But total contract amount is irrelevant as well. As long as both players make the same amount in the first year (within limitations), then it's all good.
Artest tried to be the star in which he wasn't anyways...dribbling too much, trying to be the playmaker, if Artest actually shot the ball into the basket against the lakers, we coulda advanced...It'll be VERY fun and interesting watching Kobe while Artest dribbles and chucks the ball...HAHA!!
This is what I believe to be Morey's plan: We don't know Yao's status next season. He has been our best player, cash cow, and franchise cornerstone for the past several seasons but we don't know what the future holds for him. Will he play next season? Will he retire prematurely? Will he ever be a dominant player again even if he does play? Now Morey is aware of all those possibilities. He is also aware that we should go in very different directions depending on Yao's status. So I believe Morey is targetting players who will excel on a team revolving around Yao AND on a team without him! We get Trevor Ariza. Now we decide on a path based on news on Yao in the upcoming weeks. If Yao gets surgery and is out a season, but has a good prognosis for his contract year, then we keep the core of the team (Scola, Battier, etc- guys who play best in a half court system revolving around a dominant scorer) around and probably go .450 next year and maybe get a lottery pick. Then when Yao comes back healthy we'll have a championship contender for 2010-2011, and then we'll reevaluate after that. If Yao's prognosis is bad and will never be a franchise player again, then we will trade away the core assets of the team for available players who will field the most competitive TEAM possible. Depending on who is available (something that only Morey will know through communication with other GMs) as well as free agents we may install a read and react, high bball IQ type of team, or a athletic open court Phoenix Suns style of team, or a new Big Two superstars team- just some new style of team without a Yao Ming. Trevor Ariza is a very versatile and skilled player who fits many styles, leaving Morey's options open. He has championship experience in a hard to learn triangle offense, is athletic and can finish, plays good tenacious defense, is tough and seems to be a good person, and doesn't mind being a role player. Ariza fits in many of the directions the Rockets decide to go in, which is dependent on news on Yao's health. This way, if Yao is still our center piece, Ariza is a good fit. If we part ways with Yao, Ariza is also a good fit. Win win situation. He may not be an overall better player than some other players on the free agent market, but he is a more VERSATILE player which fits our need and our situation of being at a crossroads.
I think our series against the Lakers last season was enough to show what RA is capable of with a bunch of high quality role players (a bunch of running role players). We get more speed, we play Brooks' game and we utilize Adelman's system. My only concern is our defense in the long run. Will RA break down our whole defensive mechanic once Battier becomes expendable or will he continue to build his offense off defense? If we don't play defense, we don't need Ariza. A few more trades here and there and we'll be a young team with good mentors and discipline.
I wouldn't be surprised if they don't go after a veteran to provide some leadership along with Battier. Maybe a solid character type player who can influence the younger players. Any ideas?
I'm really sad to see Artest go but I like signing Ariza to a long term deal. He's younger and more athletic than Battier/Artest and will likely turn into a similar kind of defense first type of versatile defender(able to defend 2 or 3 positions). I think Battier will start to decline over the next year or two and Artest was already starting his decline. Ariza's obviously better playing off a couple of other stars and I think Houston signed him with the intent that we would surround him with star type players in the next year or two so while this move might not have the impact we hope this year, I think over the long term it will prove to be a good signing. Plus I think after 2 or 3 years, his contract will be considered a good value when the salary cap starts creeping up again making him easy to trade if we wanted. It's a smart move with all things considered. Good move, Morey!
I think what the snag might be is that you can't package other players along with a S&T deal, so the salaries for artest - ariza would have to match up
I meant the added money yearly too, but prolly artest and ariza yearly will be close. I haven't read what the Lakers proposed to Artest other then the 3 years.
welcome aboard ariza. the only thing I am worried about with losing artest is his leadership and toughness.
Rubio is 6'4"-6'5" and 180 lbs. You must have Brooks confused with Von Wafer or Shane Battier. Brooks is only 6'0" and 161 lbs.
But they do match up. Only the first year needs to match and both the Rockets and Lakers are offering deals that have a first year salary of the mle. If this deal is just a FA signing, then that's the way it is. But I don't see any reason in the CBA to prevent this going down as a sign and trade.
You're assuming that either team is keen on spending more money. As Hollinger points out in his analysis of the two signings (here), the Rockets will be in luxury tax territory next season. Under your scenario, a sign and trade to free up the MLE would mean that Les would have to pay DOUBLE the MLE (on account of the luxury tax) for any player signed with it. If people think paying $5.6 million for Ariza is too steep, imagine being Les Alexander and knowing you're really paying $11.2 million for Gortat (or whatever mediocre big man we would sign in free agency).
he's going to be a prime player in the years to come...but i still am disappointed about yao and tmac...how are we going to handle this? ariza is just a piece...who else??
I think you must be missing something here. For players to be traded, the only thing that matters is the first year salary (or current salary if it's in season). Hypothetically speaking, it wouldn't matter one bit if Ron were signed to a 1 year, 5.6 million dollar deal and Ariza was signed to a 30 year, 168 million dollar deal. As long as that first year matches up within the limits set forth by the CBA, nothing else matters. Not length, not total money, not average money.
Yeah but regardless if you actually use the MLE or not, you're still better off having it as an option. Remember the MLE can be broken down and used to sign players for less than full value. If they can't get a deal done then that's just how it goes. But all things being equal, doing a sign and trade, Artest for Ariza is better than both teams using their MLE.
Feigen is arguing in his blog responses that the Lakers wouldn't do it, because they're already able to sign Artest for cheaper. Also made this comment, which I can't decipher: [rquoter] Jonathon, as both Artest and Ariza only had verbal commitment (and both are agreeable on MLE terms with different length of contract), can Rockets and lakers make some deal like sign & trade with each other thereby saving their own MLE other potential? (No they have to have something to sign them with. In a sign-and-trade, it has to be possible for the free agents to simply sign. -- Jonathan) [/rquoter]
