You gotta be kidding me Rock....let's look at a few of your comments: "Look at Cuban, he just threw away millions to acquire Kidd. 4 something million on a player he didn't even have on the squad to make the trade work. Not to mention the luxury tax hit he took." Of all the moves made in the past few weeks, this is by far the worst. I'm glad we don't have an owner that sticks his nose in b-ball decisions when it's obvious they know nothing about the game. I live in Dallas and 90% of the fans I've spoken with have absolutely NO IDEA what the Mavs are thinking. The Mavs will NOT make the finals and I'll bet you $100 they don't make the WCF. Great move Mark....if a move like this doesn't garauntee you a spot in the WCF, why make it? "Les has sent a mandate to Morey that his goal and number one priority is dumping salary to get under the luxury tax. " I'm assuming you have the email or memo to back this up? "Which means Morey's job is to try to improve the team without taking on any more salary and which makes improving this team via trade infinitesimally more difficult and picking up a player on the wire non existent. If that is the owner's goal then Morey's hands are tied." Or, Morey's job could be to revamp the roster after the crappy job CD did over the past 5 or so years.....Maloney, Cato, the list of horrible contracts goes on an on. If you remember, this team was f-d at the end of last year, Morey has done a nice job of turning things around with limited to no flexibility under the cap and that's not because of Les, it's because of the situation he was hired into. Is there a little bit of stinginess involved because of the "money ball" theories with which Daryl works, yes. Is that one of the reasons he was brought into the fold, yes. Does that mean that Les' goal is to run everything on the cheap, NO. If it was, we'd look alot more like the Clippers instead of the Spurs. "Cuban or Kupchak didn't have that limitation nor even Kerr." So Kupchack got lucky...earlier in the year he was the idiot that almost lost Shaq and Kobe. Kerr, the jury is still out, but he actually gave up talent to get Shaq and they are much deeper than we are. Cuban has been good for Dallas, but that's because the franchise was CRAP before he got here. Anybody could have made it better than it was....that doesn't make his stupid trade for Kidd the right thing to do - actually, the right thing to have done was trade Dork for Shaq three years ago and make sure you lock up Nash. And not maxing out Nash......that was a cheap move by an owner worth billions. I hardly call making a move to get under the cap when there isn't an obvious "get us over the hump" player out there a reason to call for the owner to sell.
^Sensible post. It's Les's fault that we aren't lucky like Kupchak or idiotic for overpaying (in a future cap sense) disgruntled or aging stars... I mean you can dump on Les for his handling of Rockets coaches or his selection of GMs, but this thread is a knee jerk after the trade deadline capped an insane trading season that inflated player values.
les doesn't deserve to own the team.....he deserves crap like memphis...but with such a profitable team we as fans deserve a better owner...after all we are the ones filling the seats, watching them on tv, buying rockets caps.....that peta loving cheap ass should sell the team
we knew this was the plan when les brought in morey. this situation is analogous to when the Haas estate sold the Oakland A's to Schott and Hoffman, they hired billy beane to keep the team winning with a dramatically smaller payroll. the entire point is to use sabermetrics to identify and sign undervalued players. this means morey and les might do the HUGE trade for a guy like artest if it's a lock but more likely they're going to do a bunch of smaller trades for players they think other teams have overlooked. the problem with the NBA is that profitability of a team isn't actually tied to performance. the Knicks are actually STILL as profitable as the Lakers despite being one of the worst teams in history. and where you make the big money for sports franchises is simply by sitting on a team for years and selling it off for massive profits after the value has inflated. I do agree that a guy like cuban who actually cares about winning above all else would be a much better owner than les, who counts his pennies and thinks of this as a business. The baseball analogy would be like when Tribune owned the Cubs... they spent money but it was actually just a business--compared to John Henry who is passionate about winning and about baseball and will do anything to get the job done
