ariza's problem was he was too limited in terms of his ability to create his own shot, let alone for others. he scored on atrocious efficiency due to his poor shot selection, inability to gain seperation from the defender and being forced to carry a larger role than he ever did. his playoff run in '09 was tremendous but that had a lot to do with him feeding off the attention bryant and gasol drew. he got a bunch of open threes that he could spot up and drain with ease. with a limited role, he was also able to play good defense, be deadly in the passing lanes with those lengthy arms and exert more effort in general. in houston, he couldn't be the same player for obvious reasons such as our team structure so i clearly don't regret trading him away. players like ariza thrive in certain situations and are miserable when expected to play a role they're incapable of. that's all.
Ariza would be playing the same role he is playing for the Hornets now. He is taking less than 10 shots per game and his usage rate is about what it was with the Lakers. Do you really think Lee is better him in that role?
I love how people have Lowry starting in their lineups.... If Brooks is healthy he is the starter simple as that... And I am okay with losing Ariza, we wanted him to do more than he is capable of.
Still don't, although Courtney Lee hasn't exactly set the world on fire. Good defender, but looks like he has Rafer's shooting skills.
What? 42.3% overall and an outstanding 44.1% from 3pt range. http://www.clutchfans.net/players/courtney_lee/ If Rafer could have shot like that, we would have never traded him. DD
Just shows you the fallacy of limited sampling; every time I see him play he is bricking shots. I can't watch whole games, I have to come and go. I was shocked at those percentages.
Courtney Lee is a texbook example of why you don't want role players who shoot a bunch of contested midrange jumpers off the dribble. 44% from 3 and 82% from the line sounds nice. But he hardly ever gets himself to the line, and he takes a lot of low-efficiency jump shots.
That is his biggest weakness, when he dribbles to the elbow and tries to shoot it.....massive brickage. DD
In the SHORT term, I'd rather have Ariza starting alongside Martin and Battier on the bench than Battier starting and Lee on the bench. But you really can't fault Courtney Lee at just $1 million and the added flexibility to upgrade the entire team.
Limited sampling but he should still be a 40% 3pt shooter by the end of the year, which is what he shot as a rookie.
Coming from a '99er, that is definitely a compliment. :grin: I am interested in hearing a summarized explanation of why the Ariza trade was bad from an opponent of that trade because it is hard for me to see any scenario where we would be come out in a better position had we kept Ariza. These are the main arguments I gather from opponents of the Ariza trade: #1: Better Record This Year This argument is that if we had Ariza this year, we would have a better record. And my response to this is how? Our team is actually worst off than last year's because we at least had Brooks penetrating and breaking down defenses. We would have a repeat of last year with Ariza jacking up bad shots and trying to go one-on-one against defenders. This experiment failed last year. #2: No Yao This argument is basically that last year's numbers for Ariza are skewed because there was no Yao; with Yao, his numbers would be more efficient because he can play off of him. And I would agree with this argument because this whole team would be better off playing off of Yao. But Yao hasn't played much this year so again, we are left with the same scenario as last year (Ariza taking bad shot) and stuck with his bad contract. And with the uncertainty of Yao's career, we are better off having Lee's flexible contract. #3: Better Future This argument is that Ariza is younger and more athletic so he is a better building block for our future. But again, this argument fails because his contract would have made it harder to move players without taking on players and there is no indication that he would be happy playing for a franchise in rebuilding mode. So Ariza probably would have left the first chance he got if the Rockets were to go into rebuilding mode. I agree that Lee isn't as athletic or as good a defender, but at the end of the day, its simple mathematics: Lee's skill set + his contract > Ariza's skill set + his contract. The talent difference isn't wide enough to warrant that contract.
I dont regret trading anyone as long as the talent is replaced and it wasnt on any level. Like one poster said,80% money move at the minimum. They couldve used a te or lle to get lee,cdr,or someone like that if they wanted. Look at a guyu like dorrell wright and how he's playing and he's not making that much money either, yet he's young enough and still has a bupward swing. I thought the deal sessions and hollins wouldve been better than the rockets using the mle on miller and lowry. At least sessions has success as a starter and hollins is the long,angular defender in space. They couldve gotten those 2 for 5m,sign and trade lowry for a te,kept trevor or signed wright, and let miller play somewhere else.Shane and chase hasnt helped as much as trevor would have at the 3,but its a wrap now anyway.
We, as fans, should only consider the total talent level on the team. Not how much the owner is spending. I understand sometime you need cap room for certain situations. But in this case, it was done to go under the lux tax for the most part IMO.
