I honestly believe Asik can be a better post player and already is a much better FT shooter. I don't think Asik will be a better weak-side shot blocker as he can't move as well as Howard but he already is the superior post defender. Basically I think Asik and Howard will pretty much be on the same level. Obviously Howard is more talented but the guy hasn't gotten any better after being a starter for 8 seasons. I haven't seen anything about him that makes me think he's going to make any monumental leaps in his game.
I posted this somewhere else, can't remember but needs to be posted here for the Howard doubters... JRUDOLF, the so called 'mouthpiece' for Dwight was quoted on twitter as saying "if DH doesn't resign with Lakers, he's going to Houston" check it here: https://twitter.com/NBCSportsRadio/s...43745762766849
Damn, I just tested the link to the JRudolf quote and it seems like its been removed!!! What's going on? Was it a slip of the tongue? Curiouser and curiouser.
So I infer from this that they aren't right now on the same level, but will be in a few years. If that's the case, if/when he hits this level, he'll be up for a new contract yes? If by that time he is performing at D12 supermax level, as a FA he would command a max contract too then right? If we're talking about potential production from Asik, then it seems it'd still make more sense to outright sign D12 with cap space (not having to give up assets to acquire him) and either keep Asik if you can or trade him while his value and potential are high. If he does hit this level you think he can make, we'll eventually in a couple years have to pay that price for him too.
I've seen this argument several times now, and it's backwards. It's not a guarantee that you'll have to pay Asik the max in 3 years, there's a chance he won't get offered a max contract by anyone else and we can sign him at a discount, the same way nobody offered Lowry more than 6M a year. With Howard though, you're guaranteed to be paying him the max even fi he doesn't produce at a max level.
Its not backwards, it simpy how the market operates. That's the whole point of the argument. Asik being an UFA would command whatever salary he's worth. So you can't argue it both ways. If he's just as good as Howard then he'd be getting max money on his next contract. If you're hoping you can get him on discount then the market must not think he's nearly as good or ever will be as good as a max player. Because he's a middle tier player you'll never get him on a value contract unless he's a true max player which is a big if or he's a rfa but even then you'll have to pay market value most likely. You're example of Lowry isn't anywhere near comparable as Lowry was a rfa and a bench player. Unproven to the league few teams would offer him much. That's how DM got him on a value contract. Now if Lowry were to play superstar level now on his current contract and only get a mid level contract when his current deal is up then you'd have a point. But really if he were playing like cp3 he'd get max money without question. It's simple economics. The nba is a micro economy and the only way to gain advantage is to leverage the rookie scale and supermax players as they're artificially capped.
Daryl said something along the lines of he'd double up on talent at the same position. JSmoove, Dwight, and Asik would put the Rocks rotation of big men amongst the best in the league.
Either Asik is going to be a starter for the Rockets next season, or he is going to be traded. No way you tell a 10+ rebounder to sit on the bench. The only way Asik sits on the bench if Dwight demands it then Asik will probaly asks to be elsewhere.
He said in essence, if he had an all star at sf, and lebron was offered, he'd still take lebron, in essence what he's saying is just because you have an all star, doesn't mean you wouldn't upgrade it if possible. Harden for example, can't be upgraded at sg, the only 2 that one could say are better than him, are both many years older than him and suffering debilitating injuries (one far worse than the other)
Jarrod Rudolph (a well-known Dwight Howard mouthpiece) has stated on NUMEROUS occasions that he would bet the farm that if Dwight DOESN'T SIGN with the Lakers, then he most assuredly would sign with the Rockets. The Hawks are not even mentioned as a possibility. It's really down to whether he wants to stay in LA, or not. I'm of the opinion that Dwight WANTS the Rockets to give him a compelling reason to leave. He wants guys like Harden, Parsons, and even McHale to woo him, and make him feel like this would be a FUN place for him to play, and a FUN locker room to be a part of. He missed that in LA, and I think other than the extra year he can get with them, he doesn't feel like there is anything (basketball related) that attracts him. It's just very hard to pass up the contract, along with the lifestyle. I really do think he wants the Rockets to convince him, though.
What does one have to do with the other? Can't do S&T for Howard so why is Asik even brought up? If Dwight comes to the H, it will be because HE decided to leave 30 mill and extra year on the table.....(which I HIGHLY doubt he will) But lets say he does....why cant Asik and Howard co-exist on the same team? Why is one pitted against the other when technically they could end up being on the same team? They cant trade Asik + other pieces for Howard because you cant do S&T for Howard.
I'm not really familiar with any of the rules but I heard somebody say under the new CBA a team over the cap (Lakers) wouldn't be able to take back any players via sign and trade. Don't know if true or not.