Bloop, There's a difference between getting the job done and dramatically overpaying like Cuban did for a broken down PG that will NOT put them over the top....especially when he was so frugal with Nash. What exactly did you guys want the Rockets to do? Mortgage the future for .95% chance of winning it all by bringing in Artest or Miller - then losing Artest like the Astros did with Randy Johnson? What magic deal was out there that would have catipulted the Rox into an odds on favorite? I would argue that if no such deal existing (and it didn't), then why all the fuss? I agree that Cuban is probably a better owner from a fans perspective, but like it or not this is a business. As the Yankees, Mets, Dodgers and Mavericks have proven, it doesn't really matter how much you spend - it's a team game and the parts HAVE to compliment each other. I really dont think this is a matter of Les not having the passion to do what it takes to win - he's constantly made the big deals since he bought the team and it really only panned out with Clyde (came close other times, but didn't get the ultimate prize). What I do think has happened is that he listened to his GM about where this club stands in its learning curve under Adelman, where this club stands today vs the competition, what players were available that could close the gap vs that competition and whether the asking price was reasonable. If that means that they have decided to let this season go by and take their chances in the playoffs with what they have, so be it. At the end of the day, it's his team and that's the advice he's hired Morey to give. Morey's job is to give an honest assessment of the club's competition, a financial assessment of it's contracts, and an assessment of not only their talent but the talent available on the market. From Daryl's interviews this season, I don't think he's ever been sold that this club could win it all and I don't think the trades made by Phoenix, Dallas and LA changed his mind any. If you aren't sold that you have what it takes, and there is not a deal out there that changes the makeup of your club enough change your mind as the GM, why make a move? With that said, I ask again...What move was out there that would have ushered us into the WCF with a legit shot at the finals (without hamstringing us next year)? I could very well be wrong, I'm just not of the opinion that Artest or Miller would have done it.
So, let me get this straight. Spending money makes you a better team? So New York should be the best team in the league right?
there's one billion fans in china...if les alexander doesnt know how to exploit that advantage...then he must have his head up his ass...that's the simple truth...he's sitting on a gold mine of potential revenue...and he needs to dig in...
What is your point? I never said Harris for Kidd was a good deal or Kerr and Kupchak were better GM's. Les is pinching pennies on a team that is making him a good profit. And I can't help but believe that part of that is because he is sick about losing so many millions in his other ventures. Morey has said almost verbatim you can only judge trades based on what's being asked to do, and what goals you are working with. He recently said once Stoudamire was a free agent he was off the board as an option for them. He just said yesterday that the deals also allow them to add a player. Why is that? They could have cut Snyder a long time ago and added a player. It's because Les was not about to spend another dime on this team. And now they are a million plus under the luxury tax and it's okay to drop Haruska and pick up Bobby Jones. Obviously his goals are improving the team while staying under the luxury tax. Personally I think he did a great job at achieving that. He is not the problem. SOmehow the title "It's time for Les to sell the team" mislead you into believing otherwise.
I think the current trade with NOH is definitely a business decision. The problem is not about the deal or spending money but about who we deal with. If it means we are willing to improve our rival to become a contender while weakening our team to save some money (under the LT) then chances are the owner is highly unlikely to spend money (LT go over) to improve our team. Nevertheless, the most painful fact is still on the fact that we help to improve NOH bench (a rival contender) as everyone acknowledged and that is unacceptable.
So he is a cheap owner because this team has been making cheap trades? So what? Are these "cheap" players not performing well? Paying a player a ton of money doesn't necessarily mean he's worth that much. Look at Ben Wallace. $15 millions just for good rebounding and shot blocking?! He's not the leader or superstar of any team either, so he's not the reason why fans go to see games like how T-Mac is for Rockets. I don't see a problem with getting cheap players. I think if a player is paid too much, he's spoiled and won't work as hard as a player working his way up. Look at Stephon Marbury and Allen Houston, overpaid.
