Now that it is obvious that our beloved Rockets have to rebuild, the biggest question is HOW do we go about doing it. Some favor the TANKING method where we intentionally play less talented players, extend recovery periods of veterans from "injuries", dump salaries, etc. for the sole purpose of "WINNING THE WORST RECORD AWARD" to get a higher draft pick. Others favor the CHANGING method where the team makes drastic roster changes to improve its current talent and remain competitive via a different group of accomplished players. The largest variable / difference between the two modes of thought is TIME. While TANKING this season will not take much time because the team is already struggling with wins, doing such will only net the team just 1 player via draft in the lottery. Essentially that's like "putting all of your eggs in one basket" hoping to get "lucky" enough in the lottery to move up higher than one's record or estimated probability of winning the first pick. Even after winning the first pick, the tanking method then relies on there being a dominant/dynamic game changer at the position of need for your team in that year's draft. Finally, that same player then has to then GROW into their projected potential within an expected/demanded extremely minimal amount of time (i.e.-less than 2 years). Even if by chance you get the first pick of the draft and actually get lucky enough to get the consensus #1 player, it would then take more TIME to acquire players that complement the talents of your new franchise player. This process is actually elongated when you clear any serviceable or respectable talent from your roster to salary dump or acquire higher picks. This process at the least takes 4 additional years to cover from. In the end, by tanking 1 season, you essentially take a position that you will sacrifice/surrender being respectfully competitive in the NBA for a minimum of 5 seasons. During that time you HOPE that the player you tanked for will GROW to be a cornerstone for your team and not be relegated to becoming a bust or injury victim. In which case you have now subjected your team to laughable status and may not competitively recover. By going with the CHANGING method you have an opportunity to change the direction of the organization while remaining competitive and acquiring younger players. This process may occasionally/potentially place you in the lottery, but the culture of your organization NEVER becomes or embraces a losing mentality. This is essential to preserve while simultaneously attempting to acquire younger players early on their rookie contracts that may not have had an opportunity to develop their talents on an NBA level. By doing such you keep a winning oriented and opportunistic environment for young players to strive in while remaining competitive. This process is less likely to take 5+ years to achieve and has a diminished probability of depending on a single player that may not pan out to their projected potential. I think CHANGING is best served for our organization, especially since there are no obvious "game changers" coming out in this year's draft or any that will be available via Free Agency. I believe that our Rockets organization has already started to go down the CHANGING route with some recent acquisitions. It appears as though we may be targeting lottery level talent in positions of need from teams where that player may not have had an opportunity to play or develop. The assumed goal here is that, eventually you will strike gold if you dig hard enough and keep "doubling down" on young talented players with high potential. For example: Jordan Hill - 23 yo - #8 overall in 2009 draft Terrance Williams - 23 yo - #11 overall in 2009 draft Patrick Patterson - 21 yo - #14 overall in 2010 draft With that said I think that it should be a no brainer for the team to aggressively pursue lottery level young, athletic, multi-dimensional (2-way players) having obvious talent and potential in areas of our team's needs: Hasheem Thabeet (23 yo - #2 overall in 2009 draft); and Anthony Randolph (21 yo - #14 overall in 2008 draft) Not only does Thabeet and Randolph fit the bill and pattern of rebuilding "on the fly" (getting younger while staying competitive), but they can likely be had at an affordable market price (minimal detriment to the current talent on the roster). Contrary to popular belief, the 2011 NY pick will be trash based on the way the Knicks are playing coupled with the fact that they are in the east. They will be a playoff team and that pick will not be the lottery pick that everyone expected it to be when we acquired it. Trading it now will be a classic sell high move. The Knicks will damn near give a left nut to get Melo and/or prevent NJ from getting him. They already lost on Lebron, they cannot afford to strike out twice and they know it. All they need it their own pick back that they gave us. I say hold on to it until closer to the deadline line and try to garner more negotiating leverage to try to get an additional player (Randolph + Kalena Azubuke/Wilson Chandler) I don't think we should "blow up the team" and change our culture to one that accepts losing as a bi-product of an end decision that hopes to win the "Biggest Loser" award. It’s much harder to create a winning culture than it is to keep one. PG = Lowry - Brooks - Ish SG = Martin - Lee - Williams SF = *Wallace - Williams - Battier - ^Randolph PF = Scola - Hill - Randolph - Patterson - Hayes C = `Thabeet - Miller - Yao (@ vet's min) - Hill *Wallace: via trade (Jefferies+Bud+Battier/Patterson) ^Randolph: via trade (2011 1st rd draft pick) `Thabeet: via trade (Trade Exception) VOTE NO TO PROPOSITION TANKING
Minor trades will get you a mediocre team and suck for another 10 years. Tanking will get you a contender in 5 years with good management.
