I was on ESPN's Trade Machine fooling around this morning. I was seeing if there was a way to get Camby without giving up too much to match his $9M salary. I understand that the Clippers can get a heck of a lot more for a $9M ending contract than the Rockets would be willing to give up, but that's not the point of the thread. Like i said, i was just fooling around. So here's the point: I start with Cook's $3.5M. I add Barry's $2M and Dorsey's 900k. I just need to add about $2M more when I get to this conundrum. Should I add Hayes, or Landry? I couldn't decide. Landry is the more skilled player with a higher upside. Hayes wasn't even a rotation player last year... but he's so damn good at what he does. So who would you be more willing to part with? NOTE: alot of replies are focusing on the fact that i mentioned Camby... I'm not advocating any sort of trade with this thread. nor the acquisition of any player. Camby was used randomly as an example to pose my question.
That's a tough one! But the upside alone would make me lean toward letting the Chuckster go. That and seeing how scoring is going to be an issue this year, Carl's offensive game is more valuable.
Landry without a second thought. He's more valuable to the rest of the league and would make any trade more attractive than if it included Hayes instead. Hayes is a lot more valuable on our team than he would be on other teams..basically I'm saying the Rockets will get less in return for Hayes compared to what Hayes provides for the team. Of course, with this year's roster and the fact we're probably going small ball, Hayes' skillset might become less valuable to us while the opposite is true for Landry. Although, everytime I see Hayes shoot a free throw, his value temporarily goes down as I lament the reality of a pro NBA player with that kind of FT shooting form.
I wouldn't be more willing to depart with Landry as quick as Hayes but LCII explained it well, if we'd trade Hayes we'd get nothing but scrub players back. Landry's value would force you to trade him.
Sorry for the double post. Fixed/ To add; I'd only let Landry go if it were a package brining in a star or semi star player his value to NBA teams is good enough to pull that with others due to his potentional.
Well from the Smoothie's post it looks as if he want's salary for the proposed trade. Camby would certaily give you an interior defensive presence and provide everything the Chuckters could. I would think putting Landry in that deal would be one sided deal helping the Clipps.
chuck without a doubt. landry can improve his defense, and has a pretty good upside (maybe not an all star, but maybe a 6th man)....chuck on the other hand gives tremendous effort, great defense....but has no offensive skills, and there's no indication of him improving on his offense. gotta play both ends.
I'd probably give up Hayes first (if the receiving team really would take either), but it would hurt if the trade isn't for a legit center. If we got a legit center, Hayes would go back to the end of the bench, so we wouldn't miss him as much. Any other trade and we would really be hurting at the 5.
if Dorsey could show a pulse, i would say Hayes. If Dorsey is still just a body taking space on the bench, then it get a little more difficult, but I guess Hayes is the bigger liability.
Landry is more likely to help us land a big name so obviously it depends upon the deal being discussed. I know you are just speaking generally and that doesn't answer your question, but there really isn't an easy yes/no answer.
I'd part with Chuck before Landry. Landry is young and still has a lot of upside. That and his offense is better than Chuck's ever will be.
I'd say Hayes is probably the only untouchable on the team. For the price we can keep him at, he's a huge asset. Other teams don't see that. We'd only trade him if we could get a star in return, and no one will do that.
Because of Yao's absense, Chuck is going to be way more valuable to us this year. Chuck is the only legit big man defender we have on the whole roster. We have NO, ZERO interior defense without Chuckie. And Landry is probably overvalued by the league right now because of his explosive finishing and jump shot. If we could ship Landry, Cook, and Dorsey out for Camby's expiring, I'd do it. More cap space for 2010 and a legit center to boot for 2009 that would probably be willing to re-sign for a minimal salary to back up Yao for a couple years. That would leave Shane and some of the rookies to move near the trade deadline for a better fit, expirings, picks, whatever. Or, it would leave us with the flexibility to move Shane and McGrady at the deadline in a major overhaul if Morey could pick up a couple superstars with them.
I disagree bigtime. The rox are going to play some teams they won't even have a chance against because of their size. Camby gives u a better chance and he has a expiring contract. Just like deke gave the team a chance size wise. I can look at sa,dall,la,den,port,utah,clev,orl,bost as teams the rox have no shot of beating. That's a lot of losses right there alone.
