Here's what Daniel Leroux (RealGM Writer) had to say on the trade about Houston... Read More I personally think he's wrong on two things: 1. We didn't bring in Lee to play SF 2. This trade did not make us weaker, we're pretty much unchanged strength wise.
this guy is dumb if he thinks lee is expected to play small foward. hes a backup 2 guard who at times can go over to the three. but this dude makes it seem like thats the reason we got him lol
[rquoter]Shane Battier makes sense with Martin, yet it seems strange to trade Trevor Ariza for Courtney Lee unless you see him playing more minutes than those behind Martin over the next couple years.[/rquoter]
I think it makes more sense to have Battier/Martin and Bud/Lee... am I missing something? Ariza/Martin was good, but Buddier/??? wasn't.
I don't know what he's been reading and who he's been talking to, but that's ALL I've been hearing. Most people think this was a pure salary dump.
Maybe because he is thinking too hard. The first point is moot, and over-analyzing. Kevin Martin is a SG, and so is Courtney Lee. That is the default position they will both play, as they have their entire careers. Or, it could make sense if you see Trevor Ariza's minutes declining next year. Also, looking at Kevin Martin's game totals the past few years -61, 51, 46- it's safe to assume Lee will be getting quite a few minutes. 1. How has Houston committed to Aaron Brooks as a starter? Financially, certainly not. The only commitment the Rockets have made is to Lowry with his new contract. 2. Though reasonably paid, Ariza is far from an elite perimeter defender. He may be a pretty all-around player, but is barely an adequate perimeter defender. Steals != defense. 3. It is an interesting take to say the Rockets have essentially made a choice between Lowry and Ariza. Working from that stance, anyone who actually watches the games can tell you which of the two has a bigger impact. In fact it was Morey himself that called Lowry our "most important player" sometime last year. Although Ariza is reasonably priced, the choice is easy. Only an uninformed outsider like Realgm would think Ariza the better player, confusing Lowry as any other 8 point 4 assist backup who is potentially overpaid. As such, the allocation of resources is still optimal in reality.
This guy is not looking at the whole picture. Houston made this trade for many reasons. He thinks we're trying to replace Ariza with Lee. By trading Ariza, Battier will start at the 3 while Chase would come off the bench for Battier while Lee would back up Martin. Chase is more suited to be a SF. Having Ariza, Chase would have to play at the 2 spot more which is not his strength. But by having Lee, Chase can play comfortably at the 3. A combo of Lee/Chase looks better than a Battier/Chase. But the main reason for this trade is that the Rockets saved a boat load of money and it set the Rockets up for a bigger trade. This trade put us in position to make a big move for a star player we desperately need. But this guy doesn't see that. He just think the Rockets traded Ariza and tried to replace him with Lee. But he doesn't see that there's a log jam at the 3 position. He doesn't see that Chase is emerging and will need more minutes to develop as a player. Chase will be better than Ariza soon if not already. Battier will probably be traded by the deadline because his contract will be mostly valuable when the deadline comes. Ariza wasn't the player Houston hoped he will be so they basically just erased their mistake in signing him. Morey erases his mistakes fast (Andersen, Ariza, Dorsey etc). Plus Ariza wasn't a good fit in Houston as a player or probably as a person. Ariza's character concerned me a lot the way his body language is during games when he wasn't given enough shots. But he's gone now and we have Lee who's character fits right into this team along with his good defensive mind and spot up shooting. Trust me, Lee will make us forget all about Ariza. But overall, the main point of this trade is for the Rockets to save a bundle of money positioned themselves to pull off a bigger trade in the near future. Plus already having Battier and the emergence of Chase on the roster made it easier to pull this trade off. That is the reason for this trade.
How did he get that job he sucks, Im glad he's not a GM. Morey over the past few months has given us HUGE assets to make a trade for another star. Last I checked EVERYONE was talking about the money we saved. Lee was successful at his position in Orlando and Kevin has always been successful, we have Bud and Shane (And Mike Harris, I think?) why do we need Lee to play anything more than backup sg? the whole point of having depth is that you don't have to play players out of there position. Why the heck can't they play the same position and why would Lee want more minutes over Kevin, he's not better than him, and he's not a star, but he'll make a damn good backup. Who is this guy, sheesh. Trevor didn't fit and I don't think he even wanted to be here, most of last season he was acting like it was all on him or something, we don't need that again. I'm happy with the trade esp if it gets us a star in the next trade. My opinion, Morey gets a B for this one, just for believing in C Bud enough to give him a chance and for saving money(Did we also get a trade exception?). He will get an A + if this trade garners us a star or just a good player at the 3.
Any Rockets analysis of the trade, positive or negative, that doesn't include the word Budinger, isn't worth reading.
Agreed. Once again, the trade is considered without one consideration of Chase. Budinger needs minutes, period. Dumping Ariza's salary with almost no decrease in talent in your starting lineup, getting a player you like in Lee at a position of need, receiving a $6 million trade exception... Not a bad return for your fifth option on offense.
There was just as much crticicism, when we traded our starting PG Rafer for Lowry. Lowry doesn't get more minutes than Brooks. It doesn't make the trade for Lowry strange.
All these non-local writers don't seem to realize who Budinger is. At least do some research before you post an analysis. If only NBA teams were this ignorant...
Simply put, Trevor is consistently overrated by the national media. They look at the points-rebounds-assists-steals and see someone who deserves MORE than the MLE. We watch him 82 games a year, notice his shooting percentages, and watch him gamble for steals every few minutes. As far as I'm concerned, I would turn the premise of that second half on its head and say yes, Kyle Lowry is much more valuable than Ariza was, but then, it was kind of a stupid comparison in the first place.
Chase = M.I.P. for the 2010/2011 season. Patterson = M.I.P. for the 2011/2012 season. Can the Rockets win it three years in a row? Yes we can!
The difference there was that the Rockets were making a move for the future. Rafer was going to be on his way out anyway, and with McGrady done the Rockets didn't have much hope for contending. So they figured they'd get rid of the older Alston, promote a younger, promising player in Brooks, and add a nice younger player in Lowry that they coveted. Lowry also had a more clear role in that rotation, because we only had 1 PG and lacked depth at the SG. In this case they're giving up Trevor Ariza, himself a young player that they considered one of the elite defenders at his position. Courtney Lee might be coveted, but his role isn't clearly as defined as Lowry's was when he joined the team. Sure, there are similarities. But I don't see Courtney Lee as bringing qualities this team sorely needed like Lowry did, nor is it obvious how this move makes us better in the short term or long term from a basketball standpoint. At best, it seems like a lateral move basketball-wise. I just hope the Rockets use the money they saved to improve the roster, preferably this season.
