When was the last time a team traded AWAY a key star...

ahahaha, are you actually serious?

i dont know how you could think Allen Iverson wasn't a star, he was the only reason the sixers won the games they did, same goes for KG?...Both those teams would of won what, like 4 games without those players...the reason they traded them away was because of dilemmas within the team?...Also Ray Allen, honestly, they only made the playoffs because of him?

the people that agree with this guy, and then bag out all the other fans for wanting to trade T-mac, your a bunch of hypocrits, you watch hardly any basketball..

 

TOF's Unite!

Rocket River

 

ahahaha, thats a fair point made by rocket river...

well said..

it doesn't really bother me as to whether he gets traded, i just thought the thread started was a little out of line..

 

So the new topic is that all the teams that get rid of superstars get worse except all the ones that don't count because SMB says so?

 

The point isn't if the Rockets would be better or worse after T-Mac is traded. That's a bad question because as someone already pointed out, only God knows what we'd get in return for him! The real issue is, is McGrady an untradeble part of the team? and what justifies that if you think he is?

Work ethic? Durability? Heart? Playoff victories? How did McGrady do enough to prove that he should be untradeable? !

 

^^^^^^^the fact that you have to ask that question makes me thank god you are not a rockets GM.


Good thread to the OP and I agree.


5 star rating.




Go tmac, go yao, go rockets

 

How about answering the question instead of downplaying it. You sound like a kid who doesn' know jack about basketball and thinks Tracie is a basketball God or something.

 

Why in the world would anyone want a GM who considers a declining max player with injury problems untradeable?

 

Orlando won 19 games before they traded McLady. Did they win less than 19 games after the trade?

 

Your twisted re-writing of history, not fact.

It is a fact that 5 of the top 8 scorers from the .500 team McGradey joined were no longer there beacuse the Magic had to make room for Hill and McGradey, then Hill went down for his career for the most part. T-Mac then single handedly led the Magic to the playoffs and was the scoring champ two years in a row, with limited to no talent around him.

Secondly, the team T-Mac left dead last was not his fault. Weisbroad made all the personnel decisions, not McGrady. Are you telling me that he should have won the NBA championship with J Howard as the second best player on the team.

Once again, please do not re-write history again General Dumba$$

Not a basketball fan?? I have been a Rocket fan since the 70's. I am a Rockets fan, not a T-Mac fan, or whoever.

Keep on showing your low IQ General Dumba$$!!

Its all over the board, or can't you read?

Actually, the professional say that, not just me, so you are the stupid one. It was even recently said by a notable sports writer that T-Mac was the best pure talent he has ever seen. Better than Kobe, Garnet, Iverson, et al. You're not going to bother because you have no reasonable basis, and your argument have more holes than baby swiss cheese. General Dumba$$

You obviously are not a Rockets fan, and you do not know anything about basketball. Yes this is a Rockets forum, so why don't you go back to the Mavericks or Jazz message board you came from.

 

I guess when it comes down to it, trading Tmac is an option because of the fact that good two-guards are a dime a dozen. Yao, on the other hand, is one that i would deem untradeable since a big man of his skill and size does not come along every NBA draft.

We need to think of not what we'd be losing by trading Tmac, but rather what we'd gain by trading him.

 

What difference would it make if they weren't trades? Does that mean the Rockets would improve if they cut McGrady? How would a team benefit more from losing a player for nothing than they would by trading for young talent and draft picks?

The point is there are examples of a team improving when they lose a star player. There are tons of examples of teams that are consistently mediocre when they don't get rid of star players, so I guess success in that circumstance is the exception as well. It turns out, only about 3% of the league wins a title every year. If you are not progressing toward that goal, you are not doing something right.

Maybe TMac and Yao will eventually win a title together and maybe they won't, but to say that trading TMac would automatically make the team worse is just plain wrong. The team may get worse, may get better, or may stay the same. We won't know until it happens, and even then, we would only know the success or failure of that particular trade.

Yeah, that was me. Exceptions implies a rule. The rule you are espousing doesn't exist. There are just too many variables and not enough opportunities for success to show a path to the title. In the end, it often comes down to, quite literally, the luck of the draw (see Tim Duncan). The league is littered with teams that choose not to trade star players that end up going nowhere though.

 

Detroit also traded away their top scorer, Stackhouse, for a solid, young, and lesser known Hamilton.

 

Jerry Stackhouse averaged 29 points and 5 assists just one year before Detroit traded him, and then Detroit won a ring the next year, or in the next two years, don't remember exactly.

 

Name me a star who led his team to a ring without being a great competitor. I can think of none.

 

Perhaps not immediately, but certainly many examples where good things happened within a few years. If we do trade TMac this season, I surely think Yao has enough in the tank for the next few years.

 

I don't know how this isn't obvious to you. If you lose a player to free agency you get nothing in return. If you trade a player, you get something back. That is why teams try to trade players that say things like "trade me because I won't be resigning in the off-season". Somehow your ridiculous notion is that it is somehow better to get nothing in return. Letting a player walk for nothing won't even generate cap space for most teams, as it didn't for the Mavs.

This is exactly what I was talking about. You discount the teams that did improve, for whatever reason. Of course if you keep moving the target no one is going to hit it. Even in that case, I gave you an example of a team winning the title the very next season.

The Grizz shopped Shareef Abdur Rahim and got Pau Gasol. When you shop a DISGRUNTLED superstar, you get poor returns. When you shop a player, but keeping him is still an option, you don't have to take 50 cents on the dollar. It is the difference between when the Rockets traded Steve Francis (who some considered a superstar) and when they traded Scottie Pippen.

Then you missed out on quite a few examples of teams not getting worse when they lost a superstar.

What I am getting at is, there is very little historical evidence of teams not trading away a star immediately getting better, especially teams with late draft picks. Maybe the team gets better standing pat, maybe not. Maybe the team gets better trading TMac, maybe not. There is not enough evidence either way to make a definitive statement, as you have, that trading TMac would not make the team better. I can give you an excellent example where not trading a star hurt a team though. In 1984 the Portland Trailblazers offered to trade the #2 overall pick and Clyde Drexler for Ralph Sampson and the Rockets refused. If the Rockets had traded their superstar they could have had Hakeem, Drexler, and either Jordan or Barkley for their whole careers. Instead they lost Sampson to a knee injury and went in the tank for a decade.

I disagree with the premise that trading TMac equals giving up and saying we are going to wait 4 years to compete. You look for a deal to help you win now. The GM should always be looking to see who he could get for ANYONE on the team. He should not have some asinine rule that says if you trade a key star, you will not improve.

 

Not here to stir the pot, but many call mcgrady injury prone. Last I checked , yao has missed as many games if not more the las 4 yrs as mcgrady.