We can debate this until we all turn blue but when has Morey ever done anything we expected him to do? I'd say rebuild but then he will probably trade for Melo with an extension in place. Someone else could say reload and he will probably trade for Rubio and the #3 pick next season...who the heck knows.
No team wants to tank if they don't have to. Right now we probably will have to to stockpile some lottery picks, then either trade or develop. We don't have very many young upcoming major talents on this team. You can call it change mode or tank mode, whatever, it's not a choice.
I say we tank but we might have different definitions for it, for me tanking would be playing Scola less, playing Martin less, playing Chuck less etc and give more time to our young guns like Hill, Lee, T-Will etc. For me, trading Scola and Martin for picks/young talent would also be "tanking", that is just my definition though. if they win they win, if they lose so be it.
TANK!!!...that's the only way we'll ever get a FRANCHISE player, morey has tried every year to trade up and fails, it's time to get in the lottery by tanking. Rose,Wall, Durant, Wesbrook, brandon roy, melo, paul, d.will, wade etc were all obtained through the lottery, I rather gamble on that rather than wasting time with a team thats going nowhere even if they make the playoffs.
We already tried that with YAO and it didnt turn out all that great. Either way we will have a huge amount of cap space with Yao,Shane,Jefferies expiring. = 33.4 mil off the books is a great way to start from scratch
Tanking? I am spending money to watch the rockets's games, then you want to let the team play for lossing. I do not know how do you do it, no team can not plan tanking right now, it is still a early season. You can say "go for young players", that is changing.
Its the same thing, playing the young guys more and the veterans less increases your chance of losing. Sure it is not losing on purpose but you are putting yourself in a position to lose. Pretty sure the majority of fans would like to see the young guys get more go.
^^^ Right, you still play for the win but play more young guys, trade down the hill vets possible. So there is no change or tank mode imho.
Tanking is more of a wishing and hoping deal than the Yao staying healthy thing. If you tank, then please tell me that a Boston Celtics Summer 2007 type of thing is coming. Lotto picks/young talent for star players. None of these players that could be drafted in 2011 are sure fire stars. The 2011 draft looks like 2000 all over again. So tank, and end up with barely a Kenyon Martin.
Look at the Celtics, Spurs, and Lakers. Trade the young pieces for Nash and Grant Hill and the Rockets are contenders. If the Rockets rebuild they want players 19 and under. Those players are several years away. That's when to rebuild several years from now. You want the next franchise player to be peaking when the current crop of new generation superstars are getting long in the tooth.
All of the following are also lottery picks. Jordan Hill - 23 yo - #8 overall in 2009 draft Terrance Williams - 23 yo - #11 overall in 2009 draft Patrick Patterson - 21 yo - #14 overall in 2010 draft Hasheem Thabeet (23 yo - #2 overall in 2009 draft); and Anthony Randolph (21 yo - #14 overall in 2008 draft)
I don't believe in tanking. It's a long shot even with the worst record. In the best years there is usually just one or two elite players. And even with the worst record you can still miss them. Deliberately tanking will never happen under Adelman anyway. But what the Rockets might consider is to trade some of our more immediate producing assets for youth. I am all for trading Scola because of his age and high trade value. Without a healthy Yao we will not compete for a championship. Scola is a winner. he will help us get above 500 this season. he might even help us make the 8th seed. he will not help us win a championship with the current squad. So IMO trading him now for youth would be fine. Also Lowry is at his highest trade value. And if williams delivers what I think he can he brings almost everything Lowry does. A back court of Williams and Lee with Martin at the sf gives us a better defensive unit and Martin could easily be substituted for Brooks in that group. Also I don't want to give away any of our assets. But if a young potential superstar is available I would be willing to give a lot for him. I am not talking about Randolph. But players like Love, Iggy, Cousins even Bosh would be high on my radar. Of course none of the above will likely be available and even if they are they won't come cheap but if they some how became available I would be willing to give up a lot to get them.
is there a franchise player in the 2011 draft? Possibly. In 2002 we had 28 wins and got the first pick. Who knows what happens....
I don't want to see the Rockets intentionally losing games, but any players who are not a part of the team's future should be shipped out. This means goodbye to: -Scola -Lowry (sorry bro, your contract sucks) -Battier -Miller -Martin Maybe Brooks too, depending on if he can be resigned at a reasonable rate or not. I'm also not opposed to working Hill, Patterson, and Chase into trades if some top tier young talent can be landed. There's not much to gain from hanging on to guys that project as role players and will have to be resigned to bigger contracts by the time this team is ready to do anything.
so........what are the chances of getting a franchise player? why people always expect prospects to be a franchise player
Tanking requires a number of teams willing to take your talent and give you younger guys and picks. Otherwise, you are not getting decent value in return.
