you should stick to one topic at a time. This is stupid for suggesting we could get David Lee for someone as cheap as an undersized 2 guard. And for suggesting that Matt Carroll or Kapono would sign here to be a 10th man when they're both starting and producing this year. The Mike James suggestion I'm sure will be talked about in the offseason.. personally, I'd rather have Rafer still. I just hate James's attitude. You can be firey (i.e. Sura) without being a detriment to your team if things don't go your way.
Please help me understand: The Rox (JVG? CD? Both? Other???) have a fascination with mj. He is what he is and whatever that is it ain't much in MinnieLand. What is the fascination? IMHO they had a similar fascination previous to mj with Antonio Daniels. I just hope when this season ends too soon, and dadgum I hope I am way wrong on that but getting thru Mavs in Round II appears overly daunting at this moment, please please please get it right at the 1 and 4.
yes.....anyone who refers to themselfs in the first person is a wack job....unless it is a joke! im glad he is not here, rafer is not the awnser but neither is he!!
Couldn't agree more. It's an area of need, he's talented, he's cheap, he's available and it's been confirmed twice that the Rockets want him. There are many more Mike James threads to come, on top of the several we've already seen over the last 2 years. He's the new KJ. That's what I don't get about those who don't want James on the team. Rafer is still here. I can't see JVG trading him nor could I see anyone trading for him ... he'll be back. James is portrayed as a chemistry-killing demon, which is ridiculous, but even if the offense didn't flow right with him in there, you can put in Rafer. If Rafer goes Rafer, you can put in James. It's a very low-risk move, in my opinion. People need to think about it: Our current point guard could not win a backup job on any of the teams ahead of us (seriously) and our backups shouldn't be in the league right now. We need another option. The only problem I could see is other teams could come in and possibly offer better. James is definitely done in Minnesota though ... no way he's back next season. That was a terrible decision by both parties, given the direction Minnesota is going in. Again, couldn't agree more. It's all about options and matchups.
My intention wasn't really to spark debate as to who would fit best on the Rockets but who's actually out there and attainable for the Rockets. Prior to the trade deadline, 5 or 6 teams were reportedly seeking point guard help. In Free Agency those teams will be either cashed up (have more than the MLE) or have tradeable talent ,ie not players that aren't just salary relief but will make a difference. If a team can avoid Luxury Tax they'll do it I think. For eg Denver were going to trade Kleiza for Lucas, trade would've gotten them safely under, but next season they'll be too far over the LT threshold to make that trade worthwhile for them. Again T-Wolves are the only team in a financial situation that the Rockets can immediately fix. Unless Billups lands outside of Detroit T-Wolves and other opportunities open up Minny are the only trading partner in the foreseeable future that makes sense for both treams. Other posters have mentioned keeping Rafer but I've never suggested trading him nor do I think the Rockets will trade him. The purpose of another point guard is to have depth in that position.
Mike James here is possible. Another good thing is it would be a full year off the trade kicker, makes it less for Minny to part with him. I have been a big fan of acquiring James every time it happened or almost happened. But he is getting older. I think the time to acquire James or Atkins was this year. Next year is just one more year closer to the time they become ineffective. Hard to know if Mike James already has started a downword spiral, or if how Minny handles their guards is just too screwed up. Next year I'd be more inclined to try to get a younger guy in there to compete with Rafer for the starting job. Diener or Smush for 1/3 of the MLE or LLE maybe. But we need to let the season play out to see if we most need another PG, SG, or what.
Not to beat on a dead horse, but here's the Sporting News' take on James: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...g=learnfromthetradesthatid&prov=tsn&type=lgns
We don't want him. That's taking it al ittle far. We showed interest in him after we couldn't land any other pg's we were interested in him. We wanted Chucky Atkins. He is a team cancer. He's been one once here and now he's become one in Minnesota. James is a chemistry killer. At best he's a streaky scorer and good defender coming off the bench. At worst he's a shot happy pg who couldn't co exist with TMac or KG. It's not a "no risk move" b/c James would have to be willing to conform to a supporting role on the team. So far he's proved he can't do that since he got his ego after his stint with Detroit. Teams aren't going to offer better. Despite what some may think (I think someone posted article) James isn't a hot commodity arround the league. His stock has slipped a lot and there's not a lot of teams lining up to take a guy who couldn't work with TMac or KG. I'm all for getting a backup pg but lets go after a better one then James. Rafer isn't the reason we're losing.
KAS13 I agree with most of what you said, but that last line: "Rafer's isnt' the reason we're losing." Are you high? If we had a PG with the BALLS to take physical contact, or even just FINISH a drive to the basket, and not jack up 3's non-stop, we could have won against Boston and Cleveland (not to mention some other bad losses earlier this year). Rafer's defense sucks and he's the main reason everyone on D has to collapse to prevent penetration. As soon as that happens, the opposing PG dishes to wide open shooters or slashers. The better the opposing PG, the harder it is for us to win. When Boston's PG's outplay ours, you know our PG SUCKS!!!
Just stop and read what you're writing. We don't want Mike James ... he was a team cancer for us ... but we showed interest in bringing him back? Not once, but twice. I know the point is to defend Rafer, but that's just not accurate. You don't have to be a hot commodity to draw better offers than a retired player and John Lucas III. I think it's low risk, not no risk... and I still think the same. Every player on the team not named T-Mac and Yao has to conform to a supporting role. James has done it before. If Rafer is as good as you say, then Mike will have to earn his time (and for the first time, so will Rafer). You got a better player than James that the Rockets can get with their tradeable assets, let's hear it -- I'm all for it. Of course he isn't. He never is. Rafer can only be the reason we're winning.
I wish I was watching the crap basketball we've been playing. However, it isn't Rafer's fault that Head has dissapeared and TMac shot 10-31 and didn't even think of playing defense.
We showed interest in him after we attempted to make other deals. When we could have had him by throwing ina draft pick we passed. Heavy interest. Plus, him coming back had a ton of conditions on it. You know that.. I said I'd take James back. However, I'd rather make a run at Atkins like we did the whole time. James didn't do it before. That's why TMac had his ass shipped out of here. Get me Chucky Atkins please. He's played roles in both but he certainly isn't the deciding factor (although tonight he made a terrible foul that cost us)
Come on man, JVG was knocking on his door as soon as FA signing season opened, 12:01 am. And then we tried to trade for him at the deadline. Can't you tell, JVG WANTED HIM BAAAAAAAAAD.
