Pro-Tracy, Anti-Stacy I think that about 99 percent of the board would agree that in some way shape or form, we need a talent upgrade. Other than center, the impact player could feasibly fit in any other position. However, the board is split on how to go about getting this piece. Some say trade Tracy, some say Shane, Ron in and S&T. Maybe one of our PF's.... But I want to throw one thought/idea out there and it is this. This team, has done extraordinary things the past 2 years. Have we won a championship? No, WCF? No. However, we did make it to the 2nd round and challenge a team that we had no business challenging (due to injury constraints.) Why have we been able to do this? Are we built like Orlando, Phoenix, Dallas etc? NO. We don't have the plethora of scorers and offensive variety these teams have. But this is ok, we have something different, chemistry, defense, grit and determination. We can bring Tracy back or not, that is mostly irrelevant to what I am throwing out and it is this. I attribute this success, to the excess of X-factor players we have. They make it happen. Shane, Ron, Chuck, Luis, even Deke and Kyle come to mind. These guys are "pitbulls" as it has been phrased. I want to throw out the idea that by even dealing one of these guys, we may break that mojo. Keep in mind, other than Lowry, those guys have been here for all of that. We are quick to desire talent, but I do wonder, if we end up swapping even just one X-factor guy, if that will break the chain? Food for thought.
Good points. Ideally we keep most if not all of them. They are the perfect support crew, whether or not that proverbial savior ever shows up or not.
With a Healthy Yao . . .or Even a Healthy DEKE The Rockets could take out All 4 teams in the finals now Rocket River That is my honest opinion
We need a scoring wing. A closer. SG or SF. All the chemistry and grit is great but it's not enough. Even if McGrady miraculously makes an impact at some point next season, he couldn't fulfill the role of closer before the knee problems. I can't see him doing it after.
I happen to think we might not need a bona fide closer. A healthy McGrady, Yao and team would be very efficient at both ends of the court. I also believe said team would win close to 60 games (after what I witnessed this year). Do we really need a trade that depletes our ranks just for a closer for the other 22+ games? Yes, pure speculations on my part, but it comes from the gut so I'll go with it. Now ask me about some tall 6-11+ players
Tracy can be a closer when he gets his head in the game. When he wants to play and is healthy, he is nearly unstoppable. Will he be his unstoppable self this coming season, or will he gimp around with a chip on his shoulder again? Only time will tell. Hey coon, how about some 6'11 players
There's a difference between a player that can be a closer and a player that is a closer. McGrady isn't some young player where there is a chance for him to grow. The classic example of why McGrady isn't a closer: Game 7 at home against Utah. We were up 5 with about 6 min left in the 4th quarter and the Jazz were in the penalty. McGrady settled for contested outside shots for the rest of the game. Closers don't do that. We needed our closer to be aggressive and take advantage of the Jazz being in the penalty. McGrady utterly failed and chucked away the game. Look around the league at legitimate closers and tell me any of them would have completely avoided taking it to the rack. Wade, Kobe, Pierce, Lebron, Melo, etc...? Shooting from outside is fine as long as it isn't the only thing you do in late game situations. You may say that game was just one isolated failure but it is a glaring one considering what was at stake and more importantly, it has been McGrady's problem for years. Don't get me wrong. He is a great playoff performer. He is a great guy to have on your team from quarters 1 through 3 but he isn't a closer. At least not a legitimate one or an elite one. In my opinion, we need a legitimate one to contend. I can't think of a single championship team in history that didn't have guys that could step up big in crunch time. We can't keep hoping for McGrady to be a closer just because he has the potential to be one. Realizing potential is what counts.
I realize the difference, which is why I said only time will tell. If he is feeling better, and this being a contract year, I wouldn't be suprised to see him explode. But on the other hand, that's too many 'ifs.' I'd gladly take someone who has proven themself over the past couple seasons over Tracy, rather than take the chance. Getting a closer or a lights out shooter will take big bucks. Unless we trade Tracy (which I'm more than willing to do), we can't get someone like that. Regardless of what we do with Tracy, lets just get a decent backup center for Yao, and keep Yao to 30 minutes and possibly only 70 games in the season (resting him on back to backs).
McGrady hasn't been an efficient scorer for a single season that he's been a Rocket. He has also generally taken more shots than any player on the team when he's in the lineup. If your argument is that our team would be efficent for the first time in the McGrady era next season because of the improved role players, then maybe it would just be the role players compensating for McGrady's inefficiency. If McGrady was an elite closer, meaning he made things happen in crunch time consistently, we could live with his inefficient scoring. Repeatedly shooting contest 20-foot jumpers late in games is not being a closer. Whether he does that because of his declining health and athleticism or something between the ears or a combination of things, he doesn't fit the role of closer when you look around the league at players that legitimately fill that role. The passing and other skills he brings are nice but real closers simply score points when it matters in addition to those other things. There are plenty of stats to support that fact. All of the top closers take it to the rack and get to the line late in games in addition to shooting jump shots. McGrady doesn't mix it up nearly enough. He rarely gets into the paint or to the line when we need it most. I think a contending team in today's NBA needs a perimeter player that acts as closer and we still don't have one. I think we'll be a notch below the elite teams until we get that closer and no amount of chemistry and grit will change that fact.
Pitbulls, That's right! Don't mess with that, don't mess with the team chemistry. My feeling is that we trade Tracy and use as much as his salary to upgrade our weak area's, resign Ron and Von. Brooksball says: Tracy is not the type of player you want eating up so many shots and having the ball in his hands in the finals minutes. I'd rather Scola, Brooks, Yao, or even Lowrey have the ball, but not Tracy.
I think people confuse TMAC's ability to close in the regular season to his finishing games in the playoffs. I know his stats are awesome in the playoffs, but it'd be interesting to see his 4th quarter #s for those arguing that TMAC could be a closer for us.... Anyways, back to the OP, Lowry and Hayes will stay, as they dont make much, but are key role players. Deke will unfortunately retire, but the Rockets will try to get another 'pitbul' (hopefuly) to replace him. Shane will probably not get traded for obvious reasons (management loves him, good defense, captain etc). Scola wont get traded unless he's mixed in with TMAC for a blockbuster trade. That only leaves Ron.
I'm all for keeping Ron. I just don't want Ron and Battier in the starting lineup next season. We need a legitimate SG out there. The problem is that both of them deserve to be starters. If we sign Ron, I think we should look to trade Battier. If we want to keep Battier, we should forget about Ron.
I could see us trading Lowry if we decide to get a vet pg. Lowry wouldnt be getting any playing time, so it would be dumb to have him on the books, since I assume AB would be our backup. I agree with Scola, he wont get traded unless its huge for us.
I think having Shane and Ron start, is not as bad of an option as some people think. I really like it, although, granted it is awkward. The only reason those 2 can start is with Yao in at center, and we might not always be able to plan on that.
The reason I dont see Lowry getting traded is because he's only making barely over $ 1 mil (wow Morey!)....So why trade him? And it'd be pointless to trade away a key role player barely making anything as just a salary throw in even in a bigger trade. And I doubt he's even traded for a 1st round draft pick, as Lowry himself was a high 1st rounder just 2 years ago....
