Does the Battier/Gay trade still bother/frustrate/infuriate you to this day?

Can anyone prove they don't win more than 22 games?

I think not, because they had the same starting lineup as the one the year before, but their defensive ppg blew out from 88 to 106. Battier isn't supposed to be a creator, and with him on defense they are 5 times better than with Gay. Gasol only missed 20 games, so with the same unit suited up for 60 games, they may well have won at the same % as the previous year.
So replacing Gay with Battier would make Memphis win like 40 games.

 

If they traded gay for battier they would still suck except they might lose 96-102 instead of 100-106.

 

People also forget how we got out from under Swift's contract which gave us the opportunity to use the MLE and stay out of the lux tax....

Now, none of those moves paid out with the exception of Scola but at least we were under the lux tax land.

DD

 

The trade only slightly bothers me but I don't think you can necessarily take what Gay has done/is doing in Memphis and apply it to the Rockets. The systems are different, particularly under JVG. His development more then likely would've been slower. Also you have to consider that Memphis runs a completely free wheeling fast breaking jack up shots system which is great for Rudy because he can run and dunk etc. but I just don't know that he fits in with us anyway.

Besides having a shut down defender who is a locker room leader and will sacrifice himself for the team is a luxury most teams don't have.

 

By your logic, Battier clearly makes teams better more than Pau Gasol does.

Let's play following the same logic, before Pau, the Lakers are borderline contenders, with Pau, the Lakers are playing in the finals.

Before Battier, the Rockets were second round virgins, with Battier, the Rockets are still second round virgins.

Conclusion, Pau makes team better more than Battier does.

However, follow exactly the same logic, Battier makes teams better more than Pau does because Memphis won more with him, and lost more with Pau.

The same logic creating self-contradicting scenerios. Interesting.

This contradiction shows this "how a team does before X player and after X player determines how much better/worse he makes a team" logic is flawed. By the same logic, Francis/Mobley makes team better than T-Mac/Howard because they won more.

 

My whole point is that you're speculating MORE than someone who says that Memphis (with basically the same lineup) would win more than 22 games compared to making the trade.

Sadly, it seems that sometimes when sports fans get an 'opinion' it can be really hard to use reasoning to shake it...

 

Only if you don't understand the logic?

I'm saying that just because Battier can't create his own shot does NOT logically equal the Grizzlies winning less than 22 games.

And to point this out I ask the question 'can it be proven that they would win less' (ie, on what EVIDENCE does this argument rest)

Then I give an 'undercutter' - an argument to suggest that essentially the same Grizzlies lineup that won 49 games might well win more than 22. Shane contributed defense, 3pt shooting and leadership on that team, and they won more than 10 games. So why would they win only 10 with the same lineup?

This is a simple 'counter-argument' which destabelises the unspoken assumptions of the previous argument (that offense wins games). [In fact, the teams that win NBA titles are almost always one of the best defensive teams.]

It's NOT THE SAME LOGIC to talk about Pau and Battier going to their 'new teams' because they've never played on those teams before.

The burden of evidence is on you to prove that the Grizzlies would win less games with Battier than Gay, which you cannot do because there is nothing concrete to build on.
It's a pretty weak argument to try and build a thesis that Gay is better than Battier...

 

I dare to reason that Ryan Bowen with a 3 point shot won't make teams better than all star Steve Francis, even though the latter played lil D and had a brain the size of a peanut.

 

You are comparing the record of a whole team just before and after player X to tell how much better/worse he makes teams. In your case, it's Memphis just before and after Battier.

Following the same logic, Francis/Mobley are better teammates than T-Mac/Howard because Orlando won more just after the Francis/Mobley trade.

Battier leaves, Gay comes, you say Battier makes a team better more than Gay. TMac/Howard goes, Francis/Mobley comes, the same logic says Francis/Mobley make a team better than TMac/Howard.

That's my problem No.1 with this type of thinking.

Problems No.2.

Following the same logic, Battier seemingly makes a team better much more than Gasol, since his departure seemingly cut the Memphis wins the next season by more than half.

However, reality debunks such flawed logic, as Gasol propelled the a borderline contender the Lakers into the finals, while the Rockets stuck as second round virgins with Mr.Making-Teammates-a-Whole-Lot-better Battier.

All this says, such "before and after" logic works, but only sometimes, the other times it completely obscure the big picture. so it's a weak argument that serves to comfort sports fan homerism.

 

I love battman and have no problem with having Battier instead of Gay, but I think CD got beat by the logo on that trade. We had to give them stro +the pick for only Battier. Sure stro had a bad season but his contract was not horrible. I think we should have recieved their pick back... It would be nice to have lowry on this team.

