[Chron] Keeping Scola becomes Rockets' top priority

Right, but you wouldn't be offering just Jeffries' and Battier's contracts. You'd be talking Hill, a couple of first rounders, including at least one from the terrible Knicks (who TOR/PHX would be making WORSE by taking Bosh/Amare off the board). Two or three lottery picks along with a chance to regroup for the summer of 2011 class is definitely worth taking the expiring contracts of Jeffries and/or Battier. It's not that the Rockets would be able to get Bosh for trash. I just don't think it'll take giving up Brooks or Martin.

 

i told u awhile back that ima give u a shoutout this summer when we DO get Bosh, wait and see grasshopper

 

wat a dumb statement.. seriously?

jus like Amare and Rip and Joe Johnson etc were softer after injuring their faces w/e man come with a more credible reason than that

 

At this point of time I would have to say DM priority:

1. Keep Scola
2. Get Bosh

You also have to add to Scola's value with his Team Chemistry, Lack of injuries, Toughness.

 

Keep in mind, though, that the Rockets will be competing against teams that are well below the cap and also against Dallas (which is armed with Erick Dampier's $13.2M NON-guaranteed contract, which is basically the same thing as $13.2M in cap room to Cuban). This means that, in order to take back Chris Bosh re-signed to the max (for him, $16.57M), the Rockets would have to send back about $13.2M or so in salary. In order for Toronto to want to eat that much money (who CARES if it's expiring contracts when the Raptors at that point wouldn't have ANY salary obligation relative to those contracts?), the Rockets' offer will have to be SIGNIFICANTLY better than any other team's.

For instance, the Bulls or Heat could simply offer their recently drafted first rounder for Bosh. Each of those teams has the cap room to make that swap.

On the other hand, if the Rockets offered, say, Jordan Hill, Shane Battier, Jared Jeffries and a future first rounder for Bosh, would Toronto really want to essentially pay $14M+ for that first rounder? Probably not. Hence, the need to include as little salary as possible (which still MUST be at least $13.2M or so) while including as many assets as possible to make it worth Toronto's while.

For those who don't think that Toronto has any say in this matter, you're crazy. Even if Bosh threatens to bolt and leave the Raptors with nothing, the team STILL isn't going to take back $14-15M in salary just to "get something" in return for Bosh. They could simply call Bosh's bluff (knowing that Bosh NEEDS Toronto if he wants that extra $30M on his contract via sign-and-trade) and wait for a more appealing offer. Heck, even just a first rounder from Chicago or Miami might be better than many of the offers that those in the "Toronto has no choice" camp on this BBS are proposing.

 

You're not paying $14m for that first rounder, though. You're paying $14m for the first rounder, plus Hill, plus likely another first rounder. Also, for a team like Toronto which openly admits that cap room isn't as important to them (due to the difficulty in luring a star free agent to Toronto), expiring contracts to trade at the deadline for an Igoudala-type (think Houston's situation this year with Tracy) might be the best way to go.

I don't think anyone's saying that Toronto is going to take back that salary just to get something. It's whether giving up a Brooks, Martin or Scola is necessary. There's a ton of value in Jordan Hill, Chase Budinger and two potential lottery picks. There may be some value in Trevor Ariza. Those assets aren't trash. In fact, I'd rank a combination of those among the better hauls in S&T history.

And again, you're underestimating the potential impact of Bosh and his management team in this. Chicago, Miami, Dallas - they can offer all they want in a trade, but Bosh still holds a lot of cards. If he tells Toronto that he's either going to Houston or New York, and that he feels he can make up for the $30m lost with the Knicks through endorsements - that definitely gives Toronto a lot to think about. Could they still call his bluff? Sure. But I'd hardly consider it a done deal, especially if they're getting Hill, Budinger/Ariza, multiple potential lottery picks, expiring contracts, etc.

 

Yes, Hill, Bud and the picks have value (btw, my hypothetical only involved one pick, so please don't add picks to the deal and then criticize me for not accounting for the extra picks). But are those guys worth Toronto spending an extra $13M or so? Maybe. But certainly not an easy decision for the Raptors. Your point about the value of expiring contracts is well-taken, but I think Colangelo would rather have the cap room. Hell, he may just want to recruit the best players from overseas. He doesn't need expiring contracts for that!

Of course, Bosh holds a ton of cards. But the idea of him "holding Toronto hostage" is an extreme exaggeration. If Bosh wants to leave $30M on the table, then more power to him. But at the end of the day, he'll want that money, and Toronto will get something in return. Whether it is a package from the Rockets, or a future first rounder from Chicago or Miami, or possibly even a Dallas package of Dampier/Beaubois, that's anybody's guess.

