Yao's window closes a little bit more every year, though. DD, assuming that Paul is not against coming to Houston (he might have listed others first because he thinks they are more realistic or whatever) and assuming that we could get him by only trading expirings and possibly Brooks, and assuming that he would be willing to sign an extension...do I get a "yes"?
Ummmmmmm, yeah, like Nash. Except worse case scenario, he wants out. We trade him for other talent. And best case scenario, he plays for the Rockets fo 10 years and wins rings with us.
I think DD does have one legitimate point. If this were an option of trading for say Danny Granger or Chris Paul, I would easily choose Granger because of our strength at the point. That being said, Granger is not demanding a trade, if he were I would say go for him. Also on Paul not wanting to come here, I think its more accurate to say we are not his first choice. All the teams he named were teams with obvious holes at the point. We have strength and depth there.
Yea...i don't now what to make of it having CP on the team. It's like having Stockton on the team...it just doesn't seem to fit because he needs ball in his hands all the time. Maybe it does fit...i don't know. But the thing is...there ain't nothing wrong with Aaron Brooks...Brooks has his own style and speed and seem to fit this team better. I really don't know what to make of it. And the fact that you have to get rid of some key players to get CP?? Hell no. I am not going to deal with uncertainty.
It all depends on what you have to give up to get Granger. If we could trade Ariza, plus an expiring, and one future draft pick, yes. But if you have to trade both future Knick draft picks plus Budinger and one of our young bigs plus expirings, that's a little steep for Granger, while it isn't steep for Paul. We're talking about a true "all in" move. We give up our youngsters and our picks. That is our true trade value, Hill, Patterson, Budinger, Brooks, and to some extent Lowry, and the first rounders. If we are going "all in" and throwing in the picks to get "THE PLAYER", do you go "all in" for Granger? I say no. I say no to Iggy as well. Now, if we can acquire them while still holding on to some of our desirable trade assets, some of the youngsters, and some of the draft picks, then it is doable. But to give up all our youngsters and picks to get Granger and Iggy? Nope. Paul, on the other hand, IS a top 5 player in the NBA. Those are the kind of guys you go "all in" for.
Yea except you have two years to build accomodate him into a working system. If theres any hurdles, then he bolts and you have lost everything. No thanks, unless he comes cheap.
Although this is a well thought out and well written post(repped), I am going to have to call BS on the premise. The claim is that our team is built on a Yao-centric platform. And that in order to accommodate CP3, we will have to rebuild a CP3-centric platform, which we currently do not have the players for. Acquiring said players would take longer than the allotted 2 year timeframe before he bolts for MSG, or Hollywood, or where ever. I say, you are not giving Adelman nearly the amount of credit he deserves, and that your in-a-vacuum description of our "system" is much too rigid, compared to reality. I ask, how did our "Yao-centric" system perform the past year, Yao-less? Was the team a collection of headless chickens without the key cog in the Yao-machine? In reality, we were pushing towards the playoffs all year long, finished with a winning record, all with a $40 million hole in the roster. What we desperately needed was not "Yao and only Yao, the key to our system", but rather simply a talent infusion- IE putting that $40M to good use. Chris Paul, a legit superstar and top 5 player in the league, IS that talent infusion. And if Adelman can make our supposedly "Yao-centric" system work without Yao, he sure as hell can fit a top 5 player somewhere in there too. EDIT: And for DD, just replace "Yao-centric" with "Adelman-centric" in this post.
For those keeping score and looking for "sigs". Sorry DD, but I totally do not agree. And you can bet that if Morey has a shot at getting CP3, he won't hesitate for a second to give up Brooks to do it. Not bashing Brooks. I like him a lot. But just like Morey would move Scola to get Bosh, he would move Brooks to get CP3.
I disagree. 1. Orlando--He wants to go there because of Dwight Howard and nothing more. Orlando has a fairly talented point guard in Jameer Nelson. Sure he's not elite but it's not one of Orlando's weak spots. 2. LA--He wants to go there because, well, look at that team. Fisher has been playing on borrowed time and, while I agree that this is the position the Lakers are at the weakest, him pairing with his Olympic teammate Kobe and having Gasol there is probably a better reason why he wants LA. A team of Paul/Bryant/Gasol meeting up with LeBron/Wade/Bosh in the Finals? How crazy would that be? 3. Dallas--They have Jason Kidd. Unless the Hornets all of a sudden wants Kidd, Paul would be teaming up with Kidd/Terry/Dirk. My suspicion is that Paul picked Dallas is because, hell, he's already picked teams from three different divisions, so why not throw Dallas into the mix? 4. Knicks--Sure they have a hole at the 1, but this is more on his wishful thinking of teaming up with Amare and maybe Melo. 5. Portland--The team is young, they have big men that can P&R, and they have defenders. They also have Brandon Roy. Paul probably warmed up to the idea of playing for Portland when it was announced that a trade was in the works to send him there anyways. So why is this important? It's important is because Paul, like it or not, just wants to go to a team that will be able to compete or can compete already. He might look at us as a rebuilding project or just a playoff team and not a title contender.
If CP3 would sign an extension, I am down with that, if not, I think you are treading water. There are no guarantees that the team would be that much better with CP3, it all depends upon chemistry and whom you have to give up. Do you guys remember how Rick said it takes 3 years to learn his offense.... THIS IS YEAR 3 ! DD
One of the things Paul did when he mentioned teams, were teams with Massive holes at the point. He respects other players and isn't going to name a team like the Rockets and basically tell Brooks he wants his job. It would be like if he said he wants to go to Utah. He didn't name teams like Miami that have no way of getting him. I'm sure if somehow they managed to keep their big 3 and have a way to get Paul he would agree. I think the fact that we were not on his unofficial list to be leaked out doesn't mean he cannot be enticed.
Horse crap....he mentioned Dallas and they have Kidd, he mentioned NY and they just signed Felton.... Come on, he wants the attention that all his peers are getting this year. DD
By this logic, we should not acquire anymore players. We should just lock everyone on our roster up for a long term deal and send Morey on a vacation. Paul is good enough to either force change in the system, or change his style of play to fit the system. You are right there is no guarantee that we would do better with Paul, but adding another top 5 type player to your roster, has proven better than not to add wins to your roster. You play the playoffs with 8 guys 9 tops. I don't care if we lose the 7th to 13th players on our roster. All these picks, and young players, look at NBA history, statistically they have a better chance of not being effective than being a game changer. Adding Paul gives the Rockets a higher probability to win the playoffs than not.
Furthermore, which players in our "Yao-centric" system does not fit with CP3 exactly? Kevin Martin, Chase Budinger? Off the ball scorers, great fit. Trevor Ariza? Athletic slasher, all around player. Great fit. Luis Scola :: David West :: Great fit. Yao Ming? Yao Ming? Disagree. Paul has never played with a low post scorer before, how do we know he doesn't fit?
Rockets really need to get a franchise player or Houston is a forgotten place for big name players. no, Paul won't come here.
