of having a luxury. Especially one that's trying to rebuild and clear capspace. Chuck Hayes on the Mavs is auto-resign. Chuck Hayes on the Rockets is not.
Which superstar exactly is Chuck Hayes supposed to be keeping the Rockets from attaining under what salary cap? Chuck Hayes on the Mavs is an abomination. Chuck Hayes on the Rockets is Rockets.
Where did I say Chuck Hayes prevent us from getting a superstar? I'm speaking in terms of economics. The marginal benefit of having Chuck Hayes when you have Scola, Patterson, Hill, Monte, and perhaps even Morris at times, does not outweigh the marginal benefit of having that capspace. I didn't say what the capspace would be used for. Quite frankly while I like for it to be a superstar, I don't expect it. But the value and versatility of the capspace is something I feel is more useful than having a 5th power forward. For example, suppose Lee leaves for FA next year. The capspace can be used for a backup SG. Or suppose Lowry gets injured, then capspace can be used on a PG. Trading or signing a rotation level player is fairly easy, especially in today's economy where teams are always looking to shed salary. Whereas Hayes with a long term contract would not be nearly as easy to trade for a need elsewhere.
What did this Capspace guy contribute to his team last year and how does he compare to Chuck? Chuck is better than Scola, Patterson, trash and inknown commodity.
Now I'm feeling stupid for actually taking your previous post seriously. Should've known you were just being sarcastic.
just wait till Sam's boys rookie contracts are finished. Westbrook, Ibaka, Hardin. Sam will have a heart attack after losing them.
You can apply the "opportunity cost" argument on every player on the roster. Yes, we have a surplus of PFs. But the question is, should Hayes be the one we let go? Why is Hayes be labeled as a "luxury" and not the other guys? It comes down to how much you value the contribution of each player. You just assume that Hayes is not as valuable as guys like Scola or Hill, or Thabeet, etc.
Speaking of Sam Presti... We should sign chuck to a nick collison type contract. We need to go all in during 2012's free agency or make a big trade soon. Sign hayes to a 3yr 15mil deal that is front loaded - 9m this year, 3m the following two years. ThaT should not only be a competitive offer but may help if he's included in a trade. Revise number downward based on lockout negotiations. If we have no shot at d12, cp3, etc., let chuck walk - tank it out. Keep our pick and get our star player that way and we would be on our way to success Sam Presti style.
