Well, then you should've told Morey to have not resigned Scola, not drafted Patterson or Donatas, and not traded for Hill. Then Hayes wouldn't be a luxury but a necessity, similar to how he was before Scolandry arrived. I know the term "marginal benefit" is mostly used in economic settings. But I never really thought, until this thread, for the concept to be so hard to understand in general. Always figured it was very simple to comprehend.
Not sure if the front-loading like Collison is allowed. Collison's case was an extension, not a new contract and I think the rules may be different. In any case, I think Chuck will be back because, as Stevierebel noted, there is mutual interest between him and the team. However, honestly, I don't know where this road is going to lead and all I know about Chuck is where this team has been with him been and what we've been through. With the lockout dragging on, there is nothing to do, but if we get to see tomorrow I hope it's worth all the wait. After all, with a quality player and quality leader like Chuck, it's just so hard to say goodbye to yesterday.
Fair enough, Carl. My concern is that after the lockout ends the need for good contracts like Lowry will be even more important. Chuck has some China money, hopefully he doesnt go perkins on us. I'd look to have Hayes back regardless our where the team is AS long as it doesn't hinder us from having a lot of room in 2012. To me, it doesn't not make sense to overpay chuck and lose our pick to nets because we squeak into the playoffs. We need either: lots of cap space, trade for a star, or a top 10 pick in next years draft. Those are the only ways for us to get a cornerstone player and we need to evaluate all other decisions to determine if they help us achieve 1 of those 3 options. Maybe one of our resident experts can answer our chuck Hayes contract structure question.
Yeah and wait till 2 years from now when Miami is over your mythical instantaneous hard cap and has to cut Bosh. Wait are we disussing random bull**** that nobody knows about? Oh and I'm sure Collison's giant 2 mil salary is impeding them really bad on that front anyway.
Why? The GM's job is to attempt to improve the team. Nobody, including Morey, could certainly predict how these guys would pan out. You constantly evaluate the value of a player. Are you saying that if a player is drafted or signed, that means the incumbent guy at the same position should be let go? You don't seem to comprehend my point, which I thought was simple. "Marginal benefit" and "opportunity cost" and "luxury" etc. etc. could apply to every player, not just Chuck Hayes. It comes down to how much you value the player (in consideration of his salary, of course) as oppose to other players on the team.
The term marginal benefit shows a player's added... oh what's the point. Even if I explained this concept in detail you still wouldn't get it. Let's just agree to drop it. I don't want to write an essay only on the prayer that you understand.
I don't want to hold my breath only on the prayer that every thread covering a topic in which you have an interest is not littered with statements saying that you are absolutely right, and that anyone who disagrees is absolutely wrong. Opening your mind a bit to differing opinions would be a marginal benefit for some here, but welcome.
Ironic you say this. The whole "marginal value of a player" vs "simple value of a player" simply my way of presenting another angle on Chuck Hayes' value. I don't give a damn if people think my view is wrong. That using marginal benefit is not the correct way to judge a player. That's a difference of opinion. But from reading Easy's post, that's not what he's saying. He's saying that because every player has a marginal benefit to the team, then there's no reason to use it. That's basially like saying, "Dwight Howard score points, and so does Jordan Hill, so why compare their point totals if they both score?"
You obviously still do not understand my point. Maybe it's me who needs a prayer. You apply concepts of "marginal value" "luxury" as a matter of fact, but they are actually an opinion -- your opinion. You can judge any player on the team as such. It still comes down to which player you THINK has more value than others. When you think your opinion is as good as fact, you obviously cannot allow any other opinions.
Hate to break it to you but nobody on here has presented Chuck's value in any terms BUT marginal value. You just seem to think that you are God and know exactly what he's worth. Grats on preaching to the choir I guess.
Usually when I do this, people just ignore me or agree with me. Yet responses have been purely negative in this thread. Which either means my point is stupid or that people don't understand what I was striving at. Personally, I actually prefer the former. The original post to which I responded to started by saying how you can't see why people make those arguments against Hayes. Wouldn't that imply you cannot see the other side of the coin as well? Pointing out that posters on this board tries to act like his opinion=fact is kind of like pointing out water is wet. Yeah, no kidding.
Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined. I luv ya Zig... But I have to agree with DD on this one.. This is a business and he has to do what's best for him. I didn't have a problem with Lebron going to Miami... I had a problem with how he did it.... T_Man
And the Reality is that Chuck wants to play in Houston. His loyalty lies in Houston. The only way he doesnt resign with Houston is if Morey doesnt offer a competitive contract. But why would Morey offer a non-competitive offer? He wouldnt. Being the Stat junkie that Morey is, I am sure he realizes that their was only two positions that had winning records against their opponents last season. Those positions were SG and C. Kevin and Chuck. The PG and PF positions were tied, and of course the SF had a terrible record against opposing SFs. I guess that would make Kevin and Chuck the most valuable players to the Team. Now maybe if Les and Morey were truly planning on getting a top pick next year by tanking, then resigning Chuck would not be as important, but we are talking about a Franchise that is looking to compete next Year. A franchise that is not rebuilding the entire team as are the Clippers,Nets,Wolves ect. We are mainly focused on Rebuilding our Defense and trying to find a closer. When it comes to Loyalty, The Rockets are the reason Chuck Hayes is who he is. We gave him a chance, we stuck with him, our starting C went down, giving him the opportunity to play starting C for 2+ Years. If he was on any other team none of this would have occurred. He would have most likely never had the opportunity to show how good he can be at the NBA Level.
If LeBron did what was best for him then he would have gone to Chicago and won a buncha rings instantly and made more money. Instead he did what he wanted to do, there's a difference. Chuck has already said that he wants to come back. So you're only agreeing with DD if you want Chuck to leave. So you shouldn't talk about what Chuck needs to do but instead what you want him to do.
Starting center is a luxury for almost every team in this era. I have enough fingers to count the number of legitimate starting center in the league today.
This. This because it actuallyis more true with Chuck Hayes than that dumb argument was everytime we brought up Battier. We have a team loaded with talent at the Pf position and guys young who could use a Chuck Hayes type of influence on the them. Grow them as players faster to better players along with our coach Kevin Mc Hale who has his team player Chuck Hayes a veteran to back up his teachings.
Chuck is, yet again, underrated... Much like Lowry, he is a must sign. IMO, Lowry and Chuck are two guys that can contribute for the next decade. Young guys need veteran leaders to learn from. It just so happens that Lowry and Chuck are ridiculously young veterans...