You're right, you didn't say they were better GMs you said the following: "Which means Morey's job is to try to improve the team without taking on any more salary and which makes improving this team via trade infinitesimally more difficult and picking up a player on the wire non existent. If that is the owner's goal then Morey's hands are tied. Cuba or Kupchak didn't have that limitation nor even Kerr." My point is that I don't think it has anything to do with limitations on Morey (and by the way Cuban is not a GM). You threw those three out there because they made deals. The reason Houston was a part of those deals has nothing to do with a cheap owner - they never would have made the Kidd deal, Kerr has MUCH more talent to move around in potential deals than Morey does and I GARAUNTEE you that we would have done the Gasol deal if it was offered to us for Brooks or Landry and filler. It's obvious you're still in over reaction mode. Check back when you calm down.
I think people in general fail to realize how valuable Jackson's expiring contract may be next year. Fans always act like cap management is something that's only good for the owner's pocketbook, but Morey's made it clear that a major advantage of this trade is the possibility of using Jackson's expiring contract next year to bring in a good player. Plus, Mike James was getting paid way too much over too long a timeframe to keep around any longer. We should be very glad to be rid of the last vestige of the horrible contracts that have weighed this team down for so long.
He was too cheap to pay Steve Nash... I love how everyone complains about how Les Alexander and Drayton Mclane don't spend enough money. Rockets 11th in payroll NBA SALARIES 17th in attendance 2007-2008 Attendance Go to the freaking games in Houston in maybe your owner will want to spend more money. The team is very good, but Houston is a bad sports town. It makes it hard to motivate an owner to spend more. Sad thing is, 17th is a good attendance year for the Rockets.
Ok, remind me again why they Mavs released Michael Finley? Oh yeah, it was to reduce the luxury tax that they had to pay. -- Michael Finley was waived late Monday night by the Dallas Mavericks, who took advantage of a one-time amnesty provision that will allow them to avoid luxury taxes on the $51.8 million owed their captain over the next three seasons. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2135039 Why did they not make a higher offer to retain Steve Nash? That's right, they were trying to save money. According to sources, Nash brought the Suns' offer back to the Mavericks, but Mavs owner Mark Cuban declined to match it. Stein reports that the Suns' offer was nearly $20 million richer. Mavericks sources said Cuban was reluctant to give Nash more than a four-year guaranteed contract because of fears the 30-year-old couldn't physically handle playing more than 32 minutes per game. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1833028 That's the problem with Cuban, he doesn't have a consistent approach. First he spends a ton of money and they don't win. Then he decides to save money and the Nash deal blows up in his face. Now, he's overreacting again and panicking and making the Kidd trade. Personally, I'd much prefer an owner that maintains a consistent approach. You might not like the plan, but at least it seems that there is a plan that they are sticking to. Dallas keeps flip flopping back and forth and for all the cash that Cuban has spent he has no titles to show for it and his team is one whole game ahead of Les' team.
The world around the nba when morey was brought in is that he was a numbers guy and les was looking to get the numbers straight so he could sell the team. At the time when he was hired I wondered why the rockets hired a non basketball guy to do basketball stuff. I think if les wants to sell, then he should sell. This isn't a knee jerk reaction to what has jus happened, its just the general feel and look of the organization and a gm telling the money paying fans about next season. If the rox would have stayed put and got gerald green for snyder, that would have been better than getting jackson that hasn't played a full season in 5 yrs. I mea there were moves to make even if the artest deal was too much, but to talk about next yr already, I have a problem.
"The word around the nba when morey was brought in is that he was a numbers guy and les was looking to get the numbers straight so he could sell the team." So you're an NBA insider or you're making this up? I don't recall anyone saying that Morey was hired in anticipation of Les selling. "This isn't a knee jerk reaction to what has jus happened, its just the general feel and look of the organization and a gm telling the money paying fans about next season. If the rox would have stayed put and got gerald green for snyder, that would have been better than getting jackson that hasn't played a full season in 5 yrs." It is knee jerk and you'll be happy next year at this time. "I mean there were moves to make even if the artest deal was too much, but to talk about next yr already, I have a problem." Once again, fill us in on those moves (or your sources for that matter).
