When you look at guys like Marbury, Shaq and Rashard Lewis having similar contracts, he is certainly worthy of the money. Manu is the best bang for your buck in the league...you will not find a better value. But I hate when people hate on Tracy for his contract...it is fair and just when you look at other guys with massive contracts that simply are not on his level.
But we're not comparing Tmac to the other guys. We're comparing him to Manu...and as you said, Manu is "the best bang for your buck in the league." So whether you like it or not, the salary differntial is a critical and valid point.
You said T-Mac is not worth the $11 million raise, and that's where I disagree when talking about an overall standpoint. Yes, compared to Manu it is a critical and valid point, but I thought you were talking from a broader perspective like many people do when referring to T-Mac's contract. And IMO the fact that Manu is 30+ years old and is starting to get more and more banged up, and has never been a #1 option is a much bigger factor in this arguement than salaries. T-Mac has basically been a yearly 24/5/5 #1 option for the last 7-8 years, and has led the Rockets to 3 50+ win seasons in the last 4 years. Manu is still very much unproven as a #1 option, and it is questionable with his age if his style of play can keep up for a few more years. T-Mac meanwhwile has adapted his game to his injuries and has proven to be extremely effective under all types of circumstances.
I agree, at the time he was given the extension after 04-05 he was a top 5 player in the league and coming off a great 1st season with the rox. It's impossible to tell what a player will become as they age. Any GM would have done the same...a 25 yr old t-mac, top 5 talent, athletic superstar in every way...come on now.
You have got be kidding me... Having a discussion with you is like talking to a blank wall. When you make blank statements like "The Atlanta team of the playoffs was much different than the Atlanta team of the regular season" or " Manu earns 9 million this year. Tmac earns 20 million. Tmac isnt good enough to justify an 11 million increase in salaries", you might want to consider explaining yourself. How is Atlanta all the sudden a different team once they entered the playoffs and how exactly does T-Mac not justify his 19 million dollar contract? Take a good look at that list of players making similarly large amounts of money, how do you justify the others producing far less while making more? Hey, you are entitled to your opinion which I respect, I have no problem with that, but why? All I'm doing is waiting for your explanation. Players are paid to scale in the NBA. Tracy McGrady, being a lottery pick obviously starts on a higher pay scale than Manu Ginobili (he of the 2nd Round). Naturally, players will get paid more as they progress and their careers carry on. Tracy McGrady's contract is a product of the NBA and its just how it works. Factor that with the fact that Tracy McGrady has been in the league longer than Ginobili, its understandable why his contract would be worth more. "Its illogical to gauge individual worth based on team success." No, actually it is perfectly logical. When people talk about Jordan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Wilt, Russell, the first thing people will bring up are the rings. When people bring up Tracy, all they talk about is his inability to get out of the first round. So, if your statement is truly the case, Tracy McGrady should be vindicated for his 1st round failures am I right? Because, as the old knowledgeable WEKKO368 says, "Its illogical to gauge individual worth based on team success." I rest my case.
Sorry there was a misunderstanding. I thought the thread title would indicate that I was referring to Manu . Once again, you're gauging a player's ability by his team's ability. Illogical. And the salary differential is very important. For instance, if we had Manu instead of Tmac, the extra space might allow us to swing a deal for Mike Miller. And a combination of Manu + Miller trumps a Tmac any day of the week.
I don't give credit to T-Mac. That LA game is a perfect example. He vanished and the rest of the team stepped up big time. He may have had 8 points in the fourth but he only had 11 points for the entire game. Individual play still counts for a lot but I don't think there's any question that the biggest factor behind the win streak was team chemistry and team play. T-Mac's, or Yao's, individual contributions place a distant second.
