Few more notes I wanted to add... Point Guard Aaron Brooks vs. Kyle Lowry This is the one spot that I don't think has to have something give, but I know the Rockets loved Will Conroy from training camp. One person told me at camp at that time that he was as good as Lowry. NOW, that was a small sample size, and Lowry has kicked tail since then... I just thought it was fishy when the Rockets NBDL team went out and traded for Conroy. Brooks' trade value has got to be very high -- Lowry I'm not so sure. Power Forward Luis Scola vs. Carl Landry If the Rockets goal is to add a 4/5 type of player, I would think one of these players has to go. Not because of anything they did wrong -- they've both been great. There just wouldn't be room at the inn. Landry is a top notch scorer. His trade value is higher -- he's got another year on a BARGAIN contract. He's younger and more athletic, but has had leg injuries. Scola is a more well-rounded player. Savvy, tough, better rebounder. This is the toughest choice. Small Forward Trevor Ariza vs. Shane Battier No one is asking this question, but I think it is the question right now -- what happens here, and how does Shane Battier's career in Houston ever end? That has seemed like sacrilege given how he has been the Moreyball crown jewel. But consider that Ariza, if he's part of the plan, has to move to the three. Does Battier go to the bench? We assume the Rockets have to go out and get a starting caliber two guard, so if so, either one of these guys goes out and the other goes to the three... or one is going to the bench.
LOL, nice thread title and OP Clutch. I predict two years from now someone will post a gif of a player that isn't on this team anymore even though the purpose was not to discuss who is better. :grin:
You've got to sell high on Brooks now. The choice between Scola and Landry is based on Age and potential. Scola has reached his peak and Landry hasn't. Ariza vs. Battier is the hardest but Battier commands more money ($9mil.) and is 30 years old. I go Ariza based on age and potential.
gotta keep: brooks (my god, we have a top notch young talent here, WHY TRADE HIM???) ariza (younger, should improve) scola (landry trade value high and he is less durable than scola)
It depends on who we are trading for. Obviously DM is targeting a superstar. He isn't settling for B+ talent. If the Rockets get Bosh, obviously we would like to keep Landry to back him up but the Raptors would probably want Carl. You'd probably throw in Lowry too and keep Brooks. Bring up Conroy and hope he works his way up to back up. If the Rockets get a pg (Paul), then obviously you'd allow Aaron to go. If we are getting just a sg, then I wouldn't give up either pf. I think Brooks goes before Lowry in this situation. I still think Ariza is not going anywhere unless it's as a potential deal breaker for a superstar. I know they really think highly of Trevor and want to see him play off of a superstar (Yao and whoever they can get this year) before thinking about replacing him. They definitely don't want to drop him off at the nearest airport like most of the fans do. It's a growing year with Trevor and he signed knowing that after this year, the offensive pressure will shift back off of him and onto others.
I went with Lowry, Landry, and Ariza. All are young. Brooks versus Lowry is the only tough call for me. I probably should have voted Brooks over Lowry, but went with better defender/rebounder. Brooks will probably be even better with Yao as he is the better three point shooter. I do like Lowry's ability to get fouled under the current NBA "rules".
As Clutch said, the toughest choice is clearly Scola vs Landry -- reliable vs dynamic, rugged worker versus unstoppable scoring threat, older versus younger etc. I would trade Ariza in a heartbeat. Easy call there. If all we're looking for is a useful role player in that spot, Budinger can fill those shoes and provide more than he could ever dream to do. Besides, this team would completely lose its way without Battier's leadership, especially with the dearth of veterans. I have zero faith in Ariza being able to develop into anything substantially more than what he is. Brooks over Lowry. He brings more to the table offensively and still clearly has more upside than his counterpart. With the game on the line, I'm much more comfortable with the ball in Brooks' hands than any other player on this roster.
Wow, I think most people on here are going by media. Honestly Scola is better for the rockets than Landry. Here are a few reasons I pick Scola over Landry. 1) He is consistent and has a double double almost every game. 2) He is not going to ask for as much money to stay than a Landry would 3) He is more mature and knows that he is privileged to be playing in the NBA and getting paid for it. (Landry likes the money, he's young nothing wrong with that) 4) Everyone in the world knows that Scola is going to spin until he can throw up a shot, but it can't be stopped. Landry doesn't really have a "move" more of a "dunk" but not move. Lowry and Brooks Too hard keep them both, if I had to let one go though, it would be Lowry. Brooks is a great Rocket! Ariza or Battier Ariza, mainly because of his age. Battier will be missed though.
