he can still talk no? and he's going to push for a trade/buyout the longer this thing takes. eventually if nothing happens, he'll give back whatever money we want so he could get a buyout.
I was under the impression that after 41 straight games missed due to injury he could play and any game missed after that the insurance would pay.
That's doubtful, if not impossible. The insurance is paid because he's injured and unable to play. At this point, he's proven that he's neither, and the Rockets have made public statements attesting to that -- they just say he's not playing well enough to contribute, which makes all the difference, insurance-wise. Why would an insurance policy cover the salary of a player who's being benched simply because of coach's decision? I would be AMAZED if we weren't eating salary with each game missed at this point. If someone wants to jump in and tell me that's not the case, go ahead -- but this will only get resolved when we hear something more definitive from the team about it.
If we are in the playoff hunt and a deal isn't made Adelman could swallow his pride and beg TMac to return... at least if TMac is healthy enough to play we would have a shot in the playoffs at winning a championship... or at least our odds would improve greatly. If healthy he is still our best scorer and passer.
Yeah, any game after that missed DUE TO INJURY would be paid by insurance. Tracy is now healthy enough to play. Just because he is not "Vintage 2004 Tracy McGrady" doesn't mean that the insurance has to pay. Frankly, the idea that the Rockets could simply unilaterally shelve a player healthy enough to play and actually be able to collect insurance money is preposterous. If that were the case, don't you think every team would do that with its overpaid, non-star players? It's FREAKIN' INSURANCE FRAUD, guys! How some people (ahem . . . DD . . . ahem) still think that's even a possibility at this point astonishes me.
As much as no one wants to believe it, if we just kept McGrady away, without trading him, or buying him out, the rest of the league, and players would view it as essentially screwing him. Now I know some people here even talk about death, so that clearly isn't that much in that regard, but not everyone witnesses last season, and forgets the previous seasons, and what he's been able to do. Players would view that as a cheap "get back," for a player that opted to have micro-fracture knee surgery, and came back, now wanting to play more. It would tarnish the Rockets organization, and NOT only that, we all KNOW McGrady won't keep quiet for too long. If he's not playing for another month or so, he will create a distraction for this team. It's time to start recognizing what this team is doing, unfortunately right now, McGrady is all the news in Rockets land. That will continue, and grow to greater heights once he begins talking, because the distraction from the media will grow too large. It'll tarnish the Houston Rockets organization by some bit, and also create a more growing distraction for the team, which we don't need. Even if our players don't get affected, it's just so we have that "move on" factor, that there are no more further questions about him, and he still doesn't continue to grab the main headlines.
I think he'd be as much distraction as we has last year after the trade deadline. Noticable, but not problematic enough to stop them from possibly advancing.
I don't think so, it's completely different scenarios. McGrady was still rehabbing from his surgery, there was no need for him to speak out, or create a distraction. That would make him look even worse, the only comment I could think of is the Lakers comment, but that was also taken out of proportion in the context of speech. McGrady this season has been clamoring to play. If the Rockets just sat him out, the PR on his side would become hell. There would be intense pressure to either find a deal, or buy him out, not only to create a stop a further distraction, but also not to jeapordize future situations, because other parties would consider it "screwing," him in the time of a contract season, when in reality, the thing he asked for was more minutes.
omg, if NY is the Rockets' only real probable trade partner, then please let TSlack sit out for the rest of the season. i really want to see an improvement.
Trade deadline is in Feb. The closer we get to it, the more likely teams are to 'change it up' and shuffle around their current lineups - there's no rush for the Rockets - we'll see what happens as time rolls on. Buyout after the deadline I imagine? But ONLY if it saves us lux tax.
It will tarnish our rep for us...as we are trying to make the playoffs...to not buy out a player and allow him to join a contender for little to nothing and possible make it harder for us to make, or advance, in the playoffs? I don't think so....
What about a trade of TMac,Dorsey to the Nets for Battie, Simmons, and Alston. They combine for about the same amount of money and all are expiring contracts. New Jersey would do it since it couldn't hurt their season, and we don't hurt our off season chances
i keep saying this very thing, yet so many here want to act like tmac isn't even on the rockets' roster on paper anymore. He is, and will stay there unless they find a favorable trade...so dont be surprised if he doesnt get traded..
if you bye him out & let him go b4 the playoffs rosters are set 4 the year you give him a chance 2 make you look foolish playing for another team in the playoffs even if you like t-mac that is a bad move even a cancer can make it work 4 -7 games !!
Lol its funny how everyone is a cancer now because their name is in the media. Is Von Wafer a cancer?? Is Ron Artest a cancer?? was Steve Francis a cancer?? Because the man speaks his mind he is a cancer. Hmmm
