Clearing something up: The Rockets didn't choose Lin over Dragic or Lowry

excuse me not come here EDIT * Should read "didn't want to stay here"

 

The problem is you evaluate all of the players available to you before you dump the first one. So yeah, it does matter if the second player is not as good especially when you're paying just about the same for him.

 

^in your really odd analogy above it actually does matter if the new girl is not hot. It's important because you are committed to her for 3 years. And you paid extensively for her. 8 million dollars is a lot for a "meh" girl. Could have just had a one night stand (someone on a 1 year contract to fill the spot) and searched for a girl that's worth it to offer that money to.

All puns intended.

 

Dragic signed with Phoenix and Lin was the security blanket. That's as simpel as it gets. Some of yall need to stop being history revisionists.

 

<br>
Actually what you just said is revisionist history.

Houston management told Dragic they would not offer the player option he wanted so then he went to sign with Phoenix.

It was not as if he outright signed with Phoenix.

And "Cometswin" brings up a great point that you don't just let someone go without evaluating what other options you have.

 

The point of this thread is not to compare whether Lin is better than Dragic. The point is that people are irrational bashing Lin because they think the Rockets chose Lin over Dragic. The fact was, the Rockets did not choose Lin over Dragic. So bashing Lin for that is bashing him for a non-fact.

There have been pointed out multiple times. The player option thing is NOT about whether Dragic was a good player. They simply DO NOT give player options to non-superstars. You guys simply ignore this fact and keep on whining about Lin getting more than Dragic.

And like I said multiple times, would you rather have Douglas, Machado and Livingston as our PGs?

 

Ok what you and Cometswin say is legit IF Dragic has been playing consistent starter minutes for 2+ seasons with all star stats. I'm going to say this one more time because too many of you are taking the player option too lightly.

The problem is the player option is not a good guarantee for anything. Look I know we all like to play GM here, so let's actually think like a GM. You have a rebuilding team looking for a superstar (Harden is not here yet). There aren't many options left in the market. We are going to assume that we will give the player option to Dragic. Here's what could potentially happen since he just had 28 starts.

Dragic becomes an all star
Dragic becomes a bust
Dragic is injured
Dragic is just solid

We know that a player option is un-tradable to any team so lets get trading out of the way.

As a GM you are rebuilding your team and once you achieve your superstar, you need to collect the right pieces at a certain amount of time. A player option will screw your timing completely. Why? Well lets' actually fast forward to the 3rd year and analyze the situations.

Let say we get ourselves a superstar, and now we need to fill in the missing pieces for the 4th year.

If Dragic becomes an all-star, he can opt out for a bigger contract and screw your planning over
If Dragic is a bust or injured, then you are screwed and stuck with no cap space.
If Dragic is solid, then he can go both ways either to opt out for a chance to get a bigger contract, or stay in and fill your cap space.

The only way to plan your course is to hope that Dragic becomes an all star AND that he chooses to stay in the 4th year because he can't be traded at all.

Now you can argue that we can plan to have it all done in 3 years and everything will be fine! That's great and all, but what if you can't get the pieces ready in 3 years? If you don't, then you are screwed over for another year because you can't move pieces to trade. Where as if Lin turns out to be a bust, he can be moved right away.

So yes you can evaluate for a short term solution, but for a long term rebuilding solution, a player option spells death unless your player becomes and all star and actually chooses to stay with the team instead of opting out for a better contract which is VERY UNLIKELY. It is a very risky thing to give, and only given to when you are desperate or if you already reached all-star or superstar status.

Now if Lin turns out to be an all-star in the 3rd year and you know he's not going to stay, you can still trade him away for lots of assets because he is move-able without the player-option. There's many more variables as well, but this is as simple as it gets.

 

I can't imagine how any of the more experienced posters on this board can honestly believe that Morey turned down the 4th year player option on Dragic's deal without understanding the market and having what he thought was a decent fall back plan.


It's a pointless argument, anyway. Whether you think there is a connection between the Dragic/Lin deals or not, Morey/Les specifically chose to not accept the Dragic 4th year player option. Then, Morey/Les specifically chose to sign Lin to his deal. If they chose to accept the player option then we would have Dragic. Those are facts, there's really nothing to debate.