Those statements are pretty much self-explanatory but I'll give it a shot. The Atlanta team that played Boston was very different than the Atlanta team that played in the regular season. The regular season Hawks were underachievers. The playoff Hawks were playing near their potential. In the playoffs, they came together as a team and players stepped up. This didnt happen in the regular season. In regards to the salary difference, if you saw Tmac play and you saw Manu play, wouldn't it surprise you to learn that Tmac makes 11 million more? Thats because even though Tmac is better, he isn't too much better. Maybe Manu is underpaid and Tmac is overpaid, but based on their abilities right now, there is no way that Tmac should be earning 11 million more than Manu. And the list of other players with large contracts is totally and utterly irrelevant. We're talking about the contracts of Manu & Tmac. Yes, his contract is worth more, but he as a player isn't. I'm not disputing that he played well and earned his original contract. I'm just saying that right now, he isnt worth what he's getting paid. The original question was something along the lines of "who would you rather have...tmac or manu?" In my opinion, the Rockets would be much better off if they had Manu + 10 million cap space to work with instead of Tmac. Yes, that is true. You cannot gauge an individual based solely on his team's success. However, you CAN gauge an individual based on how he played when his team didnt succeed (or did). And in his career as a rocket, he has had nothing but losses and excuses. I didnt watch him play when he was in orlando, but i've seen all his rocket games. And despite the stats he puts up in the playoffs, his overall game leaves me wanting. Theres just too many weaknesses.
I didn't think the money was supposed to be factored into the question. If you look at it that way, i think the Lakers would be a better team with Manu and 10M in cap space to work with instead of Kobe. As far as you not seeing Tmac play in orlando goes... I understand why you dislike him so much now. If i had never seen him play before he got to houston i would probably hate his guts too. He is really a shell of his former self. Thats really the reason why there are so many people here who love him, he used to be a beast.
Oh...well, if thats the case... I would do that trade if i had Kobe. I think the Lakers would be a better team with Manu and the 10M in cap space to work with.
I can respect your opinions about Tracy McGrady. By losses, I guessing you are implying the playoffs because Tracy has a .580% winning % with the Rockets in the regular season. You're also saying that you can't judge a player's worth based on a team's success, but you can judge a player when his team is not performing well? So you can blame T-Mac when the Rockets don't win, but he deserves no credit when they do? That makes absolutely no sense to me. Tracy is a a BIG reason as to why the Rockets even won 55 games in the first place. When the Rockets won 22 games in a row, it seemed like the chemistry of the team was also better than it was in the playoffs. If you actually watched the games (Utah series), you know perfectly well that the Rockets were absolutely abysmal when Tracy wasn't on the floor helping to facilitate the offense, and it most certainly didn't help that Alston was out. There is no denying that Tracy contributed to the success of the team. In that respect, I would say IMO, that Tracy McGrady is VERY important to the team. Also, you said it yourself that basketball is team sport. If McGrady is to blame for the Rockets 1st round exits than his teammates are just a liable. However, lets be honest here, playing on a torn labrum and a bum knee while being MIA for the next 3 months due to these injuries means the guy was definitely playing at less than 100%. He is a BIG reason the Rockets were even competitive during the series. Now I have been watching the playoffs as of late and I will tell you this. Manu doesn't take it to the rack NEARLY as much as he used to and he is on the wrong side 30. I don't think that this is a move that would make the Rockets any better by trading T-Mac straight up for Manu. To make things simple, if we were to say that their scoring output was the same, Manu still does not possess McGrady's ability to see the open floor (i.e. court vision). Finding a player of his size and abilities is VERY rare in this league. Just in case you are wondering THIS MAY be a reason for their discrepancy in dough collecting: Ginobili's career stats: Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG Career 434 232 27.8 0.454 0.382 0.815 0.9 3.2 4.0 3.6 1.5 0.3 2.10 2.40 14.7 McGrady's career stats: Team G GS MPG FG% 3p% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG Career 749 605 35.1 0.437 0.337 0.747 1.6 4.6 6.2 4.7 1.3 0.9 2.35 1.90 22.4 Well, if you can't judge a player by the team's success as you have apparently mentioned then maybe individual stats is more your game. Over the course of their respective careers, it can easily be deduced that Tracy McGrady simply produces more on the court which may be a reason as to why he is being paid the way he is. In his Orlando days, he did indeed lead some pretty abysmal teams to the playoffs...pretty much by himself. However, he was never ONCE favored to win a playoff series during his stay in Disney World. Without a doubt, Tracy McGrady has achieved more individual success which is why he is being paid the amount he is being paid. I respect your opinions and I look forward to more convos in the future
On second thought, that only works if you get a good player with the 10M. There are plenty of teams that have alot of cap space but can't do much with it. In free agency, alot of teams end up paying big bucks for guys who aren't that good. I think i would stick with Tmac...and Kobe. Cap space doesn't really help much unless you're rebuilding.
