I really like your posts generally, jopatmc, but you are totally off on this one. Like, completely. - Lee cannot play PG - The team loves Lowry. They will keep him unless they have to trade him to get an absolute superstar. - Lee and Lowry play different positions, so it is hard to understand how one makes the other expendable - Lowry cannot be traded for one year without his consent, as others have posted Saying "Lee makes Lowry expendable" is kind of like saying "Lee makes Yao expendable".
I don't believe they will pay the lux tax unless they get a superstar, I don't believe that will happen, therefore, I think they jettison JT. DD
Why would they get rid of JT, but go out sign Smith and pay luxury tax on him. They would end up losing most of JT's savings with Smith's salary and tax.
Depends on whether they consider JT to be worth twice his salary (which would be like $ 1.5M?). Considering that his salary is very low, they might just think that's ok. But I think our speculation is moot as I am sure there will be more trades before the deadline. If Jeffries ends the season as a Rocket, you can change my sig .
I realize Lee is not a point guard per se. However, if you notice, there is a pattern with Morey, Adelman and the perimeter players. They run Lowry and Brooks together. Brooks defends shooting guards. Brooks plays shooting guard when Lowry is in the game, forcing cross matches for the defense. Brooks is not a classic point guard per se but he is starting at the point for us. When we have Brooks/Martin/Budinger/Yao/Scola on the floor, there really is no point guard. You got 5 guys who can go get their shot if they have to. My point about Lowry is, he just signed a MLE contract. Now his contract is more in line with his value while he was severely underpaid before he became a free agent. Lowry would be happy to waive his right of refusal to go to Philly (his hometown) as the starting point guard. Yeah, they've got 3 point guards, or whatever. I'm not saying it is an absolute. But Lowry would likely waive his right of refusal to go anywhere as the starting point guard. I am in agreement with DaDa on the point guard position. Either one or both of Brooks/Lowry will be traded.....within the next year. Lee is not a dribbling assist machine point guard. Neither is Derek Fisher. But Fish is a point guard nontheless. What I am saying is Lee gives us much more backcourt flexibility. I happen to think the player most likely traded first is Lowry because of his salary. But it wouldn't surprise me if Brooks went first since he is coming up on his option year. And it wouldn't surprise me if both guys were gone within a year, if it gets us back one of either Nash, Rubio, or Paul. A Paul deal would almost necessitate Brooks going out with our expirings and a couple other pieces for Paul and Okafor. A Nash deal would almost have to be Brooks going out as well. Rubio????--don't know if he would require a point going out since they have Johnny Jump up there already. So, since likely either Nash or Paul would require Brooks, then that leaves Lowry as a very expensive backup to a premier point guard or as trade bait for an upgrade at the SF position. I can see Lowry being dangled as part of a package for a small forward, whether it be Iggy (likely) or Melo (not very likely) or somebody else not on the radar yet.
I think Brooks would get moved before Lowry would, if they were to move one of the two. They would value Lowry at his current deal as a starting PG higher in terms of price/performance ratio than Brooks at an $ 8-10M/year deal (which is probably where his market value might be). By the way, interesting thought here, now that NO moved Collison, if their season doesn't go the way they hope it will, they might actually be interested in Brooks as a key piece to a Paul trade later down the line. I think they moved Collison mainly to make Paul happy, but if it turns out they are not going to be a contender, he might pout again mid-season. Then it gets interesting. Brooks, Hill, picks, Jeffries' contract...
Given that JT's salary merely moves them from about $1.35 mil to $2.1 mil over the tax threshhold, I don't see how moving his salary is important to any effort to get under the tax. Dumping JT alone won't get you under the tax. You still need to dump $1.35 mil more by, for example trading JJ for someone making $1.35 mil les than JJ does and probably pay some money to cover the salary difference for less than 1/2 season, and maybe throw in some more cash as "incentive." But if they were gonna have to deal JJ anyway, why not just trade him for someone making $2.1 mil less and money to cover the difference at that rate (+ incentive money) instead? Removng Taylor is pretty much pointless in any effort to get under the tax. The only reasons why they'd dump him are (a)they don't actually think he's worth a roster spot and $750K and (b) they think JT is the least useful Rocket and there's someone out there they want to add and they need a roster spot. Otherwise, it's just DD on his dead horse beating tour.