This was tough from a power forward perspective. I went with Lowry, Landry and Ariza. I'd trade Brooks, and go hard after DWade in the offseason. That's why I would keep Lowry. I keep Landry over Scola because of age. Scola's rock solid, never misses games, but he is about to turn 30, whereas Landry is 26. I love Scola though. This is like asking which Rockets championship is better. Ariza is 24, and would flourish as a role player with Yao playing. Battier is in his 30s. There is a 7 year age difference between the two players.
Without knowing who else is on the team, I have to go with the players with higher upside offensively. So: Brooks-Landry-Ariza Lowry, Scola, and Battier would all be very difficult to give up, though. If we added a big time star in the backcourt, I could change my mind on Brooks vs Lowry or Ariza vs Battier.
at PG: Lowry is unlikely to be traded except as a throw-in, imo. he's not unique and isn't having a great year. AB would be a major part of any trade, and it would be hard to replace him. you better get something great if you trade AB. that could haunt you for a long time. at PF: this one is tough, but you have to trade Landry here because he is way outplaying his contract, and he's got that extra year. so his trade value is much higher than Scola even though production wise they aren't too different. Scola's value in trade is going to be less than it should be since he's up for a new contract, and will only get you $4m of talent back (or whatever his 2010 number is). it would suck to see Landry go, but from a value perspective, in terms of what he could bring back, you sell high. at SF: easy call in theory, you keep Ariza and deal Shane. however, this one really depends on who you are getting back. if you're getting back someone who is more of an offensive player that you'll need to hide defensively, keep Shane. if you're getting back a two way player that can hold his own on both ends, then keep Ariza.
If it becomes clear that Yao and ___ (star SG) are our diamonds to build around: Lowry over Brooks because you know what you're going to get everyday with Kyle: Non-stop hustling, rebounding, attacking the basket. He's a bulldog around Yao & ____. Aaron doesn't offer too much if he doesn't have the ball in his hands a lot. Scola over Landry because while Carl's scoring punch is awesome, I prefer Scola's balanced game & blue-collar style of play; you know what you're getting. Have a hunch that Carl's game suffers more if Yao were to return. Battier over Ariza because Battier knows where his strengths & weaknesses are and plays within that, Ariza doesn't... yet? I go with the more cerebral player here, but I'd to see how (& if) Ariza's game changes when Yao returns.
I have felt that way about Conroy for a while now myself. I think he can replace Lowry. I actually think he will be a much more effective offensive player than Lowry. He gets to the foul line just as often, he is a better shooter, and he knows how to find people. I think we could sign him for a cheap 2-year minimum contract deal and save Lowry's salary by including him in a trade with McGrady. Battier would be a great fit on a playoff contender in the East next season (Cleveland/Boston). Or he could be used as a throw-in in a trade, and be bought out and free to come back here or go to a contender. I'd rather keep Ariza long term at the small forward position over him. However, trading him is trading our heart and soul and will be a very tough day for me. I would not be satisified unless he was part of a trade bringing in a superstar LEADER. I actually think Morey wants to keep Scola and trade Landry. With the salary cap going down and so many teams over the cap already and losing money, the odds are good that Scola shops a deal and we are able to re-sign him relatively cheaply. How about MLE dollars for Scola for the next 3-4 years? I think that would be good value. His game is made for longevity since he plays below the rim. If we could pay Scola around $5.8 million next season while Landry is making $3 million and then the next season Scola is making around $6 million and Landry is a free agent, has blown up, and probably getting $7-$10 million per, then we could possibly getting a lot more value. Landry is NOT a good defender nor a good rebounder. Luis is the better defender and a lot better rebounder. So, here's what I am proposing. McGrady and Cook to Sacramento Kevin Martin and Nocioni to Houston Kenny Thomas, Battier, Landry, Lowry, Dorsey, and Taylor to Toronto Bosh and Banks to Houston. Sign Conroy Sign McCants Sign Pops
Ok, I rescind my original response, I would love to keep Brooks, Ariza, & Landry out of those 6 guys. But if it means bringing someone or some players in then of course you would have to give up the players with higher value. So after a trade I see us ending up with Lowry, Ariza, & Scola, which is not at all a bad core of players.
