I think he;s that or he;s not much. If he regains his explosion, he's a no. 2, big if. If he doesn't he's a smaller 4 with a limited repertoir who never really had to get boards on positioning before, and there would be many guys I'd want ahead of him.
I doubt if JVG will want him becuase of his injuries. One more hit and he could be done for good. Stay away from him.
we dont need a person who is most likely prone to injury and is not the same no more. If he wants to sign for the mininmum I wouldnt mind having him.
if we are able to get a starting PF some other way (TE?) and then move mo for a back-up PG (daniels & james) then i would say we could sign McDyess as a back-up. reserve minutes would suit him best. give him 18-24 a night, and he may be able to play the whole season. as far as contract offers: we would most likely offer 2 yrs vets min with a team option after the first year. he would most likely ask for 3 years @ $3M. my guess is we can agree on 2 years, team option after 1 but about half of the MLE ($2M).
Looking at his stats per year doesnt say much, especially when he was injured. New York played him while he was still injured because their gm was about to be fired. Shortly after being shipped off to phoenix he went straight to the injured list. For about the last month of the season it seems he played pretty well with a couple games with double digit rebounds and points. He averaged about 30mpg in the month of march with reaching 40mpg on two occasions. Its only a small number of games but they seem promising. Only problem I saw was that mcdyess had some foul trouble in some games. It seems many people here agree that we should gice mcdyess a chance, but at what cost. Is the full MLE too risky? With the uncertainty of trades I would go after Mcdyess instead of Barry with the MLE. Last time I checked Barry wasnt the youngest player in free agency and missed 23 games. I find them both equally risky since Barry wants around the MLE and 4 years, while he can probably ask Mcdyess for less years. If steve is still here theres no reason to go after barry unless we want him backing up the 1 & 2 and at the full MLE and for that price I would want a starter. If steve stays here our biggest hole is at the 4 and Mcdyess is a possibility to fill it. If steve is indeed traded then by all means we should go after barry.
I wonder how big the check was that Andy Miller wrote to Jonathan Feigen for that glowing endorsement of McDyess. Of course he wants to play closer to home now... he can't go much farther than that on his legs.
Stats don't tell the whole story, but those were his numbers and I don't see them improving that much from there.
Clutch, it is funny that in back to back weeks we have had first an article ripping T-Mac saying it is better if he DOESNT come here, he isn't a JVG type of guy. And then this week we have an article from Feigen on McDyess (the same McDyess that is a HUGE question mark) that is complimentary as you said. Where is Feigen's head at??
I think you're being irrational. 1) There wouldn't be 15 minutes for Mo if we simply signed McDyess. 2) MoT wouldn't accept that kind of role. 3) What are the chances, really, that Nachbar will be better than Croshere? If Nachbar turns out AMAZING, and takes ALL the SF minutes, and that leaves only backup PF minutes att he 4 for Croshere, then that's what Croshere will do. I don't know why you can't see that MoT simply won't play more than 10 minutes if we sign McDyess, while Croshere has an excellent chance at doing so. MoT is a goodp layer. But what's the point if he doesn't play? What's the use of having Micheal Jordan if he's going to sit on the bench?
Sane... weird thing... you and DavidS are two posters that I always find myself agreeing with. but today both of you have said something that made me go Maybe my idle mind has gone crazy but I feel like MoT is better for the team than Croshere. Other than the fact that MoT probably makes more money? Is that even true? I remember Croshere signing a ridiculous contract after the LA v. Indiana finals something like eight years, $50 mil... I don't think we want to touch that. About McDyess... I mean the NBA is a business of calculated risks. I don't know enough about him for an accurate risk analysis... but if the price is right... you do it. But back to topic. 1. If we get McDyess... MoT will still get his minutes... assuming we move Cato. Otherwise there will be too big of a logjam at the PF position. But if we do move Cato... MoT will still get 25 minutes a game because Mcdyess shoudn't and will not play 40 minutes a game. 2. Austin Croshere played 13 minutes a game last year. Averaging 5 points and 3 rebounds. What is the difference between that and Scott Padgett production? 3. What are the chances of Boki being better than Padgett? My outlook on Boki is not all that optimistic. But for me the answer to the above is "HUGE." A lot of people have the image of Croshere tearing up the Lakers stuck in their head... when he was one of the league's top sixth men. But recently he's just plain stunk man... I don't see how he would really help the Rockets at all. We need a solid rebounder at 4, and a pure shooter at 1,2, or 3. Croshere doesn't really fit the bill.
