Man that is so funny. And you made a valid point, too. Sounds like you are dissing Kenny, though. LOL. oeilpere Webber is not really raising his salary; he is limited to a 5% increase. Thus, he will create no base-year compensation complications for a sign-n-trade. That means that this is one of those rare sign n trades that can actually be done without a three-way. So what is my point. My point is that BYC complications is what gives teams like us with cap room advantage on sign n trade. Without BYC complications, we are on pretty much on the same footing as anyone else. We lose our main advantage; i.e., our cap room would make a 3-way unnecessary. If you say a straight purchase is unlikely, I feel a S&T is unlikely. So we are left playing a game of bluff. The Kings will threaten a S&T for better players somewhere else, demanding we match it with Mo' and Mobley or something further ridiculous like Francis, and we will bluff that we will sign him straight away...."go screw yourself...our guards are untouchable". Sounds like we lose. Hell, I don't want Webber if it takes until late Sept to sign in. Screw that. I'll keep my cap space thank you very much. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 17, 2001).]
HeyPee, I didn't mean to diss KT. I was just trying to keep it brief. I definately think he has some trade value. ------------------
How can the Kings threaten a S&T with someone else? The idea of a sign and trade is that the player signing has to want to go to the team he's being traded to. Petrie can bluff like he's gonna work out a deal with another team, but if we know Webber wants to be here, we can call his bluff. However, a more likely proposition is that Webber flirts with us and threatens to sign outright with the Rockets to get Sacramento to work out a S&T w/New York a lá Eddie Jones. It least I think its more likely. ------------------ Charles Barkely on the Raptors defeating the Knicks in Round 1 :"I think it was the Lord. The Lord was with the Raptors. You know the Knicks like to talk so much about religion, but I think the Lord was a Raptor fan."
oeilpere, How will there be enough shots for Dream, Webber, Cat and Francis? Webber will take more shots than Taylor did this past season and Dream fussed about not getting involved enough on offense in 2000-2001. Mango ------------------ Get it right or just don't do it! Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated. Start more Webber threads!
If we were to sign Webber, I would think there would be plenty of shots for Dream. Consider that there aren't a set number of shots per game, the faster the tempo, the more shots(Golden St. @ 87.5 to NY Knicks @ 75.6). And with Webber's defensive rebounding, and passing ability there should be more fast breaks, and an increase in tempo leads to more shots. Plus, Webber is going to draw a lot of attention in the post when he gets the ball, the defense will probably try doubling him, or trapping him in the lane. Where do you think the man doing the doubling or trapping will come from? Not from off Francis or Mobley, and probably not off of our three(whoever that is, they should be a good shooter). I think it'll come from Dream, and with Webber the excellent passer that he is, I think Dream will garner several open looks a game. Perhaps Dream's shot attempts will go down, but the attempts he does get should be of a higher percentage. I think. ------------------ Charles Barkely on the Raptors defeating the Knicks in Round 1 :"I think it was the Lord. The Lord was with the Raptors. You know the Knicks like to talk so much about religion, but I think the Lord was a Raptor fan."
I am simply combining that with oeilpere saying that Les won't sign straight up. If he won't sign straight up, then the Kings can call our bluff and threaten a S&T with someone else in order to pry a better deal out of us. We cannot force their hand with junk, if oeilpere is right about us not willing to sign straight up.
This could have been our line up. Francis Mobley Pippen Webber Jackson Battier Norris Jason Collier that could have been a pretty good team. ------------------ make it stop.
