Why give a damn about CP3 not wanting an extension if we can land him? Why does it matter? Honestly, I can't think of a single reason. However, I can think of several reasons why we'd be better off with him playing out his contract instead. 1. Paul has had 2 injury-plagued seasons in his 5 year career. If you thought T-Mac was getting paid doing nothing the last 2 years here in Houston, we could see a repeat if CP3 gets an extension. 2. Yao's shelf life is 2-3 years anyway. If the experiment doesn't work out, the Rockets would be trying to rebuild anyway, rather than creating another CP3-in-NO quagmire where we barely compete. 3. Who's going to clear cap room for him? Paul wants to go to Orlando, who won't be clearing the luxury tax threshold anytime soon, much less the salary cap. NY will be capped out if and when they get Melo. And if they don't, why would Paul want to play with a 32-year old Amare and fillers? Lakers? Won't get under the cap. OKC? They have Westbrook. Atlanta? they just tied themselves up with multiple players. Maybe NJ if they can't get anyone to take their money next year? Not to mention the next CBA likely shrinks the cap, making his possible destinations even less. So really, I see no reason why the Rockets would think of this as any more than a rental, and revisit the situation in 2 years. So please, enough of the "Paul doesn't want to play in Houston" stuff. WHO CARES? 2 years of CP3 with a solid chance of resigning him seem as good as any. If anything, if Morey devote a 3-year extension locking him in for 5 years, I might be more worried that his health might screw us down the line.
I agree. I think we should worry about landing a superstar while we still have the chance. They come very sparingly in the NBA. We can worry about resigning him after we win two championships
Well, T-Mac was on record to saying that he was back 100%, so I'm not sure what Yao could've said regarding this. But Rockets people realistically only expect 3 years at most out of Yao. And the history of tall centers lasting long in the league is pretty bad. If anything, Yao producing at the age of 33 would be incredibly unexpected.
I dont care. 1. We need to consolidate some assets anyway 2. Even he stinks it up on purpose cause he is unhappy as some have suggested he would(i diagree) he would still be an asset as a expiring contract after this year when he only has one year left on his contract. If you were impressed with what DM did with TMac..... imagine with what he would pull with a max expiring player that actually still has game!
CP3 is a conductor and has the imagination of the elites of NBA history. It is a big commitment to get him as we are going to have to shift our roster and style to fit his talent. I've always been of the belief that it is better to have superstar bigs than superstar small guards? Few teams have been successful with that style--Isiah and Iverson come to mind. Kidd always had allstar-level bigs for teammates. There are so many talented guards out there...
Looks like our chances of aquiring CP3 have gotten higher it seems. http://nba.fanhouse.com/2010/07/25/okafors-contract-makes-chris-paul-to-orlando-unlikely/ http://www.nola.com/hornets/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-4/1280040009168510.xml&coll=1
Detractors like to point out how Bibby is Adelman's prototypical lead guard that they don't need an assist man at the one. Before Bibby there was this guy...
Because I am bored, I figured that I'd try to come up with a Chris Paul trade scenario that would actually make some sense for all teams involved. This is what I came up with: http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=29cy9ls Houston receives: Chris Paul, Marcus Banks, Reggie Evans and a $2.5M trade exception New Orleans receives: Aaron Brooks, Jordan Hill, Trevor Ariza, Jared Jeffries and a future HOU 1st rd. pick Toronto receives: Emeka Okafor, David Andersen and cash (from HOU) Why Houston does it: They get Chris Paul, WITHOUT having to take on any long-term albatross contracts. Instead, they take one year of pain with the hefty (but expiring) contracts of Marcus Banks and Reggie Evans. The Rockets still retain Shane Battier to start at SF and have Chase Budinger to back him up in a more consistent role in the rotation. Plus, Banks at least gives the team a third PG at the end of the bench instead of a fourth center (Andersen) or a fourth PF (Jeffries). Les pays an additional $9-12M in salary, tax and cash payouts from this deal. Why New Orleans does it: If the Hornets come to the realization that it would be best just to trade Paul now before his value goes down or before teams can smell the desperation in their organization (a HUGE "if"), then this trade provides them with several benefits. Most importantly, the Hornets replace Paul with several assets in Brooks (a 25-year-old PG with All-Star potential), Hill (a 22-year-old PF/C who was a recent lottery pick), Ariza (a 24-year-old SF with defensive prowess and championship experience, yet still on a somewhat reasonably MLE-sized contract) and at least one future first round pick. Those assets should significantly help their rebuilding process. The Hornets also get out from under Emeka Okafor's monstrosity of a contract (4 years, $53M+ remaining) and save about $8.4M next season alone. Why Toronto does it: Let's face it. Toronto will never be a major free agent destination. And the Raptors desperately need a solid defensive and rebounding presence on their otherwise Charmin-soft roster. Enter Okafor. Emeka is actually the perfect player to start at C for the Raptors. However, that contract is not exactly inviting to Toronto. Hence, the "dumping" of Banks and Evans on the Rockets. The Raptors replace bad players with a good player for next season at approximately the same salary AND still don't touch the $14.5M trade exception they got from the Bosh sign-and-trade. Toronto's trade possibilities will still be numerous with a starting center in tow and that trade exception in place. The Rockets pony up enough cash to cover Andersen's salary. I'm not saying this trade has much chance of happening. So much depends on the Hornets' willingness to actually part with Paul, and that front office seems VERY reluctant to do so. But, if Paul truly does become available, I think this trade makes a ton of sense to all teams involved. Just my opinion, anyway.
