the quoted piece got it completely wrong. trading our picks and jackson for artest was a no-brainer and morey gets an "a" for pulling that off. his grade, if however incomplete, would be measured by his risky move by starting ab at the point. i see it as a high risk, high reward type of move, though a bit too dicey for my taste. we will go as far as ab goes in the playoffs. and he needs to recognize that pressure.
well bjax's expiring is an absolute trash... how about the unproven potential superstar Donte Greene and a first rounder with which Morey would trap a good rookie from the draft who might be much better than Batum and Arthur combined? talk a look at Batum's and Arthur's stats of this season, considering it's still their rookie season.
Morey doesn't make the decision of who starts on thsi team. That is Adelman's job. Please... learn some basketball and coachign basics before bringing up something as uneducated as that.
dakeem1 is right. When Lowry was brought in, Morey said the decision to start which PG is completely in Adelman's hands.
Alston is a joke. I don't give a ***** about him, I'm glad we finally traded him. Brooks and Lowry will be awesome next season, as a matter of fact they already are very good this year.
Tough to completely grade the guy's performance. I'd say "Incomplete" because we don't know what, if anything, he'll do with Tmac's contract this summer/next year. And THAT depends on whether he has the green-light to move the contract out, and if so, which of our young promising (and relatively low-salaried) players have to go with Tmac so that the other team gets value. But grabbing players like Landry and Brooks so late in the draft, and turning BJax and poor draft picks into Artest? Priceless.
it was morey's idea to bring in lowry and rid of rafer. he did say at the time he'd leave the decision to adelman as to who'd start b/w ab and lowry. but c'mon, it was obvious ab was gonna start, at least for the remainder of this season. i was just pointing out that if morey's grade is indeed incomplete, it will be the last minute trade (and so making ab our new starting pg), instead of the artest trade as the original article started. there is no need to respond in the arrogant way you did, because frankly that makes you look silly.
I'm one of his harshest critics, but I've think he's been ok and his grade is still a work in progress. Of course his 1st move was 2 steps back to me. Getting Artest was a forward move even though it shouldve been done a yr earlier. Rafer trade shouldve been done this summer. I like some of the things he do, its just like most numbers guys, they're slow to move. He's not a magician or great, but he's ok. You get elevated when you draft all star quality guys.
The Artest trade was a good trade. He made that trade not knowing all the injuries we would have to deal with this season. Can't blame that on him. Artest has been good this season. Before the season we were in a win now mode and that trade was a win now type of move.
So who should we have traded last year to get Artest? And who do you think we could have gotten for Rafer in the summer? Yes, it's possible we could have traded for Artest and traded Rafer earlier, but what kind of team are we left with? The trading chip last season was going to be Brooks and maybe another player. And I have no idea who we could have gotten for Rafer in the summer (special circumstances allowed us to trade him for Lowry at the deadline). If you give up Brooks last year -- who now seems to be a part of our future -- for a player who could leave after a half season? I don't know about that. As I said at the time, I think that's short-sighted.
Durvasa, they say brooks was the deal breaker. Everyone know I like brooks, but to get artest playing at last yrs level wouldve been a no brainer. I think even without yao last yr, if they had artest/mcgrady combo, that the team couldve been at least conf finals. Shane and brooks for artest. If they never made the battier-brooks for artest deal, rafer and chuck for a versitile frontline player made sense. I brought up the tim thomas type. I bring him up not say he's a better player than scola or landry, but his versitility makes the team more rounded. So when you play a team like utah or La, you have a guy that gives matches up and forces them to adjust. When Odom comes off the bench, thomas matches up with him both on the perimter and in the post. When utah plays yao with okur, now thomas makes boozer guard him at the 3 pt line and try to guard him off the dribble.I think a gms job is not only about getting good players, but u have to balance ur team. The rox have the same type of players. They have have 2 lumbering,slow centers, 2 smallish pf, and 2 short pg's. Does that mean they can't win games? No, it just means team can matchup to u easily. Also, you can't force matchups the other way. Overall, I think he's done a ok job.
