Would you trade Hakeem for Shareef AND Big Country?

First thing is that Taylor and Anderson won't take up all our cap space. It is more likely that Taylor gets about $5 mill per year and Anderson gets slightly less than that. That still leaves several million left available that could be used in a trade or some other scenario - i.e. trading Walt or draft picks o both.

Second is that Harrington would NOT be part of any deal. The only deal, actually, that works with the cap in this instance is Olajuwon and Thomas for Reeves and SAR. Adding Harrington would cloud the mix and make a more difficult trade.

Just some thoughts there. Besides, I've heard the Rockets aren't really that interested in getting Harrington back. They feel they already have a player like him in Thomas.


------------------
I am very very sleepy.

 

I was overexaggerating for effect not being realistic. The point is that it does create serious cap issues if Reeves remained a Rocket. It isn't just the short term but the long term to consider. What if Reeves is a TOTAL bust and the 12th man on the bench for the next 3 seasons at $10 to $14 million per? That would be very ugly and it is possible.

Yes, he could snap out of it, hit the Slim Fast and become the big man we've dreamed about, but chances of that happening are about as good as me becoming the Rockets starting center or Oliver Miller passing up 2 for 1 cheeseburgers at Sonic. It just ain't gonna happen.


------------------
I am very very sleepy.

 

For me the dilemma is not about getting CWebb --vs-- Reef. I don't think Webber is coming here. I am waivering on the issue of getting Reef AND Reeves, making it difficult to make future moves with this team --vs-- Keeping the cap room to secure the current squad while having cap room to make the necessary moves we may need.

But like Achebe has pointed out, the only player such a deal may rule out is Mo. Mo is only 23 has never had a big man coach (he was a Clipper) and is very coachable. We have yet to see what CD can do with him with a full offseason. Shan, on the other hand, can resign via early bird and we'd still have our draft picks to work with. This draft is replete with big men and with Rudy and CDs draft records they should be able to parlay at least one of those picks into a physical rebounder down low.

I think this is a tough situation because with the new CBA, there won't be any marqee free agents until about the time Reeves' contract comes off the cap. And each year until then, salary (Walt, Rogers) will be coming off the cap. If we could dump Cato, get Reeves and Reef all in the same deal without giving up a draft pick this year, the deal should be worth it.

------------------

 

Those are great points, Jeff. In his weekly chat at espn.com, David Aldridge said the the Rockets are going to sit on the cap space so they can be players in free agency.

------------------

 

Everyone needs to relize now that Big Whistle and Little Whistle (Don and Donnie Nelson) both like Bradley as does Mark Cuban. No way the mavs will trade Bradley for Dream. There will be an offer made to Bradley after the season from the Mavs for him to remain with the team. This is fact.

Also, the Mavs have no interest in trading Donnel Harvey unless it is for something substantial as they beleive he will become a stud in a few years.

The two most likely trade prospects from the Mavs are Etan Thomas and Gary Trent because of the glut of Power Forwards that they have.

Just a side note about the Mavs...there has been talk (although extreamly tempered) of trying to put together a package that includes Finley for Shareef. The chance of this happening is very remote since Cuban and both Nelsons love Finley, but the possibility has been discussed.

------------------

 

NO WAY!!!!

Trade for Reef and Othella yes, no Small Continent. That is way too much money. Would we be able to sign Shandon and then Francis? Would Les be willing to pay the "Luxury" tax? With big contracts to Francis, Reef, Huge Island, Shandon and Mobley, what kind of bench would we have?

Please Rudy, don't get stuck with that albtross around your neck.

------------------
When we tire of well-worn ways, we seek for new. This restless craving in the souls of men spurs them to climb, and to seek the mountain view.
-- Ella Wheeler Wilcox

 

That is something no one has brought up but really worth pointing out. He might cover it after he has been in the new arena a couple of years but, by that time, Reeves will be gone. That luxury tax could cost him big time.

------------------
I am very very sleepy.

 

When this first came up I was gung ho for it but have rethought it.If they do this deal,I would put it up there with drafting Rodney over Clyde,and all those wonderful blown first round picks of years past.I'm with you 100% ROCKETBOOSTER.We are doing a masterful job of rebuilding on the run, and, as stated,this would stunt our growth for a very long stretch.Being in this position is a rare thing in the NBA.If we are patient, play our cards right, and think long term,we should continue to be one of the best teams in the league for many years.All good organizations have their down years and then, their windows for success(and I mean winning the whole enchilada).I honestly believe we are on the verge of a loooooooong window.Why screw it up now for a quickie?(I know Reef is a great player at 23,so this might sound strange,but Big Country sets us back too much.
Rudy works so well with young players and when he has a combo of that and veterans that buy into his system,look out!We started devloping that chemistry last year and all the early games against the crappy East has paid bigger dividends than just early wins.Rudy IMO has gotten a bum rap...It's tough to coach teams that are stacked with vets not on the same page,with different agendas,injuries,etc.I hammered Rudy quite a bit,two years ago here and I now think I was wrong.....With capspace,plenty of picks,and the flexibility that goes along with all that(not to mention most players would love to play here),Rudy should be able to work some of that unbelievable magic that he IS capable of.Think, almost in terms of geological time.............and this franchise will move into the new Arena and not look back.

