I wouldnt mind Anderson here at all. He is a pretty big guy and would certainly be real good defnsively next to Hayes. Thats areal defensive team there. Hayes and Varejao? Then move Battier and Scola to get Danny Granger here. Lineup is very good defense and offense. Varajao/Hill Hayes/Patterson Granger/Budinger Martin/Lee Lowry/Brooks You have two guys down low locking down every PF and center in the league and could rebound with the best of them and play team defense with the best of them. Two elite scorers who can score with the best of them in Granger and Martin.
I can hardly see Indiana wanting Battier and Scola when they are starting their own youth movement. Why on earth would they want to move Granger anyway?
I really think the management will wait and see what happens to this season before making a trade so desperate. If we have good draft position, we can snag and develop a big like Kanter. I'd much rather try trading Yao's contract for an impact player like Granger or draft picks. However, the idea of a frontcourt rotation of Varejao/Hill, Scola/Hayes/Patterson intrigues me...
This idea is on the basis that Morey is being opportunistic, not desperate. Taking the opportunity to snag a player who has Low trade value at the moment to secure a position for NEXT season. Sure drafting a big seems to be the best case scenario for the Rockets long term, but there are no guarantees that you could even get a quality center and then if they will even develop into a quality center. In Varajao's case, you know exactly what your getting.
That logic has some potentially disasterous consequences. First, there is no guarantee that the traded player exception (TPE) will be in the next CBA. It is unique to the current CBA. IOW, it did not exist previously. Secondly, and again related to the next CBA, Stern wants a hard cap. The players want status quo. Reality will be somewhere in between. IMHO the next CBA will have a lower cap, fewer exceptions and the ability for teams to keep their franchise player(s). (In spite of what Stern states publicly, he does not want LeBum to the CHeat to become business as usual in the NBA...he would much prefer fans coming to watch in awe of star players, not boo them). Betting the franchise on a TPE is risky. Look at what the Cavs have been able to do with theirs. Locking up Jamison in the hopes of unloading him is risky when everything in the future hints at a lower cap, fewer trades and possibly NBA contraction.
A lower cap simply means everyone's salary will be adjusted by the same percentage. As for a hard cap, think about it. How are they going to implement that overnight when teams like the Lakers are so far above it? Are they going to make the Lakers buy out or waive players and not pay them? Nope. Are they going to make certain players on the Lakers take larger pay cuts? Nope. The union will never go for that. Those are signed contracts. A hard cap will have to be implemented gradually year over year until the current guaranteed contracts run out. It will take several years to get all the teams down to a hard cap. They will have to work off all their contracts......and TPEs. I just don't see any team being penalized tradable assets just because a new CBA comes into existence. There may not be TPEs allowed in the new CBA but the existing ones will be given a chance to be used. After all, it's not that many anyways. Cleveland's, and possibly ours if we moved Yao for a huge $17 TPE would be the biggest out there. New Orleans, I think, has about a $9 million TPE that they are unlikely to use. You do have a point about traded player exceptions, a small one. But I don't see how they can wipe away traded player exceptions when they are obvious assets. Those TPEs that already exist will likely be included in the CBA and be stifled down as the hard cap comes more into play each season. Players want status quo. Owners want a hard cap. Neither one is going to get everything they want. Salaries will be reduced and there will be more limitations on the cap but there will not be a hard cap in the first season of the new CBA. There's no way to implement it. Only way is to progressively work toward a hard cap. In my opinion, I can see where Traded Player Exceptions could go a long way towards helping teams not fall into contraction. Take the Hornets for example. Losing money out the ying yang. They will never be viable in New Orleans. That's the second team to fail in that city. The only solution is to move the team and sell it to someone in another area. How does the NBA accomplish that? By reducing the Hornets payroll to almost nil, that's how. Traded Player Exceptions and expiring contracts along with young players on rookie contracts and draft picks traded for their long term high contracts (Paul, Okafor, West), then sell the team to a new owner in Seattle and get that franchise on the road to profitability. Contraction is not in the best interest of the owners long term. It's a short term fix. Stern's vision is for expansion, not contraction. The owners have a little tug-o-war between themselves because there are a few like Buss that want to contract. But most of the owners want more parity and competitive balance, hence the franchise tag, sharing of revenues, etc. Contraction will only happen if there is another owner (possibly Heisley) that decides he wants to take his money and run. And then you have two teams (even number) so you can rebalance the Conferences. But, a better option to contraction is eliminating payroll, through trades, and helping teams get in a position where they can be sold into a more viable market. In the end game, Yao is not worth anything other than as an expiring and salary cap relief to some team. I fully expect him to be traded as we are not tanking and going the lottery route. It's just a matter of what we get back and if there is a team that really wants to dump out and rebuild. And if nothing else materializes, then sending Yao to Sacramento and taking back Garcia or Landry or whoever gets us under the lux tax and gets a possibly viable player to add to this team. The trade for Yao is going to net us either a usable or tradable asset, cap relief, AND a possible TPE that, if carried over to the new CBA, could become very valuable.
