If the Rockets can't improve and need to rebuild, how should the team go about it?

Correct. Most(?) want to tank/rebuild/whatever you want to call it, FO doesn't want to tank/rebuild/whatever you want to call it. So....what more is there to discuss? Guess we gotta keep on battlefightin'!

 

I dont think that way. Thats the point. Everyone on here thinks the Rockets would have been so much worse if only they would just trade Scola. Martin actually hurt this team this year. Dalembert was a dud 3/4 of the year, and yet they still ended up where they are because mostly in part to their young talent.

The Camby trade was made well after the Rockets were on their way to supposively be a lock in the playoffs. There was no point in trying to loose games purposefully at that point.

Other than Scola, who else are they supposed to "strip away?" Goran Dragic... someone who is going to be heavily sought after as a future all-star franchise PG.... someone who the Rockets would be lucky to draft if they would have been bad enough to get that good of a player in the lottery. Crap, some people on this board think the Rockets should give him the max or close to it.

Back to the tanking...

People on here use that word as if someone like Morey goes into the lockeroom and says... "Here's the thing guys... we want this guy, so we want you (coach) to openly loose games by making bad basketball decisions costing your reputation, pride, and potential financial gains you might have in your career from being a winning coach. And you (the Player) I want to play you hoping that you dribble the ball off your foot and cost yourself a new contract next year so we can draft the other guy next year so we can build the team around him and not you."....

This is ridiculous and does not happen.

What people want to happen is for the Rockets to strip away older players and play the young guys and let them sink or swim. I get that, I want that too, and I honestly think Morey wants that as well. However, other than a total of 3 players, only ONE of which was affective on the court, how much of an impact would that ONE player really make in the loss column if he was not on the team? 5 Losses max.

People on this board just simply dont know what they are talking about when they talk about "Tanking." You aren't going to force young players and coaches to be bad, and there isn't that many veterans to "strip" away that will make a difference in the loss column to get those precious ping pong balls.

 

I would rather watch young guys with unknown ceilings get heavy minutes and tank in the process then watch players whose ceilings are already established plod along pointlessly.

From the beginning I advocated just playing the 09ers starters minutes and trade Scola and Martin. I hated the Dalembert signing. Watching Twill and Thabeet would have been at least interesting. Watching Scola and Dalembert is not.

Once it was assured that Yao was not coming back the only sane thing to do was just to blow it up. Instead we got another horrible season,

 

What your saying makes sense, and I agree with you on that front. It would have been more interesting to see more of the young guys on the court. That much I can agree with you on. However, that doesn't mean that the team would end up anywhere close to where they needed to be in the loss column to get in the top 10 if even there.

I dont know if this is supposed to just make you feel good or not, but its obvious that all three of those players are not in the Rockets long term plans. Morey tried to move them both before the start of the season and he never wanted the Dalembert signing unless he was able to get him on the deal he got him at where he could move him this Summer or waive him at minimal cost.

 

Here is the problem. Look at our roster now.

PG's: Dragic, Lowry, Boykins and Fortson. 2-3 will be gone.
SG's: Martin, Lee. Martin likely to be leaving.
SF's: Parsons, Bud, D. Simpson and Morris. Morris is not a SF and Simpson will be gone.
PF's: Scola, Pats (Morris?) DMo coming in.
C's: Camby, Dally and Smith. Smith will likely be gone and Dally probably traded.

So without trades, 4 spots will definitely be open. Maybe five if they decide not to keep Boykins.

So now if you would trade Lowry, Martin, Dally and Scola for picks(2-3 picks)
you would then have 7-8 spots to fill. 4-5 of those spots should be filled by rookies.
None of the people leaving or being traded had an effect on the team except for Scola, Martin, Dally and Lowry, but as you have seen during the season the team has done well without them except Scola. Either he or Pats has to be moved in order to free up minutes for D-Mo, if possible.
So saying they will be terrible because we have 4+ rookies on the team is wrong because the team without it's top players has done well. Each rookie will have ample time to compete for time. Others will spend time in the D-league until the trade deadline when more space can be freed.
The point is to get them on the team and work during the season to get them on the court.

