If Milwaukee loved him, why did they have to give him up? Why couldn't they give up another of their point guards at the time? If they liked him so much, why did they do the deal to blow their entire roster up and not keep him and build around him? Your comparison with Indiana is not valid; they went the effective route in building their roster and finding a backup point guard. How so? Understanding Ollie was not worth that much, they let him go. Who did they replace him with? Erick Strickland, a more effective backup throughout his career. He signed for the minimum. During the season, they signed Tim Hardaway, also for the minimum. I've seen Ollie play recently. Yes, he has improved. No, he has not improved that much. Decent backups like him are dime-a-dozen in both the NBA and minor leagues and can be had for much cheaper than what he'll earn, and overpaying Ollie would just prove the Rockets haven't learned from their mistake of giving Norris that much money. As for the Carter comparison: he's lasted in the NBA every bit as long as Ollie has, playing a similar role (although his skill set is not the same as Ollie's). Miami overpaid for his potential, and was bitten by it, like the Rockets have been bitten by Norris' contract. His contract was slightly larger, but the point remains valid: overpaying for players is the way teams run themselves into the ground and into trouble with the salary cap and luxury tax, despite the amount. Even if it's just a million dollars - over an entire roster, that's many millions of dollars in excess, as such a team is likely to repeat the same mistake several times. And, considering he'd be nothing more than a third stringer in Houston, what's the point of signing him and wasting his contract, one of which he's not worthy?
I am sensitive to cultural prejudices, but at some point, you have to ask yourself: "Which came first -- the chicken or the egg?" University (Newton) Blue
Milwaukee had no other PG to give up besides Cassell and that would have been giving up too much (ignoring the subsequent trade of Cassell for garbage). Indiana said they wanted him. Did you see that playoff series? He was Indiana's best player at the end of games. They wanted to go younger and I think that they already had Strickland under contract. Strickland sucked so bad that they had to get an Immobile Tim Hardaway to come out of his retirement (thankfully leaving ESPN). I don't think that overpaying by maybe 500,000 a year is a big deal for a guy who can help your team. Ollie is better than Norris at everything, once again the comparisons are invalid. What FA backup PG would you rather have? Even Lue will get far more than Ollie and Ollie is better at playing the point.
Ollie can't/won't shoot the three. A backup player that can shoot from the outside consistently and protect the ball at an average level is worth much more to this club than a backup player that has a great assist/to ratio but offers little as a scoring threat.
who cares if he doesn't shoot the three? he can shoot the two and the rockets have plenty of guys flinging up 3s and turning the ball over, they don't need another one. Damn!
For all those that are saying that Ollie isn't worth $2.5 million, I have to ask if they saw him play at all this year or even last year. You guys make $2.5 million seem like a lot of money. There aren't too many decent players that get paid that little (K. Malone aside). I thought Anthony Carter and Moochie were getting about $4 million/year. Ollie is better than both of them. I'm not saying Ollie is a great player, but he is a good player that plays his role. Also, if you guys have seem him play he's a very good defender. Possibly the best defender among backup PGs in the league.
They have it for ONE year, and that's assuming that all these players can play together (which they probably can), and that they all stay healthy (which I'm not sure about). Malone and/or Payton (probably both) will be gone next year I think... or at least will be much less useful. That certainly doesn't seem like a good enough reason to me to not search for some more young talent... but I don't think Ollie is the best place to find that talent.
if we are trading cat...and probobly rice and either griff or mo, for a banger and a combo pass first guard, we still need a backup point.
A bit of history on ollie in the last 2 years, He was with the Bulls in 01/02, he was specifically requested to be included in the trade to indiana, i.e. not just cap filler because indiana traded away their existing PG in travis best. Ollie played very well, especially in the playoffs when starting PG jamaal tinsley went MIA. Indiana did not sign Ollie because Milwaukee offered him a 2 YEAR CONTRACT, which indiana could not match because they needed their cap room for this years resigning of miller, miller and oneal. The reason Ollie is a free agent this year is due to a clause in his contract, either a player option or a trade clause allowing him free agency if he was traded. He played very well this year, as well as last year.
Ollie, per ESPN's David Aldridge, is seeking a 5yr, $15m deal, and the final two suitors are Cleveland and Milwaukee.
5 yr./15 mill does seem a little much because he is already 29 or 30. I think that a 4 yr. deal is best. I really think that he can help a team for 2.5 a season for 4 years. That 5th year at 5 mill extra doesn't seem like a good buy. However, I like Kevin so I hope he gets it, just not from the rox or bucks.
Too rich! Not so much the 3 million per year but the number of years. 5 years is WAY too much. That's where the Rockets got burned with Moochie. I think 3 years at 2.5 million a season (7.5 overall) is more like it.
u know, if we didnt have Mooch making 24 mil, 15 mil wouldnt sound too bad for a decent back up PG. Friggin Moochie, even hurts us in the offseason
No question. And it is not so much Moochie making 24 million. It is that he is doing it on a SEVEN year contract! It will take forever for him to come off the books. Never sign role players to more than 3 to 4 years. Never!
