Why is talent so tied to scoring? Hayes is one of the best one-on-one post defenders in the NBA. Take him off the team and it's doubtful we get to 7 games in the Lakers series. Would you rather have an empty stat guy like Eddy Curry or Zach Randolph or a no-stat guy like Hayes that actually impacts the game more positively? ...and by the way, if you take Hayes off the list, you should remove Battier, too. It's not like he 's out there throwing up stats either. The four biggest impact players (active only) on the team at this point are Scola, Brooks, Battier and Hayes. Landry, Lowry and Ariza COULD be and I hope they are, this year, given that they will have plenty of oppurtunities with the stars out.
Wow, seriously? I don't think I implied that he wasn't talented. I love Chuck and I think he's arguably the best defensive player on the team, but when I think of the top 4 players on the rockets he isn't one of them. Who would be protected before him if I had to drop a player... scola brooks battier landry ariza lowry All in good fun anyways, It's nice that Chuck gets his name in there.
Base on the present line up and with all the injuries. I think its fair to categorize the team as a middle class. How else can you define a team that can compete but is always saddled with injuries?
The media probably just watched the Lakers series. And theres your explanation. Chuck Hayes outplayed the hell out of Landry.
If their contracts were the same? Look, I love Chuck, and I've never been a fan of those other two, but every GM in the NBA would take Curry or Randolph at 1.5 million over Chuck at that same price. Well, maybe not Curry because of his health issues, but you know what I'm saying. I mean, the main reason those two guys are such laughingstocks is how much money they make compared to how much they produce.
Since when does the media care about great defensive talent that doesn't show up in the box score? They confuse Hayes and Landry all the time, and I think that's what was going on here. They think Hayes/Landry is a great finisher around the basket (Landry) who also plays tough defense and does the little things to win games (Hayes ... sometimes Landry). That adds up to a very good player worth mentioning on this list for them.
The fact is Chuck Hayes can give fits to most of the star level PFs and Centers around the basket from Gasol to Garnett. I doubt the media is confusing Chuck and Carl because they don't even look a like other then both being black. And let's not make it one of those discussions.
Chuck and Carl have the same general build, and their jersey numbers both have 4's in them. Sometimes I even confuse them when they are on the court together from the full court perspective of the games... and I am the last person who would confuse what Chuck looks like with Carl. The Lowry/Landry thing is more puzzling to me.. I mean seriously can't they see the difference and isn't it their jobs to know which one is a guard and which is a power forward. In reality, I think the reason Chuck is in the list Aldridge gave has been mentioned... we somewhat recently finished a rather well known series with the Lakers (whom everyone paid attention to) and Chuck started the games without Yao... not to mention Landry and Lowry weren't exactly stellar in the series. They weren't bad, mind you, but Chuck got more publicity in the end of that series than either of the other two did.
Hayes is more important to the team than Landry. Especially now without Yao. He can't score, but sets plays for others on offense, rebounds and defends like few in the league. If there should be one trade bait of the two, it would be Landry in my book.
The intangibles would favor Hayes but when it comes to trading I believe Landry fetches more the Hayes. If the team decides to trade Landry, The team would probably get a decent player in return however Hayes would not net as much. So, Yes Landry would be the best trade bait by default.
I'd definitely rather have Hayes than Wafer. I'd probably not "throw him into a trade" just to make salaries match, either, because he's the kind of guy that is always worth more than his trade value. Similarly, this might be the first time that Shane isn't worth more than HIS trade value. BTW, I was telling a non-Rox fan the other day that, barring Morey's "rabbit out of a hat" trade for an all-star that we are all waiting for, I saw the Rockets as a borderline #8 seed, which is lower middle class.
