Even If the Rockets Lose Scola, They May Get an Asset

Asset, asset, asset. That's all I hear about nowadays.. What we need a superstar.

 

No problem,you've made an important point. Much appreciated.

 

Yo rookie, the whole point bima is trying to make is this: IF the rockets, for whtver reason, decide they cant afford to resign him, then they can take this route...He's not saying a trade exception is better than keeping scola. obviously we'll match any reasonable offer and it's possible they'll even slightly overpay since Les has given a general ok to match...but that doesnt mean they will certainly match if another team decides to insanely over pay for him. That's when they may decide they can't match and go for a trade exception to get something rather than losing him outright.

 

one additional point to my previous brief post...

I believe you are overrating the TE at a point in time when too many others have a similar asset or simply have open cap space.

to me, i would rather overpay for scola and have the bird in hand, then manage the cap and have a TE.

why? because scola's playing style, heart, hussle and desire provide a significant impact on this team at a position that is vital to our current and future plans. i would also project him to be playing at a similar level for the next several years with a below average risk of injury (again due to his under the rim playing style).

a trade exception is merely a placeholder with the promise of returning an asset, but has no guarantee. in my mind, the probability of that TE returning an asset of equal or greater value than scola is minimal.

 

At what price does it not make sense to bring back Scola?

 

That's exactly what I was trying to say. Great post.

 

One step at a time. Rome wasn't built in a day.

 

Cool yeah, let's just get one of those. What have we been thinking?

 

and to me, that's just not acceptable. i don't really see it as a viable alternative and the thread seemed to be a preemptive, "well, if the hurricane does destroy my home, at least i'll have insurance to argue with and maybe get equal value back at a later date"

sorry, but i say screw that attitude. this is the year we are supposed to be "all in". you don't go all in with letting scola go for a te.

 

That point was understood, and I agree that something is better than nothing. But you know well that with any thread, people will start going off on a tangent. And I think that discussing the question where one would see the tipping point where the Rockets would prefer getting this "something instead of nothing" does not really mean derailing the thread. What I am saying is that I think that this tipping point is at a very high level, because even overpaying for Scola would be better than getting this "something better than nothing" (=TE).

You are dividing it into the decision and what happens next. What I am saying is that the decision depends on how you value the "something better than nothing" versus overpaying. So before you get to "WHAT HAPPENS NEXT", you have to compare what you get there to how much you are willing to overpay before it gets so painful that you would rather take the trade exception.

And what I (and I believe also studogg) am saying is that there is probably hardly an imaginable situation where the overpaying would be more painful than losing Scola, even if getting a trade exception - because the realization of the value of the trade exception is very uncertain.

 

Oh hell naw why you trading Scola? He beter than trade exception. Scola is exceptional, he the human trade exception.

 

We'll see. I just don't think we'd let Scola walk for a $4-$5.5 million trade exception. Daryl has been talking too much about having Kyle and Luis back and the importance of this fact.

BUT, if I got to your situation and it got to Luis leaving, it is the better route to take instead of letting Luis leave for nothing just because there would be a nice share of players that will be moved at that salary as soon as some of these teams start to tumble.

 

i guess i just wanted to read more into the thread than "water is wet" or "even if the knicks do well this year, as long as they do worse than us, we still get a more valuable pick than we would have without the tmac trade"

there, i saved you a thread

 

I think that from a negotiation standpoint, it is better to say that you will under no circumstances help facilitate Scola's departure from Houston (because this should help scare off people who think about making an offer to him). But yes, if it were to actually come to it and you could not achieve your main goal (keeping him in Houston), you would prefer to get something rather than nothing.

Just referring to your last post - you mention a $ 8 M trade exception again. Would that be if he (theoretically) got a $ 16 M contract for the first year? Or how do you get to the $ 8 M?

 

Answer. ^

 

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm with ya though...must keep Luis Scoooooola!!!! I'm hoping he gets at least a 3 year deal with the Rockets. Then I'm all over a Swingman jersey.

 

hasnt morey said he will match whatever offers scola receives so isnt this thread unnecessary unless you want to just stir up rockets fans and make them worry we might be losing our rock, most consistently healthy player, warrior, etc...

scola is not going to receive a max offer, many people have him rated drastically below david lee who will be averaging 13 mil per year in his new contract...

anyways i know this is not on track with your thread, but scola would be worth every penny if he cost us 12 mil a year, but hey we might just let him walk and resign yao to a max contract and have him in street clothes for enternity...