We are luck we have Les as an owner. You may not agree with his methodology but there is no denying that he wants to win. Those saying he should sell the team should be careful of that for which they ask. Name five current NBA owners that you would prefer over Les.
I say keep him, he is a great owner and people shouldn't cry to get rid of him, he didn't cause the injury's.
I am quite sure there are die-hard fans that don't want to tank. And casual fans that do want to tank. In fact, I'm more inclined to believe that casual fans prefer the tank method, because they can just get off the bandwagon for a few years until the team becomes good again. To say that wishing to tank is equivalent of a die-hard fan, IMO, is hugely disrespectful of die-hard Rockets fans.
Is being flamboyant the best trait of a die-hard fan? I guess I'm not a die-hard fan then. While I spend way too much time on this message board, analyzing our players, draft picks, trade scenarios, I have never really yelled like crazy while attending Rockets games.
Les should assemble a group of aging Nowitzki, Terry and Kidd and see if he can win something. I don't care if he is flamboyant as long as he is winning something.
Les didn't bring you those championships. He happened to be owner when they were won. But he didn't earn those for you...credit management which was already in place and a team that had already been built.
That's a bit of a mischaracterization of the point I was making. i'm simply advocating making wiser decisions in the name of building for the future. Tanking may or may not be part of that. But either way, we should be trying to aquire more draft picks as to improve our chances of finding a building-block-type player; not hording veterans so that we can stay competitive. In order to make big strides towards winning a championship, you have to take chances, and you have to make tough decisions. We haven't really done either over the last few years, and it's hurt us. If we make the right acquisitions and hit on a couple draft prospects, we will be competitve ...oh and we will also put ourselves on a trajectory to contend. Anyone can sign or trade for veterans to stay at 500; it's harder to actually build something dominant that can last. For that, you have to really go for it. To me, playing it safe is a loser mentality. I'm not satisfied with being mediocur. die-hard fans are not satisfied with being mediocur.
Disagreeing with his methods to build the Rockets is different from saying he's not a fan. It's like saying Daniel Snyder's not a fan because anyone can sign big FAs who turn out to be busts. If you don't like the way he runs the Rockets, so be it. But that has nothing to do with fanhood. Just his evaluation as an owner. He may very well have what you consider a loser's mentality, and doesn't want to take risks. Honestly, I live my life fairly safe without taking risks, without going for risky moves career wise or investment wise. And I know a lot of others who feel the same way. None of us consider ourselves stupid or a loser because of it. And if I had my half of my money invested in the Rockets, I probably would think hard before wishing the team to be the Bobcats or the Wizards just for the miniscule chance of turning into the Thunder.
I seriously doubt Les is as hard core a basketball fan as Cuban. Owners who love the game the most: 1. Cuban and Jordan chirp chirp chirp chirp 2. Everyone else
There is a VAST difference between WANTING to do something and actually DOING something about it. Cuban is a much better owner than Les, it is not even close. DD
i'm glad that you have a conservative investment portfolio. I'm happy you protect your financial success. It must mean you have something worth protecting. Not really relevant to our conversation though. I'm talking about winning an NBA championship. If we had a contending team, then it would be a good strategy to play it safe and be conservative with our moves. We'd have something worth protecting. what do we have worth protecting as of now? We have to build something woth protecting first before we go into "play-it-safe" mode.
There is a difference between being able to make a risky move and doing the best with the opportunities that are available. Drafting Yao and trading for T-mac were risky moves. Signing Artest was a risky move. Since the injuries to our highest paid players the opportunities have not been available to take a calculated risk that would significantly improve the franchise. Not one that Stern would allow, anyway. We have hundreds on here that believe they can do a better job so why pay Morey all of that money? DD thinks he can do a better job. Why not just hire him? Too far below his pay scale?
I disagree. Cuban (love him or hate him) doesn't care how much money he loses as long as he wins and he's not counting playoffs as a win as a true fan shouldn't. Les will only lose money if he's guaranteed a winner which is hard to do when you don't have a city/team that is a media draw. ie Cuban loves his Mavs to the point where money doesn't matter. Les has never shown this trait. In fact I think Les doesn't want to "rebuild without winning" because he doesn't want to lose gate/sponsor money.
i don't think drafting Yao or trading for T-mac were risky moves. Most GMs would have made both of those moves. we gave up so little for Artest (at the time), it was not thought to be a risky move. I understand your point, but i think the last big risk we took was trading all that young talent for Barkely; although i may be forgeting something.
Yao was not a consensus number one pick. Although it was a safe move in respect to marketing it was a risky move in respect to the game of basketball. That's the reason Barkley ended up kissing the ass of an ass. Trading a player that is literally labelled "franchise" for a guy who had burned bridges in two cities was also a risky move, although one you had to take considering the upside. Artest was a risky move from the perspective of team chemistry. Any team signing Artest was going to be taking a risk.
