How long are you willing to tank to get a superstar?

Sure are a bunch of quitters on Clutchfans this morning. Geez, the team goes just 2 games under .500 and tank clowns start to come out. Season ain't over.

 

I dont perceive us in tanking. Therefore, the premise is flawed.

 

as long as the rockets put a product on the floor that is fun to watch and playing their hearts out, I would be ok with them sucking for a few years. Go ahead and load the team with young guys and you may end up with a crappy record. Or you could end up with a team built in the mold of the Thunder.

If that is the only way for us to get a super star, then so be it. We are actually gravitating toward this route. In the past, we had some sort of all star to build around. Not so much right now.

I will be upset if we continue to look for short term band aids that get our team first round exits or crappy lottery picks.

 

I have more faith in Nostradamus than in tanking with this team.

 

Not the fact we are two games under but the way we've been destroyed in the paint in the last two games that is a MAJOR red flag. The game was close last night but we needed 13 three pointers to keep it close, can't expect that on a regular basis. Our defense has been bad all year long but losing Chuck might be the crippling blow, tough to say but reality is that we are going to get murdered in the paint vs teams with any kind of post presence and athletic bigs.

Morey won't tank but he will be willing to develop the young guys and trade for more youth. To future was always right in front of us, if Yao wasn't coming back strong then we would rebuild until a star was ready to lead the young guys.

 

A lot of very good players like Paul Pierce, Amare Stoudemire, Tracy McGrady aren't making your cut since they were drafted in the 5-10 range....it's very difficult to be in a position to draft one of these guys when you win 41 games.

BTW - ending up with Bogut - how is this bad exactly? He's way better than anything the Rockets have at center now.

 

I don't condone tanking.

 

Durant hasn't done anything to be better than melo, and if westbrook isn't on his team, he would be looking at one and done for the forseable future.

CP3 has being out of the first round once, and he won't be out of the first round until he is traded.

Rose you said it yourself.

the only sure fire franchise players are Lebron, Wade, Dirk, Dwill and Howard.

 

LOL... let the knee jerk threads began! YIPPEE!

I personally would rather our team attempt to cash in on our assets. If we begin tanking now, who knows how long we'll be down before we come back up?

I mean if you really think about it, we're only 1 or 2 players away. I really dont think we need a "SUPERSTAR".

The Spurs are always a top 5 team, but realistically, do they have a "SUPERSTAR"? I (personally) dont consider Duncan, Parker or Ginobili superstars. None of them can single handedly turn a franchise around. They're all-start caliber players that compliment each other very well at all positions - PF/C, SG/SF, and a PG.

IMO, we're really just a good Center away - someone who can score 10-15ppg, grab 8-11 rpg, and block 1-2 shots per game. And the only one that fits this description (that may be available) is a player like Emeka Okafor.

I know his contract is not a good one ($41mil over the next 3 years), but i think Emeka instantly makes us a better defensive team that could make some noise in the playoffs.

 

WE DON'T TANK...


WE DEVELOP!!!!!!!!!...

 

Man Bogut would look pretty damn good on this team. I think all of his numbers could go up if he was on this team. ....But he's not coming here

 

The implication here is that a player once developed into a true superstar rarely leaves their current team and that's largely been a function of the incentives built into the current CBA allowing teams to offer more money/years to retain their players. The problem is we don't know how the new CBA will treat rookies and teams retaining their players. Teams would probably want to keep those incentives and so would players but if the overall contract length/amount goes down as expected, how does that play into the equation? In short is it reasonable to expect this trend to continue into the future?

If your only methods to obtaining a transcendent star are through the draft with less than one star available (and a poor track record for injury free #1s in recent history) or through FA/trade(a trend that has the possibility to be impacted by the CBA) then how does that effect your strategy? Add to that the recent history of teams winning titles without a top 5 to 7 guy - the Celtics have a lot of good players but certainly haven't had a top 5 guy while they have been going to the finals in recent memory and don't forget Dumars' Pistons teams which lacked starpower altogether. I guess the point of this post is to say the variables are even wilder than originally outlined.

