The point was they were acquired because of the superstar we drafted before. Not like now, The Rockets have been trying to get Bosh, Melo, Paul, Williams....all falling short.
Favors is trash. Wall and Cousins are the only good players in last years draft and Blake Griffin wasn't drafted last year... he was 2009 and injured the entire yr which is why he's a rookie this year.
Sorry Merla I guess I was trying to point out that Rockets are unable to get anybody called a Megastar / Superstar / Tier 1 talent because they are a free agent or an upcoming free agent and will agree to a sign and trade to Houston. Houston does not have the Glitz Glamor / History / Lifestyle / Culture / Weather like L.A. Boston, N.Y. Miami... We need help through the draft "OR" a Tier 2 talent like Iggy / Danny / etc that will blossom into a Tier 1 talent.. For instance Kevin is a Tier 2 talent but he will never become that 1 guy (Closer, Finisher, Clutch, Take over the game)
I like the Jazz's version of tanking. If you are going to be mediocore blow it up and get assets to try to get better ASAP. That beats being average for an extended period of time.
Thats the point. Until the Rockets get a superstar/great player the chance for trading for another is slim. Getting Yao through the draft might have been luck but the chance of getting lucky through draft is 100X greater than trade. You know how you get lucky? By having less wins. You can do that by playing your young players and trading the veterans.
You've determined the entire draft class outside of Cousins and Wall isn't good in one year? Turner, Wes, Monroe could all become something. If the Rockets had Turner they could at least offer him for Paul next year and give the Hornets the option of rebuilding quickly like what the Nets just did. I'm quite aware of when Blake was drafted. It's not even the point i'm trying to make.
This. What the anti-tankers/rebuild people need to understand that every win now hurts our chances from getting into the top 10 or even 5 in the draft. Why? Because of the lottery, the more we lose the better our chances are...even if it is just 1% increase it is better than a meaningless win while watching the playoffs. That 1% could literally be the difference between drafting 13th or drafting 8th...and that could be the difference between drafting another player like Brooks-Budinger...or drafting a true all-star like Roy.
Also I just found this.... http://espn.go.com/nba/lottery2011/mockdraft We are only 5 games ahead the Clippers in the L column and 5 games behidn the Jazz for the 8th seed. So all this too late to tank when we can still get in the top 10 is not true.
I am all for tanking a couple of seasons in order to take a chance to draft a superstar. Look at what Spurs had done to get Duncan then on to championship material? You stay put and you keep lingering in mediocrity.
The Jazz would indeed be a very good example of tanking. They lost the coach that was the only person keeping them from irrelevance and then they turned around and traded the only player that has some superstar potential after that. That, folks, is tanking. For all intents and purposes the Jazz are finished and that franchise will be in for a very very long period of mediocrity. They may never even get out of their hole unless they sell the franchise to a new ownership and move the team. They are done.
Once you have top 5 pick, you also can trade for a star player, like Nets did, or Celtics did. As "trash" as Favors might be, somehow Nest can turn him into D Williams. Doesn't this tell us something about the draft picks?
You think the Nets tanked last season to get Favors? I think they just sucked, you think it's even possible for the current squad to duplicate what the Nets did last season?
First of all, the idea that you need to win the lottery to score big in the draft is silly. Since 2000, here are a few of the lottery picks outside the top 3: -Joe Johnson -Richard Jefferson -Amare Stoudemire -Chris Bosh -Dwyane Wade -Iggy -Chris Paul -Brandon Roy -Kevin Love -Brook Lopez -Steph Curry That's not even counting guys who are very solid contributors, like Joakim Noah or Caron Butler. The higher you draft, the better your chances of getting the player you like, especially if your front office has an eye for talent like ours. By playing the young guys, you give them more in-game experience to develop while reducing mileage on your older, more fragile players like Scola and Martin, and if all it costs us is a few wins in a season where we'll miss the playoffs anyways, I can live with that. Second, you don't have to make the pick yourself! As we've seen, draft picks are valuable commodities in trades. The better our pick, the better our odds of trading for a proven star or packaging it to move up in the draft. Third, even a future bust can have value. Will Favors be good? I have no idea. But his potential is intriguing, and he's a desirable commodity because of it. Our pick doesn't have to turn into a star for us to cash in.
what's the point? sucked to suck. tanked to suck. what's the difference? the No 3 pick is the truth. duplicate what? There are 5 top 5 picks each every season. it is not hard to get if you know how to suck. Rockets current squad is not far from being the bottom of the league.
Since you advocate losing to get a top 5 pick and you are not even sure if Nets even did it, why use Nets as an example. Tanking is losing on purpose, and I highly doubt Nets did that. They tried to win every game and failed, which is why they got the No. 3 pick. and Rockets are 4 games under .500 what were the Nets? what is the the record of the bottom of the league?
Depends on what they do with their draft picks. To be honest, they're still in a better position than we are.
Very much so. Did they trade their first round pick to the Nets? If not they win this trade, they are getting 2 lottery picks and one that will be top 10 and plus 2012 GSW pick which is looking good right now if the Warriors don't start making changes also.
Problems with tanking: 1. The draft class needs to be strong enough for tanking to be worth it. 2. You need to scout the right guy, and be lucky enough to get him before anyone else does. 3. The guy you draft has to be better than the guys you're dumping to tank. The vast majority of new players will not be as good as Scola or Kevin Martin. 4. Tanking creates a loser culture, and degrades players' skills and morale. The team will not gel and try hard if they know they're playing to lose every night. 5. It disrespects your paying fans, many of whom will decide that your games are no longer worth attending. This cuts into the owner's pockets, meaning he's no longer as willing to shell out the money to support his expensive hobby. 6. Tank for enough seasons and the team will develop a bad reputation. Current players won't want to resign, and free agents won't want to come here. Houston is not LA, Boston, or New York. The Rockets don't have any innate attraction that will draw players in even if the team sucks.
1. The draft class needs to be strong enough for tanking to be worth it. No. The top pick itself is an asset. You only need good GM to decide when to use the pick, when to trade the pick. 2. You need to scout the right guy, and be lucky enough to get him before anyone else does. That's why GMs are paid. That's their job, not their problem. 3. The guy you draft has to be better than the guys you're dumping to tank. The vast majority of new players will not be as good as Scola or Kevin Martin. If your top picks or the one you traded using top picks are not as good as Scola or Martin, that's bad GM work. 4. Tanking creates a loser culture, and degrades players' skills and morale. The team will not gel and try hard if they know they're playing to lose every night. so what, the team playing to lose will be discarded once you find the man. Plus, we, supposed to be in win-now mode, have collected plenty of players from loser cultures, such as Nets, Kings, NBDL. 5. It disrespects your paying fans, many of whom will decide that your games are no longer worth attending. This cuts into the owner's pockets, meaning he's no longer as willing to shell out the money to support his expensive hobby. Being mediocre is even more disrespectful to the fans. and you know what will cut into owner's pocket more? team being irrelevant to anything or only 1 TV broadcast in 2 seasons. Tank will actually generate interests more than being mediocre. 6. Tank for enough seasons and the team will develop a bad reputation. Current players won't want to resign, and free agents won't want to come here. Houston is not LA, Boston, or New York. The Rockets don't have any innate attraction that will draw players in even if the team sucks. free agents do not want to come to a mediocre team either. What free agents Rockets got during these two years?