ROXTXIA Wrote: Oeilpere, before you disappear again... You mentioned Shandon and New Jersey once. Well? Possible? Shandon and Cato or Walt and KT for KVH? KVH to Sacramento for Webber? I know it's only speculation but I had wondered along these lines even before you barely mentioned Shandon and the Nets. All teams come away happy. Would Shandon go to Jersey if he got his $$$? Certainly Sacramento would take KVH? ------------------ Roxy: The things I have heard were: 1. The Rockets were going to pursue New Jerseys pick very vigorously. They felt it was the most accessible. I do not know if that has changed in the last week or so. I doubt it has. I think they are still looking at NJ closely. 2. They were looking at a number of possible scenarios to acquire Van Horn and/or two other possibilities as late as hours before this past season’s trade deadline. The fact that Shandon would severely help that Nets team (especially on D), and that he was starting to talk about not coming back to Houston, and CD was looking at accomplishing some personnel goals that RT requested, well ... it made an arguable case for Van Horn and the Nets. 3. Van Horn would kill too be here, according to Rick Maj. and a couple others I have spoken to over the past 4 or 5 months. I for one, have always saw him as a comfortable three, never a four or spot five, especially in the west. To answer your question about where he would end up … If a deal involved the Nets, their pick, Van Horn, Shandon and some Kings involvement my feeling is this: 1. KVH would definitely be a carrot that the Kings would take, hands down. But let me also say that CD and company would be hard pressed to find an comparable player as “easily”* acquired as Van Horn may be this off-season. That being said, the Rockets may want all the marbles. They may go after both Van Horn and Webber if ANY possibilities exist to accomplish just that. It would solve a lot of problems and believe me the draft picks would be given up to affect that move. NOTE: * By “easily” I mean it may be that when dust settles KVH will be accessible to us. Getting all the money ducks inline may be the real hurdle. Keep in mind that guys like Van Horn, LaFrentz, Donyell Marshall, Robert Horry and other long, rangy, movement guys who will bang around when needed or take the J at 16 feet are Rudy's quintessential forward. He loves them. 2. Webber’s acquisition by anyone may be a long drawn out affair I am afraid, and Van Horn’s salary has some problems to overcome too. Without a doubt it would be a difficult financial venture to bring that off (getting both). Les also wants some restraint in the money department this year. It will be interesting to say the least. Mmanal wrote: Oeilpere, How possible do you think it is for the Rockets to pull off an Orlando-esque move of unloading picks and players for future considerations to clear cap room? Big time possible. aelliot (and I think HeyP too)spelled it out earlier. There are a lot of franchises out there that saw the immediate reassurances of trading and moving your roster around that way. Mmanal wrote: I agree with your point that more cap room will be needed to retain Dream to play center. If the Rockets can unload Walt Williams by combining in a draft pick or two in the same fashion that Orlando did with Derek Strong and Corey Maggete, that would create the necessary salary slot to retain Olajuwon in addition to slotting 12.6 mil to Webber. Yeah, but I don’t think they have to piecemeal anything together, at least I don’t think so right now, as of today. Mainly, I am confident (right now anyway) that they have enough options to use, including drafts, cap space, Shandon(if he agrees), Walt, Cato, and to a certain extent Mo(if he agrees) and Carlos to bundle for some effective roster changes, etc… As far as Dream goes: I keep feeling that Dream will come around to the Rockets if some moves are made. I do not think it is a money problem with Hakeem. I could be wrong about him, or he could be leading us down the path as before (the Toronto fiasco, which HE perpetrated, the public outcries of Rocket’s unfairness, which HE made public). He’s a proud man and he is a hard business man. This perception that he portrays himself as benevolent at the expense of others lost a lot of its lustre this past couple of seasons. But I hope if he stays he stays here. That being said, if Webber comes or a comparable roster change takes place, and Cato is gone (who he does not see as a hard worker, he has not a lot of respect for), and if we acquire someone who will listen and allow Hakeem to tutor comes on board(Jackson, Woods, etc …. )then I see him coming back and coming to Houston. Mmanal wrote: I seriously doubt that Sacto would take Cato and Rogers as you point out (dont know if anyone would) and would probably