....for me, I think the smarter bet is on staying competitive, keeping assets/financial flexibility available on acquiring a star, and having a solid/deep team built on fundamentals. If the new CBA makes it even harder to acquire a star then you might revisit that strategy but in the short term I think your odds are about as good at putting together a team good enough to win a title through FA/trade even if you miss out on a transcendent player. Those types of players you can build dynasties around(Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe) but you can win a title without one of those players if you have a solid organization from top to bottom. Even look at San Antonio now - Duncan is a shell of himself, Ginobili is not the same player he once was and they are still a top two team in the West.

 

Since there is no hope for trading for a superstar with mediocre talents, tanking or losing is the only way to go.

Tanking = High draft picks = better assets = better odds landing a superstar.
Good management is the key during the whole process.

Clippers are a bad example because they have atrocious management. Even that, they have Griffin and Gordan to at least keep them interesting.

Rockets, with great city, great coach, great GM, great boss, great Yao, great team history, are not winning or interesting. Being mediocre is a waste of time and everything.

1 nations TV broadcast in 2 seasons says a lot.

 

I just cant root for my team to lose...EVER...especially on purpose.

 

The Kings are a great example to bring up here. They have had high draft choices ever since they sent Artest to Houston. They collected lots of talent to add to their existing emerging star in Kevin Martin....drafted Spencer Hawes, Jason Thompson, Omri Caspi, Tyreke Evans, and Demarcus Cousins - all guys who were decent picks for when they were drafting and what they needed. And now? They are still one of the worst teams in the league. The problem with building through the draft is you don't know what's available. On talent this should be a good team but Tyreke is a guy who has to dominate the ball to be effective and that doesn't play to the strengths of their other talents. Cousins is a gifted passer for a big but the system doesn't have him at the high post often to utilize that and the team doesn't have good off ball cutters either.

I wouldn't say they drafted poorly, they drafted mostly the right guys given what was available but what was available didn't fit together so here they are after playing the tank game for 5 years, they have good young players and they still suck...and what's going to happen when their rookie contracts are up? They are going to want to leave to go to a contending team. The tank strategy only works if you get the magic bullet - if you get Lebron/Wade/Durant, then it works but for any other good but not transcendent star, you end up like the Kings perpetually rebuilding hoping it's young stars will develop into transcendent ones which never happens. Now what incentive do role playing FA's have to sign with Sacramento? Look at New Jersey too...how bout Detroit? The Knicks bought their way to the top of the standings faster than any of those teams have been able to build through the draft.

 

Remember when Boston tanked to get a good draft pick?...
How about the last time we got a number one draft pick, what happened then?

The draft is a gamble at best, and worse off, it's a gamble that you have little control over. At least when you try and make the playoffs and fight your way through a hard schedule the gamble is somewhat in your hands. However, when you rely on players like Greg Oden you take a definite risk. I bet you anything Portland wishes they could have that pick back, Durant and Roy? That would have been amazing, plus, the reduced strain on Roy might have helped him avoid injury. I would rather develop talent and create a solid core that would entice a free agent/traded superstar come to Houston...

 

You need to remove the word tank and replace it with rebuild. Tank implied that we lose on purpose and that is something that should never be in the culture of any team or organization. If you mean we should liquidate the older pieces like Miller and Scola to start clearing cap space that is something completely different.

 

I am all for trading Scola. He is the perfect representation of who are team is.

Scola get more form his God given talent. The ROckets get more from their talent.

Scola will never be a superstar or even an all star but he will always be good enough to get respect. The Rockets will never win a championship or even a western conference championship. But will be good enough to earn respect in this league.

Scola has peaked and will not probably ever be much better than he is now. The Rockets are probably as good as they will be as a team.

Scola never says die. He is not a quiter and always believes he has a shot to win. The Rockets as a team have the same mentality. Th never quit and win when they shouldn't.

My point is I am all for trading Scola. He is that one player that can help the most on a winning team. But on this team he just helps get the worst lottery pick.

 

Without losing, Portland do not even have a chance to regret and they wouldn't have Roy or LMA either.

losing = gamble for the odds.
mediocre= no chance at all.

Even without winning anything, I bet Les loved the last number one pick.

develop talent, create a solid core........good thinking, but you'd have to get talent and the core first. Rockets have neither without going deep into the drafts.

trade for a superstar?
Our last number two pick got TMAC. Yeah, you need a top lottery pick to make the trade happen.