I just thought it might be a good idea to consoidate the basic arguments for and against Webber into a single thread. Feel free to drop in your own comments. We all agree that Webber is a fantastic player with MVP type numbers. We all think he is a good guy and a star. Some believe signing Webber is the final piece of the puzzle to putting the Rockets in contention immediately. Webber is a much better player than Taylor and is exactly what the team needs they would say. Some think that signing Webber would tie up too much money in a single player and cause us to not be able to compete for depth and key players in the future. There are also chemistry issues that must be addressed they would say. It seems to be a given that Webber coming to Houston means Taylor and most likely Olajuwon will be gone. Norris, Anderson and Bullard could all return for early bird or exception deals and are not out of the question. According to our cap experts, Webber would take about $11 million of our proposed $13 to $15 million in cap space assuming we renounce Olajuwon. Some sources including the Sacramento Bee and NY Post have suggested that the Rockets are still in the Webber equation and that the team may even be looking for ways to get more room under the cap to sign him. That is in direct opposition to what the Rockets have said publicly, that they will pursue their own free agents rather than going after Webber. Ok, now that we have all this in the thread, let's talk about what would make you comfortable with signing Webber if you aren't for it or comfortable with NOT signing Webber if you are for it. For me, I would need to know that the Rockets could bring back all of their key free agents (minus Taylor) and find a way to shore up the center position either by trading for one or dumping some salary to leave enough room for signing Dream. ------------------ How the hell should I know why God would allow the Holocaust. I don't even know how the electric can opener works. - from Hannah and Her Sisters
Honestly, I don't think Dream is relevent to the discussion at all. Unless you honestly believe we are going to contend for a title this year, Dream is not going to be in our future plans anyway. If we get him, that's great -- but don't sacrifice your best option (whatever that may be) so you can have your center for one more year. This is the year we have cap room -- it's highly unlikely that we'll be significantly below the cap at anytime in the next several years -- Francis' contract will be up, Taylor or Webber will be taking up room, and it's unlikely we will move Cato. In addition, with the substantial slowdown in the growth of the NBA, the cap is not likely to rise as fast as people's contracts, so current players will take up a larger portion of the cap in the future as well. Essentially, this is the one year to get free agents and set the core of the team for the next several years. Dream is not a part of that core beyond a year at best, and moves shouldn't be made based on trying to find space for him. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Dream has to be relevant to the discussion unless we're going to contend then why get Webber? The only reason to get Webber is to contend, and that is why people are talking about losing Dream. Plus, the fact that we don't have a competent, experienced center to start. I'm leaning against getting Webber because we lose cap space, are unable to get a center, and it could disrupt chemistry, and effect our depth, and severely reduce our chances of filling the necessary holes in the future. ------------------ "Win if you can, lose if you must but always cheat!" - Jesse Ventura
Suppose that Walt, Cato and KT are being shopped, for instance, for future considerations. If we get Webber, being shored up at the 3 and with Griffin being able to play some 4, i'm sure that we'd have the 3 and 4 spots covered with Morris and Langhi. Getting Webber comes down to being able to keep Hakeem or not, i suppose. If we could somehow get Brad Miller and get rid of Cato, sign Moochie to his early bird, and either let Shandon and Mo go, or sign and trade them to Sacramento for Webber, who in his right mind would be against it? Maybe even Mo, KT and Shandon for Webber. I don't think he is going to just walk away from there. Now tell me that isn't an attractive package to the Kings, specially since Christie is testing free agency and may walk out on them? Of course it would be insanity to start the season with Cato and Collier as our centers. I don't dispute that. I suppose no one does. With Moochie staying, i wouldn't be too worried about the backup sg slot, as Francis would play a lot of minutes in there. That would leave us with a line-up of: Dream/Miller/Collier Webber/Griffin/Miller Griffin/Morris/Langhi Cuttino/Francis Francis/Moochie Of course getting rid of Cato and Walt is easily said than done, but, we can dream, can't we? Do we HAVE to get rid of both of them? Maybe just one of them would suffice. Capologists start rolling your scenarios, please.... Tell me that this team doesn't bring chills down your spine Jeff. Yeah, i'm aware of the chemistry issues, but Webber once said that he wouldn't mind averaging 15 points a game playing next to Shaq. The guy wants to win man. And i don't blame him for taking his time, frustrating as it may be for us. This is probably his ONE shot at a championship. He cares. ------------------ Just ship Cato's ass outta town. Plain and simple.
