Can we finally put to rest that the Gasol/Brown trade was 1 sided

I think your assessment is just as flawed as his. Memphis drafting Thabeet doesn't show anything about how they feel about Marc Gasol. If I remember correctly Thabeet was drafted purely as a long term project, and was not going to see a lot of floor time, so how can you automatically assume Memphis showed no confidence in Gasol. Your argument can only stand if Thabeet was NBA ready, which he clearly was not.

Athletic big men are so hard to come by these day, you grab whatever you can in the draft. It is illogical to assume drafting a center when you already have a solid starting center = showing lack of confidence in your current center.

 

You are right, except that they gave up on Thabeet after just 1.5 year. (It is arguable that they gave up far earlier than they actually could trade him.) Either their "long term" isn't very long or their talent evaluation sucks. That comes back to the point. Did they really think Gasol was that good when they traded his big brother away? Obviously not. The fact that he pans out surprises everybody, including Memphis.

 

According to me, if you are satisfied with your C playing C, then you don't draft another dude to play C. That's completely different than drafting a C to play alongside the C that you currently have. Either you have poor reading comprehension skills, are very dense, or are deliberately trying to twist words.

The rest of your post requires no response because you can't get this basic logic down. The Rocket's plan was always to play the two alongside each other, similar with Robinson/Duncan or Ellis/Curry. That's nothing like the Grizz situation.

 

Actually it does. If you are satisfied with your young prospect at a certain position then you don't spend a high draft pick on a dude to play that same position. Especially when you are a lotto team with holes. But again, I would love to see some examples of teams drafting this way. They simply don't.

This would be an accurate assessment if Gasol was an older player, not a younger top prospect like some are trying to spin here. I'll go on record as saying if your team is bad and you are satisfied with a young guy at a certain position, then it's pretty stupid to use a high pick on the same position. And we don't see teams doing this....because it makes no darn sense. You don't use a #2 pick on a long term project at C when you are content with your 24 yr old center. And for the slow, dense ones....you don't do this when you plan on them both playing center.

If it's so illogical then it shouldn't be very hard to find some concrete examples of teams using high draft picks on positions they consider themselves to be covered in.

 

They gave up on Thabeet due to the need to add ammo for a playoff run (unexpected injury to Rudy Gay and quick need for some instant help). They were winning and couldn't afford to wait for a long term project to develop. They didn't trade him for a future pick, they traded him for an established player who fills a need.

I still feel that they had a plan in mind when they made the Gasol deal otherwise they would've held out for something better (ie. WAIT TIL THE DRAFT). I don't think it was to shed Gasol's contract because they picked up Randolph the season after (who I believe is making as much, if not more, money than Pau). I don't think that Wallace is very surprised.

 

And this is what you don't understand: Sampson was not a pf. The rockets might as well have been the ones to cut his career short playing him there.

I have continually made the point that their PLAN was not just to play them along side of one another, but to play them at a specific position, namely they wanted hakeem to play pf.

You continually ignore that point, and stick with the broader point of just playing them together as if that is all that matters.

Well newsflash: when sampson blows out his need because one of the players you drafted threw a hissy fit and demanded that he play another position than what you asked him to, and make no mistake sampson's career was cut short because the rockets could not convince hakeem to play pf, even though he was the more suited of the two to do so. Their plan had failed, and they comprised there on original plan, which was not only to have them play together, but hakeem be the pf and it cost them sampson's career.

 

This is most bullshet thing I've ever heard. A player's career was ended because he played between C/Pf..

 

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/feb/02/gasol-for-what/

Fans and press were generally not happy (comments below article...not always the msartest fans but gives an idea...).

Te be fair, though, Wallace indicated shortly after the trade that Marc was seen as the big key of the trade:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/apr/11/marc-gasols-potential-has-griz-eager/

 

This is what you fail to comprehend. Regardless if Thabeet was put on the bench or Hakeem became a starter, each player had a role that their respective teams required them to play.

There was talk, by the grizzlies organization of having Gasol play pf and thabeet center, when thabeet developed.

In fact, hollins played thabeet with gasol in that very configuration the year thabeet was drafted. The point is that if they played them together then obviously their goal for the two were not one or the other, but both on the same floor at the same time. Just like your rockets did with sampson-hakeem. So your point that they didn't think gasol would be all he became could not be based on the thabeet drafting as you continually believe.