Varejo is intruging, but he's not a center either. Now if you paired him with a guy like Kaman,Nene,or Gortat, then you have something. He's another positional defender who doesnt protect the rim. He's also a very,very limited offensive player. If the rockets were 1 frontline player away, then i would agree,but they're not. His age is cool, but he's also had some injury issues as well. Personally, I'm in 2012 mode and anything disturbing that is a no go for me. All contracts whould expire by that or be low. They should really be banking on the williams,cp3,or howard. That means the payroll should be around 40m at the end of next season. No sign and trade gimmick thoughts, just straight cash availible.
Perhaps we'd be better off with "the bird in hand," Leeb. Morey set things up to make a major move this year, and so far (jury still out, deadline still weeks away) has struck out. No guarantee that the same wouldn't happen in 2012. I'm not saying Varejo is who he should target, healthy or not, but I don't think he should put all his eggs in the 2012 basket. If the right deal presents itself, he should be all over it, soonest.
i dont know why CL members dont get this. WE NEED a damn Centrer NOT ANOTHER POWER FORWARD. i know he plays center but so does chuck hayes.
Still cant give me valid any reasons why he cant play the position. Is it size? Because he's 6'11"/260 pounds. Virtually the same size as 90% of the centers in the NBA. Chuck Hayes is a power forward in nature because he is 6'6". The only thing you might be able to knock on him for the center postion would be blocked shots, which doesnt really matter as much as you would think in terms of winning. What matters most is team defense, rotations, and dribble penetration. Post defense is mostly related to position, but he has the size and length to keep 7' centers from getting easy shots over his head. Im open to your suggestions on why he cant be this teams center but you need to back it up with some valid reasons.
Your plan is nuts. Scola is BYC (not sure how you got that to work in a trade checker) and what miniscule cap space the Rockets have next summer would get eaten up by Jamison being a year longer than Yao. Further, your vision of the 2011-12 Rockets has 12 contracts including Jamison and Varejao. And that's not counting Brooks is a QO FA and Hayes is a RFA. Your poorly planned trade yields this depth chart PG: Lowry / Brooks QO FA / Smith SG: Martin / CLee / TWill SF: CBud PF: Jamison / PPat / Hill / Hayes (if re-signed) C: Varejao / Miller Congratulations. You managed to take a Lottery bound team and make it worse. And in order to retain Brooks, re-sign Hayes and fill out the roster to 15, you've bumped into the current LTax level. All in the hopes that some team somewhere wants to part with a star caliber for...well, frankly for nothing. That's nuts.
Obviously, there would be other moves. The idea being some of those asets plus a $17 TPE may be enough to go get Anthony plus others. Yao's $17 million expiring that has $8 million of insurance money to go with it, has definite value.
If u think Yao and his insurance paid contract is going to net us anything, I have an island south of houston for sale,lol. Look, the rockets couldve traded yao and hope last year for alot more than they can now. The Anthony pipe dream is alot worse than getting andy and jamison. Deckard, if we dont set 2012 as a run yr at fa's, we will be stuck in this shallow grave we're in right now. They have this yr plus next to set the roster up for that run. They need to get miller and his contract off the books. They shouldnt get a contract longer than that yr unless its for a young,almost all star caliber player. They also need to continue to grow the young players on this roster.
How is it you can argue that no player will ever want to come here AND we should set ourselves up for 2012 at the same time?
