No, but I guess if Scola is your superstar player then maybe we have hit rock bottom. No, I meant that Scola is the heart of the Rockets. He never quits, he never gets hurt, he's hyper competitive. He's proven himself in the playoffs, he's proven himself in international play and the Euroleague. We need Scola.
I wholeheartedly agree with how you have described Scola. Here is the problem though, the Rockets, on this course, are not making the playoffs. So his proven play is better served as a trade asset than losing all of its value as the Rockets struggle to find an identity. Look at Battier, knowing what we do now, the time to trade him was a couple of years ago. You can't get peanuts for the man now.
that makes sense if the team gets back on track quickly...but if it doesnt, we dont need him to not make the playoffs and be a lottery team...some people have mentioned they want him here forever, but at what price? forcing him to stay no only may rob him of team success elsewhere, but it robs the team an opportunity to improve itself by trading him. I love the way he plays and what he stands for, but the guy shouldnt be untouchable. Look at the suns...it's obvious they're not going anywhere...by not trading nash they rob themselves of an opportunity to rebuild more quickly and nash is stuck with his final years in the NBA on a losing team.
Everybody wants to trade anybody for anything. If there is any trading to be done, IMO we need young, athletic players with potential combined with draft picks. However, under Moneyball philosophy, that won't happen. Morey won't roll the dice on draft "potential." He looks for "value" which translates to "solid, but mediocre player" -- so the draft picks we get in a trade would be wasted or those acquired draft picks would be used on one-dimensional players like Battier rather than a Rudy Gay. The Rockets will recover and finish with a mediocre, but winning season and Moneyball will guarantee mediocrity for years to come.
Really?! You're kidding right? I love Scola but you're making it seem like he has superstar value. I would never trade Scola to begin with but even if we would how will it turn us into contenders?
Scola is definitely the best player on our team right now, if the right deal comes around we should absolutely take it and trade him. The chances of us losing someone as valuble as Scola and getting someone else back more valuable while not making our team overall WORSE(because of other assets we'd lose as well) seems highly unlikely. We seem to be at a very strange point in Rocket's history...it's obvious Yao will never be a great player again; we're very likely just watching him play out the last year of his contract until he retires...while at the same time watching a group of players that will never be superstars try to live up to their moneyball potential and give us the most wins for money spent even though we don't have a snowball's chance of sniffing a title. I can't believe I see people saying we should 'build' around Scola...I like the guy, but if he's the best centerpiece we have for a championship run, then we need to blow this team up right now.
No. I am not kidding, nor am I making Scola out to be a superstar. However, I am contending that Scola would take a team that considers itself playoff ready (such as the Thunder, Pacers, Bucks or Bobcats) far more competitve. Scola's value will likely never be higher than it is today. If you aren't winning with him, come deadline, its time to move him.
he's not referring to a trade that makes us instant contenders... You're thinking of something like Scola for durant, but of course he doesnt have that kind of value. We're referring to trading him for whatver his value is, if we're rebuilding, not reloading instantly to be contenders this season. In other words, get a younger talent that helps this team rebuild. Scola for Gasol, for example.....Marc Gasol is 25 i believe, along with Martin, brooks, hill, it expands our window of opportunity. Of course you may still need to tweak some and make another minor trade for extra help. We could go younger than Gasol, but it's just an example. Basically you shift your focus to this younger core, with a window of anywhere from ~5 to 10 years: Brooks 25 Budinger 22 Chuck 27 Hill 23 Martin 27 Lowry 24 And exchange the older core, with a window of ~2 to 4 for youngers guys: Battier 32 Scola 30 Yao 30 Battier could be re-signed at a cheaper price to keep some veteran experience...but scola's contract just started and someone will throw 10 mill at yao no matter what..
The last two years the guy has tried to move up in the draft so while I don't disagree completely, I do think he is looking at the draft just much as trying to go for "role" players.
Unless you are getting a stud, then why discuss this?! You are trading the best player for the rockets at this time hands down. This talk about trading scola for jeff green is no short of being half r****ded. Green is not a star,super star,first option OR anything similar. He is a good role player on a up and coming team, period. You should entertain offers for scola to see what you could get but you dont trade him for anybody like green,smh. If thats the type of player we are looking at with trading Scola then i say keep him. Add a few pieces around him and draft well....Who cares if he is 30+, the guy plays below the rim which equals less wear aNd tear on the body and usually equates to a longer career.........IT IS WRITTEN.
