For all of the basketball knowledge that I know you have DD, you leave me shaking my head more than almost any other poster. It's almost like you are saying, "I know we got him for nothing, and I know the players we gave up have amounted to nothing, and I know that we got to the second round for the first time in forever, and I know that he gave us a toughness Houston hasn't seen since Hakeem's prime, but.... we didn't win a championship so it was the wrong move." You've acknowledged that all of these things are true, yet because we didn't win it all it was a bad move. It's like you are essentially saying that every move is the wrong one if it doesn't end in a championship. So, I guess the Cavs shouldn't have drafted Lebron. The Suns shouldn't have traded for Nash. We never should have traded V-Span for Scola. Only 1/30 of the teams win a championship. It takes pieces to win a championship. Ron Artest was a very vital piece that we needed to try and win a championship. He gave us a better chance that did Donte + the 1st rounder, and he certainly gave us a better chance than any scrubs we could have gotten for him at the trading deadline. Sometimes you have to sit back and just admit that things didn't go our way, but in no way does that mean we made the wrong move.
No, I am saying ....the move itself was ok, letting him walk and getting nothing in return was bad. Also, I never said the guys drafted last year and this year in the first round would amount to nothing.... DD
Even they did not trade for Ariza, the Rockets would not have been able to get Ariza without Artest. Morey decided not to do the trade when he realized Yao Ming was out. Had Yao not been granted the exception, Morey would have been forced to make the trade with the Lakers or end up with nothing. So they did get something back in my opinion.
What did the spurs give up to get Jefferson? I like artest a lot, but once tracy went down, the team wasn't going to win anything. Late 1st rd picks aren't garbage if your scouting is good. I've said it many times, really good organizations like pick late because they can get a lot of value from players that late. It is a moot point now, but if the spurs were able to get jefferson fon trash of expirings, I imagine the rockets probaly couldve done the same at the dealine since milw wasn't going anywhere anyway.
Oh God, not DD with his "asset management" crap again. Without Ron Artest, we would not have gotten to the second round. He sucked for some of the playoffs, but Game 6 against Portland, he pushed us through himself. Period. The second round means increased revenue and success. Increased success means Les Alexander has more faith in Daryl Morey. Increased revenue means money thrown at other teams to acquire the likes of David Anderson, Jermaine Taylor, Chase Budinger, and Sergio Llul. Would Alexander have done it anyway, after another disappointing first round exit? Maybe, but I doubt he would've tossed aruond THAT much cash. If we had kept Greene and our first round pick, we wouldn't have had the financial freedom that Artest leaving gave us, and we wouldn't have had the opportunity to sign Trevor Ariza. To add to that, Ariza wouldn't have gotten to play against us in a 7-game series, impressing him, and wouldn't have been as eager to sign with us. So, losing Artest did have a direct effect in signing Ariza. So, is 2nd round excitement and Trevor Ariza better than Donte Green and a 1st rounder this past draft? Yes. Much better.
First of all, we got $7mm in cap space and a roster spot Secondly, you assume that teams were actually interested in Artest, yet no one outside of the Lakers gave him an offer when he was a free agent, and they only offered the midlevel. That should tell you right there about the "demand" for Ron Artest. One team. We only offered him a one year deal. Perhaps Les killed a s&t for Ariza due to not wanting to take on even more salaries by using the MLE on more players later. Perhaps Buss felt the same way, since both owners are over the cap. We gave up practically nothing for Ron, and didn't get much in return due to there being almost zero demand for his services in the FREE market
What else is there to do with an unrestricted free agent that wants to sign with last year's NBA Champ? The best you can do is a sign and trade with L.A., but they didn't want to, so there you go.
