It is my understanding that trades can't become official till after the draft. This would mean that the Rockets are the only team that can bail Vancouver out of its mess, that is if they are willing to agree to make a favorable trade later. I believe their pick next year is worth quite a lot. 1) Would Vancouver be willing to trade its pick this year for the pick Orlando owes the rockets and the #22 if the Rockets conveyed the #13 pick? 2) Would the rockets accept Vancouver's pick next year for the Orlando conditional pick, the #22, with the agreement that the rocks convey the #13? I can't see Detroit appeasing Orlando since Vancouver could still bribe the rockets for the #13. All Detroit has to do is bribe the Rockets and Vancouver's pick next year is the Pistons. 3) Would Detroit be willing to trade the #9 for the #13, the pick Detroit owes the rocks, the #22, and an agreement not to convey the #18 if it is conveyed to the rocks? This would eliminate all chances for Vancouver of settling the deal on the 1st and get the rockets up four spots. 4) Is Vancouver willing to just lose the pick without fighting? ------------------
I think an interesting tidbit could be that the Grizzlies own the 28th pick. Houston could possibly look into getting this pick and the sixth pick in order of helping the Grizzlies if the Rockets give up the 13th and 22nd. I just think this pick would play a part in any trade that occurs between the two teams. ------------------ Stevierebel
I think an interesting tidbit could be that the Grizzlies own the 28th pick. Houston could possibly look into getting this pick and the sixth pick in order of helping the Grizzlies if the Rockets give up the 13th and 18th. I just think this pick would play a part in any trade that occurs between the two teams. ------------------ Stevierebel
That's an interesting idea. I think that might be possible and just might happen. I'd go for that trade.
I understand Detroit is lobbying Orlando with some unstated trade considerations if Orlando does not convey the pick. Detroit would stand to get a much better pick next year. If we got both of New York's second round picks as part of some deal, I could go for that too, as many of the second round picks look interesting to me. ------------------
Tick Tock. Tick Tock. Wednesday, Thursday, then FRIDAY. Friday is the day it will become known if Vancouver is screwed or not. If the rockets convey the #13, expect good things to happen on draft day. ------------------
Joe Joe, I think there is another option. As Juan Valdez has mentioned in another thread, Van can wait till next year and try to trade with a team (other than the Rockets) that has one of the top 18 picks. Granted, it is dangerous waiting the last minute to do a trade (the other team know you are desperate), it is still an option. I think your scenarios are interesting. 1) This trade is basically Van's #6 for #13, #22, and something lower than #18. This is not a great trade, but considering the circumstance, I don't think it's that bad for Van. 2) This trade is Van's next year's #1 pick for #13, #22, and something lower than #18. I don't know what is the strength of next year's draft, but I doubt it's stronger than this year's. I don't think Houston will take it, becasue Houston is left with no picks this year. If we lose out on Webber, can't resign Anderson and Taylor, and have no picks, we will be in BIG trouble. Another thing that makes me think that neither scenario #1 or #2 will happen is because if Detroit wants to screw Van over, I am sure Van would want to give Detroit a pick in the range of 15 to 18, not #13 or higher. But that's the vengeful me talking, which often does not apply in the real world. 3) This trade would be Detoit's #9 & somewhere between #26 to #29 for Houston's #13, #22, and the agreement not to send #18 (if they get it) to Van. I think this is not a bad deal for detroit. However, I don't think Houston will do it for 2 reasons. (1) The deal is not that sweet. (2) Houston always pride themselves as a "Classy" organization. Screwing Van over is not consider a "Class" act. And you never know when you may ever "need" help from Van somewhere down the line. 4) No... Van will not go down without a fighting. I think Van can get a 14 to 18 pick either this year or next year to send to Detroit, be that a trade with Houston or another team. ------------------ Congratulations Bill!!!! Willoughby gets college degree Willoughby graduation video (In the "More highlights -> NBA" section)
Joe Joe's right. That's why Vancouver is desperately trying to satisfy the trade this season. If they don't, it has to be their pick and will almost certainly be a decent lottery pick. ------------------
Moonbus, I've looked at a few articles (including the frontpage here) and all them say that Vancouver has to send Detroit a top 18 pick before June 1se this year or forfeit their own pick next year unless its in the top 5. Houston is the only team that can get them a top 18 pick before June 1st this year since picks can be conveyed, but not traded now. I don't think making a trade with detroit makes a statement at all about class. Vancouver put itself in a bad situation. Houston wants to use the 13 and 18 to move up. The Rockets don't want to convey a pick to Vancouver in a deep draft when they'll have a worse pick to convey next year. If Detroit gives the rockets an oppurtunity to do what they want, they'll take it. Vancouver has more to bid so its up to them not to screw themselves again. I know they've made mistakes (Drafting Francis and Big Country, Being in Canada, Not trading for a pick before deadline, Naming the team the Grizzles, hiring Billy Knight), but I can't see them not making a deal with the Rockets, who are probably willing to pay near face value for the #6. Its always hard to pay enough for a draft pick so high in a "deep" draft. This draft is way too potential for my taste. I like Battier at #6 who won't help Vancouver. Griffen could help Vancouver, but he's gone from the board by then. Vancouver needs impact players (who should still be on board at the #13) not prospects who should be better in the long run. If Vancouver isn't better in two years, it will begin to lose players fast despite new scenery. ------------------
Moonbus i'm looking for the thread now, but I think Vancouver doesn't have the option to use another pick next year. Next year has to be their pick unless its in the top 6. I'll look into it more. Thx I read one by him suggesting vancouver could trade for a top 18 this year, but no trades can be made official now and Detroit isn't going to agree to accept the pick after the 1st. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Joe Joe (edited May 30, 2001).]
Joe Joe & Hobbs, thanks for clearing up some of my misconception. Joe Joe, I am still confused about your "Houston is the only team that can get them a top 18 pick before June 1st this year since picks can be conveyed, but not traded now" statement. Why only Houston, and not other teams like Boston, Charlotte, or Toronto? I like Battier and I would've taken him in other drafts at #6, but I think the "apparent" potential of some of those players IMO are too much to pass up at #6. In this draft, I will take Battier no higher than at #8. After re-evaluating your choices, I would say: 1) yes 2) no 3) no 4) no ------------------ Congratulations Bill!!!! Willoughby gets college degree Willoughby graduation video (In the "More highlights -> NBA" section)
It is past the trading deadline for the 2000-2001 season. Trading doesn't start up again till a few weeks after the draft. Teams can agree on a trade, but do not make it until later. This is my understanding of the trade deadline. Houston owes Vancouver a pick from a previous trade and is allowed to convey a pick to Vancouver now and agree to make a trade later. No other team owes Vancouver a pick. I could be wrong on this. Does anyone know the rules on trading draft picks better? I know the rockets picked Pryzbilla last year for Milwaukie instead of making a trade before hand. It is known the trade will go down, but its not official till later. ------------------ [This message has been edited by Joe Joe (edited May 31, 2001).]