Thabeet was always seen as a long term project.

 

Dude, you are quoting the commercial appeal? LOL. Go read the grizzlies boards. I would pull up the threads but it's not worth it.

 

Olajuwon was the center from the beginning. Even though he was smaller, Sampson's game was more outside and Olajuwon was pretty much only inside at the time. From 1984 article:

Further, Sampson hurt his back in the 86 Finals because he was undercut for a rebound. Then he got out of alignment and started having knee troubles. The final blow came when he slipped on a wet spot on the floor. None of that is because he played at the 4.

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2006_4062974

 

Did hakeem threaten management or not?

 

Yes, I thought the main newspaper for Memphis would be a good source to read a Memphis-based column about the trade. I understand the people who post after an article are not the best, but it still gives an idea as to the local reaction. I am sure plenty did not like Pau because he was seen as soft and not a winner, but most seem to have only seen Kwame and low picks as the replacement. Even if Houton fans think Martin is soft and a flopper, they would not want him trade for Q Richardson and pick #30.

But, again, I was trying to help you by the Wallace quotes where the basketball people saw Marc Gasol as important.

 

Did I make that argument (or not)?

Sorry, I don't care about the draft discussion with Icehouse...just didn't know why you claimed Sampson was hurt because he played at the 4.

 

The reality is that theories about sampson's knee and why he blew it out are vast. I think Hakeem himself blamed it on management, probably to absolve himself of the guilt he felt about it.

Anyway you look at it, having sampson guarding the more athletic 4s could only spell trouble.

But once again, the rockets brass did not what to be seen as having made a mistake and as long as sampson went along with it: it was all gravy. That is until someone got hurt.

Hakeem was really immature back then.

 

Personally, I think he would have gotten hurt no matter what. He was skinny and frail and hated contact. Playing in the post was not good for him, either. He got hurt going for a rebound (his back). He said he liked Hakeem inside so he didn't have to rebound and block shots. Does that sound like a center? He liked to shoot outside and dribble the length of the court and try to be a point guard.

 

It was fun while it lasted. The rockets nearly beat the best team ever formed with it. It was too bad that sampson got hurt.

 

(fyi, you're conveniently leaving out the 2 1st round picks also included in the deal in your statement above)

But I don't think Memphis was getting better offers than that if you consider all those pieces. People are saying Memphis was stupid and didn't get the best they could.. but a 21 year old top 20 pick, a top 10 prospect, and 2 1st round picks IS a pretty solid package. Maybe not completely worth Pau, but that's arguable. And people are trying to present this as if it's not even close to acceptable as a trade

 

What you don't understand is Sampson not wanting to be a PF, or Hakeem not wanting to be a PF, or any of those guys personal feelings about the matter....NONE OF THAT MATTERS BECAUSE THE ROCKETS PLANS WERE TO PLAY THEM ALONGSIDE EACH OTHER. So unless you are arguing that the Grizz planned to do the same with Thabeet/Gasol, then your comparison fails.

If Dream is playing PF then Sampson is playing C and they are still playing alongside each other. How does that change anything and make your comparison relevant?

That is all that matters when my point is a team won't draft a dude to play C when they already have who they want to play C playing C. Substitute any position in that sentence and it still holds true.

Yes, one was a starting role and the other wasn't. One was drafted to play alongside the other dude at his position, not to back him up or overtake him for the position, which would put the other guy (Gasol) on the bench.

That would be even dumber than the Gasol trade.

If the plan was to have them both on the court at the same time then they would have both been starting at the same time. Oh....kinda like Hakeem/Sampson were. I call BS on this.

As another poster has explained to you, Hakeem's thoughts really aren't relevant to the Rockets planning to play them alongside each other.

This will be my last response to you about the matter because everyone can clearly see that you are just spewing garbage now (related to this topic).

 

Because they were crap picks and don't really show that the trade was a good one. They were near 2nd rounders.

No, it's not when you compare it to what a superstar usually gets you. There is no way you can look at what the Jazz got for D-Will or what the T-Wolves got for KG and say a top 20 pick, a possible top 10 prospect (that the team tried to replace) and 2 near 2nd rounders is a great package.