------------------




[This message has been edited by hardwood (edited January 17, 2001).]

 

First of all this trade is rediculous, and I really hope it doesn't happen.

Second, someone mentioned that the cornerstone of Francis/Mobley/Sar would be one that you wouldn't want to pass up.
hmmm....kinda looks like Bibby/Dickerson/SAR, doesn't it? They must be a great cornerstone as well. =)

KEEP MO! SIGN WEBBER! KEEP ANDERSON!

When you look at a starting lineup like this:

C- MO
PF- Webber
SF- Anderson
SG- Mobley
PG- Francis

you have to think risk x impact. Impact obviously being a championship, the risk being okay to none, multiply that and the number that you get is better then having beefy country on the bench sucking away the blood of this team through an iv in his fat neck. SAR is good, but not worth the flexibility or the long term cap situation with Reeves.


------------------
-jbond77

 

I don't know how anyone you honestly think that we can keep Mo and also sign CWebb. They play the same position! Neither can play center, and besides they wouldn't want to even if they could. Its either/or. Plus Mo's going to command more than $4 or 5 million next year: the exception is going up to that much, and a young PF who can score is going to command closer to $7 or $8 million, per. One of the teams that loses out on CWebb will give Mo big money, especially if he puts up the numbers he's been putting up lately.

------------------
"Thirty-seven?" -Randall, Clerks
www.clutchtown.com

 

Directly answering the question of this topic:

NO. HELL NO!

No Reeves for years. That would be like paying SAR 30 Mil when you consider the luxury tax it puts us into.

That would make everyone feel like the they were being penalized for loyalty to the Rockets.

If we can get value for value, some talent along with contracts ending this year, so we still get cap relief, OK. Or if we get the rebuilding talent we need, OK. But Reeves would kill our franchise, just as he has Vancouver.

------------------
the more I know, the more I know I don't know...

 

I have been a reader for the past couple of months and this is obviously my first post.
Here it is. I had read all this Dream speculation and thought it will be good to trade him. However, when EJ announced what he said last night, i honestly felt my heart fall. Dream is the foundation. I still feel that it would be best if we trade him but it would be hard replacing that part of the puzzle. Capspace means nothing like most of you are saying. On this trade. I think SAR is a superstar. To get him, we need to take Reeves with him. With Reeves, we take the conditional pick and him and send him off to Chicago for a unconditional pick. It would then free up capspace to sign Mo.

------------------
Stevierebel

 

If we trade for Reeves, we're stuck with him. There is no way a team is going to trade for him. No way.

I know you think Reeves might be better than a "scrub" or a second round pick, but that's not what it's all about.

------------------
Nederland 2002

Rocketman95 on board. Check out his latest game recaps.

 

Jeff, you've won me over to your side. I never thought I would say no to this deal, but Clutch, DocRocket, and your posts over the last few days have made me sit back and think a little bit on what we stand to gain here. We get a superstar, sure. But after that deal, our hands are tied. We won't be making many more transactions. So, are you SURE adding Reef and BC makes us a championship contender? It might, but on the other hand it might not. And that's assuming Mo and Shandon stay for one more year of playing for below market value, which is not a given at all. Esp. with David Falk into play.

So you stand to lose Dream, KT, Shandon, Mo, picks, all cap room, and possibly more players for Shareef and Big Country. Is that a step in the right direction? I don't think it is. The risk is too great. If you waive or keep Hakeem, there are not many teams who have a ton of cap room this summer. Us, Detroit, and Atlanta are the only teams that come to mind. Webber wouldn't go to Detroit or Atlanta- he wants to win. And if Sacramento falls flat on their face again in the playoffs, I guarantee you they still won't be his top option. The more I think about it, the more I think we do have a chance at CWebb, and at keeping Shandon and possibly Mo. And if not, you can keep Shandon and Mo for sure, and look at getting a Marc Jackson guy via FA as well. Also, you have some chances for trades, and the likewise. I would still like to trade Hakeem in possibly a deal with Dallas like HP said for Bradley, Laettner, and Harvey, where Bradley and Laettner's contracts expire and we get Harvey essentially for free. (we keep our cap room) But we all want a championship, and we might be a step closer by waiving Hakeem than by trading for SAR AND Big Country, as much as it may hurt some of you to give up on Reef.

------------------
President of the Jason Collier and Mo Taylor fan club!

Draftsource.net
ClutchTown.com

 

The Bulls have stated that they have an interest in Reeves, so couldn't we just do a trade similar to this?