Revisiting this, and using 82games admittedly crude draft position tracker thingy - http://82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm the likelihood of Greene (based on draft position 28 ) becoming even a role player is pretty low. Taking the numbers from picks 25-31, the possibility of Deep Bench/Bust/DNP is very high (arguably the DNP's should be excluded to not count flyers taken on foreigners but lets include them for simplicity) ranges from 45% to 75%. Let's be cautious then to account for the DNP's and say his risk of being a non-rotation player is about 50%. On the other end, his chance of becoming more than just a role player ranges from 5-15%. so he's not nothing, but he's 50% nothing, 40% role player/marginal contributor, and 10% a huge mistake to let go. I'd take a year of Ron over that AND this year's draft pick which would probably be a similar analysis.
But you've just given up Rafer Alston, Aaron Brooks, Shane Battier, and Chuck Hayes for Ron Artest (who may or may not have been back this season) and Tim Thomas. What happens to our PG position? You must think really highly of Tim Thomas if you think getting rid of Rafer Alston and Chuck Hayes for Tim Thomas (without another PG) is a better deal that getting rid of just Rafer Alston for Kyle Lowry. And I don't agree with you that getting Artest last season would put us in the conference finals. Rafer was hurt (he missed 2 games in the first round) and Tracy was not close to 100%. Our fall back option at PG was Bobby Jackson and that's it. You're either overestimating Ron Artest and the rest of the players on the team, or you're underestimating the competition. Remember, in the second round we would have probably had to face either the Lakers (if we were a 4th seed -- most probable) or the Spurs. I don't think we'd be favored in either of those matchups. And as you've noted in the past, what good is it anyways getting to the second or third round? Isn't winning championships the goal? You've traded away our future for a series win ... maybe two if we're lucky. I don't see the wisdom in that.
Those are good points. But I'd say that keeping Donte Greene doesn't just mean we're banking on him becoming a great player for us (I agree with you -- the chances of that are slim). He still could be an asset we could trade for another player. So its not just Artest vs Greene. Its Artest vs whatever else we could get for Greene. And to be clear, I'm not saying that the Artest deal was a bad one. I thought it was great, at the time. Right now, it's looking less great because I think our chances of winning a championship have significantly dropped. So do the Rockets value having Artest for 1 year more than than their "future" assets (Donte Greene, our 1st round pick this summer), when they know the chances of getting far into the playoffs aren't great? I'm not so sure about that.
I agree with you that Artest is not living up to expectations in terms of how much he impacts the team (not to a lot of people's expectations anyway). But I am pretty sure you could get more by trading Artest than by trading Greene. So the trade was pretty damn good.