much rather just take picks and maybe a Mo Taylor type instead of overpaid, underachievers like Cato. Of course I agree. But to reiterate the weight of the problem rests with the Dub. He must decide where he’s going, and if it’s Houston he must do that as early as possible, and he must, absolutely must help convince the Kings of the Rockets offer. Personally I do not think Mo will go there. Cato and Walt (plus something else) may be acceptable for a number of reasons (ease the King transition into a Webber-less team, open up the perimeter more, and the option to unload one contract in a year) . But I think the key is Web’s timing of a decision, and his ability to help the Rocket’s sell the trade to the Kings. ------------------ Hey Partner wrote: Webber is not really raising his salary; he is limited to a 5% increase. Thus, he will create no base-year compensation complications for a sign-n-trade. That means that this is one of those rare sign n trades that can actually be done without a three-way. So what is my point. My point is that BYC complications is what gives teams like us with cap room advantage on sign n trade. Without BYC complications, we are on pretty much on the same footing as anyone else. We lose our main advantage; i.e., our cap room would make a 3-way unnecessary. I agree totally. Keep in mind Webber, if he decides he is leaving, will leave because of a number of things. The least important will be the compensation package. (Note: I am now, like everyone else, convinced he is going. I was on the other side of the fence until about two weeks ago, and now am convinced he’s gone). If you say a straight purchase is unlikely, I feel a S&T is unlikely. So we are left playing a game of bluff. The Kings will threaten a S&T for better players somewhere else, demanding we match it with Mo' and Mobley or something further ridiculous like Francis, and we will bluff that we will sign him straight away...."go screw yourself...our guards are untouchable". In the normal course of things that probably is close to what initially will play out between the two sides. But realistically, it is such a disadvantage, not impossible, but “binding” to us, to do a straight FA acquisition, that CD will find some combination to make it work if it is workable. Hell, I don't want Webber if it takes until late Sept to sign in. So true brother. My two fears are these: 1. We end up concentrating on the Webber thing so much that it dissolves all the other needs and wants or effectively eliminates our options to fill those needs drip by drip. I think he would be a great move for the Rockets, but only if ALL things considered it is done fast, and equitably. 2. If this team ends up with ONLY Webber next year we are in trouble. Period. (Note: CD and company have assured us that will not be the case, but it scares me just the same.) Mango wrote: oeilpere, How will there be enough shots for Dream, Webber, Cat and Francis? Webber will take more shots than Taylor did this past season and Dream fussed about not getting involved enough on offense in 2000-2001 Hell that will be the least of our problems. Frankly I do see all of the mentioned getting their share. I may wonder how KT, Langhi and a few others (see my hopes for KVH, or similar roster addition above) will fare. Holden wrote: This could have been our line up. Francis Mobley Pippen Webber Jackson Battier Norris Jason Collier that could have been a pretty good team. ------------------ Little buddy, I cannot believe you put Pippen in there among these other “respectable sports names”. You should go to the bathroom and rinse out your mouth with Ivory, Joy, Irish Spring or good old Lye Soap. Shame Little Buddy. Shame. --------------- [This message has been edited by oeilpere (edited May 18, 2001).]
thx oeilpere... That reading is so great. Damn, if there is anyone who puts the spell on me to make me start down the evil road of summer speculation, which just ends up making me dizzy like Achebe and giving me constipation, it is you. You make me drool over 3-ways with Sac and NJ, where NJ gets Webber/Shandon and we get KVH and the #6. Sac gets something like Martin/Cato and a Future and a plethora of picks from us. Damn, we could spin that other ways too, where we get Martin instead of the #6. drool. I could definitely see Rudy wanting to steal Van Horn in a Webber fall-out, without hurting our frontline. NOTE: A NJ deal means I lose my bet-your-moniker game, people. Boy, would I be so happy to get Van Horn as a 3 plus a defensive intimidator-pick or youngin without parting with Mo'/Dream/Moochie.
Is there any activity on the SAR front? Would the Grizz/Express still be interested in a similar package as was discussed mid season? ------------------ You can't stick a porcupine in a barn, light it on fire, and expect to get licorice.
