(While some of our guys might need some balls,) I am concerned the powers that be are as deluded as I think you are that this team is a contender. Rox need more. More positive point play. More shooters. More bigs. More big balled guys. That's my opinion.
I really wish somebody like Jamal Crawford, who would be a risk by most standards, had a more reasonable contract. As it stands now we could essentially trade Mike James and one other minor piece (Snyder) for Crawford straight up. Great, that you get a 20 PPG scorer that can take over games, create his own shot and is one of the most underrated clutch players in the game. Horrible, that you would be forced to pay him $8-10 million for three more years. Would this kind of trade be worth it? To take two players that don't even play (James, Snyder) and trade them for a proven scorer that's owed a ton of money? Adding a 20 PPG scorer without having to give up any rotation players isn't an opportunity that happens everyday. Would I do this? No, probably not due to his salary alone. I would say that a deal along these lines is what I would strive for though.
Ok, Here is another news from ESPN Kings sending guard Bibby to Hawks for four players http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3249180
I think Brooks is tradeable too. The guy is damn good, but you have to be willing to give a little to get a little. For a championship this year I would risk Brooks.
Tony Allen? Maybe you meant Ray Allen a big difference And why is Paul Pierce in this thread he never moved from the Celtics.
When are we going to make a big move? You guys didn't hear? Monday morning at 7:30. I thought everyone knew that already.
Yeah, sorry for that. I do mean Ray Allen. No, I did not hear that cause I am working right now. Would you mind telling me what happened? thx.
Big move? How big you are asking for. We are not trading Tmac because we couldnt get good return and we are not giving up on him. We are not going to trade Yao obviously. We dont have expiring contracts big enough to take a part in other's fire sale. We are going to hold onto our rookies since they are doing well. So there you have it. Plus we are on a roll right now, so we are not desperate. This year is just preview of RA's stuff IMO. Next and next next year are the prime years for us. If we still can not do it, after 2010 a lot of contracts will expire, then you will see a blown-up of the current roster.
There's no way you're going to get any kind of trade of value unless you are willing to trade Scola or Landry. In some ways I can see trading Landry because there's no way we are going to afford him next year. We were stupid not to give him the standard rookie contract, now as well as he's playing, he's going to be worth a mid-level which if the Rockets make no changes they won't be able to afford.
I agree the Rockets' management fumbled the ball on Landry...especially considering they paid SEA for the pick. But Landry is no where near an MLE $5.5m player. He's $4m at the very top and that assumes he doesn't look like a rookie if the Rockets make the playoffs. MLE money is used by bad teams to fill out their roster and good teams to get that one last piece of the puzzle. Landry is no playoff teams' last piece to the puzzle and no one is going to give 1 player an entire MLE if they need multiple roster spots filled. It's unfortunate that the Rockets will have to dip into their own MLE to keep him...but it IMHO won't take the whole enchilada.