I should add that if we kept Moochie, and got a solid center, and got Webber without tearing up our bench I wouldn't mind getting Webber at all! ------------------ "Win if you can, lose if you must but always cheat!" - Jesse Ventura
Dream has to be relevant to the discussion unless we're going to contend then why get Webber? The only reason to get Webber is to contend, and that is why people are talking about losing Dream. The point of getting Webber (or Taylor, or whomever else) is to contend for the next 4-6 years, not just next year. If Dream eliminates our best long-term option so that we are better for 1 year, is it worth it? Make the decision that's best for the team ignoring Dream. If we have money left over for him, great. Otherwise, oh well. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
I believe that if there's a realistic shot at getting Webber in the next two weeks, we should go for it. I'm hearing people say that we may lose Moochie, but don't we have the 4.5 mil exception to offer him? Also, why do we need a good center? What will a good center do against Shaq? Shaq will continue to dominate every center in the league until he retires. I don't believe that we should abandon the pursuit of Webber just because we have Griffin. I totally agree that Griffin is a great player but he will not, and I repeat, will not solve our rebounding problems because he's a small forward who'll be on the perimiter tha majority of the time. He will get 7 or 8 rebounds for us but we can't actually think that Francis will keep his rebounding total up also because Griffin will get those whenever were in the zone. Ahh, the zone defense. That's one reason why I think we need Webber. A guy who can pass out of the zone and create his own shot. Didn't Mo Taylor say the reason why he left college was because of the zone? Because he didn't know how to react to weak side help coming at him. I say if you can get an average center who's smart and knows when to rotate for weakside help then you don't need a high priced center. I say the only ingredient that the Rockets are missing is veteran leadership to polish up their great talents and then we'll be in the hunt for a championship. Therefore, i think we should go after Webber. Why are we worried about future cap restraints? If we sign Webber, we will have the future. They're all very young and will all be together for a long time because they will all have long-term contracts. I think we should lock Webber down and stop going off of "POTENTIAL". We're basing Mo Taylor off of potential, thinking he will flourish in the frontcourt with Griffin. We know what were getting in Webber. Also, one more point. As for the salary cap,chemistry and future free-agents, that's crap. By signing free-agents every summer, you're actually messing up chemistry every year. Ever since 1991 or whenever the Bulls won their first championship, there was never any key acquisitions to the starting line-up with the exception of Rodman. And he was not even an option in the offense. Every championship team stay intact,(Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Jazz, Lakers, etc...) now that's chemistry. ------------------
I agree with Shanna. Nothing would make me comfortable other than a championship or deep playoff run. Shanna makes the point. This is the year we build the team for the future. And I agree. It was our year. It still is our year. If we fail to build with Webber we've done nothing with our opportunity. Rebounding is our weakness and is a visible wound. We need to address it. Griffin was a nice pick, but it did not solve our main problem. ------------------ humble, but hungry. [This message has been edited by PhiSlammaJamma (edited July 05, 2001).]
so how many ways can we rehash Webber. This thread won't be the last of them. OK, everyone repeat their position, again. Webber's maximum salary is 105% of his current salary, which is $12m, right? $12.6m then. Webber does not matter to me one way or another. But I definitely do not want to spend $8-9m on Davis simply because he is the next best alternative. Just save your money for next year, if you can't land Webber. Note one thing that Jeff doesn't mention, there are TIMING issues here. You do not want to lose Mo *and* fail to get Webber. I say we must focus on signing Mo before we get too far along. We can offer him $4.5m right now, without committing to renouncing Dream yet, which he may very well take the wrong way. I say Griffin gives us to the flexibility to court everyone respectfully, and if Dream thinks renouncing is disrespect by locking us into a limited caproom summer spree, then don't do it until you know you have Webber, or until you have Dream ready to sign (in the event Mo' wants more than $4.5m) [This message has been edited by crispee (edited July 05, 2001).]