WOW. Why would Webber go to a rebuilding Jersey? I know it is "almost New York" OP Lately, I have read rumors of a sign and trade(Webber) to Orlando(Outlaw, Miller...). Why would the Kings take Miller when they have the two Euros? Unless it is a three team trade involving a team that is interested in a young small forward. ------------------ Fuggetabout it
bigboy, Oh, don't mind me; oeilpere put a spell on me. lol! But just think ... [your screen is getting fuzzy, spinning,,,,what is that hypnotic soft whirling sound] ..., if NJ lands the #3 pick, then Sac takes that and NJ gets to keep Kenyon with Webber/Shandon and no more rebuilding than Orlando had. ------------------ Heypee's Bet Your Moniker Game, <a href="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/Forum3/HTML/012870-2.html">(bet me here gurus)</a>: <font size="1">SF is not top priority...A 3rd String PG will make the team before Langhi is unseated as 2nd/3rd String SF. 1. If a 3rd PG is not on the roster, I lose my moniker, or 2. If a new SF unseats Langhi, I lose my moniker. 3. But, if a 3rd PG makes the roster, and Langhi is not unseated, you lose your moniker. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 18, 2001).]
First off oeilpere let me say WOW! You seem very knowledgable in regards to the Rockets. Let me also say that I am a DieHard MAVS fan, and I know that there is an unspoken belief that MAVS fans are not suppose to like the Rockets, and Rockets fans are not suppose to like the MAVS. Well I say that's crap because I also like the Rockets. I would love for the Rockets to find a way to pull off getting both Webber, and VanHorn. It would make for some very interesting games between all the Texas teams. The only way I could see that happening though is if Webber signs outright, and there is a trade for VanHorn. I also was not aware that Webber is capable of only getting a 5% increase in pay, I'm guessing that's because of the CBA agreement. As for the number of shots that would be available. I don't think there would be a problem if the team is winning. I doubt Dream, Webber, Franchise, Cat, or VanHorn would mind getting less shots if you make it to the WCF (against the MAVS of coarse). It is similar to the situation that the MAVS have. Finley has scaled back his game with the emergence of Nowitzki, and Nash. Not to mention the signing of Howard. None have complained. Of coarse that may be centered on the fact that Nash, and Dirk are best friends, and Fin, and Howard are best friends. I think as long as the team is winning, and they get along there should be no problem. Check out the line-up by the way... PG - Franchise SG - Mobley SF - VanHorn PF - Webber C - Dream ------------------ http://www.rapmusic.com/texasg/NewMavsLogo1.jpg
It is because Webber is already paid above the current maximum for a 7-10 yr vet. In that event, he is allowed to maintain a payrate above the maximum, but he is limited to signing contracts at only 105% of his current salary. This is known as the Jordan clause. Guys like Garnett and Shaq fall into this category of being paid more than the new maximum. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited May 18, 2001).]
oeilpere, I still don't think Dream would sign into a situation in which he would be Webber's caddy, but lets move on to another point/question. Is Dream likely to sit by this summer waiting for the Rockets to go through various moves on the Webber front? Dream would have to take (be offered) whatever money is left when the spreadsheets have been crunched and the various deals are ready to be put to ink. I just don't think Dream's pride will allow him to swallow all of the above as easily as many here think he will. Mango ------------------ Get it right or just don't do it! Resistance is futile....you will be assimilated. Start more Webber threads! [This message has been edited by Mango (edited May 18, 2001).]
Hasn't KVH said he doesn't like playing the SF? pere-If Cato isn't used in S/T, or can't be used to move up, any ideas on who wants him? ------------------ "That's been a lifelong dream of mine." -Vince Carter, after laying it in on a breakaway, much to the Vancouver crowd's displeasure.
Nike--I think I remember him saying both things at certain times--he doesn't want to play the three on defense because he isn't fast enough to run around and chase most 3's. However, I think he likes to roam the perimeter on offense and is OK with playing the "3" role on defense. ------------------ P.S. This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated.
Defensively, Van Horn has the dreaded Joe Smith syndrome -- too slow to guard SFs, too weak to guard PFs. At some point during the year, I did read that he didn't like playing SF, because it was more embarrassing to have someone dribble right around him on the perimeter than to be overpowered inside. ------------------
NIKE, maybe we can assume he won't say that now with zones. But hell, it is not like he'll play SF all the time, anymore than Nitwitz plays the 3 all the time. Rudy will use mismatches to get his 3 guards out there, all at once. Moochie is way too good at the key, and Francis is way to good at wing, and Mobley is way too fast for any SF out there, for Rudy not to throw some mismatch minutes in there with KVH at PF.