True, but again that's a two way street. It's also Greene & pick vs. Artest and whatever else we could get for Artest. I'd say that Artest's expiring contract/cap flexibiliy is as good as anything one would ever get for Greene at this point (provided Greene doesn't take the leap up into desirable commodity)
Durvasa, im going to tackle this one at a time. This is revisionist history, but I enjoy conversation with you. In 06, we were in win now mode. There is no need to bring up the possibilities from that draft, so im moving forward. Even when Yao went down, based on previous experience, I knew they would be ok. When the m-o got rolling, I thought they shouldve traded for artest. It was reported the deal breaker was Brooks. I can respect that they think brooks is the future, I like brooks a lot. If they did make that trade and gotten Artest for Battier and brooks or Jackson and brooks, you couldve asked for Beno in return. So for discussion purposes, the rocket have tracy and ron in the playoffs last year along with beno as a backup. Do I think Brooks is a better player? Yes, but is brooks a better player than beno and artest? So let assume that went through and the rockets have Rafer,Ron,Tracy,Shane,Scola,Yao, chuck,head,beno, novak on the roster. Lets assume they still got their 1st and 2rd picks and also landry is a free agent. Now the only thing the rockets have is the mle and lle to negotiate with. If Ron played well after we aquired him and played well, I offer 4yrs 11m per. Beno I will offer pretty much what he got which was 3-4m per. Now here is where I always catch flack,but I don't care. The gm needs to balance the team out and close up the matchup holes this team always have with certain lineups. Doing so might cost you rafer,shane or even landry, but its for the good of the team. When I say balance, I use it because you have to make sure your team can match up with everyone or at least come close enough to a draw. If you just look at the top of the mountain, La, there is no comparison. Reason being is the rockets have no one that is big enough,quick enough, or mobile enough to guard Odom. Also, Gasol at the 4 is the same vs our 4's or backup 5. To get this in balance, I, leebigez, would have signed either turiaf or anderson and traded for a tim thomas/villanueva type of backup. Now getting villanueva might have been a little more difficult, but getting thomas at 6m from the clipps wouldve been a lot easier. Also signing Chris Anderson or Turiaf made a lot of sense also. Why do these balance the team? It gives the rockets versitility. The tim thomas type behind scola along yao not only spreads the court, but it balances out the matchups vs Utah or La. Thomas is a 6'10 sf/pf like Odom. So its natural for him to guard someone like Odom. On the perimeter he's quick enough, inside and on the blks he's big enough. Scola, Landry, nor Hayes can guard this type of player. Its not natural for them to guard that type of player and its not like they're good enough to really punish Odom on the blks. Also when the rockets play Utah, boozer now has to guard a guy 24 ft from the basket. He or Okur can't guard thomas at the 3pt line and keep him from getting to the basket. What you have just done is what they do to you. They are now in a bind because now boozer is away from the basket and out of rebounding position. Now Okur has to really play yao one on one.Now the travel distance is greater to yao which gives him more space.The other guy, Turiaf/Anderson also balances the team. They do it more from energy,length,athleticism, shot blocking side. They both can play center and also play pf. So instead of having to resign deke or playing scola at backup, they now have guy that can finish around the rim as well as protect the rim. When teams put yao in pick and roll, its not because they plan on shooting it all the time, a lot of times its to open the baseline and attack the rim. When teams get into that mode, having a guy like turiaf/anderson would allow the rockets to have a guy in the game that aren't huge offensive liabilites and can protect the rim. Also, when yao goes out and normally the freeway to the basket starts, the rockets would have a guy that can block shots, rebound, play with energy and still finish plays. I know its sounds like the trade thread or whatever and like I've said morey has done a ok job, I just wish he would do a better job at balancing the team. Scolandry,Hayes, and dorsey make no sense.
I just don't think, talent-wise, Tim Thomas separates himself enough from Scolandry/Hayes to make it worthwhile to give up our PG and Hayes for him. Tim Thomas would bring one skill that's well above what we have with Scola/Landry/Hayes, and that's perimeter shooting. His length/quickness is not outstanding enough to be much of a factor and make up for his lack of a motor. I don't think he'd get nearly enough minutes on this squad to make his 13 million for 2 years price tag worth it. What has he done this season anyways? He was trade twice, and he's now getting spot minutes in Chicago. I've never heard anyone describe him as a good defensive player. Being a competent defender is about more than your physical measurements. And didn't Scott Skiles, a defensive-minded coach, actually ask him to stay away from his Bull team a few years ago because he thought Thomas would be a distraction? That doesn't look good. I agree that balance is important. But I'd be worried about our PG position. You're suggesting that we trade away our PGs and our best team defenders in Battier and Hayes for Beno Udrich, and add Ron Artest and some front court players like Thomas and Turiaf/Andersen .To me, that's an overloaded front court, and we'd lack guards who can run the offense and create shots for others. I do think Chris Andersen would have been a great addition. He's a big time defensive player for the Nuggets -- as a defensive presence he is every bit as good as Marcus Camby was for them.