Jeff-Webber's max is 12.6 mill, if the cap is 42 mill or under. It is 30% of the cap, so if the cap is 42.7 mill for instance it becomes 12.81 mill. Walt will be very tradeable this offseason IMO. He doesn't hurt chemistry, then has 2 very good things going for him- #1.) He's a very good fit as a "zone-buster". #2.) He is a free agent at the end of the season. So to a team like Chicago or any other team lacking shooters, or in lux. tax troubles, getting a veteran shooter who comes off your cap space at the end of the year is very attractive. Detroit got Cliff Robinson for a couple of pieces of trash because they would come off the cap quickly. If Hakeem would accept 4.5 mill, and Sac. would accept KT in a sign and trade (Which I think they would, if CWebb made it clear he was signing in Houston, whether Sacramento wanted to cooperate or not). We could get both Hakeem, and Cwebb, and still have room for a Moochie early bird. The other big thing is, if you sign Mo and Hakeem, rather than Mo and CWebb: A.) You'd probably have room to accept an extra free agent at ~5 mill, or help out a 3 way, with some creative juggling. (yeah, Orlando, we'll take Bo and Mike off your hands so you can sign Antonio Davis) B.) If you choose cold turkey, and stick with just Hakeem, Mooch, and Mo, by my calculations in heyparty's thread, due to the expiring contracts of Walt and Hakeem we'd possibly have around 10 mill in cap space next offseason-enough to get in a bidding war with Denver over Raef Lafrentz or take Kandi from the babies, err Clippers, or be very helpful in 3 way deals with the amount of stars looking to be restricted free agents (the VC class), and certainly teams know better than to keep disgruntled stars around, right? ------------------ "I think alot of people find Cato's game to be very offensive." -aelliott, comparing the offensive skills of Kelvin Cato and Michael Olowokandi
I think the benefits far outweigh the negatives in pursuing Webber. Here are my key reasons I think this, then get to Jeff's specific question (Jeff I like the way you framed the debate even if I get tangential in my approach): a) I don't see increasing our chances at losing Moochie and Anderson, and for sure losing Mo T and Dream, as much of a loss compared with the potential benefit of Webber. The former guys are role players that come and go, Webber is a star who always passes to the open man and looks after his teammates. b) If you look around at players at the max or near the max, Webber--as is any other relatively young elite player, is a steal valuewise. Very good players get close to the max, and Webber is far beyond that. c) Worst case scenario is we could trade Webber in 3 years (at 32?) getting more in return than what we would lose now in the worst case scenario (if Mo, Moochie, Shandon all leave specifically because of Webber coming). This to me isn't likely, but isn't bad fall back position. d) I think pairing Griffin with Webber is perfect. Griffin can focus on D, rebounding and filling the lane while he learns in practice (against him) and in games (with him) from THE elite low post player with THE best court vision in the game. When Griffin is 24 and really, really, knows the game than Webber will be solid role next to him. e) if Francis, Mobes, & Griffin are as good as we think, it won’t be long before we are over the cap anyway, whether it is through Mo T and another good player, or Webber (the only great player out there right now and maybe for next year as well). In the spirit of Jeff's post however, the only reasons I wouldn't go after Webber is: 1) inside we think it is likely that he really would stunt the growth of Francis or Griffin AND think that those two guys plus Mobes and Mo T are all the key pieces—thus form here on out we only need role players around them. 2) he has a hidden condition (physical or mental), or bad work habits, or some reason to think he won't still be an elite player at 32 (the next Kemp, Baker, Coleman). 3) his persona is really cancerous to the team- a la the Blazer's triumvirate of Sheed, Pippen or Stoudimire, Coleman maybe fits here too. I just don’t think any of the above 3 are likely. I think Webber has more in common with Malone and Chuck than those other guys AND Griffin will be better for playing with someone like that. That is how I see it.
I don't agree that this is the one year to get free agents. We signed Shandon Anderson two years ago, with no cap room. We signed Maurice Taylor last year, with no cap room. Even if it is the one year to get free agents, big woop. Steve Francis wasn't a free agent acquisition, neither was Cuttino Mobley. Neither was Griffin. The Rockets have never needed free agents to win. Kenny Smith, Maxwell, Drexler, Elie, Thorpe, Hakeem, Horry, Cassell...no free agents in that group, and two titles. The Rockets constantly find ways to improve their team, and rarely has free agency mattered for them. I was for signing Webber until the Griffin trade. Now it is more important to me to have a home-grown team that I can watch develop and be proud of. I'd rather cheer for the Rockets than hired guns who can't cut it in the playoffs. Also, I think Hakeem is indeed relevant to the discussion. There is a value to having Hakeem retire as a Rocket. We don't know what value the organization places on it or what they are willing to do to make it happen, but there is a value nonetheless. The Rockets have proven this value by turning down trade offers for him that would have improved the team on paper.
