Morey Fires Back At Misconceptions - In case you missed it...

The whole asset thing was blown out of proportion!!!!

When Morey said he had assets, he was speaking about reasonable contracts, talent 2 or 3 players deep, Draft picks, and rights to International players.

Morey was just being a honest and expecting the personnel to do the same. Every one of those players has been compensated economically, and I'm sure they thrive playing in the NBA. But as it's the Cliche - whenever a player gets traded is because somebody wanted him. He was willing to go for a superstar level player, but he wasn't going to sell short his hand.

Ultimately there were two key pieces of last year who were dealt, Battier and Brooks. But I think both moves made the Rockets a stronger team.

What in the world did Morey do Wrong????? Other than step on some toes. And from the look of things, Brooks and Battier appeared to be happy to part ways.

 

I'm missing the point? Ok, let's review:

- The discussion was about potentially losing Chuck Hayes this offseason.

- The discussion was about the Rockets should do this offseason in regard to Hayes.

- Whether or not Chuck Hayes was or wasn't offered an extension previously doesn't change a single thing about what will happen with him in the future.

- The discussion was about the market (i.e. a contentending team) pricing him out of the Rockets price range.

- You asked "how can paying market value be ovepaying?"

- That's exactly the same scenario that occurred with Lowry and you deemed him overpaid.

- When Chuck Hayes becomes a FA then his market value will be set.

- Whether or not the Rockets could or could not have signed Hayes to an extension has nothing to do with his market value. In order for there to be a market value then there has to be more than one team making an offer. That can't happen until Hayes becomes a FA.

- You yourself said "My point is you sign the players to an extension BEFORE you let the market decide".
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=6085857&postcount=110

Notice that you said "BEFORE"? So you obviously understand that signng a player to an extension is prior to them hitting the market. So, then why do you all of a sudden use that as an argument about whether or not you can overpay if you pay market value. Those two things have nothing to do with each other.

Did my reply make any statement about the merits or non-merits of signing players to extensions prior to their contract expiring? You could be 100% correct or 100% incorrect and neither has any relevance whatsoever to my repy or your post that I originally replied to.

You asked "How is paying the going rate, or the market price, "Over paying"?
"

I simply pointed out that the Rockets paid market price for Lowry and you deemed them to have overpaid. It seemed to me that you had already answered your own question.

You can certainly debate the no extension policy but that's a completely separate topic than what I responded to. I don't see how I'm missing the point when I'm the one that stayed on the same topic that I started with.

 

I'm happy Morey fired Rick, it's now all on him. The players and coaches are his choice and his fate will rest with his upcomming decision. What he doesn't understand that it takes a couple of years to develop a championship team when buidling through the draft. He also, doesn't understand that the 2 free agents available (Dwight and CP3) are going to sign elsewhere. Morey must show loyalty to a group of players and allow them to gel. If you keep trading players, not chemistry develops and the Rockets continue to mss the playoffs.

 

I'm a Morey hater, but why show loyalty to a group of players and letting them gel when clearly they are not a championship team. We must rebuild through the draft.

 

It wouldn't had happen had he just admit he was wrong for calling players assets

 

Fair enough - nicely spoken.

DD

 

You're telling me. No reason why this whole asset argument should involve 10 threads on the GARM first page right now. I guess that's a symptom of the off-season.

 

Why didn't Houston offer Gortat the full MLE?

 

Amazing post that seems to have been ignored.

 

Agreed.

If he had called players deficits, then maybe I could understand all the reaction.

 

Most people are missing the point. It's not "assets" that's the problem. It's "trading assets" that's the matter.

 

Because you still have to play games even when you are not a contending team. If a team gels, team wins more games, more fan support, player value rises.

Rebuilding through the draft is easier said than done. In order to do that, you have to completely suck. And in order to completely suck you will need to be a bad team losing a franchise/star player, see Garnett/Minny, Ray Allen/Seattle, ZBo/Portland, Vince Carter/NJ.

Or if you are Cleveland, when your entire team get's blown the frick apart.

Or you can be like NY or Clippers, super ****tty front office

We don't belong in any of the groups. Our groups don't depend on one franchise player, that's why when Tmac went down, we still went into second round, and when Yao went down, we still won 42 games. Morey build the team pretty damn strong outside of Yao and McGrady, which was what he was suppose to do when he was hired. The team is so balanced, that even when you trade away core players like Battier and Brooks, we continue winning. The only way we can truly suck to the level of the lottery, is to have multiple injuries. Or trade away all the pieces for lesser talent.