The democratization of a Rocket summer. (Of course the purest democracy is a lynch mob where the majority rules.)
I'd open my arms to a Stromile Swift that wanted to join the fold ---he loves the Rockets*, is a FA, and would be the hard working four this team needs. I envision a blue-collar, lunch-pale guy that would benefit from constant double teaming of Yao and T-Mac. He could just jump over whomever is left under the bucket with defensive responsibilities. *this fact is likely overplayed by members of this board, especially me.
I am not in love with SS. Besides he would have to be overpaid not to be matched by Grizz, ala JPo. Dice is the man. Let his knees be ok'd and sign him fast.
Completely agreed. I don't understand how some people could let a menial role player like Cuttino Mobley or Kelvin Cato get in the way of this. When the Lakers were winning championships, when "experts" were asked to pick their favorite to win the title, the reply was always, "I don't see how anyone can beat the Lakers when they have the best inside player in the league and the best perimeter player." That's what we have a chance at assembling here and it's astonishing in itself that an opportunity like this has arisen. McGrady is every bit as good as Kobe Bryant. Yao can become the best inside force in the game and if he doesn't, we're not winning the title no matter who we get. Those Laker teams won with a supporting cast of Derek Fisher, Robert Horry, and Rick Fox. These types can be obtained with the MLE and the draft and can learn their niche over the years. Worried we won't get anymore talent once we trade all our assets? Look no further than this year's Lakers who added two future hall of famers who wanted to play alongside who? Two of the top 5 players in basketball.
Agreed. A foundation of Yao and TMac would be a force the likes of Shaq and Kobe. The only question I have is whether TMac is willing to work as hard on the defensive end as he does on the offensive end. Once we have a foundation like this, we would be able to fill in other role players, many of whom would probably choose to come here for MLE money if they know they are going to play with Yao and TMac. And if Hill brings even half of what he had in Detroit (granted, an if the size of Alaska), out issues at the 3 would be taken care of, TMac could take the 2, and JJ could either back up the 2 and 3 or take over at the point. That would only leave us needing to aquire a 4 and maybe a large 1.
Good post and valid concerns. However, if the aforementioned hadn't occurred, he wouldn't be available. No player in the league sans Tim Duncan doesn't have any question marks. For a player of McGrady's caliber, I take the risk. Back when he was on the trading block in Toronto in 2000, I strongly advocated swapping Mobley for him. The T-Mac doubters cited reports that he hated lifting weights and had a poor work ethic. Four years later he has blossomed into the 2nd best guard in basketball. I'm confident that with a change of scenery, a winning environment, and playing alongside one of the game's best big men, he can overcome all the doubts. I vote to wipe the roster clean in exchange for McGrady.
I was actually thinking that when we got Barkley. With Dream demanding a double team as well as Barkley all the other or any role players we had would be ok. We also had Drexler at that time. We lost Cassell, Horry and a couple other good role players. I know this is somewhat of a different circustance because we are thinking Yao and Steve can't coexist, but are we definitely sure that this one player with Yao will make any role player better. Does he make other players around him better because I have yet to see Yao do that either. The almighty T-mac was playing in the East and like someone said he didn't even carry that team to the playoffs and then complained he was too stressed out. If we do get T-mac I am going to be extremely concerned that we reload on role players to play around the two of them.
I can understand the break-the-bank thinking on McGrady. If there is an opportunity to get him, I can see strong arguments for it. But, it surprises me that more consideration isn't given to potential drawbacks of such a deal. These things will occassionally blow up in your face. Do you think Orlando thought they'd have won 17 games this year when they were signing the contracts with Grant Hill and McGrady? They thought they were a powerhouse for years to come. And look at our own Francis trade; we were incredibly fortunate to get him, paid a bargain price, got a great player that has carried the team for years, and fans can't wait to be rid of him for some reason. Barkley trade: great player, finally got us past Seattle, but two years later I was pining for Sam Cassell. That was a good gamble but it didn't pay off. It might happen again. Or, it could be like the Drexler trade. I'm just surprised no one is talking about McGrady's shortcomings.
Shhhhh, JV, you are in the middle of a stampede. I am part of that herd, but I hear you. Please continue running with us.
