The trade was Ralph for Portland's pick (use the pick to draft MJ). Then we could have used our 3rd overall pick in the 83 draft to selected Clyde instead of selecting Rodney. ArtVandolet, You've still got the story a little mixed up. Here's the way it goes: '83: Houston drafts Sampson (#1) and McCray (#3). Portland drafts Drexler (#13?) '84 : Houston has first choice overall and Portland has 2nd overall. Portland is rumored to have offered Drexler plus the 2nd overall pick in exchange for either Sampson or the first overall pick (Olajuwon). If this had happened and we had traded Sampson, then we would have had Olajuwon, Drexler, McCray and then used the 2nd pick of the draft on Jordan. It makes for a nice story, but what does it really matter. ------------------
same question i asked otehr day ------------------ Shane "Save Our Rockets" "Life without basketball in Houston........without an arena that is what it will be"
Ultimately, it was the McCray pick that got us the two titles. First we traded McCray for Thorpe. Bam! Title. Then we traded Thorpe for Drexler. Bam! Title. If only we would have traded Drexler for someone! So I'm happy we drafted Sampson and McCray. Plus they weren't good enough in their first year so we ended up with Olajuwon too! It all worked out. ------------------ humble, but hungry.
aelliott, Digging around in December postings to right a wrong? Now I know who is Chief of the Serious Police. Mango ------------------ It could be worse ....... you could have been born a Jazz fan!!!! [This message has been edited by Mango (edited March 24, 2000).]
Read his 1984? autobiography "Ralph Sampson: A Center for the 80s" That pretty much tells you his best games were in high school. Good luck finding it; Amazon doesn't even carry it. Sampson's fatal flaw was not wanting to shoot a hook shot so no one would compare him to Jabbar. That's like Vince Carter not wanting to slam dunk so no one would compare him to Jordan. Can you hear Vince: "I don't want to jam. I want to be known as a faster Larry Bird." ------------------ The farther the Rockets move down the standings, the farther I move down the bleachers.
I thought the "meat" of the deal for aquiring OT was Jim Peterson. Whether it was Peterson or McCrae, either way it was a great deal. What is sometime forgotten was that Thorpe was one of the elite "20 & 10" guys before coming here. It would be like adding McDyess last year and him be a 16 & 9 guy playing with Hakeem and Barkley, rather than what a 20 & 11 guy being the lead fiddle in Denver. ------------------
Sir, This is one of my big pet peeves: Thorpe had only 1 20/10 in his career and only one other 18/10 for that matter. There is not this 18/10 role playing guy out there that everyone seems to think...only the superstar hall-of-famers. here, outta the following: Thorpe Willis Oakley Mason Divac Horace Grant Grandmama McDyess traditionally regarded as 18/10 men, not quite stars or superstars, we have a grand total of 3 20/10s (thorpe, grandmama, Mcdyess) and 3 more 18/10s (thorpe, willis, grandmama). It's just an illusion. Traditional 18/10s and 20/10s are big-time stars...there are not role playing 18/10s. ------------------ The farther the Rockets move down the standings, the farther I move down the bleachers.
HP, maybe I miss understood you, but I think OT was a 20 & 10 guy for Sac the year before he arrived here. Then with Houston he never broke the 17 PPG mark. My point was Thorpe and McDyess production are heavily impacted by the players around them. McDyess only scored over 20 with Denver, he didn't get that close with Pheonix and probably wouldn't have with us last year barring injury to Chuck and Dream. Just being a 20 & 10 guy doesn't mean for all-NBA or anything, there is a big difference betwen Grant, Thorp, Kevin Willis (he was close too), and McDyess (even in their primes) than superstars at their position like Malone and Barkley, Duncan and Garnett (and maybe Webber too). Though McDyess might join that superstar company eventully, in my book he and those other 20 & 10 guys I mentioned are not dominant enough to design your team around--thus are more aptly described as "super" role players in my book. ------------------
Sir you don't call someone a 100 rbi man for doing it once...I don't care who he had around him. True 20/10 men do it more than once, no matter where they are. They are just too important for a coach to squelch them, and they usually can do it regardless of the team's concept. so, i'm just objecting to the use of the term 20/10 much less 18/10s. Only two of those guys I mentioned above accomplished 18/10 more than twice. Those guys are 18/8s ... or 15/10s sorry...but it's a pet peeve of mine. Partially because people always complain about guys like KT by saying he'll never be an 18/10. I say; Why don't you just say he'll never be a hall of famer, and leave it at that. 15/8 out of KT is highly doable, and very helpful. anyhow,,,i'm on a tangent now...bye ------------------ The farther the Rockets move down the standings, the farther I move down the bleachers. [This message has been edited by heypartner (edited March 24, 2000).]
