how so? You could do a sign and trade. Trade Amar'e for Chandler or Galinarri during the summer. Amar'e went via S&T to the Knicks.
Do you mean thats what hindered the trade?... From what I inferred Phoenix didn't want to halt the trade by doing physicals. Houston wouldn't accept an Amare sans a physical so the trade was killed.
i actually read an article on this right after we made the kevin martin trade, and i thought we didnt do the trade cus stoudemire said he wouldnt stay in houston the next season
Based on my previous posts in this thread I'm sure most posters can infer my take on this issue. I'll be the first to admit that when I first heard news of this trade back in February, although I was very excited, I was also cautious and when I heard about the no-physical clause, understood why the Rockets didnt go forward. Knowing what I know now, I feel considerably more comfortable saying that the Rockets should have made the trade. Scola was poised for an improved season, and I think he would have done well in Pheonix. But this team would be a different team with Amare, no doubt. He could have been the player we've been searching for- a player to consistently run our offense through. As many other posters have said, he would have also made the Rockets a more attractive free agent destination, and although he was pure athleticism early in his career, his game has evolved quite significantly since then and is much more refined. I'm not upset with Morey and Co. for the job they've done. I agreed with the Landry trade and am still shocked at how much we got in return. For the most part, the Rockets have made good personnel decisions, but at other times, they havent. This was one of those other times.
He's improved the Knicks interior defense -- he's been averaging close to two blocks a game over their winning streak. Further, you'd want him because he can flat out take over and win you games. We don't have anyone on our team that can do it as consistently as he has and Brooks is the only guy we have that is even capable of doing it. Scola's good, but he's never taken over games like Amare has. If that SnT was possible, don't you think the Suns would've done it? Amare could have left the Suns/Rockets high and dry -- he did the Suns "a favor" by agreeing to the SnT, which gave Phoenix a large trade exception. If Phoenix demanded Galinari, NY would probably have told them to get lost and signed Amare outright.
If your question is: Do you think Amare is a talent upgrade over Scola+Battier? The answer is of course. But the trade didn't get through NOT because of talent consideration. It was because (1) his commitment, or lack of, to sign with us and (2) not having a physical exam posed a huge risk given his injury history.
amare gives you 25 and 8 a night while giving up even more...that man is allergic to defense. did y'all watch the suns-lakers series last year? his lack of defense deserves a highlight reel of its own. at least scola tries.
Difference of opinions, This is the first year Amare has played at this level. A "Superstar" to me has done it for a long period of time in their career.
The trade didnt happen due to the no physical clause. This was reported from almost every major media outlet. Had the Suns agreed to a physical for Amare, the Rockets would have ostensibly agreed to the deal. His commitment, or lack thereof, was not cited and lends credence to the idea that the Rockets were willing to re-sign him to a long term deal and didnt see it as a major issue. Pheonix was willing to part with Amare because they couldnt afford to keep him. The Suns had been losing money as a team and finances have been driving a number of their decisions. In terms of team payroll, the Suns are 21st in the league this season and thats largely a result of them getting rid of Amare.
I'm curious to see how you're coming up with this conclusion. I haven't seen Morey starting trading players like Scola and Martin just yet. Although Scola can't be traded until tomorrow. Let's see what happens come the deadline.
I don't know how much merit this holds but I heard during the offseason that PHX refused to do a sign and trade with New York.
Phoenix may have refused to take on Eddy Curry or some of NY's other trash for him.. I'm not sure, I never heard that rumor. But I sincerely doubt they were refusing to take back Galinari or Chandler in the deal. And in the end, they did do a sign and trade with New York for a large trade exception.
Yeah... Either way, IMO, Phoenix screwed up by taking on all that salary to win a few more games this year and they really screwed up by taking on Turk. They should have traded Nash away and start the rebuilding process. The owner was already wanting to cut salary from the beginning.
So far NY has gone from 27th in D last year to 23rd this year. They're worse than the Rockets defensively. What you failed to mention is that Stoudemire makes DOUBLE what Scola makes. This w/o improving the team defensively. I'll pass.
No, not even if there was a guarantee he would sign an extension. Scola + Battier is still way better than Stoudemire defensively.
When Phoenix wanted to waive the physical requirement, this screwed up the Rockets who planned on using that as an excuse to rescind the trade had Amare said he would sign elsewhere.
