then we have no chance in hell of winning a title. After reading the “Tmac for Manu” thread and looking at the ones from different sites posted I have come to the conclusion that most people (aside from me and some other homers) believe that Manu Ginobli is better than Tmac, most believe he’s much better. If that’s the case we have zero chance of winning the title and little chance of getting far in the playoffs. Just think about it…Tony Parker is waaay better than Rafer, Ginobli’s better than Tmac (I disagree), Battier is only slightly better than Bowen, TD’s better than Yao, and Scola is better than Oberto. When you go to the bench it ain’t even close. Barry, Finley, Udoka and Vaughn would be definite upgrades to our perimeter rotation. Bonner, Thomas, and Horry are better than the Hayes/Harris/Landry combo too. For us to win anything significant either most people have to be proven wrong or Yao Ming has to become better than Tim Duncan in his prime to overcome that sizable difference in role players’ production. As an objective realist neither of those two seems possible but as a rockets fan at least the first seems more likely. Lets be honest we’re not going to suddenly have great role players.
Maybe you should read a bit more carefully. The overwhelming majority believe that Tmac is better. Can you name a single poster who said that Manu is a better overall player?
pmac, there are a lot of r****ds on clutchfans. They're not the GMs so don't worry about it, you know just as well as me Morey would never think about this trade in a million years.
about 300 said they would do the trade, about 500 said they wouldn't... DD was right if you factor in that this is a rockets fan site, its easy to see that most people think Manu is better. We're all homers so its a bit obvious that if that many of us would do the trade most people would. Almost no one on the Jazz or Spurs' sights thought it was even close.
It should be clarified whether or not we would get Manu + $10 million. And I dont put much stock in those polls. I look for convincing arguments within the thread for one side or the other.
Like I said, Manu + 10 million sounds pretty tempting. Do you think this is a bad trade? If so, why? Consider the fact that the added $10 million will allow us to get a 3rd star or quality role players.
Yes, that thread has different factors added but this thread is not about that. This is all about the players (not their salaries) and quite a few people think that Ginobli is a better player than Tmac. I'm pretty sure that's the reason DD made that other thread. Basically i'm saying...If Ginobli is better than Tmac we're screwed.
^^^^ You are absolutely correct. Alot of people on these boards dont understand the fact that Tmac gets paid about 10+ million more than Manu, thus making manu a better player for the money. I would be damn if I took tmac straight up for manu if they were paid the same amount of money, but tmac has too much liability with his injuries and what now at this moment in his career. I would definitely take manu right now over tmac. That way I can spend extra $ on a decent role players who can compliment yao. Maybe Elton brand, carlos boozer, or michael redd this summer.
First, you need to know how much were are over/under the cap. We are about $7.6 million over the cap. So even if we traded T-Mac for Manu, we would only have less than $3 million to work with. You aren't going to get Elton, Boozer or Redd with that money. Hell, even the MLE offers much more money. Not to mention that a Manu for T-Mac trade wouldn't even work because the contracts don't match.
The point is that if you could trade T-Mac for Manu and another quality player you would do it, in a heartbeat. It's never going to happen because Manu is probably going to retire and die in San Antonio but if the Spurs did have a brain hemorrhage and offered up a trade the Rockets would be fools not to jump all over it.
Put another way the issue isn't who's better. T-Mac's not a great deal in terms of dollars to value, not the way that Manu is.
Which is why any student of the game would say we just need to make tweaks to our bench to basically get longer and bigger at backup at SG, and at SF. We do those two things and we are good. Getting a serviceable backup to Rafer who is a pass first guard would be nice but not as necessary as the first two.
That is exactly what the issue is. I don't care about a trade that will never happen. Even if the trade was made, in order to be as good as the Spurs we would need pull off another steal to get a finals mvp caliber player like Tony Parker with that $10M and we would still have upgrades to make to our supporting cast. If you say you would rather have Ginobli then you are saying that we don't have a chance.
There's no way that T-Mac = two superstar players. A trade for Manu + a good (not a great) PG would be enough. Regardless of where this team with T-Mac is with regards to contending I think that team, with Manu and a decent PG, would be a lot closer.
Are you intentionally ignoring everybody? Heres the answer in a nutshell: If we can have either Tmac or Ginobili, we pick Tmac. If we can have either Tmac or (Ginobili + 10 million), we pick Ginobili + 10 million.
I understand you're point Ginobli is a star playing essentially on role players money. In the other thread people kept saying that Ginobli was "close" to Tmac. (i even got sucked into saying it). Even if you gave us Ginobli and that 10 million and we landed a guy like Mike Miller like you said in the other thread it would not be enough. If TD/Ginobli/Parker and better role players got embarassed in the WC finals, how do you think Yao/Ginobli/Miller and worse role players would do? My point is that Tmac has to be more valuable than Ginobli (or Ginobli + 10 million) for us to be successful because their team was unsuccessful with that and they are better than us. You see? If you guys are right we don't have much hope.
