Nope, perimeter defense isn't nearly as important as interior defense, and our good defensive wings will usually take care of the most talented player on the opposing squad.
I doubt it. I think Morey fattened up Brooks to sell to Toronto to get Bosh. Toronto would've wanted more than just a few draft picks, and the only two rockets who were guaranteed a contract were Lowry and Scola. Morey was probably thinking that no matter which way things went, the Rockets would win. If we got rid of Brooks for Bosh, we acquire our All-Star forward to put next to Yao. If we didn't get Bosh, we still keep Brooks as a scoring threat from the perimeter.
I agree, Lowry is a large dropoff from Brooks, I don't know I would say massive, but definitely visible. The team's style of play would no doubt be affected.
What I'd like to see and what is realistic is pretty far apart. I think we will stand pat with maybe a Brad Miller signing. if he doesn't take it, I think Chuck , Andersen and Hill take the minutes. Then we try and make a trade deadline deal. But with so many other teams that also have expirings or TEs, it's quite possible we end up trading a conditional 1st and an expiring to get under the LT - assuming that things aren't going too well with that C platoon. Then next year we do some house cleaning.
Agreed. Deadline it is. Although, if something materialized that would enable us to get Iggy for Ariza and Lowry or Ariza and Brooks, then I think Morey would pull the trigger on that deal. I think Morey pulls the trigger on a deal for Iggy or Wallace if it involves sending out Ariza and one of the point guards. That is a trade that allows us to upgrade, while holding on to all our young talent and expiring contracts to feed to New Orleans for Chris Paul. I don't see Morey moving our expirings and young talent unless it is for a greater dollar value of expirings and and upgrade in young talent. Perhaps something like Jeffries, Ariza, Andersen, and Lowry for Dunleavy, Brandon Rush, and T.J. Ford. We get back more expiring contract value, and a young player on a rookie deal.
i have a couple of thoughts on this... 1) Why would Indiana want expiring contracts when there's nobody worth paying top dollars to next year in the FA market? Why wouldnt they just keep their "star" player and build around him and Paul George? (No way, Duncan or Melo go to Indy) 2) IF Indiana does decide to part ways with Granger, it wont be until at least the middle of the season, close to the trade deadline. 3) If they're not gonna be trading Granger until the trade deadline, would you make the trade if the Rockets are fighting for the best record in the West with the squad we have now?? Lets say by the trade deadline, the rockets are 38-15 (Lakers were 42-14 at the trade deadline last year)...would you wanna give up our rotation players (Brooks/Battier/Ariza/Hill/Budinger/Future 1st round pick (s)) for Granger + fillers???? Before we start thinking about making trades to improve our roster, let the team go out there and see what this team can do. Let AB get more games in with YAO and see how they gel together. They've only started like 36 games together...
Why would we make a trade like that when we have our two point guards and no assured way of getting CP? Talk about a crap shoot! I understand that you see Iggy at the 3, and I'd certainly love having him there, but that's quite a contract. Iggy makes over $12 million this coming season and is signed through the 2013/14 season, where he'll be pulling down just under $16 million. Lowry and Ariza together will be making much less than that, assuming Lowry's last year team option (partial salary) is exercised by whoever has him. Still, I could see Lowry and Ariza going there. Lowry's from Philly, I think, and Ariza makes far less than Iggy. Morey would have to be an insanely big Iggy fan to go for it. I just don't see it.
You know what I find is funny? We have over $18 million tied up in our SF position. Shane, Trevor, and Jeffries are all MLE players and if you add in Chase, you get around $18+ million..... It would be nice to have one at $12 million instead of 3 at $6.... DD
Your gonna have to give up Brooks to get Granger. Do you realize how good this kid is? He has almost a flawless all around game and is a good person, good team player. I believe he is about 28, which would be the same age as Yao, Scola and Martin. I could get excited about that team. Just get a servicable PG and you're good to go.
Just to be clear, no one knows what it would take, or even if he would even be offered. Maybe they want our Backup PG instead. DD
For the sake of argument, if Granger really was up for grabs, why would they want the Backup when they could have the MIP starter for their All-Star?
Do you think they need a point guard more than they need Granger? Doubtful. Paul George is unproven. Granger is elite.
I really believe that this in some respects, is what's going down. A back-up center, and a Granger, G-Wallace, Iguodala, Carmelo type upgrade at the 3.
That's what I was hopeing for all along. I really think we are a good sf away from being contenders if Yao is healthy and a good 5 seed but not able to win it all if he's not.
You support my point exactly. If the pacers were to turn Granger loose, they would want someone of similar caliber. They wouldn't want "the backup" Lowry, they'd want the "franchise" Brooks.
Danny Granger is an all- inclusive, total package type player. He is extremely athletic, fierce and has that bull dog mentality in penetrating and driving to the rim. He can score points easily, post up, shoot 3s on your ass all day, and do a facial dunk anytime he wants. He is a team player and a person who is hard to defend 1 on 1 and also a go to guy. A type person Rockets can depend on down the 4th quarter stretch and whom the Rockets desperately need.
