Why didn't we just get Collison and then trade Brooks?

Brooks is better than Collison.

 

It doesn't work for New Orleans. They wanted money today. They don't want an expiring contract.

 

Brooks+Battier>Posey+Collison. It ain't even close.

 

Collison would've been an upgrade but Posey has another year on his contract and this was the opportunity for the Rockets to save $10 million.

 

The Rockets traded Ariza to free up the log-jam at the SF spot. Why would they trade him for another SF (that's getting paid $6 million, mind you) and a PG?

So basically, they would still have the log-jam at the SF spot, and they would have created another one at PG.

That would have served no purpose whatsoever.

And I know your whole point for this thread was that the Rockets could trade AB to another team, but that's no guarantee.

Trust me, the Rockets were much better off getting a back-up SG and saving $10 million.

 

You gotta be kidding me... Collison > Brooks. Open your eyes homie and that thats the truth.

 

Collison is a better passer,Brooks is a better scorer right now. NO need a big SG to pair up with Paul.

 

The Heat will be lucky to win 45 games this year.

 

CP3 will leave the hornets and Collison could easily taken over the Starting PG position and dominate for many years to come.

 

I think it would have taken some more time before Collison could start,but I do agree with your line of thinking. In fact,I'm surprised why NO went that way.

 

me too!! We would be trading more to get less!!
Brooks>ariza - lee>collison

 

Besides what's already said you're looking at the deal as if the Rockets were the originators...were the center of the whole thing. I really doubt that. I'm guessing Indiana really were the ones who started this.

Step 1: Indiana wants' Collison, but has nothing to offer NO in return.
Step 2: Indiana brings in NJ because they need a big (which Indiana has available) and NJ is under the cap, so salaries don't have to match.
Step 3: NJ offers Lee to NO....deal looks pretty sound.
Step 4: Morey catches wind of the deal and pulls a jedi mind trick on NO. "Lee is not the wing you're looking for. You need Ariza"

The way I see it, why didn't NO opt to take Lee instead of Ariza? Indiana and NJ wouldn't care. I would think Lee and Ariza are fairly even talent wise, but Lee has such a better contract then Ariza, and it looks like NO could have used a SG more then a SF. Instead they helped out a division opponent, if not by talent, certainly financially.

 

Well said Sir,
Morey is extremely cunning. Probably told them that Ariza can take a load of Peja who has not been playing well and has had injury problems. At first I did not understand the trade, but when I saw the salary savings and the trade exception its a pretty reasonable deal.

 

Why don't we trade Luis Scola for David West too!?

 

Except that Collison started 37 games as a rookie and averaged 18 and 8.5 when Paul was injured. On 50% shooting.

 

Meant to reply to this post.

 

You don't trade your best player for Nick Collison and James Posey. That's essentially what you'd be doing... Isn't that kind of the bottom line here? Nick Collison would not step in and lead the team as its best player like Brooks did last year. Is Nick Collison going to be anyone's best player next year? Can't say I'm betting on it. Plus Posey would have been our FOURTH small forward. Awesome.

 

...let's not forget he averaged about 8 turnovers a game too during that stretch. Don't get me wrong, I think Collison is a good player and certainly most young PGs have TO issues in their early years but let's not overrate him based on a small sample of statistical success on a bad team. Once Paul was out, I'm sure most teams didn't put too much time and effort into developing a thorough gameplan in place to slow down Collison - most teams on talent alone could just "play their game" and get the win against that injury riddled NO squad. I guess my point is, I don't think he has the ceiling of a Chris Paul type player - a good PG, yes - but a transcendent top 5 guy when healthy, No.