If the Rockets had acquired Roy on draft day, should they have kept him, or trade him to Memphis for Battier?
There are too many uncertainty in this question. it's like saying shall we draft that 7-6 chinese big man and bet our first pick on him? it's a bet, a bet no one can see the result.
IBTL- Enough of this hypothetical crap. Seriously another Rudy Gay thread ust popped up as well. Enough is enough.
Whoa Whoa now don't go crazy lol. But yea this thread is worthless. But if I could get Roy + Gay for Battier, Um yea I would do that in a heartbeat.
Battier is better for this team right now, but eventually (2-3 years), Gay will be much better and Roy may be as well.
for this team skip and battier > gay, swift, and roy... getting rid of swift was one of the most overlooked pieces to that deal; i think that has helped us immensely on the court and in the clubhouse with chemistry...
Stro was a big drag on our team IQ average. In all seriousness, I agree with you. Getting rid of Stro was a gain by loss.
I'll go with Battier. I'm pretty sure that had we drafted Roy we would have kept him. I would have been happy about that at the time but things worked out perfectly. IMO, Battier has more impact on this team than anyone drafted in 2006 could have for at least the next 2-3 years. Roy seems like he will be a nice player but nobody and I mean nobody compliments our 2 superstars like Battier. He takes so much pressure off of Tmac at the defensive end and hits big shots. This team doesn't have time for a guy to develop nor does it have a place for a guy who needs the ball to be effective (I'm talking more about Gay here).
I was one of the more active Battier defenders early on, but I have to say I think I'd have kept Roy. Battier probably helps us more this year, but I think Roy is too much of a sure thing long term to pass him up.
Roy looks like he's gonna be a pretty solid player in the years to come, but do we really need another talented SG. Jesus, we have T-Mac, Battier, Snyder, Luther Head (ahaha-SG), we don't need another guy trying to fit into that quagmire. Battier is better for this team now, better for this team 5 years from now. We don't need a 3rd scorer who is gonna be looking for around 20-25 points a night, we already have two superstars... adding a third doesn't mean we're just gonna be a lot better. We wouldn't be because that doesn't fit our system or team need. Battier does in every respect. Plus, our 3rd scorer has to be someone able to score often but not constantly trying to drop 30 taking away from Yao and Mac. We've got a couple of guys like that, so I really think we are better off without Roy. Now if T-mac somehow retires or is forced to retire because of injury in the next 5 years then yeah... we'll wish we had Roy, but I doubt we'll ever really regret not keeping Rudy GAY.
Ok well: Battier < Roy + Gay + (0^10 is still 0). Um Roy is a good player already and is going to be a superstar in this league for years to come. Gay has all the potential in the world, which people don't like to hear but I believe he is gonna be a very solid player in the future. So we get 1 player who is good now and 2 players who will be AWESOME in the future, for what I believe is a Very Good player now. Yea its worth it. A Roy + Gay combo + maybe a few additions here and there could make a very capable future championship team.
No doubt they're all good individual players. But my thinking is who is tbe best to complement Yao and Tmac, and that would be Shane. If you put them with our best guys, it will be chaotic.
you have it mixed up....roy will be much better and gay may be as well. roy is a baller as long as his health problems are not an issue. gay might become good or might become a stromile swift. if you haven't taken the time to watch roy play then you should. him and bargnani are the 2 best in this years rookie class.
well with the record we have you really cant complain about the results.....so i say pull the trigger......i will have to admit though, that is a much different tune than i was barkin when they actually did it!
