This sucks. Our team is terrible. I wish we hadn't signed moochie, and had just payed dream the billions he wanted. What the hell were we thinking???? We might still be losing, but at least Dream would be at the Rockets games. maybe we can trade Toronto Glenn Rice, Jason Collier, Cuttino Mobely, Moochie Norris, and Kelvis Cato for Dream.
What is with this popular theory that we'd have Dream if we would have offered him Moochie's contract????????? Moochie was an Early Bird...we went over the cap to sign him. It is more accurate to ask why didn't we drop Shandon for nothing and paid Hakeem the rest. We could have given Hakeem $9m and Mo' and still signed that contract with Mooch....what we couldn't have done was signed Rice. That is why I say that it is more accurate to say we got Rice instead of Hakeem. but really, how many believe, instead, that Hakeem had made up his mind before the "negotiations" began, and money wasn't the issue? imo, Hakeem left because we changed the offense against his liking.
crispee, I believe you had worked out at least one scenario in the off-season by which we would sign Hakeem, Mo, Shandon, and Moochie (probably Bullard, too), giving Hakeem a 1-yr deal for good money. In your scenario we did not have to drop Shandon for nothing (which would have made the Rockets look extremely bad). What offense does Toronto run?
Hakeem said that Houston was never an option (don't remember where, but some article quoted him as saying that). Therefore, no matter what was done, Hakeem would have left. It was not about money, it was about his pride that was hurt sometime during last season. Besides, the way this season has gone, Hakeem would have suffered a career-ending injury by now. H saved his carreer by leaving!
TheFreak, Yeah, I had a scenario, but it required Mo and Shandon to both take less money than they did. I believe it was $7m dream, $5.5m Mo, and $4m Shandon, and Moochie's would take us over the cap. That is all theoretical considering that Mo and Shandon signed for significantly more than that. If we are to enter the real world of arguing TheFreak, we had to drop Shandon for a $3m player to get Mo' $6.4m and Dream $7m. To get him $9-10m like many of us understood Fegan demanding, we would have had to drop Shandon for nothing. That is based off of the final numbers for Shandon and Mo'. As fictional as my first scenario is, it still does not matter what Moochie signs for, because we would be over the cap when it came time to sign him. So we are back at: What is this popular myth that Moochie's contract has anything to do with Dream. They are two totally different things. As for the offense, I'm not trying to disrespect Dream. I'm just saying that he seemed to have made up his mind, and Toronto gave him quite a dog and pony show. We both agree that Dream felt disrespected, correct? Do you think it was a money issue or the fact they were trying to change his role? If it was a money issue, Moochie's contract has nothing to do with it. If it was changing his role, Moochie's contract has nothing to do with it. bottomline: Moochie's contract has nothing to do with not being able to afford Dream. It is more accurate to say Mo's contract, Shandon's or Rice's contract are the culprits.
Look, I am not trying to be disrespectful of you fromobile or anyone else but ..... 1. For gawd's sake will all those Hakeem worshippers who cannot let go .... at least give the rest of us Hakeem worshippers who are able to free ourselves from unrealistic hyperbole .... a break. Hakeem is gone because Hakeem wanted to be gone. Give me a %#$@*&^%% break and get a life. Please, that dead horse has been thrashed long enough. As my astute friend pointed out above ... it was not a Mooch or Hakeem ultimatum ... it was not an either/or decision ..... nor was it Hakeem versus the Rockets brass in a money struggle. It was Hakeem wanting to go, and him getting his wish. Period. End of frigging story. 2. It is almost ubiquitous of these very same ardent but unrealistic Hakeem dream shoppers, to keep bringing up "if we only had Dream"- "then things would be different". Yes they would. I agree. Hakeem would be on the IR instead of our "injury of the week" presently. Or, he would have fragmented the team so badly by demanding to be first option, that we may have needed yet another two seasons to unleash the young talent that is presently on board. 3. If Hakeem were here from day one this season - besides us not having the present personnel (Rice most assuredly would not be here), I do not see any difference in the present standings. None whatsoever. We would have lost a couple and maybe, just maybe, his presence may have turned a couple of key possessions. A wash. 4. Hell, I don't know about the rest of you but Cato is playing less than I wished for as our starting center, but he's a heck of a lot better than what I expected of him prior to game one. If Hakeem can bang it inside, keep up with speedy Gonzales, and produce numbers similiar to what we are getting out of Kevin or Kelvin ... than yes, let's say keeping Hakeem would have prospectively evened things out. Again it's a wash. Even-steven. But as realistic as I sound .... as pragmatic as close friends tell me I am .... as optimitically as I try to live ..... I do not .... cannot not convince myself even closely .... that by having Hakeem here .... that it would be good for team chemistry..... that it would be good for the progress of the roster talent .... that it would be good in the long run for the entire Rockets organisation.
