Jordan Hill sure did seem promising tonight, If we trade for Bosh I'm really hoping he isn't part of a package to get him.... With that said I wouldn't mind a Brooks & Scola + Fillers for Bosh, trade, as long as we don't give up Hill or our first rounder this year... --RB
NY's actions are stupid. If only because they picked him in the first place. If it's true that all indications are that they wanted Curry, then they should've had a backup plan to trade the #8 pick if Curry left. Similar to how Morey dealt our #8 for Battier. If the Knicks offered Jeffries with the #8 pick for expirings only, I'm sure plenty of GMs wouldn't even hesitate to help them out. Hell, maybe they even could've unloaded Curry with that pick. Instead, they took a RAW player who needed time to develop for a coach that likes the 7-man rotation. Saying that Hill didn't develop makes no sense because he's suppose to be a project. If the Knicks didn't pick him for the all-important "P" word, then they shouldn't have picked him at all. Thank god we have a GM that makes moves that make sense.
Thats what I meant. If this was their entire plan why not trade the pick away in the first place? For a expiring and a first round pick in this upcoming draft at least? If their whole intention was to trade away the pick for the cap space...fine...then trade away the pick for a expiring contract and a future pick. This was a pretty deep draft, another team could have benefited from that 8th spot. I'm not saying Bima is wrong that Morey didn't need Hill in the deal, or that the Knicks valued him...just that if they had planned on trading him away with Jeffries for cap space it's just incredibly stupid.
He is playing like a vet tonight ... 5-9, 12pts, 8 rbs ... 0 TO!!! , add some defense, I will take him over Chuck Hayes any day
not really, the knicks didnt trade the pick away because they thought they had a shot at someone they really wanted a la stephen curry.......or somehow turn the pick into ricky rubio, when all that didnt happen, it was probably too late to trade away the pick since curry was selected 1 pick before them and they had to trade him away with jeffries for cap space, or else the rockets wouldnt want to take jeffries, knicks are a team for 2010 and jordan hill wasnt going to help in 2010, the extra cap space could very well help.
The problem with the knicks is that they are not an agile organisation, their owner meddles too much and they can't really make quick decisions, notice how all their moves are leaked way ahead of time to the press.
It's not smart to go into a draft with only one guy you want any ways. The Knicks should have had a more than solid backup plan when Curry was taken. 'Meh' is right, if you don't really want someone at the spot you draft. Most teams usually trade the pick, instead of just drafting someone. That was a top 10 pick just wasted. Smart GMs don't waste assets like that.
Agreed 100%, meh. My point was not that Hill isn't a valuable prospect. It was just that he was not at the top of the pecking order in terms of how highly valued I think he was as an incoming asset from this trade. I would figure that Morey rated those assets in the following order: (1) Kevin Martin (2) 2011 pick swap (moving up to what might be a top 5 pick) (3) 2012 first round pick (what very well may be a top 10 pick) (4) Jordan Hill (nice prospect, but one which Morey admits the Rockets had ranked in the 10-20 range, likely meaning 17-18) (5) Jared Jeffries (terrible contract, but serviceable defensive player and the reason for getting the picks) (6) Hilton Armstrong (former lottery pick with size, but just a throw-in to make the money work on Sacramento's end) It was the combination of (a) the fact that (however stupid the Knicks' 2009 draft day blunders) New York HAD to dump Hill's salary and (b) Morey's whole statement about having Hill ranked in the 10-20 range, when both the 2011 pick swap and the 2012 pick will more likely than not net the Rockets picks ABOVE that very range, that lead me to this conclusion. Of course, pbthunder is right that we don't REALLY know what Morey's thinking. Thank goodness he's such a genius.
I disagree about this in terms of where he was ranked. Of course, Morey likes more finished products from college and just in general. He doesn't strike me as a gm who likes a guy with a ton of upside and de-values those guys. Hill was a highly rated prospect on every gm's board. If morey had him 10-20, thats cool and thats what most of the draft is anyway. Actually, there is little difference from about 12-40 for the most part. Thats why there is a history of guys late first outperforming guys 8 on down. Thats why we see 2nd rd picks out performing guys drafted much earlier. The talent line gets smeared from those ranges and we see it happen all the time. Guys get passed because of their size regardless of production and guys get picked higher because of their upside. Great gm's know when and where to take the upside guy and when to take the solid,limited upside guy. The major difference is having that ball of clay to work with. The work ethhic is what will seperate guys in that draftable range. Hill is a good prospect, maybe not great, but having a guy with age and size on the rockets side isn't a bad thing.
