if i may, i think you're conflating a typical business deal, which is really more akin to negotiating a contract with a player/agent, with what morey does, which really has no analog in the larger business world. in the former, there's a reasonable assumption that both parties want to do business with the other, and while there's a fair amount of posturing, and may indeed be time pressures (end-of-quarter/year) that force one party or the other to make a concession, in my experience, most deals get done, and they're done in a fashion that everyone is happy with. in this instance, there are many more parties w/ which one can negotiate, lending a level of artifice to the art that i think just doesn't exist outside of sports trading deadlines. good point, reasonable thread, but no connection between this scenario and the real (business) world (imho).
This is a good post, but not what I was speaking too, most of my experience in deal making is in company acquisitions etc, and several times people are too greedy and decent deals fall apart. Of course it is not an apples to apples comparison, but it does seem somewhat apt when applying it to what we have read and the potential suitors dropping by the wayside Anyway, I did not mean to cause a malestrom, just to put in my .02 etc. DD
The new reports said the Knicks wanted protection on the picks too. No one knows how bad the deal really looked like. DD is getting unnecessarily emotional.
I don't see how we are holding out too much. I don't like all the deals out there. The New York one is pathetic, we get stuck with Jeffries, a unproven Forward and Harrington from what I gather. The Chicago one gets us Brad Miller who is semi useful, and Thomas who has a bigger head then Swift did. Earlier when we declared that we were trading T-mac most people thought we'd get a swingman. I'd rather we just sit and get nothing then trade for trash like that. Its not going to help us win more games this year in anyway shape or form AND it'd be no different to letting T-mac sit. Unless something else complements these deals I'm not buying this. I just don't see how we are getting value from this other then getting rid of T-mac who is pretty much gone anyway physically and mentally.
LOL - so now I am emotional? Really? Heheheh.... I am not emotional about this in the least, I am merely saying.......that it looks like X...... I only get emotional after loses. DD
I don't know why you guys think that if they don't include Hill it's a bad deal. Lets see, if we keep T-Mac we get nothing. If we trade him for Jeffries, Hughes, and have a chance to move into the lottery in 2011 and have a chance at another lottery pick in 2012. What's not fair about that? Even if those picks don't turn out to be lottery picks you can still turn those 2 picks into trade bait or we can keep the picks and let Morey take his chances with those. He's just as good at drafting players and he is in trading for players.
True.... However, I think the Rockets are actually not looking towards next year but the year after, where the CBA and Yao expire etc.... And any deal that gives us a hit next year but a shot at winning seems pretty reasonable to me, as long as it does not bleed into 2011-12. The ones that go beyond next season are the ones that I worry about because then you may be placing a bet that Yao is going to come back 100%, which he might do, or he might not be all that effective at all..... Either way, I get why people are thinking this is premature criticism, it isn't. It is just me saying, hey, I hope we are not being too greedy. DD - the King of two stars !
This season didn't have too much expectations to begin with. Did you have championship aspirations for this year? The more attractive pieces to the deal for us are the draft picks. Whether we use the picks ourselves or flip them in the summer for a player remains to be seen, but the options are there. The players that come along with the picks more than likely expire at the end of the season just like tracy.
I'm new to this Thread so I'll make it up as I go: we do NOT know what has been passed up, just the words ('dis'information tossed our way like morsels to curs). A deal needs two (or three or X) to be done, and it has to be a 'win-win' for all parties and their specific needs. That includes, in no uncertain terms, the teams' owners (see: Gasol, Pau...see: Camby, Marcus and see him twice...et alia). Yes, DD, the civility is gone from here. I wish the mods could find a way to reinstitute it. Whither the fun of a reasonable discussion...
i feel you DD i feel that if we are trying to squeeze w/e we can for tmac and it fails then we get screwed because A. theres a good chance we might just buy out tmac so ppl arent willing to lose assets just to get him , when he prolly could be "had" anyways b. we are losing 3rd teams for trades because many trades have already occured for w/e reasons , being financial or talent based. hopefully i wake up and find out something great happend overnight
First "fair deal" in your opinion, in this board's opinion, or in Morey's opinion? P.S. I have seen some of your reactions to Morey's Brooks and Landry draft picks, and frankly, I would personally be wary of what constitutes a "fair deal" to you...