I'm glad Dream isn't going through the losing we are. No one should go through the last part of their career losing like we are. Man we are the worst team in the NBA.
Dude, fro, you got the gas pipe from popeye. How's that taste? P.S. God bless Hakeem, but thank god he's gone.
Actually, his quote was that Houston was never "in the running", which putting it into context, you can see that he was referring to their initial offer (I believe they started out offering him 1 year for 2-3 million). I don't think it was necessarily either, more like he just wanted them to really want him back. He seemed to accept his role fine when he kickstarted their playoff chase and played a key role. oeilpere -- stick to giving us the next Walt Williams-for-Lamar Odom trade rumor.
I don't think Hakeem wanted to leave Houston. He just wanted to be wanted. He knew, didn't think, but KNEW that he could produce more than Houston thought he would. That's why he left. I don't doubt for a second that Hakeem would do more than Mobley's doing now, and we would have one more win than we have at least. Props to Kelvin Cato for playing well this season, but Hakeem fits in better with this team. For all the peple that said Hakeem should go because he can't run with our "young,exciting" team, we run less than the friggin' Jazz. It's not about money. If someone shows you the money, then that's the value of how much they want you to be on their team. We told him, this is what you're worth. Toronto said, this is how good WE think you are. he's averaging 2 blocks per game, and an ESPN writer (don't remember which) said he's one of the best rebounders in the Eastern Conference. He averages 8+ rebounds, and almost 2 blocks. Wouldn't we love to have that? Now, forget ALL this, it's a good thing Hakeem left. 1) For Kelvin Cato, who will be playing for us longer than Hakeem would've. 2) We didn't want it to get ugly during the season, and make the organization/Hakeem look bad.
So, if it wasn't necessarily either but rather some abstract form of disrespect, then that means Moochie's contract had something to do with it?? If mgmt says "Please with sugar on top" and does Dream's favorite victory dance, and Dream was as happy as can be, Fegan still has Moochie hold out, and we still go over the cap to sign him. Last summer clearly was not about Les saving money. Dream got disrespected somehow last season, and we couldn't recover from it and/or we didn't care to. How anyone could tie this to Moochie's contract is beyond me.
crispee -- are you still talking to me, because I never brought up Moochie. You asked if it was money (as in Hakeem wanted more) or a role change (Hakeem didn't like his role?), and I said neither (he's got plenty of money, and money hasn't historically been an issue with Hakeem. Also, he performed fine in his role at the end of last year). Why do you keep bringing up Moochie with me?
TheFreak, are you still talking to me. So, let me get this straight, you are just know saying you were replying to me about something other than my original reason to speak in this thread? Like maybe ask me a question next time Freaky, or assume I'm going to think you are referring to my thesis sentence.... you know, that first sentence I wrote in this thread.
I was responding to the statement of yours I quoted. You know, the part that came after the word "quote". Didn't mean to deceive you like that crisper. Sorry!
lol, So, your first unquoted response and subsequent points was to teach me Hakeem history, ad nauseum, and chop off my Moochie points that I made over and over, ad nauseum. Boy, I have to go take a dump, now.