Well today is going to be a tough day for the Hornets. They will face a difficult issue of having to either trade Paul now, or hope they can appease him and get him to stay, or trade him in the future. The benefit to trading him now is ending the story. They will not be building a team around a player who may or may not leave, thus giving them more flexibility in future roster moves. Also his value may be higher now while he still has plenty of time left on his deal. The benefit to keeping him and trading him later is they could maybe appease him and get him to stay. Also since he is under contract they are under no real time restraints to get this deal done now, at the trade deadline, or at next years draft. etc. I think the smart move is to move him now. You get the most assets for him, and you can move on cleanly. New Orleans did the same thing when they moved Baron Davis a few years ago. I would expect Paul to be gone at the trade deadline at the latest.(when teams are able to trade players recently signed and traded etc)
It would be great to get Paul. But if it doesn't happen, I really won't be too disappointed. Between the knee issue, the fact that he doesn't sound wild about playing here, the mere two years remaining on his contract, and everything the Rockets would have to give up to get him, I'd just as soon see the team trade for Igoudala, if he became available, and make its run like that. I think the team is going to be better than many expect, a true contender, and that Yao and Miller are going to have a bigger impact than many expect. I have a good feeling about his team as currently constructed. Am I the only one who feels this way?
I like it! Far better than most of the speculation I've read here. Looks like a win-win-win for the teams involved.
^The Hornets already have a point guard; they have no need for Aaron Brooks, yet he's the best player they're receiving. That's obviously a flaw in that proposed deal.
Bima, that is easily the best CP3 trade I have seen. IF the Hornets have to trade CP3, that trade makes a lot of sense across the board and it doesn't gut the Rockets roster. I am not sure the Hornets can get a better asset package + cap savings than that. Placing Okafor in Toronto is a great call. They really could use a player like that to pair with Bargnani. And Ed Davis and Amir Johnson are really PFs without a lot of bulk. Someone send this trade to Morey!
Yes, while it is a good proposal, I agree with this comment (NO has Collison) and also the fact that for Toronto to take Okafor, they would need to get back more in return, specially if the're giving up 2 expirings in Banks and Evans. I know Okafor is decent player, but that salary is ridiculous. I would think Brooks may have to be moved to Toronto, with NO getting DeMar DeRozan or Marco Belinelli instead of Brooks. If thats too much for Toronto to give up, or not enough for NO to get back, then we may have to find a different fit for Brooks. I just dont see Brooks ending up in NO, not only because they have Collison, but also because he's not going to be cheap for too much longer. Aaron will be due a <b>huge </b> pay raise next year, and if NO trades Paul, they'll want someone under cheap control for a couple more years.
I just don't buy Chris Paul's announcement. It's a franchise and ticket sales saving press release. Unless the Hornets could come up with a Pau Gasol to Lakers type of deal, CP3 will never be happy with his supporting cast. I still see him being dealt perhaps during the season leading up to the trade deadline. By the way, Hornets execs mentioned that they had numerous calls from GM's around the league singling out one GM from a rival team being one of the firsts to inquire. Hmm...Who else could that be? Hehe