There are three key differences between the two situations. 1. Neither Charles Barkley nor Hakeem Olajuwon were near the player then that McGrady is now. At best, Barkley was a top 5 power forward in the NBA at age 34. Hakeem's production had dropped dramatically since his prime. Don't get me wrong, they were both still damn good players, All-Star players. But as Charles Barkley even said himself many times speaking of himself, Hakeem, and Clyde: "we're very good players, but we're no longer great players." Tracy McGrady, at age 24, is a great player. He's one of the 5 best in the game. This kid averaged 32ppg, 6rpg, and 5apg at age 23. Those are Michael Jordanesque numbers. Again, at age 23. He was triple teamed mercilessly and still managed to tear through and score 30 a game. The reason his team doesn't win is because his teammates are absolute garbage. He has nothing up there. Anyone who watches Magic games knows that Tracy can score at will. He starts off games trying to get his teammates going but when they disappoint he tries to turn it on. This is a 6'9 point guard in a small forward's body with a shooting guard's scoring ability. This is nothing like what Charles and Hakeem had been reduced to at that stage of their careers. 2. With Charles and Hakeem, you had two big men that needed the same left block. One is essentially rendered useless on any given play. T-Mac and Yao can play off of each other, kind of like Yao and Steve were supposed to. 3. Charles and Hakeem were paired for a 2 year window of opportunity. Not much familiarity, not to mention the 2 points above in that they were both well past their primes and couldn't coexist on the court. When pairing T-Mac and Yao, you do it with the hope that you can keep them together for 10 years and have them grow accustomed to each other.
Juan: I don't understand your point. There are potential risks in every walk of life. Considering that only 1 team can win the championship each year, most deals are considered failures. Sure the Grant Hill and T-Mac signing were failures but if I could go back, and I was Orlando and knew what they knew at the time, I'd do it again. I think the Barkley trade accomplished it's goal. I'm not quite sure what you mean about Francis. Basically, my point is that you have to dare to be great. You're not going anywhere playing things safe. We wouldn't be in a position where we'de think we could realisticall hope to contend for a title in the foreseeable future had we played it safe and drafted the proven Jay Williams. We took the risk on the slow, lanky, clumsy, jump shooting big man from China. It was dangerous as hell, but we knew this guy could potentially be something great and so we rolled the dice. I'm sure you're happy with the way things turned out. We know T-Mac has his downfalls, but we have to take that chance.
Francis gave up on Grizzlies from day one, that didn't prevent the Rockets from getting him. I don't see people complaining about the Francis trade now. I'd rather take the chance on a McGrady than a Francis considering the ability gap between them.
We need to get T mac, this sort of talent doesnt come along very often. Besides this we still will needa Point Guard that will pass the ball to to Yao Ming and T Mac. We had the Twin Towers now bring on the BIG Mac!
Actually, I think you understand it entirely, since you just reiterated it: every deal is a risk. Everyone is talking about what a no-brainer a T-Mac deal is. And, in many ways I agree. But, I just want to point out where the risks are, to go in with eyes open. One risk is the debilitating burden of Grant Hill. Another is McGrady's seeming lack of leadership qualities. I'll post others as I think of them (incidentally, the price for McGrady went up last night when Orlando won the lottery since the likelihood that he re-sign with the Magic increased incrementally with Okafor).
Summer wishlist: 1. Fire Carrol Dawson - Horrible signings, and draft choices, except when they were obvious (excluding mobley, but everyone gets lucky once) 2. Steve+NE1 xcept Yao for TMac (lake show has bit players around kobe/shaq) 3. Get rid of Mo Taylor, trade him for a draft pick I dont care, just get rid of him (hmm...we havent had a draft pick in how long...good job CD) 4. Oh yeah and if I didnt mention...FIRE Carroll Dawson!
Considering Tracy's situation, his shortcomings are understandable. Bad teams very rarely play good defense. If they do then they're a good team. Look at his frame though, the guys got quite possibly the best NBA body in the league for his position. He can do whatever his coach/situation motivates him to. Would you pass it to Drew Gooden or Howard if you're Tracy McGrady? I wouldn't either.
JV, I agree that there are risks to consider in getting McGrady. As thacabbage said, everything has risks. I also agree about McGrady's leadership qualities and his apparent attitude problem. And there's the risk of his health, the back problem. What I don't agree is your take on Grant Hill. He is a dead weight, not a risk. If we decide to take Hill, we know exactly what we get: a big contract of a useless player. Even if Hill can somehow play again, I do not forsee him to be able to command another big contract. Nobody, including the Rockets, will be willing to give him that kind of money in light of his history of injury (same situation with McDyess). So, If we decide to take him, it's because we believe this dead weight is worth it getting McGrady. I don't see any risk there.
"Risk" might not be the best term. But a lot of posters seem to be glossing over just how detrimental his cap hit is. And, I know the board will be complaining about the Rockets not wanting to sign free agents too. But, there is an element of risk in this: if Hill is too injured to play, he'll soon come off the books; but if he is well enough, he won't come off the books for several years.
