I am very much aware of Asik. I think the signing is "MEH"....a good contractual move by Morey to give us a fighting chance of getting him. But to me, Asik is just not that much of a difference maker - Camby is better than him and he is 57 years old. Asik - reminds me of a 7 foot Ryan Bowen. DD
Before the DD and Sam Fisher hate fest, why is it ok to sign for a need spot, not so for the draft? Is dragic a better player than Asik? Isnt the whole point to have the best players possible on the team? If Is courtney lee better than asik? Are there better players in free agency that are availible for the money the rockets are about to pay asik?
Joel Pryzbilla had a very good career especially if not for the injuries. He was solid and everything you say asik is trying to be
Seriously, why can't Morey stop with this fascination of being able to challenge the NBA title from mediocrity, when was the last time a team won a title at 8th place? It's either tank to get a top 3 pick or trade the WHOLE team to get a star. Look at New Orleans they lost their star, tanked and now they have a potential star (how easy was that?).
I know. And while a player might not be projecting as an all-star after 2 seasons (Asik) It doesn't mean he won't have a very good career. That's KIND OF MY POINT....
You just said you weren't aware of Asik. You demonstrated that clearly by suggesting that he wasn't a proven commodity. You can reply, but I'm not un-ignoring the posts again to read them.
I'm not sure it's that cut and dried though. Unless we want to begin another season without a big man? Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting Asik is "all dat" - but you always pay more for a backup big man than for a marginal point guard. Oh, and for what it's worth, we CAN pay all of Asik, Lee and Dragic. But only if we pay Asik first (wonder why Morey is getting on this so quickly?)
IMO, the only time a team should draft by need are contenders. They needed a guy to back up rose. If your a team in the lottery then it's a no Brainer you go bpa because your trying to get a star as opposed to filling a void. If a player is both bpa and a team need then it's an obvious pick.
Why it's ok to sign a need spot - that player already has a track record in the NBA, you know what they can do/not do in the NBA. You also sign for need because the center position is not meant to be played by guards. So why sign a guard when you need a center? (that doesn't mean I don't want Dragic or Lee, just saying we need a center). You draft BPA in draft because you never know how a players college/HS/foreign experience will translate to the NBA, especially for bigs who traditionally have less bball skills than guards/forwards. You just go by workouts and whatever tapes you have on that player.
What is asik's track record to make him deserving of 8m a yr? 5ppg 10 rebs in 2 starts? Its like anything else when we're talking development? He played 10-13 mins a night. We dont know how much better a soon to be 26 yr old guy can get like asik. I believe top lotto, yeah you do take bpa or guys with most talent. I also believe mid to late 1st you take a chance on a big guy if one is graded out close and you have a gaping hole. Lamb was bpa and a need pick considering martin has a vagina again and lee is rfa. I really like jones talent and upside.
Draft the best player available, and sign for need. Rockets are ok if they are drafting best player available. Seems to be the case. But, signing anyone at this stage is really a huge mistake. First we need a franchise player. And the only realistic way of getting one is the draft since trading for the one we wanted doesn't look so good right now and no one wants to come here as a free agent. We can't become a WCF team with the direction we are going. we should blow this puppy up and start fresh while I am still under 40.
Asik won't be the project like a late draft pick with possible babysitting chores included. I guess Morey isn't the type to babysit anymore, he already went through that with Dorsey who he took a chance on. Small incremental developments aside, we're paying Asik for his defense. Apparently Morey has seen enough to offer Asik that money so that the Bulls will be hesitant to match.
How much better does he need to get? He's already being talked about as one of the best defensive big men in basketball. Both as an individual defender and as a team defender. What would you pay for Kendrick Perkins? Asik is like the better rebounding and defending version ins't he? Yes, he has had only limited minutes (it's actually 12-14!). That's hardly unusual for a 2nd year big man. When he was given started minutes his 10 rebounds 2 blocks and 2.5 steals were impressive in that he extrapolated what he had been doing in limited minutes. Regardless of whether or not you like Asik, isn't he somewhat inconsequential to the question you posed in your original post? Didn't you ask "is it better to pay for a commodity or draft one". Perhaps because you're seeing the answer is "pay for one if it's a C" you're changing the argument to "don't pay for Asik". In the end, 2 years is enough time to evaluate a players ability in the NBA, especially if they have regularly been given minutes (13 per game is more than insignficant). If the gurus think that he's one of the top rated defenders then that sits well with me in declaring him a proven commodity.
IIRC, the Rockets didn't offer a full MLE to Gortat because they thought he wasn't worth it. THe signing doesn't matter anyway, because 5M for a backup center was cheap and Orlando matched regardless. As for your whole "draft vs need" vs "sign vs need", I'm not sure why you're getting confused. Draft vs Free agency is different. Draft: *You get one pick to choose any player on the table, generally a ton of players you can pick *Salaries are not that different FA: *Limited pool of players available, player can opt not to sign with you *Players cost a ton of money So you don't draft for need because you can get a better player for the same price, signing for need is preferred because then you'll only pay a fair deal for the need you want filled. Example: For example, you have the 12th pick. You can go ahead and grab your backup center Zeller, or you can get the better player in Lamb even if you already have 2 sgs. Same price (12th pick) but significantly different projected quality in players (projected roleplayer C vs possible star sg). OTH, signing a roleplayer C like Asik costs 8M, but getting a star pg in say Deron costs 20M+assets+you need to convince D-Will to sign with you. So in a nutshell, if you have a need its better to sign a player than draft a player for your need. The reason for this is opportunity cost. For the price of that backup C you could have gotten a prospect which projects better. OTH if you sign for need you don't really lose much, Asik's not a franchise player but he also doesn't cost 20M a year and he doesn't have diva issues and he wants to be here, while other franchise players wouldn't sign with Houston in the first place. Regarding your whole "we should have gotten Melo at 18 if we wanted to draft for need" argument, Melo isn't a draft for need. He's not NBA ready, he averaged 5.6 rebs against inferior college competition, you think he's ready to handle NBA minutes? I like Melo and would have been ecstatic if we got him at 18, but he's a project with some nice upside, not a draft for need.
Excellent part of your post DD. IMHO you don't go BPA all the way all the time, you need to balance need vs BPA when drafting guys in the latter stages. Morey agrees with the bolded part of your post he was gonna pick Zeller at 18th before Dallas stole him.
