OK, news out of Utah is very clearly that Rice may be cut. If we sign Rice back to the veteran's minimum, does that change anyone's opinion of the deal? I'm not sure we need him, but it is an option. And if we do, everybody wins, I think. Utah gets better picks. We add Jackson and don't lose a lot in picks and get the trade exception. Rice gets his 9M from Utah plus another FA contract from us. So he actually makes out better.
I believe a vast majority of posters have no problem with losing Rice's services. The problem most seem to have with this deal is the rox giving up so much to get rid of an expiring contract.
You are correct... from nba.com but some folks wouldn't want the facts to get in the way of a good b****fest
We give up a lotto protected 2004 1st rounder, the Drew obligation(which will most likely be 2 decent 2nd rounders, with the outside chance of being a 1st rounder) for worthless Meech and a worthless 2nd rounder Utah acquired from Sacramento
just like some folks wont let facts get in the way of a sunshine-ass fest right? like "oh this trade is good because it let us get Jackson." or "oh, it's not so bad, we get Utah's 2nd rounder, were just moving down a few slots" or "hey, we can use this to get KG" or "lets not waste the trade exception on SAR, it's too valuable" whatever.
Man, it takes a while to finally get to page 8... Gotta agree with Nikestrad & aelliott here. I like the move. From a non-financial standpoint, I think it makes sense too. If I'm in Van Gundy's shoe, I'll like to have as much flexibility for making trades as possible, so I can trade players that don't fit the team quickly & bring in those 'right' players that will possibly contribute to our championship run. It's logical to get rid of players that's unlikely contributing to a championship straight away (Rice) so the new guys such as Boki or Pike can have the playing time needed for their own development. Just like what JVG said, we need to win 'NOW', not 2 or 3 years from now. Time is money. Flexibility in personnel is a huge asset too. Personally I'll like to get rid of all the unwanted parts that don't fit JVG's systems straight away... whether it's Mobley, Taylor or even Francis in order for the team to play the right way (JVG's way). I absolutely love JVG & his approach of not hiring any Rockets' past assistants. He & the new assistants bring in a positive/refreshing attitude to the team. However, I doubt the next trade will happen before the regular season starts. I believe the next move will be after about 20 regular season games when JVG gets an idea about what's working & what's not on this team. For me, it's about the broad picture - winning a championship. It's not about getting John Amaechi because of his skills, but more because getting him contributes to the team's flexibility for our next trade. It's all about winning & getting the right personnel as soon as possible, which is more important than comparing Amaechi's skill to that of Rice/other complementary player's skills.
You look at it one way, others look at it another. You arent any more right than they are. btw, that particular quote wasnt necessarily aimed at you...I hadnt bothered to scroll back up and see what you have been saying this morning..I saw rimmy's post fiorst and responded.. but if the shoe fits....
The FACTS are we gave up 1 first rounder AND 2 high second rounders for the WORST player on Utah's team and a very low 2nd rounder. If we don't use the exception then the formula is this: Rice + 1 + 2 + 2 > Amaechi + 2 We got hosed.
I understand that and respect it. I do see and recognize the benefits from the trade, but unlike some I can't gloss over what we gave up and don't think it's worth it. btw, that particular quote wasnt necessarily aimed at you...I hadnt bothered to scroll back up and see what you have been saying this morning..I saw rimmy's post fiorst and responded.. but if the shoe fits.... yup, wasn't aimed at me, but it was "correcting" a question rimmy had about my post and threw in the word "b****fest". yeah i can see where that doesn't follow, sure.
in fact we trade 2 second round picks to the jazz. these picks are those picks, chicago would have sent us the next season (bryce drew trade).... here a quote from jazz.com: "Additionally, Houston gives the Jazz a conditional first round pick in 2004, acquired by the Rockets from Chicago in 2000. If Chicago retains the pick then the Jazz will receive two second round picks from Chicago, one in 2005 and 2006. Utah also receives additional consideration from Houston" so.... this trade doesn´t look so bad, he?
sorry for double-posting: .....just read, that we give up our first rounder in 2004.... at least it´s lotto-protected.... sorry
funny how you leave out the first paragraph above that excerpt you posted... "Salt Lake City – Utah Jazz Sr. Vice President of Basketball Operations, Kevin O’Connor announced today that the Utah Jazz traded center John Amaechi and a second round draft pick (received from Sacramento in the Keon Clark trade) to the Houston Rockets for small forward Glen Rice and Houston’s first round draft pick in 2004. The pick is protected to within lottery range. "
believe what you will.. I flat-out overlooked who he was responding to. Shoot me for being hasty and not reading further before I responded.. I had that(my) quote in mind from the arguments that were going on last night...How some around here can post inaccurate "facts" right after the accurate version is posted...but they seem to overlook them in the interest of being "realists". I dont even know why I am bothering to defend myself....character fault I guess..
We have a logjam at the 3 spot. Rice is at best a spot player with rapidly deteriorating skill...including shooting. Might as well get the cash. If the Rockets win just 4 or 5 more games, that would make the 1st round pick in the early 20's, which IMO isn't a huge loss. There have been a few studs found around there, but the odds are that nothing big will come of it. Plus, with Amaechi, that means that the Rockets could ship KC and his lofty $7mil per year as well.
I guess I have to spell it out. The expiring contract or trade exception is worth something but not in the way crash and you think. 1) Crash said Utah got the better end of the deal because when Rice contract expires, they will be 9 mil under the cap. True, ... but they were under cap before they got Rice. What kind of advantage is that? They have to pay $9 mil now for someone they might even cut. They did it because they were under min. cap and the pick(s) are their consolations. This deal is talent (draft picks and Rice from us) for cap space (from Utah). 2) If we trade Rice with any other team: They are all over cap. We have to take back a salary close to Rice's. The difference here is that Rice's contract expires in a yr. This would be the only reason other team would trade us a better player for Rice, so they will get $9 mil off their salary next year. This deal is talent (from other team) for cap space (from us, in term of expiring contract). 3) Now that we have the trade exception, we can trade, let's say Cat (5.4mil) + trade exception (9 mil) + throw in like Nachbar (1.4 mil) to Sacramento for Webber ($16 mil) This deal is talent (from Sacramento) for cap space (from us). We get the talent. Sacramento don't have to pay big bucks to Webber plus they can go after a different player of their choice.
I can understand that it was about freeing up some cash to aquire Jackon, but why give up a 1st round pick in next year's draft??
Unless we use the trade exception - and past history says we won't, we traded 1 mid-first round pick, 2 low second round picks, took out somebody's trash and included cash so we wouldn't pay luxury tax this year. That is too high of price for the team to pay for a 1 year break. When we're watching Utah use our #1 pick and our 2 low #2 rounders to rebuild, we'll be saying, "And what did we get?"