Hakeem to Vancouver
Shareef to Houston
Reeves to Chicago
Miller to Vancouver
Fizer to Vancouver
Tarlac to Vancouver

The trade that involves Reeves going to Chicago works on REAL GM, but wasnt sure how to configure the BYC.

------------------
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/houstonrockets2000

 

The Bulls need a big man that has potential (Big Country put up some REAL good numbers his first few years) and is locked up so they can keep him. Big Country is that man. I would give Chicago Big Country and maybe one of the 2nd round picks they gave us for a role player OR just give them Big Country for a draft pick, even a 2nd rounder. Basically dump Reeves to someone who wants him, and I'm sure that if all Chicago has to do is dump a draft pick for Reeves they would gladly do that deal, assuming they still want him. That way we could get Rahim, and Chicago could get Bryant Reeves.

------------------
"I have a scale at home and it only goes up so far, I love that scale!"
- Charles Barkley
TNT Studios

[This message has been edited by RocksMillenium (edited January 17, 2001).]

 

Patience.

Trading for SAR is the sexy thing to do. "...And the rejuvenated Rockets, led by their trio of 20 year old wonders, meet the Los Angelos Lakers, right here, on NBC..." Sure, it looks great on paper. The youth, the scoring, the star power. However, once you dig through the cosmetics, trading for Reef+Big Country would be a stupid, stupid, stupid thing to do. (I wouldn't be upset if we did it, but there are better options.)

Off the Court:

Look at the Rockets' situation right now. Rudy and CD have somehow put themselves in a perfect situation. A plethora of draft picks, good chemistry, and a load of cap space. We don't have anyone on our team that is untradeable (Kelvin Cato can be traded). We have great cap flexibility right now. One thing people do not understand is that even if we do not sign Webber, we still have the ability to make non-free agent trades and take on contracts (ie: Orlando and Clipper trade of this summer).

Would you pay $30mill for Sharif Abdur Rahim? That is what you are doing by making this trade. You are also running the risk of losing some integral parts to your team and putting yourself in a situation which cannot be reversed. If you make this trade (it would certainly include us also giving up our draft picks) you are pretty much saying that this is your team for the next half decade. Like I said, it looks damn sexy on paper but it is not economically sound.

Now if this deal came with the same economic problems but solved our problems on the court, I could make an exception....however....

On the Court

What does this deal do for us? Anyone who has been watching the Rockets knows that this team is in dire need of a physical interior presence. We don't need a sweet shooting superstar small forward. Sharif is a great player, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't solve our problems. We need someone like a Theo Ratliff (ohhhhh..) to compete in this ridiculously power forward loaded Western Conference. I have also been informed that Big Country has a rare condition in his knees which makes it very painful for him to run. Shoot, any idiot can see that Big Country has a rare condition which makes him unable to move. All of you are screaming for transition baskets but where are we going to get those when we must depend on our guards to stick around and clean the boards? An MManal-type scenario which would include a cheap rebounder would be ideal.

Conclusion: What it all comes down to is this => You can blow up the perfect scenario you have built yourself (draft picks, shot at CWebb, economic balance, reversable situations) for a great young superstar who doesnt fit any needs, salary cap hell, economic imbalance etc, etc.

If you trade for Rahim, you sure as hell better make sure it'll work on the court, because there ain't no way to get out of it.

------------------
It is no rumor that Matthew Bullard is 30th on the NBA's all-time 3 point accuracy list.

[This message has been edited by thacabbage (edited January 17, 2001).]

 

I direct everyone who's wondering about Mo and Shandon to my thread that no one seemed to respond- <a href="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/Forum3/HTML/010370.html">Mo Cap Stuff</a>

Let me remind you, assume we do nothing (or waive Hakeem, it's technically the same, except we don't own Hakeem's Bird rights), we'll be close to 14 million under the cap (before picks). We would have NO mid class exception. Our free agents would be Moochie, Mo, Bullard, and Shandon. You want Webber? Forget about Mo ANDShandon. Here's why (this is under the assumption Shandon opts out, you have to be fair, if he's one of your reasons not take Big Country, he opts out in this situation as well). Shandon would count for close to 3 million unrenounced. That cuts down your available money to 11 million, BEFORE picks (maybe 2 million alloted for those?). Webber will run at 14 million. Period. The end. No Webber. You want to renounce Shandon? Say goodbye to him. Renouncing him loses his (Early) Bird Rights. Moochie will not be a problem at all. As I believe aelliott stated, he's Early Bird, meaning we can give him up to around 4.5 million. Name a sane team that will offer him more.

------------------
The Serious Police are watching.
Follow the rules or be assimilated.
Shandon is underrated.

[This message has been edited by NIKEstrad (edited January 17, 2001).]

 

good to see ya posting again thacabbage...