 

There's 2 problems with your argument:

1) is that you made a claim that the Grizzlies would have won only 10 games if they had Battier INSTEAD of Gay (in 06-07).

2) You offer no evidence to support this (as pointed out above, there's no empircal evidence you can offer)

So what I did was make the rebuttal that the same team the year before won 49 games, and that Battier was part of that team, why wouldn't they win game the following year (no lock there, but at least it is some evidence).

You see, it's NOT 'before and after' logic (which, regardless of how you use it would speak AGAINST you anyway...) - all I'm doing is pointing out how redundant you ridiculous statement was ["10 games only"] and suggesting that, based on historical facts, it's MORE LIKELY they would've won MORE than 22 games with Battier as opposed to Gay (in 06-07).

I'm not replying to your next post because you've failed in 2 other areas:
1) the ability to argue your points
2) the ability to understand your opponents argument and interact with it.

It's highly frustrating having you quote me and say things that I'm not even thinking about saying, and then somehow trying to make out that I'm putting forth a weak argument.

One last time: it doesn't matter how WEAK the agrument was (that they would've won more games with Battier) - that was the point! If that is weak (and based on some objective fact) HOW MUCH WEAKER and argument substantiated by your flights of fancy?

The burden of evidence is on you to prove that the Grizzlies would win less games with Battier than Gay, which you cannot do because there is nothing concrete to build on.
It's a pretty weak argument to try and build a thesis that Gay is better than Battier...

 

GATER, et al.,

Do you accept the premise that Shane Battier has destroyed Rudy Gay on both ends of the floor in head-to-head matchups? If so, what does that say about their relative talents? If not, what league are you watching?

 

If Gay do not fit the system, he will not get PT. If his not playing, he be worth nothing. So you cant chance it like that.

About the argument about whos better, they are trading potential with establish player. We never know how potential will works out, so its a gamble there in itself.

Gay have much better offense, while battier have defense, so its a point on who will fit the team better. A player that will defend the opposite best offensive player, and take over part of Tmac's defense responsibility, or a player that will score >15 points and take over part of Tmac's offense.

Which would you rather have?

About having that scoring punch, Green showed what he could do when he played in that game against Wizards, ability to score by shooting and penetration. And where did that end up with? Mike Harris for hustle and defense.

I'm not comparing green to gay, but a comparison is made of gay and battier with green and harris.

 

My dear sir,why don't you take into consideration of the talent difference between the two teams into consideration? Yao,Tracy and Luis/Carl can overwhelm their front and backcourt with ease which makes Battier's job easier.Against a superior offensive team it gets much harder.Defensively Battier is superior no doubt but offensively if Battier had to go pick up the offensively load on a weak team he wouldn't be able to do as much as Rudy Gay who only has been in the league for 2 years as compared to Shane's 7 years experience.Shane's best scoring performance was in his debut year with a 14.4 average,since then he hasn't scored more than 10.1 a year,let alone 20.1 points. I'm not trying to say that offense is more important than defense,but you haven't taken the whole picture into consideration IMO.

 

I have always said that if JVG is your guy, and you want to "win now", then yes you do that trade.

I believe the Rox were committed to JVG but Les changed his mind and left everyone else in the lurch.

There's just no use complaining about it now.

 

I always say that very rarely do teams succesfully rebuild through a draft pick.

It often takes years of lottery futility before a team is able to make a trade to pick up even a semi star and head for the playoffs!

 

Luthur Head can play 20 PPG in Memphis if they want.

 

Awful, awful trade. If you look at where the rox were in the summer of '06 and where they are now in the summer of '08 you should come to the concluson that Shane Battier has no business being a Houston Rocket.....they had no need for him! This is the 4th straight summer were talking about needing a consistent 3rd scorer & more athleticism.

1) Houston did not need a player who peeked offensively/athletically somewhere between his junior and senior year in college
2) Houston did not need a player who would move McGrady to SG even though it was established a year & half earlier that he was more effective at both ends at SF
3) Houston did not need ANOTHER player who relies soley on 'Mac n Yao for shot attempts.

You lack scoring, athleticism & versitilty so you trade for a guy posseses NONE of those things? While I recognize Battier is a really good defender...painting him as the biggest reason Houston is great on D is completly wrong. For the Houston Rockets with JVG & Yao defense is overrated....they've never had a problem defening but they've ran into all kinds of problems scoring.

They defended before Battier, they'll defend after he's traded this summer.