I agree, this is probably the easier route to take. Or they would use let's say 4M of the Ariza trade exception to trade for someone making that much money, and trade JJ for nothing, thus creating a new significant trade exception, I could see that as a typical Morey move, for instance. Doing anything with JT has little impact, so unless they see him as a waste of a roster space, I don't see them trading him, at that bargain price.
Exactly. At this point, the most feasible February deadline "tax avoidance" deal for the Rockets would be the following: Jared Jeffries ($6.88M), the Rockets' 2011 second rounder and cash to Minnesota for Sebastian Telfair ($2.7M). The Rockets can use $2.7M of the Ariza trade exception to eat Telfair's salary. Meanwhile, Jeffries could go outright to Minnesota (which is under the cap) and generate a new $6.88M trade exception. Of course, the Rockets would have to beat out other teams in offering enticements to Minnesota to use their cap space. The actual cash difference in remaining salary obligations between Jeffries and Telfair would be about $1.4M or so (subject to whether either of them have their salaries front-loaded or back-loaded). The Rockets would gladly pay more than that in cash to entice the T-Wolves. The 2011 second rounder looks to be pretty decent (the higher of the Rockets' and the Clippers' pick), although I'm sure Minnesota would maybe ask for a first rounder. I should probably have posted this in the Random Trade Thread, but you brought up this specific issue, so I thought I'd respond here.
i do believe the rockets will trade for a star, i dunno about Iggy though.If we do trade for him i see us giving up battier, jeffries and taylor for Iggy. That would be nice i really do see us making such a move. We would be set i believe. C-Yao/Miller/Hayes F-Scola/Patterson/Hill F-Iggy/Budinger G-Martin/Lee G-Brooks/Lowry/Ish.Smith Reason i Put Patterson over Hill is because i believe that Patterson is a more developed player than Hill. I would maybe even put them sharing minutes but in the end i believe Patterson will wim that spot. Another thing i missed is i believe Detroit might wana move Prince who is very expandable now that they hey that foreign guy who opened everyones eyes last year.He might be someone we are looking for. Prince to me is the Upgrade version of Battier and Ariza all in one. Long, Athletic,defense, and can shot pretty desent.I would actually like him in the lineup better than Iggy. Because we will need to defend when we play the heat this coming season. C-Yao/Miller/Hayes F-Scola/Patterson/Hill F-T.Prince/Budinger G-Martin/C.Lee G-Brooks/Lowry/Ish.Smith Awesome lineup, i hope it goes down just like this. Get "ER" Done morey
I'm loving the thought of Iggy for Jeffries/Battier/JT Taylor. We need an athletic 3, who can play some tough D and perform on the offensive end. However, Shane can coexist with Yao if he's hitting his shot. It amazes Shane can't be a consistent 12 point scorer, when he's wide open from the D concentrating on AB, Martin, Yao, and Scola. I don't think Bud is ready to start because of his poor D. Always looking for the next great white hope.
There is no way lee is a capable playmaker to be a point .. kmart is not as well .. brooks is not a playmaker also.. lowry is valuable to us bc we rely on our bench more than most other teams do and he makes our bench go .. our bench needs someone like lowry to be succesful and we need the bench to be successful in order to succeed. as of now .. rockets have one point guard making bench player money and one making starter money .. i dont think they care that the one making bench money is starting and vice versa.. to them its working .. when they pay brooks the big bucks next year THEN they may say ok we are paying two pgs a lot of money lets see if we want to move one of them .. as for this year i dont think lowry making 6 mill is a problem to them .. no way lee will replace lowry. as a matter of fact no way brooks, martin or iggy replace wht lowry does
Someone has to be at the top of this expendable list. starters both getting 35-38 mins easily doesnt leave too much minutes for Lowry playing point and playing point with brooks. at least not at the type of money he is making. so either that or lee is just screw taylor wise and hopefully lowry is happy at his same role as last year when martin came in. which concludes another point, it also could mean martin is expendable if they truly are high on lowry. someone has to get minutes, hmm
Since when is it not okay to just be DEEP??? Seriously, it's not like having all of these good players on the team is somehow detrimental to team success. And with the payroll only a couple million above the tax threshold, trading away a key component is not absolutely necessary. Remember that whole thing about "Les being willing to spend for this team to win"? He's not going to pay the luxury tax just for the sake of paying it; but he's willing to spend on good players. We're just lucky to have so many of them.