 

The $30 million he will be leaving on the table is lessoned if he goes to a state like Texas with no state income tax.

Lots of his money gets eaten up by paying Canadian taxes.

DD

 

Oh, I completely understand your hypothetical, no criticism there. But since you responded to me, I was just mentioning it along the lines of the original scenario I presented, which definitely involves multiple picks. I agree it wouldn't be an easy decision from Toronto's perspective, but if Bosh wants to make it happen and has an astute management team, I think there's a good chance to make it work. And yes, I agree Colangelo would rather have the cap room, if things were even. However, when you combine the value of expiring contracts plus the other young assets from HOU... it might tip the scales. At the least, it's worthy of a lot of thought.

I agree, he's likely to take the money. It's exactly why I was never been a fan of the original Rockets plan of 2010 summer cap room, and why teams with cap room tend to waste it (see Detroit last year). However, if there's ever a year in which the hostage scenario could work, it's this one. Everyone in the NBA, for better or worse, has heard for YEARS about all the endorsement money the likes of LeBron and Wade could get by bolting to NY, and how that could override the extra year and smaller raises they could get with their own teams (or through S&T). Do I buy it? Personally, no - especially not in an age of globalization. But (and I know this is just my personal opinion) I think the point has been made to the extent that teams will consider New York much more of a threat than a typical hypothetical team with cap space (but no S&T assets). If Bosh, LBJ or Wade want a S&T somewhere, I think they stand a much better chance of successfully leveraging NYK than usual. Again, not saying it's automatic, but I think the possibility is there. And if it's leveraged correctly, I think the Rockets can make a compelling enough offer for Toronto to avoid taking the risk without involving Brooks, Martin or Scola.

 

I've thought for a while now that one key for getting Toronto to be happy with a Bosh deal would be taking a contract off their hands. Either Turgoulu or Calderon, if they're unhappy with one or both of them. For the reason bolded above.

Of course, this likely involves a package that basically involves Brooks, Hill, and all our expirings(Battier, Jeffries, Chuck resigned, Andersen). Which I'd personally do in a heart beat. And I think Toronto would quickly accept too if they want out of Calderon/Turgolu contract. But such a trade would have severe luxury tax implications. Something that Les really needs to bite the bullet on.

But if Toronto really likes its roster, then you're right. Our offer may not be enough assuming they can get better options elsewhere.

 

I would prefer us take Calderon's contract of Toronto's hands if we are giving up Brooks and ask Toronto if they would be more interested in Ariza than Battier from a basketball standpoint (seeing as how they were going to offer Ariza the MLE last offseason before they overpaid for Turkoglu)

 

I was just thinking out loud in the Dish about whether Manu getting that $38 million dollar/3 year extension just drove up Luis's own view of his value. Manu's a good friend. What should Scola really expect for a 3 year extension? Do more years (4 or 5 years) affect the cost per season for Morey and the Rockets? I've been thinking that Scola's new contract would be a bit more than the MLE, but closer to it than $10 million a year. Manu's offer from the Spurs shocked me a bit.

 

Manu was an unrestricted free agent so he had leverage against the Spurs. I think they will later regret it, especially because of Manu's age and health.

Scola ,on the other hand, is a restricted free agent, and unless a team overpays for him, Morey is definetly gonna re-sign him the moment the offseason hits.

 

I don't know if it will affect anything but I wouldn't balk at, for example, offering an extra year in Scola's case. He probably can play till he is 35 with his playing style.

Like I said in the Bogut thread, you don't injure yourself when you don't jump, dunk or try to hang on the rim smashing your elbow in the process.

 

Just getting this ready for the off season

 

I don't know what the spurs were thinking, but i agree that Scola has a lot less leverage than Manu. 4 years 36 mil or there about, should get the Scola deal done. It shouldn't be a big problem, the only question is if the rockets feel a need to upgrade.

 

At the trade deadline, I was thinking Scola would garner a deal between $7 mil and $9 mil a year. I think now it's more likely to be on the higher side of the range... maybe the first year being $8 mil but with increases annually, making the average salary closer to maybe $9.5 or $10 mil. He's been playing really well since Landry's departure.

Yes, he's restricted, but lets remember the restriction only applies to the NBA. There can easily be a Spanish, Greek or Russian team willing to pay him a significant sum to play for them (See Josh Childress).

 

Very good point.

 

Good point. That's why Scola was hinting on the possibility of playing "in the world."

 

Wasn't he referring to the World Championships?