ChrisPee brought up another very good point, if not the most important point in all this (I was not thinking about it so wanted to address it). Dilly dallying with Webber and signing neither him nor Mo T and other FAs would really, really, suck. I would like to think we never are really quite put in this position (our front office and Webber & his agent behind the scenes would not let this happen), but if we feel we are in this position it makes eveything much tougher to call. [This message has been edited by Desert Scar (edited July 05, 2001).]
We signed Shandon Anderson two years ago, with no cap room. We signed Maurice Taylor last year, with no cap room. Neither of these acquisitions were star players. We'll always be able to get middle-level players using exceptions. The point was that this is the one year we'll be substantively under the cap to make plays at anyone out there. The Rockets constantly find ways to improve their team, and rarely has free agency mattered for them. That's really besides the point. You have a choice between Webber or Tayler/Dream or (whatever combo you come up with). The future picks and midlevel-exception players will still be there anyway. I'm not saying we can't improve later -- but this is the one big free-agent opportunity. The choice now is between these players. You get this opportunity once every 5 to 10 years (look what Orlando had to do to get under the cap last year) -- you don't squander that opportunity by focusing on a 1-year free agent. Sure, if you don't get the best option, we can always improve later on. That doesn't mean you shouldn't take the best option if you can get it. I'd rather cheer for the Rockets than hired guns who can't cut it in the playoffs. Taylor & Anderson are just as non-home-grown as Webber. There is a value to having Hakeem retire as a Rocket. Maybe so, but I don't think it has any value in putting together the team for the future. If Hakeem values retiring as a Rocket, then the two parties will work something out. If Hakeem wants fair-market-value, then I don't think he can fit into our plans. We wouldn't take on any other 37-year old ex-superstar center on a 1-yr, $6-$8M contract. It shouldn't be any different for Hakeem. Besides, didn't you once call him a whiny b****? ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Dilly dallying with Webber and signing neither him nor Mo T and other FAs would really, really, suck. Of course this is always an issue. However, there are still 14 days before anyone could even consider signing anywhere. Why eliminate an option now for that reason? We have at least 2 weeks to play with. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
I would distill the arguement into two words: Alex Rodriguez. CBFC ------------------ Join the Chucky Brown Fan Club
If the lineup becomes this: Francis-Norris Mobley-Francis Griffin-Morris Webber-Thomas Dream-Cato then I would like to have Webber. ------------------ Protrolls.com! "I want to be like Olajon." -Sagana Diop has the right idea... Keep the ???? alive!
I can see the A-rod comparision, but at a bargain price comparatively to Webber. By getting Webber at 121 million, it would be a bargain. It would be like the Rangers getting A-Rod at 175 million instead of the 250 million he really got.(this is a real max deal) ------------------ "Instinctly u recognize things,now take advantage of what u just recognized!".. Hakeem..
The other big difference being that baseball involves 25 players and is primarily based on individual skill. One player can only be 1 out of 9 people in the lineup, or 1 of 5 starting pitchers. Thus, in baseball, one good position player only contributes about 5.5% of the total equation (11% of the 50% that is hitting). In basketball, one good player contributes substantially more and can impact all facets of a game. Thus, basketball is a star-based sport, while successful baseball teams are built around depth and quality players across the entire team. ------------------ http://www.swirve.com ... more fun than a barrel full of monkeys and midgets.
Nice try CBFC but the Rangers problem was never hitting and deffense it was pitching. So what do they do? They add the best fielding and hitting shortstop the game has ever seen completely ignoring their real problem...pitching. If they had good pitching and needed help in the middle of their deffense and some more pop at the plate the move would have been perfect. Which brings us to the Rockets. If the Rockets add Webber they are adding one of the more dominate Power forwards in the game which just happens to be a position of Weakness for the Rockets. Webber adds size, rebounding and deffense to a position that is in dire need on our team. So you see, the Alex Rodriguez scenario does not apply here. ------------------
