When was the last time a team traded AWAY a key star...

this is a useless thread in clever disguise.
The answer doesn't matter because the question is useless anyway.
It doesn't matter you get better immediately after trade away whoever.
It all depends on your assessment of the situation, and your goal.

If your goal is to win a championship, not just avoiding suckiness,
then you should start out by assessing if your star player can take you there and if you will be able to complete the necessary roster change before that said player lose the ability to get you there.

If you are satisfied with being competitive, then by all means ride your horse to the end.

Players like Tmac are like stocks of blue chip sunset industry. It's high performance and you feel it still has life for another run, so you are loath to get rid of them, but you and everybody else are all aware the end is near sometime soon. By the time you finally give up hope and decide to trade them , nobody is willing to take them off your hand.

PS, I'm not advocating trading Tmac at this point., but there are just too much useless arguments on the both sides.

 

My sentiments exactly. It is stupid to say that a team playing without a 20 mil superstar is going to better than a team playing with him, but it is also stupid if one does not wonder whether or not Tmac is the best fit for the system. It has been revealed time and time again that isolation with Tmac or Yao is not going to win you championships with the current supporting cast. If Tmac cannot integrate, then we'd be better off with people who can.

Everyone here is talking like we'd be trading Tmac away for scraps. Management and the coaching staff are not stupid enough to throw away talent for crap; they'll do whats best for the team game of the Rockets. If that means trading Mac for say, Hinrich and Gordon (two young guards with solid, versatile games), a big man, and picks, then i do not see any problem with trading Tmac.

 

Why is everyone still hating on RAFER? If you watch the Rockets this year last year or any other year he is our only option at PT Gaurd.

We bring Steve Francis, Mike James, Aaron Brooks all to compete and takeaway his minutes yet he proves time and time again that he is still the best option and still manages to get all the playing time. Maybe RAFER is not the problem.

On a side note, I do not really want to trade tmac. I love TMAC, but if he is going to go out there and play no defense and give us the effort he has been giving us this season we have no choice but to trade him. I could careless if he scores 0 pts but if willie Green scores another 20 pts on him, he needs to go.

 

How was I agreeing with you? Your examples doesn't prove your point, that was what I was trying to say. Of course, your examples doesn't support the augument of trading T-Mac either.

 

How about Detroit trading Grant Hill for Ben Wallace and Chucky Atkins? That ended up helping them win a championship.

 

trading tmac makes sense IF we get equal value...

but that will NEVER HAPPEN.

 

The Jazz were 13-35 when they waived Pete Maravich, and they went 11-23 the rest of the way and then picked up 4 more wins the next year.

Cleveland was 35-47 in Boozer's last year. They were 42-40 and missed the playoffs by a tiebreaker the following year.

 

The problem is the Rockets have already been mired in medocrity for 10 years. 1 game over 500 is mediocre. No play off series wins in 10 years is mediocre.

Tmac has increased our regular season success compared to before he arrived, but in the end no play off series wins to show for it, much less titles. It's certainly not all his fault, but he hasn't proven to be the answer yet either. Until he does there will always be doubts, especially in a season like this one where we are closer to lottery bound than Finals bound. We have improved our play over the last few weeks, but the fact that the improved play happened with Tmac out of the line up just adds fuel to the trade fires, even if unjustifiably so.

Like I said, trading Tmac isn't something they should be looking to do just for the sake of moving him, but without knowing who the Rockets would get back in the trade it is impossible to say if it would be a good or bad idea.

 

Nash did get better in his 11th year; possibly his best year. Now he's on the downside. But McGrady is in his 11th year now - is this going to be his best season? He needs to turn it around quick if it is.

As for all those other guys, they didn't start playing at the age of 18. 30 is not as young as it used to be. Years in the league is the measurement that should be used.

Top 5 "regular season" team. Going to the lottery is not worse than losing in the first round in this situation. At least you have the possibility of getting more help via the draft.

Not frustrated at all. I've enjoyed watching the team a great deal while he's been out. The only thing that's frustrating is depending on a "star" who loafs. Were he to stop half-assing it up the court, things would be a lot better.

I would rather cheer for a team I like. Post-Hakeem, at least the team tried hard. They weren't as good, but I wasn't expecting them to be, so I still enjoyed watching and rooting for them.

 

I agree with the original post here. I believe I even mentioned something like it in one of the many "Trade T-Mac" threads. History has shown that you just don't get better. You might be able to find an exception or two, but those are *exceptions.*

I've also said many times that the problem is shooting percentage. Most of the shots are there. They just weren't making them. FG%, TOs, and FTs should be the main concerns for this team. Regardless of who's suiting up, stars or not.