Not sure how Croshere came into this thread. This is a McDyess thread. About MoT. One thing I hate (pet peeve) is a PF that can't rebound. McDyess, with his injuries, may not be the answer to MoT's rebounding problems... But it will have to be addressed sooner or later. If his injuries get better, at least he could offer us some versatility at the PF spot. What I like about MoT is that he can shoot very good. I just wish we could find a PF that can hit the 15 footer AND *friken* rebound. McDyess used to be that type of player. Not sure if he still is. Croshere? Who knows? He needs a pay cut to motivate him. But I still like his game (regardless of what his limited stats; this is assuming we get T-Mac, though). Anyways, the only way that McDyess will work is if he signs a "cheap" contract within a limited time frame.
yipengzhao, 1) You are assuming that we move Cato, and that wasn't part of my assumption. However, if Cat ois not moved, then there is no room for MoT. If Yao plays 33 minutes, that leaves 15 minutes at C. If McDyess plays 30, that leaves 18 at PF. Meaning, there's 33 backup minutes at backup PF and C. We know that neither Cato or MoT will accept anything less than 25 minutes without demanding a trade or decereased production per minute. I think it's way more feasible to give all these minutes to either MoT or Cato. MoT makes more, and Cato is as good defensively as MoT is offensively. Since MoT can't backup the C spot, I'm safely assuming MoT will be the odd man out, just like Kenny Thomas was when he was here his final season. Remember, KT was probably the best player that season out of our PF's, but he was the odd man out, and we HAD to trade him. Again, there was no assumption that we move Cato. If we don't move Cato, we might as well trade MoT for someone who can play at the 3 as well as the 4. 2) Croshere has been good given minutes. Not great, but definitely good. He has averaged 10+ ppg twice in his career, and his career average is 7.2ppg. Padgett has not eclipsed that in a single season. Why? I honestly don't know. But clearly, there's a reason why Padgett has never played more than 17 minutes, and the coaches know it. MoT is probably better than Croshere, but in this scenario, we're much better off trading for Croshere. We just made the playoffs, and are aiming to go higher. We can' afford to let Boki develop at his pace. Besides, even if Boki BLOWS EVERYONE AWAY, that means Croshere plays his 8-10 minutes off the bench. Which is what MoT would play all season. The difference is, if we keep MoT and Boki is terrible again, we'd be hoping we had an overpaid SF rather than an overpaid PF. I'm not arguing that Croshere is better. I am saying that MoT wouldn't play any significant minutes if he stayed, but we can cover all our bases by trading for Croshere. it's simply a case of swapping overpaid players so that you can maximize their contribution to your team.
yipengzhao, I forgot to mention that Croshere actually put in some good minutes against the Pacers in the Eastern Finals. Like I said, when given the minutes, he does what he's asked. He can really space the floor and is a better rebounder than MoT. If we sign McDyess, I'd rather pay Croshere 8M to play 25 minutes than pay MoT 9M to play around 10 minutes.
yes McDyess used to be a good shooter. he even had a smooth fallaway shot. and he has range. somebody posted earlier that McDyess was a bad shooter... and I was going to say that's not true... so I'll do it now. a lot of people think he's a marcus camby type... that's not true... McDyess had a legit post game AND could shoot from the outside... you have to to average 20 ppg. how much i'd pay for him depends on how well we do going after other FAs. If we get nothing... then I'd take a risk on him. 5 mil/yr for 2 years, team option on third year maybe. but yeah... you'd have to move either Cato, or MoT.
... i guess... but IS he a better rebounder? not by much. i looked up his contract... 7 years, $51 mil. WOW. who are the geniuses that came up with THAT one? i just wouldn't want him on our books for another 3 years. i guess there are scenarios in which Croshere could be valuable... like if we get Elton brand, somehow get ride of Cato and MoT for guards / small forwards... then Croshere can come in and play backup 3/4 for 20-25 minutes a game... I dunno... I'm just really not a fan of his contract or his skills.
Boy, Feigen has really fallen off lately. First he suggests we trade for Okafor without giving up Francis, claims Francis is a JVG type guy, bashes T-Mac and now comes up with this: "Imagine someone stronger than virtually every power forward, able to knock down Karl Malone and jump shots, outwork anyone, someone averaging double-figure rebounds who would be a simple, no-frills, everyday professional." I used to like Feigen. What the hell happened?
crosh had 1 good game against the pistons, all in all, he got 6 and 5 in the series and shot 34% from the field. for all 13 games of the playoffs, he got 5 and 3 a game on 35% shooting. and thats against eastern conference 3/4s sheed, odom, mccarty. substitute that next year for duncan, garnett, malone ect...
agree... in one of two games i watched... 30+ minutes, no points, or maybe two points... something ridiculous like that. but the game before he was really good, like 20 points or something... so i guess that's how he earned the PT. i know... i was just trying to work in a seinfeld quote.
