[Chron] Trade with Wolves unlikely (Rockets discussing Mike James deal)

we will rue this day when we decided to bring back Mike James.

 

Umm, no thank you. I ain't giving up all those people for a underrated undersized 2 Guard.

 

fixed.

 

Wouldn't CD and Van Gundy actually run this by TMac AND Yao first before they pull the trade? I mean, most teams wouldn't get their players' opinions involved, but you would think that, if there is bad history between James and McGrady is in fact true, CD or Van Gundy would ask for TMac's blessing for this deal first? Otherwise, there would be absolutely no point for CD to actually phone the Wolves. Think about that.

 

Noone is talking about a core player, at the most Bonzi or Snyder, probably not even either one (though I really think either will do).

MJ earned a championship on one of the teams who won over more talented teams primarily because of chemistry. If I recall he played about 15MPG in the playoffs and Larry Brown spoke very highly about him.

We have tried how many times to acquire him? Clearly our front office thinks he fits in well enough. Yes we traded him for Rafer, but now we would be trading for him to play with rather than for Rafer--as was our primary goal of this summers offseason.

Also, even first rate PGs only play 36-38 MPG in the playoffs (Parker, Terry). Playoff intensity is tough. Rafer is going to get tremendous defensive assignments. Rafer already isn't a great shot, certainly not something you want to worsen int he 4th quarter with fatigue. If we get a capable back-up PG we can keep his minutes to a much fresher level, like low to mid 30s. Also, if Rafer or Head get overwhelmed for spells in playoff pressure, we have a viable option to give us heavy minutes. (Remember Parker getting bailed out by guys like Claxton and Kerr)

As for reintegration, there is some concern, I agree. But for now it means all minutes that would go to JL3, a few from Head and giving Rafer bigger breathers (I doubt he would take issue and it would probably help to go from like 37 to 32). If Rafer and Head play well and James isn't happy with 12-15MPG than he goes to the doghouse, little harm to chemistry. But if Rafer or Head or Tmac get injured, need some lower minute loads, or just get into some scoring slumps--Mike James is a great option to pick up the slack. Right now there is a very big burden on those 3 and no room for health or fatigue or mental break downs for anyone of them with a lot of the season and playoffs left.

I'll take the heavy dose of insurance well over modest chemistry risk.

 

I didnt mean not get along as in MJ was taking TMax money or something. Not get along, as in on court chemistry. I distinctly remember this one game where James kept shooting and TMax was giving him dirty looks like crazy. Everyone picked up on this during the game thread or chat room. There is no bad blood, just bad chemistry. I don't want James anywhere near the team. His main role is one we already have in Luther Head.

 

Noone disagrees with your point that we need a real backup PG.

The point is that there are other PGs out there who would be a better fit. We do not need to be so fixated on Mike James.

 

I just cant see why people would be that opposed to trading for a backup PG who can hit a J and play a good 20 mins a game? Whats wrong w/ just getting deeper?? I hate mediocrity, I actually wanna beat Dallas and Phoenix this year!

 

And that's what I meant as well. You would think a player like McGrady--who's had his share of bad teammates--would come out and tell Jeff or Carroll, "Look, I don't want him on my team. I don't think we need him on our team. And I don't want to play with him" and it'd be a done deal. Sounds un-McGrady-like, but when you're team is doing this well, I think TMac has to worry about the chemistry...but apparently it isn't going to be a factor if we don't hear his opinion on it.

Dirty looks and getting angry on the court is commonplace. Did you go to the Rockets v. Mavs game? I don't know if you can see it on TV, but that last play where Luther had a mental lapse...McGrady was pretty pissed off and I thought Head was about to lose well...his head.

Am I a supporter for bringing James back in? Maybe. But I DO know that what I've seen from Bonzi the past few games is a different Bonzi. He's surely getting back into shape. And if Kirk ever gets PT, I know he can contribute (I still think he needs consistent 8-10 minutes so his game can be consistent). So dealing for James right now would be a "Oh ok, we just added another weapon to the arsenal". I wouldn't be against it, but I wouldn't be ecstatic about it like I would have been months ago.

 

Funny how despite the blown out of proportion hand waving instance 1) Mike James was one of our top 4 players on an undersized athletically challenged team that gave the Mavs fits, and 2) with all the time in the world to cnsult with Rocket players and coaches Mike James he was our #1 offseason target to share the PG load with Alston.

As for other PGs who handle the ball just as well, shoot from multiple spots on the floor just as well, defend as well, have equivalent playoff experience, and who are available today without breaking into rotation players or 1st round draft picks, I am all ears?

 

Everyone loved Mike James while he was a rockets. I would be happy to see him be our backup pg again. Especially if it only costs us Sura

 

This is exactly the point that some people are missing.

Let's pretend for a minute we're in the playoffs then [GOD FORBID] Rafer gets hurt. Who steps up in has absence? Luther "I can barely dribble with my head up/can't pass well at all" Head? John John? V-Span?! I don't think so. Regardless of the fact that McGrady is our primary playmaker, the point is simply too important of a position to be so thin at.

The bottom line is an addition at the point in some form has to happen. Do we really want to look back on the postseason and realize we lost a playoff series because we needed another playmaker but were too reluctant to make a low risk/high reward deal like this?

 

Opposed as I am to the idea of bringing back Mike James especially after what he did in the offseason, he would probably fit right in as a backup point guard. He's already familiar with JVG's system so there's no learning curve. The only real issue becomes whether JVG is going to try to expand his rotation to find minutes for James.

All that said, we'll have to wait and see, but my bet right now is that the deadline passes and nothing happens.

 

I do worry that we are adding a canerous player to the mix, and we would be stuck with him for 3 more years as his skills decline.

Basically we would be taking minutes away from Alston, Head, and Bonzi.....

I would probably do it anyway, but I am not sure it lets us matchup any better with Dallas....

If he were a 6'6-7" player who could create his own shot ala Stackhouse and Howard...then I would be happier.

But, he is an undersized two guard who can create his own shot as well as pass pretty well....

The chemistry issue can not be overlooked though....I find it ironic that Toronto is doing a lot better this year without James, and Minnesota is doing worse with him.....

The "no knuckleheads" comment by JVG is poinent.......it is a risk.....for sure, one I would do....but I worry that it can blow up and we are stuck with him for 3 more years.

DD

 

it's not blow out of porportion when its evident what kind of playing style Mike James plays with. He looks for his own shot and always takes it whenever he can. He is either the savior or the goat, nothing in between. We don't need that kind of attitude on this team right now. And our undermanned team gave fits to the Suns and Mavs, I don't see the difference, sometimes you catch teams off guard because they think they should blow you out of the building.

That has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads about the backup PG spot.

I am a fan of Duhon, Dickau, maybe Brevin Knight (his mid range really scares me). I also think Ridnour is available. Any of these PGs would give us what we need more than Mike James and his shoort first attitude.

 

Numerous other options have been discussed in trade threads for our backup PG spot rather than Mike James. We all recognize the need for a backup PG, we just dont agree Mike is the answer.

 

Thank you. I agree with your post, but these particularly stood out to me.

People who want him forget he's got 3 more years left.

 

But this is the only rumor that seems to have any teeth. We're two hours away from the trade deadline and this is the only recent rumor that seems to be floating around so i'm just going with it. I'm sure there's a few deals or so being discussed that the media never catches a wift of but those are also usually the deals that never get completed.

 

yeah, there's not much we can do about who the ROx decide to go after. We're simply having a fan discussion why Mike is or is not the answer, and why others would or wouldn't be the answer