People can hardly stand the first 30 (actually the b****ing started around 15-20 games in) or so games we've had here. I can't even imagine how it'll be here if we trade Tracy and endure a few seasons of rebuilding.

 

But obviously typing provide more fun and less responsibility than running a real team.

 

How about we talk about trading T-Mac after we beat San Antonio, Dallas, Phoenix, Golden State, Lakers, Utah, Denver, New Orleans, Boston, Detroit, or even Portland without him.

What's funny is...if we don't win tonight against NY, then you'll see a hundred threads on why we should keep him.

And finnaly, lets let the guy come back from his injury and see how he plays rather than speculate that he won't be able to make adjustments. I know, I know its all about how he played before he was injured, but lets take this into consideration: He was the reason we started 6-1 because at that time no one was hitting the left side of the barn, so maybe...just maybe everyone was just passing the ball and watching; and he felt like he had to carry the load. Now that most of the guys are set in the rotation and are also moving well without the ball (which we weren't doing before) i thinking things are going to be different.

Lastly, even if he gets traded, not only do I hope that we get something as close to equal value as we can in return; but I hope we don't trade him to the Bulls. The last thing I want to see is T-mac winning playoff series in the weak east coached by JVG. That will hurt!!!!!

 

You mean the maximum of 7 he plays when he does get into the playoffs? Yeah, that's impressive. Comparing T-Mac's string of 1st round eliminations to Kobe's 4 final appearances makes him look lot better.

T-Mac fanboys are great. It's like a running joke talking to them.

Yeah, so they sucked because McGrady wasn't motivated and didn't try. What's your point?

That McGrady sucked? Okay, then I agree. Good job?

You mean like how people were saying the Rockets would be real contenders in the West when McGrady joined Yao, only to underachieve every season? To have "everyone" agree that they were contenders, then for them to get a middle playoff seed, then eliminated?

Jason Kidd in Phoenix: One of the best PGs in the league. Bounced the Spurs out of the playoffs. McGrady can't even get out of the first round. McGrady hasn't done it with 3 completely different teams playing next to All-stars like Yao Ming, and Vince Carter. Jason Kidd? Has revolutionized the Nets, and took them to the Finals.

Allen Iverson in Philidelphia: Did everything for the 76ers people hoped McGrady would do for Orlando.

So no, stop disgracing basketball with comparing Mcgrady to Iverson, Kidd, Kobe, or whatever ****ed up comparisons you're going to make, you fanboy.

It's not a theory. It's a fact: McGrady went to the Orlando Magic that was a .500 team the prior season to his joining. When he left, they were in dead last. Have we seen this happen with Kidd or Iverson? 2 much better players you homers like to compare him with?

The problem with most messageboard fans is that they aren't actually basketball fans. In fact, most aren't even Houston Rockets fans. Most are just fans of a single player. They could careless about the team's success, as long as T-Mac gets his 25 points.

They're both players with poor attitudes whose high statistics skew their chronic losing.

Tell us, what has McGrady done that's been so great? The Raptors got better when he left, the Magic got better when he left, watch when the Rockets get better when he leaves.

You're stupid. Think about what you just said. I'm not even going to bother explaining to you how stupid what you just wrote is, and how you just indirectly contradicted yourself.

In fact, I'm just going to quote you again, because it's so dumb it's hilarious: "McGrady is on the level of Iverson, Garnett, et al, but injuries and supporting cast have limited him."


If anyone else here who wants the team to succeed and is actually a basketball fan wants to reply to me, feel free to. For the fanboys, keep your flawed logic to yourselves. This is a Houston Rockets forum, not a Tracy McGrady forum.

 

But the rockets aren't in this situation right now. We suppose to be winning NOW. If we trade mac and go into "rebuilding" mode, that would be the worst thing that could happen to this franchise. We've been wating for 10 years to "get better down the line".

 

Yes it depends on what your goal is. It also depends on your assessment of the player in question. And all these are debatable. You are assuming that TMac is the blue chip sunset industry. How do you know? That's exactly the contentious point. Some people believe TMac and Yao can bring us a championship. Some people don't. Who's right?

This has been brought up in another thread. (I don't blame you for not knowing. With the condition the GARM is these days, it's hard to get through all the junk.) Hill has to be an exception because of his injuries. A healthy Grant Hill would definitely have made Orlando better than Detroit. In fact, Orlando was widely regarded as the upcoming powerhouse of the East with Hill and McGrady together.

The possible parallel here is that TMac might be damaged good like Hill. A lot of people are pointing out how TMac is injury prone and how his back is a time bomb. That is something debatable.