 

Excuse me, but how large the sample size is?

 

<br>
Pretty much nothing you just said was relevant at all to the post I made.

Except for the last sentence. Which was my entire point. So yes, I would rather have Livingston (there was an article that coaches/players wanted him too) and maybe a filler pg from free agency signed to a short deal (Aaron Brooks i'm looking at you) for a year or two.

My logic behind that is it would be easier to evaluate a point guard to fit the game of both Harden and our max signee, whoever it ends up being. The only reason behind this is because Harden's game is that of a scorer and a play maker. He essentially takes away a lot from a traditional type of pg. So having one that cannot shoot lights out on spot up attempts is a little bit puzzling.

On that note, it's important to remember. You have to build so that the strengths of your max contract franchise player are used properly. Play making happens to be one for Harden.

That being said, I think there's a huge question that most people are kinda grazing over. If the Rockets knew they would get Harden do you think they would have gotten Jeremy Lin still?

Personally I think not. I think the Rockets would have been more likely to keep Dragic at that point because his game meshes well with Harden.

This is also why I keep bringing up Aaron Brooks who would have been a good free agent signing if we already had Harden because his game also complements Harden. In fact we've already seen Aaron Brooks play that role, in his first few seasons, when he was playing alongside Tracy McGrady.

 

How large was the sample size that supported the idea to give Dragic the 4th year player option?

 

News flash from the PHX vs PHI game.

Jrue Hoilday just scores 30 points to go along with 13 assists against Dragic.

Nobody says Dragic sucks?

 

Then you shouldn't have posted in this thread. This fact is irrelevant to the whole point of what we are talking about here.

Yes, Morey chose not to accept the player option, not only for Dragic but for EVERYONE not named Yao. It was irrelevant to the Lin signing.

If Dragic becomes a superstar by year 3, then you may come back and talk about the whole thing again. For now, Dragic is almost as unproven as Lin.

 

The bold part couldn't be the furthest from the truth. How is a player option untradeable? You can set the activation date and after that it becomes a expring contract. Even so, why not just give solid 4 yrs? I will look it up, but he wanted 4 yrs, morey wanted 3 and he said wel give me a team option and morey balked. He signed with phoenix, right?

 

Morey used the exact word to describe it.

 

<br>
As cute as that is, I understand this point quite well. Conversations tend to deviate from the topic and onto subtopics which are still loosely tied to the original point. Thus the back and forth between "Easy" and I (along with a few others).

Let me ask you a couple of questions that are relevant by your standards though. You can feel free to answer in yes/no or give an explanation if you desire

Do you think Morey took no survey of the free agent market before letting all our pg's go?

On a related note, do you think if Jeremy Lin was not on the market and the Rockets were looking at a realistic scenario in which the only pg's we had were Douglas/Machado that Morey would have let Dragic walk?

No one makes decisions that lead to complete uncertainty. Not in the professional world. Especially not someone with a penchant for stats and logic like Morey.

Add to that the fact that Les clearly made it a point that Morey letting Lin go was a huge mistake. Les absolutely wanted Lin back.

Only one of Dragic or Lin could be paid. Otherwise it would be too much money tied up to one spot, lowering our flexibility even more.

So after you add all these facts up, is it not at least conceivable to you that Morey (under the influence of Les to get Lin) had to let Dragic go so we could get Lin?

 

There is no such things as untradeable contracts. Dalembert had a 15% trade kicker and he was traded. Rashard Lewis and Arenas was traded. Its not hard to trade a player option contract which is no different than a eto which we've seen get traded all the time. When they gave him the player option,they couldve set the date that would benefit them knowing when he would break free or not. So say he has to exercise the player option by january of his 3rd yr. well that gives the team time to decide what to do. Jameer nelson had a player option this past year and when sessions was traded to lakers, he had a player option. There is no such thing as a untradeable contract in the nba.

 

Amare STAT is untradeable , nobody wants him . It's market forces bro.
You don't break something and then try to sell it. You got Fix it as much as u can, then trade it. Supply and Demand.