I can find other players to trade than scola. I would rather add guys who can hide his defensive weakness than replace him. Thabeet at the 5 and randolph at the 3 would do it and send elsie and intangible man on there way.
Every team wants to move up in the draft. However, look at his last selection for example. We were (and are) loaded with PFs, so who did he draft -- a PF! when we really needed a young, athletic C, PG or even SF. There were no reports of trading down to pick up somebody like Whiteside or Alabi and another young player already in the league. After watching Patterson in the Legends-Viper game, I think Hill is the far better reserve PF --or starter if we traded Scola. Heck, after watching former Net Sean Williams shred Patterson, we might should give Williams a shot -- or even that human pogo stick Mickell Gladness.
Well he probably isn't a guy who is in the future plans of this team, what is he 30? So, if solid young talent is involved, why not. I don't really see the magic in Scola like everyone else seems to. I think he is the best player on the team right now, with his performances, but never get a star feel about him.
You remember last season when I said the rockets were in the wrong window? Basically this is what I'm talking about even with a supposedly healthy yao. The teams in win now like la,sa,dallas,mia,bost,and maybe even orlando are much better than the win now squad of the rockets. The rockets needed to get into the window of no,okc,port and try to beat those teams out in the next 3-4 yrs.
See, now you've struck a nerve. At the bottom of the first with the picks up for sale,i wanted the rockets to buy that pick and draft alibi or whiteside. Sure theyre not ready, but they could go to the d-league which is where patterson is, and both could replace yao in a couple of years,maybe next year. People dont undertstand that you can defend with size and quickness in the space game and be a good defensive team. A good example are the bulls with noah.
You wrote, among other things "I dont get what you're asking? In my proposal i'd trade brooks also, along with scola and the others to bring in Nash and Smith...i just didnt talk a lot about brooks because the thread is Scola-related. I think we need to start talking about stars, we're not getting a superstar anytime soon. Nash, Josh smith, that's the level we have to be looking at." Then later ask for supposedly re-vamp the team with younger players....are you aware that Nash is SIX YEARS OLDER THAN SCOLA? why don't you answer that? " I like that lineup because it puts our 2 weakest defenders up top, in Nash and Martin. They're backed and protected by the strongest 3 defenders in Smith, hill, and Yao, who will protect and pack the paint. The only way to improve that even more is to ship Jordan Hill and a pick for a more polished 2 way player, but i can't think of anyone of the top of my head." About D, are you aware why some positions are called GUARDS and other FORWARDS? doesn't the naiming give you a hint? Take a Basketball coach 101 course.....D STARTS AT THE PERIMETER...... If you have a great perimeter D, you can have bad D or a softie inside inside, and still survive, and even do good stuff..... But if you have a lousy perimeter D, even a tandem of Hakeem/Rodman at their prime, would have a lot of trouble trying to fix the problems created by a lousy perimeter D..... Now the perimeter D was improved a little, by havbing Lowry playing the point, but at what cost? Lowry is a Pg who can't shoot... So the main problems by the Rockets now, is having the perimeter D, without having players that could be floated (well, Rockets had one 1 the past, Battier, but having 2 at the same time is just too much).... That's why I said before, this current Rockets roster could be dramatically improved...not tanking the team (unwise IMO)....neither hoping something unrealistic right now (bringing a superstar)....but bringing players that could bring more BALANCE TO THE PERIMETER... That could be done getting Iggy (Brooks+1st round pick, plus expiring....could do the trick)..... After that, a 2-way PG (good enough in O for not being floated, good enough in D not to be a hole) could be gotten with the rest of the assets....that's why I proposed Hinrich, not a superstar, but a 2-way PG with enough BB IQ...could be added to the roster.... Rockets have a lot of assets (expiring, young players, draft picks, salary expections, etc, etc...) What good are the assets for if you don't use them ASAP and keep adding defeats after defeat with an unbalanced perimeter, as happens now?