The package the Spurs compiled included partially guaranteed contracts. That was the primary motivation from the Bucks' perspective. They were able to shave that figure not only from their cap but also from their real financial obligations, and it was effective immediately. That flexibility is pretty huge. Agreed. Once Tracy went down, the season was effectively over and I was very vocal in my desire to trade Artest. Like you, second round appearances mean nothing to me. I personally would have even blown the whole thing up and traded Yao as well. I think you and I both agree that this team wasn't going anywhere in the short nor long term and would have been best off trading Yao altogether. And we are now validated through hindsight. However, with Artest, its pretty clear there wasn't a market for expiring contracts last winter. They don't seem to have the same glitz as in years past and this was evidenced by the fact that two teams desperate to make acquisitions, Cleveland and Portland, simply let their major chips expire. Its safe to say it probably would have taken either Carl Landry or Aaron Brooks to make a deal. Daryl Morey probably didn't think it was worthwhile and decided just to stick with what he had. If its not helping you in the future, there is no point in just making a deal simply to ruin the present. Completely disagreed. Considering the drop-off post lottery, there really isn't much talent difference between late first rounders and early second rounders. This actually makes second rounders preferrable because they are non-guaranteed. Add in the fact that you can basically purchase second round picks like they are bags of chips and it means that late first round picks are not only worthless but also can be toxic in some cases. As I delineated earlier, the crux of the Milwaukee deal wasn't expiring contracts but rather partially guaranteed contracts. The Rockets have/had none of the latter variety.
What, is having Jefferson instead of Artest going to propel us over the Lakers? And it wasn't necessarily certain that once tracy went down, the team was doomed - the Rockets played pretty damn well as it is, and losing T-Mac for the season definitely did not merit getting rid of Artest for...... whatever you guys think we should have gotten rid of him for.
thecabbage, Milw took those partial deals for this upcoming year, but artest and hayes last year wouldve cleared jefferson's entire contract off the books. Just like the year earlier when Yao went down, you either add better players through trade or you try to dump guys and get younger or picks. In regard to the mid to late picks, we are going to have to disagree. Those rookie deals are small enough to move and can net a very ggod player. In all fairness, most prospects are pretty close from 14-36 or so, I guess that's what you were trying to say. I've also seen all stars getting pulled in those numbers also, so I don't view them as just picks. Like I said, if you know how to draft, you don't run away from mid 1st rd picks or view them as nothing. Like you said, tracy is down, all bets are off, get rid of artest for a good player forr next year.
Don't know but a lot of teams were moving salary for expiring deals...maybe Artest was too toxic for anyone else..... At the end of the day, I am glad he is gone. DD
I think Cleveland and Portland letting their contracts expire had more to do with not wanting to take on more guaranteed contracts than with the market. Portland has several guys they are going to need to re-up or extend soon and Cleveland has this guy named Lebron.
that answers your question Artest did what he was expected for a year.. unfortunately tmac was injured and yao got injured eventually too.. if they did not get injured, who knows we may have gotten to the championship now with tmac and yao injured, there's no reason to keep artest and its hard to attract players to demand a trade with the rockets if we knew tmac and yao will be injured last season we could have flipped greene and the pick to someone more young who can help us long term irregardless, artest was still very low risk very high reward move
For sure. I'm actually glad you brought up the Cleveland loss -- I had forgotten how intense that game was. You are absolutely right that it had the feel of a playoff game. Entertaining, no doubt....but I still think that Dallas game takes the cake for best and/or most cruel moment of the season. Uggghhh.....I think i'll go throw up now.
It was worth it. Why? Because we have so many young players that needed as much experience as they can get. Taking the eventual champions to 7 games with no allstar calibre players really taught our young core something. This couldn't have happened if we didn't have Artest.
I completely disagree, I think Ron actually hindered the young guys development by not running the offense, gambling on D, but more importantly taking bad shots. I think the Rockets still beat Portland and lose to LA without him. DD
I don't think we even necessarily are matched up with Portland without Ron. It is likely we face the Spurs, Nuggets or even the Lakers without Artest. For all the bashing you love doing, you overlook many of the games he helped the Rockets win, which put them in the position to face Portland in the first place.
But your assumption that the Rockets would lose those games if he was not in, is completely undefendable, as is mine that they would win the ones they lost. DD