I'll admit, I'll be pretty disappointed if we don't move him. I'd also like to see Battier moved, but that's a different story. Nonetheless, DM has said from the beginning that any deal would go down to the wire, so let's just wait and see. I share DD's anxiety about this (as I suspect do most of CF)
I agree with the OP. It seems as if Morey is not actually instigating trade talks, but he is just listening to offers. We seem a little apprehensive to pull the trigger.
I really don't feel any anxiety. There aren't any available players that will positively impact the Rockets in their current Yao era. We're not winning a title until we move past our failed experiment, especially with the Lakers being as dominant as they are. So the best available deals for us would be ones looking towards the future, much like the Knicks trade. Stockpiling assets is the best approach. Perhaps we can trade some of those assets (Hill, 1st rounders, our own young core) for players like Rubio or package those assets for a higher lotto pick. But until then, in Morey We Trust.
There are only three things I can gather based on this season. We really hate Tracy Mcgrady and our management hasn't really planned our long term future out and we aren't trying to win the championship anytime soon. Yao Ming doesn't have a large window, in fact like you said he expires soon and whether we resign him is up in the air as well. Management has repeatedly stated that winning games is our priority. The best way to have won more games was to let Tracy Mcgrady play, get his value up and maybe trade him for a decent swingman which was our crucial need. Thrown in Battier if we had too. Now what do we have? How does Harrington, Miller, Hill, Thomas et al help us win more games at all? They address none of our needs in a major way. If we are trading for draft picks are we opening saying we are tanking and rebuilding? A draft pick will not help Yao Ming for the period of his contract. Unless we pick up someone like John Wall (chances are?) we aren't contending. At the end of the day either our teams or our managements unending hate of Tracy Mcgrady has caused us to destroy most of our trade options in my opinion. There really was no negatives in my opinion of playing him for half a season. More bums on seats just to see the controversy, better way of selling him (he can't have been more worse then he is now) and maybe even a better playoff chance (because his regular season was fine) AND we would have shipped him off for something ALOT better then Thomas or Hill *cough* Butler *cough* If we are going to blame the trades we've done we should look at the events before. Yes most of its probably T-macs fault too. But we should have sucked it up would have helped us on the trade/recruiting front anyway!
What if McGrady got injured or reinjured his knee if he received significant PT this season? Then his trade value would be absolute squat. How does TMac for Hughes and Jefferies sound? Because that's the deal that would be offered to us for an injured TMac. I'd much rather have Hill or Thomas than Butler at this point in time. We need to start looking towards the future. Butler wouldn't be a Rocket after next year. He wouldn't have led this team to a title. Assets, people. We need 'em. Lots of 'em.
Personally I don't think that there's anything fair about Chicago dumping their garbage on us to free up so much of their cap space. Tyrus Thomas is far from a diamond in the rough and I would much rather have Jordan Hill, I think that Morey's on the same boat as he doesn't typically value low basketball IQ players like Thomas. I realize that McGrady is not exactly in good graces with management/ownership, but Morey rightfully realizes how much that cap space means to these teams and for us to take someone like Hinrich or Salmons just as filler and get stuck with them when salary structures are about to drastically change would not be a shrewd business move at all. I'd break the bank like that for someone like Anthony Randolph, perhaps even Jordan Hill or another player of that ilk, but not for Thomas. Though I don't like how the McGrady situation was handled I think that I would take my chances with the MIT grad any day of the week. Just remember this particular time and keep track of Salmons and the other proposed players in two years and you'll see why what Morey is doing makes sense. He's simply not mortgaging the future for so little return. The Knicks deal on the other hand, that seems a bit more fair since Jordan Hill has a chance to be a pretty good player and if the pick is included. Of course we'll see what happens, but be mindful of the future too. DD, how many of those deals that you took part in had salary cap ramifications or unknown budget variables thrown in to the mix with long-term commitments as well? Would you buy a freighter of junk while sending out another freighter of junk? That's just what Salmons and Thomas are, and I'm sure Morey sees that. In fact, I'd go out on a limb and say that the Chicago deal would have never materialized, it's just Morey leveraging a contingency plan, just like any other GM does with him. Sure I know that you can't always hardball people, but I do trust Morey's ability to evaluate talent, which Chicago simply is not offering. We'll see about New York, and I'm sure that Feigan will clarify things for us in the not-too-distant future.
I call it as I see it. No thanks needed. Remember, when you're number 1, you have a target on your back.
