Trading Scola for the 20th pick not only hurts us now, it hurts us in the future. That is what happens when you dump players for way below market value. If you want to move up in the draft, why not simply package our pick and assets with Scola, instead of flipping him for a useless pick first? And if we want to use our players to move up in the draft, we need to build as much value in them as possible. The only way to increase everyone's value is to WIN. That is the reason to have a team that could potentially win 50 games, but never the championship. So that all our players are valued by the rest of the league, and we can use them to move up in the draft when a potential superstar presents itself.
Did people honestly think once Yao came back we would be a title contender? We're in the same position now that we have been all year.
20th pick was purely hypothetical so if we can flip him for a higher pick then even better or if you want to wait to do it on draft day, perfect. I will disagree on his value, all teams know what Scola can do. He has proven his worth on winners, mediocre teams and possibly rebuilding teams now, so winning more games won't influence anyone's opinion of the guy. He is what he is, and the same can be said for Martin and Battier. AB and Lowry are interesting and those guys may fall into your category, though.
To answer your question, . . . no. The last time a team traded into the top 3 was in 2005, when the Utah Jazz traded the #6 PICK, along with two other first rounders (in the early 20s) to Portland in exchange for the #3 pick. If Utah had even had the #7 or #8 pick, I don't think that deal gets made. Teams holding top-3 picks are not interested in trading down by more than a couple of spots. And there's no way that the Rockets finish with one of the top 8 or 9 picks unless they win the draft lottery.