 

Seriously? You don't think running Parsons, Bud, PPat, T-Will, Thabeet, Hill, and Flynn for heavy minutes would not result in a top ten pick?

 

I did. I dont understand the point of getting rid of a young up and coming franchise PG who is probably going to be an all-star to get the "Chance" at being bad enough to draft a.... well a "potential" all-star.

To me its robbing Peter to pay Paul. Makes no sense. You want young, exciting talent to build your team around thats fine, but I think the method of getting to that place where we all want to go is getting lost in translation. I read your initial post just fine.

Tanking hard, as your put it, with all due respect would be incredibly stupid.

 

If T-Will is half the player that clutchfans thought he was then the Rockets would have swept the Thunder in the first round.

Yes, I think in a dream world if you take away Scola for nothing, and you do not sign Dalembert, with a few Gatorade call-ups and McHale playing small ball the team still would won more than 20 games and still wouldn't have a shot at a top 5 pick. I am keeing in mind that McHale's hand would not be forced to openly try to loose games mind you.

You aren't going to force guys like Dragic, Lowry, Parsons, PPat, etc. to play bad enough to be that bad.

I think they would be worse. Much worse, but still not bad enough to compete for a top 5 draft pick.

 

In my dream world Scola, Martin, and Lowry would be traded for draft picks to a team under the cap. Or cut Scola and shutdown Martin and Lowry like we did. Just do it sooner. Dragic and Lee would split minutes but not take the bulk over Flynn and Twill. If anyone asks Morey indicates that the 09ers are going to be FAs and we need to see what they got.

 

Trying to trade for a star seems impossible. Trying to sign a big time FA seems impossible for us too. We've wasted too much time trying to do this by collecting decent 'assets' and keeping them as trade bait and trying to win with them at the same time.

Its gotta be done through the draft. We should try trade our key guys for top 5 picks. That way we dont have to suck to get a high pick.

 

No in this draft would give up a top 5 pick for anyone or a combination of anyone on our roster.

We have mediocre role players that were meant to support superstars like Yao and T-Mac. Nothing more.

 

Boom.

 

Go all out to aquire D.Howard! ( Plan B )Bynum,Hibbert, or Asik.
Then add Landry:grin:

 

We can start by selling Le$ for a new owner.

 

no one will trade picks for our role players.

for young and upcoming players, Lowry, Parsons, Budinger, we need to send them to better situation for free.

for veterans, we need to cut them and let them fulfill their dream.

We will compete with NBDL players. Morey likes them anyway.

 

Thank you. Many of you say that you like watching young guys on the team develop. So here is your chance. Jack this deep draft for some of its talent while the opportunity presents itself. A draft like this may not come around for a while.

 

I think it's stupid to try and trade away all those guys for picks.

You'll end up hurting the development of those young players you do end up getting. The coaching squad, even in a normal year, only has a finite number of hours in a day. There are only so many minutes in practice, and so many minutes that can be earned in a game. What do you think is a more ideal way to learn how to play in the NBA; alongside 3 or 4 other rookies who don't know what they're doing and are also learning on the job, or alongside 3 or 4 veterans who have played together for a year or more? When a rookie has to press, knowing that he's actively competing against his teammates on the court for minutes, or when he's given a role and allowed to grow into it?

I'm not opposed to trading away guys to consolidate talent, or to get picks in future drafts; I think it would be pretty smart to try and get some future considerations for the players you listed; things like Nikola Mirotic and the Charlotte pick from the Bulls, for example, or the GSW pick for 2013 from the Jazz. But I am a strong believer that you can only optimally develop a few players at a time, and only if you surround them with veterans that they can play off of. If you load up on a bunch of picks in one year, there's a very high chance that most of them won't develop properly, even if you give them more minutes than they really deserve.