This. If we want to contend, we'll have to put some of our better players out there. The problem with being proactive is that it's too known that Morey's being proactive.
This roster will probably get 52 wins if left untouched, we'll see how far that gets us in the playoffs. PPat and Lee getting minutes over Hill and AB should go a long way towers improving the D. We just need someone to back up Chuck and/or replace Bud and I like our chances.
Yes, the roster is "OK" with small up-grades here or there; it is the coach that is the question... 52 wins is a bet lofty...
Other than the change of coach, what would stop them from continuing to play like they have since the trading deadline? Adelman was convinced they'd be headaches for some teams in the post season. And maybe more. But is the thinking more that it'd be a good season team and not a playoff team. That's kind of where I'm at. It would be a really fun season and then a big pain in the #!%#^ for the team they face in the 1st round while maybe but probably not reaching the 2nd in 7 games. Another season of of something like causing the Lakers to dread the end of the season for the 1st round. Would Kanter or Valciunus(?) be enough? Having read what was provided here Valciunus already gets credit for shot blocking. Yao Ming's Karma is due for swing back to the positive.
I hope so, though I've recently become more pessimistic about the chances of it happening. I think you and I have similar ideas of the best way to build this team moving forward.. I'm just not sure Morey's view of it aligns with ours. His "yay me we didn't bottom out after losing our two stars" comment kind of sealed the deal for me. I hope I'm wrong and right at the same time though.
I know this is not going to be a popular sentiment, but I really would hope people give the Rockets one more year for the following reasons. 1. The Rockets clear their cap next year, with only KMart, Scola, and Lowry under contract assuming no big acquisitions. 2. The CBA will likely change the atmosphere of the league, and it may be prudent to wait. It's one thing to take that risk on Melo or Bosh, but another to rush yourself into signing a role player who may end up killing your cap. All signs point to a super-deflated cap now that the NBA is showing its books. 3. This is a horrible year for free agents. Everyone clamors for someone like DeAndre Jordan, someone who at best will turn this team from a 9th seed to an 8th seed. And that's if he doesn't go back to his lazy self again. 4. This is a horrible draft. No blue chippers, no one worth giving the farm for. Drafting even another Patterson doesn't really do much for the near future. 5. Next year's FA market is much better. 6. Next year's draft will be much better. To put it another way, next year is a more tankable season. Look, the chips just aren't stacked in this offseason's favor. So even if the Rockets be the most proactive they want to be, the result will look like crap simply because you can't do much. If the Rockets don't do anything either way in 2012, that's when we might want to change the front office.
Nobody is opposed to reading a member's thoughts. It's just that this particular thought, i.e. "tanking for the future," has been discussed by many members in many threads (and has been rejected by people who work for the Rockets many times) and this particular thread doesn't express it in any way that hasn't been expressed before-- no new observations, new examples or citations to new statistical analysis or comments from any player/coach/GM of any team. Not like, for instance, this, which does give the example of team that was successfully built in a way that is similar to how the Rockets front office have said they plan to build this team: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=204299&highlight=jerry+west Well, I guess at least one person want to hear the tanking chorus again. Good for you. I'll leave this alone now so people interested in discussing it, should such people exist, may continue. As for posting chron.com stories, I believe you are missing the point of the bbs. Clutch will be the ultimate decider of this since he built this thing, but I don't think this is the Huffington post. People don't put things here as some sort of news outlet. The purpose of the bbs, I think, is for discussion. People post everyting from links to articles, videos, audios, etc. because they think these things-- reports of coaching hire, comments by bloggers about the process by which Morey evaluated coaches and players, etc.-- are worth viewing/listening to and discussing. If no one is interested, the threads, just like the threads about people own thoughts, won't get views and replies and the discussion ends. Simple. Anyhow, carry on...
Arguably one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Is Blake Griffin also tradeable? How about Love or Steph Curry?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but is Griffin or Curry or Love for that matter not currently star talent? Griffin is already an all-star, Love is too and Curry will be in the next 4-6 years. Their respective teams won no more than 35 games. What makes them untouchable is their talent, not their organisations record. Think before you post son.
That's your opinion, that's fine. Lowry and Patterson could be all-stars in a few years too, that's my opinion. The guy I was quoting just tied win total to roster stability as a fact, which it is not.
I agree with you, larsv8. But I don't see how our team would be better by adding an all-star for lowry and whoever. Point guards like him are not that common, especially when you factor in the price tag. We don't want to swap holes in our team. For Pat, it is obvious that he will grow. So trading him for what he is now will be a bad decision to make. Like I said, reasonably untouchable.