If you're talking about the Knicks decision-making right before the trade deadline, then I agree that they made the right deal. I believe on a Knicks board they said that not only does it free enough money for two max players, but also for one-max player, resign David Lee, and enough left over to give a good contract(maybe a Rudy Gay type). So yes, the move made sense. As for Hill in the pecking order of Morey's haul, it is possible that Morey asked for Hill over a guy like Chandler(not likely) or Gallo or Douglas. But what's interesting is how Hill was the player coming to Houston since the rumor started. That there was never mention of any other players. So either Morey's really high on Hill, or NY thinks Hill is worthless. I guess we'll never find out.
You made a lot of statements here, many of which I agree with, but I have absolutely no idea what that point of your disagreement with me was. Sorry, maybe I'm missing something.
Feeling's mutual, bro. I would point you to one Donte Greene to counter your argument that Morey doesn't go for high potential projects. Yes, predominantly, Morey has gone for the more ready-to-play, lower ceiling sorts of players (although I bet even he didn't think Brooks and Landry would be THIS good). That said, Morey has been picking in the very late first, early second round for these players. At that range, almost all the truly high potential players are off the board. Frankly, I was shocked that Donte Greene was available at #28 back in 2008. But with a pick in the 12-14 range, I think it is much more likely (than in prior picks made by Morey) that Daryl goes for a high ceiling project, for two reasons. One, it would make that player the "best player available" for the Rockets, based on ceiling. Two, it is more likely that a high ceiling prospect would be a more attractive trade asset in any sign-and-trade scenario this summer. So we'll have to agree to disagree once again.
OK, Bima, but think about what you said: DMorey's 17th or 18th. That might be like the next guy's 10th-rated player in the draft...
There is really nothing to disagree on for once. I'm not saying he won't go for a high upside guy, I just don't see it as the norm judging by his drafts. I'm not complaining about it because potential can get you fired earlier than solid. A guy like greene was raw and a solid prospect. He's the kind of guy you take late in the draft and morey did. I agree about best player availible which all varies from gm to gm. Brooks and Landry both had good upside, not great upsiide which is cool. Chase has a good upside also, maybe kevin martin type which is cool too. Taylor is flip murray to me and for a 2nd rd pick, thats where he was drafted. Dorsey is probably the only one that was a finished product and tapped out. Even with him i see the defensive potential in his limited gametime he's gtting with the kings.
Will since all of what I said was from video that I saw before the Texas A&M game video and after I saw that video I said he does have athleticism that works at the college level. I also I said his attitude and passion for the game was a big problem I had for him. That and the fact that he was a 8th pick which you expect at some point to be a starter and I just didn't see that from him. Not that he didn't belong in the NBA just that I thought he was a marginal player. Of course I based everything on the video that I saw and I admitted as much. I have no premeditated dislike for this guy and no desire for him to fail. I will acknowledge I hated to see Dorsey and landry go and I was underwhelmed to find this guy to be the replacement. I also was projecting him as the replacement for Carl Landry and IMO he will never bring that type of scoring and hustle. That being said I did watch the game last night and he definitely played with more passion than and energy than I had ever seen play before. Even more than the college footage. He is raw but that's actually if it means there is a lot of room for improvement. He is athletic I never denied but I still have some questions about how well that will translate to the NBA. You have to remeber he went against and inferior frontline and most nights he won't be so lucky. That was one of my problems with him was that he was the better athlete almost every night in college. The opposite will be true in the NBA. Still after watching last night the one thing I did see that gave me promise for his future as a Rocket is he can play the backup center role next year. He definitely has to add some muscle at least 15 pounds. If he does he will be better able to bang against other centers in this league and possibly be Yao's backup. So while I was looking at him at the 4 I know see he may be a real contributor at the 5. In spite of what I said I want him to be good. So if I am wrong about him and IMO the verdict is still out, If I am wrong that is a great thing.