It doesnt make sense b/c thats not what I said. It may be an old cliche, but think of it this way....it doesn't matter if you win or lose. its how you play the game. That may be true, but even at that level, we had no business being compared to contenders. Thats true. But keep in mind that the rockets have some pretty terrible role players. Teammates are just as liable? So Loren Woods is just as important as Tmac? Thats a moot point though. There was no way we were going to advance. What bothers me is that Tmac would go for periods at a time where he was totally ineffective. How does this have anything to do with whether or not the rockets would be a better team w/ Manu instead of Tmac? I've been continually saying that you need to factor in salaries. Are you intentionally ignoring my posts in order to validate yours? Before joining the Rockets, Tmac was a 1-man show in Orlando. Manu has always been teamed with Duncan. Dont you think that would affect the stats? I'm pretty sure the Magic were favored to win when they were beating Detroit 3-1.
Don't pay any attention to this guy. He's just annoyed that he's never been able to refute any of my contentions while I've been able to refute all of his that I disagreed with.
wekko- No I am not...I am not saying that Manu absolutely can't lead a team as the #1 option, but he simply hasn't shown it once in his career. That is a huge factor in trading T-Mac for Manu...Yao is still not at the point where he can truly carry an offense, and we would desperately need what T-Mac offers as the #1 guy. Could Manu be that player? Maybe, but it's a huge concern as it is simply not proven. I said a LONG time ago in this thread that Manu can't do what T-Mac does and broke down their skill set...Manu isn't the floor leader rand playmaker T-Mac is. He doesn't demand the kind of attention T-Mac does, and if he is shaded off the PNR like T-Mac is, what would normally be an easy layup for him in the Spurs offense would be a tough shot over a double team. His %'s would be considerably lower than with the Spurs, TO's would be way higher than T-Mac' usual 2.6 TO's per game, and he simply wouldn't be able to carry the load like T-Mac does. That was very clear in the Lakers series...when T-Mac is injured and can't get to the rim, he still commands the kind of attention that gives teammates wide open shots and still can find his points. Manu cannot, and that is badly what the Rockets need without T-Mac. [qote]And the salary differential is very important. For instance, if we had Manu instead of Tmac, the extra space might allow us to swing a deal for Mike Miller. And a combination of Manu + Miller trumps a Tmac any day of the week.[/quote] I am not a fan of this logic. In 2004 the Lakers traded a Shaq who was just passing his prime for Caron Butler, Lamar Odom and a few fillers. The season after making the NBA Finals they couldn't even reach .500. It is a star driven league, and I am not of the group that thinks that 2 very good role players are more important than a superstar. With LA making a run , T-Mac needed to step up and he did. If he didn't, the game would have ended up just like the last 2 games T-Mac missed with his knee injury...team collapsing in the 4th. Can be said about any individual player...MJ did nothing before his team evolved, the Lakers were a .500 team before Kobe's teammates started to develop, etc... Of course when you go on a long streak it is going to be a team effort, but you are not giving near enough credit to T-Mac...he made it all click, and he showed up big in games that mattered the most.
Riiiiiight, it was your rather insightful arguments that led me to give up debates with you. Especially the one about the hockey assist. Brilliant.
Yes, where do I sign? Seriously, whoever say 'yes' is an idiot and don't deserve to call himself a Rockets fan.
It is quite obvious you are not a fan of McGrady, but you know what that's cool. If ever entered your mind that T-Mac plays with Yao, and maybe thats why his stats may be down from his Orlando days. As for the 3-1 series against the Pistons, BEFORE the series started the Magic were just as likely to get out of the 1st round as the Rockets this year. Loren Woods? where'd that come from? Not him, but I would say Luther Head, Flava Flav, Shane, and the rest of the crew that actually played are just as liable. I've been saying ALL ALONG that Tracy cold use some help from his teammates. You say a player's value can judged when his team loses...well Tracy definitely put up the numbers and was doing all he could to prolong the Rockets season, so I honestly don't think the series loss was "On Him" as he would say. The team was definitely better with him on the floor. I'm not denying the fact that sometimes I wish he would take it more to the rack like he did back in the day, but he has definitely changed his style of play as of late. He is for one, more team-oriented and his getting his teammates involved. Some people may not like this particular style of play and would rather see Tracy hang 60 points a night, but there is no denying his importance to the team. When the Bulls won 6 rings, I would say Jordan was a big part of that. When the Rockets won back to back titles, I would likewise say Hakeem was a big part of that. The Rockets winning 55 games and going on a 22-game win streak, I would say Tracy McGrady had something to do with that. Tracy McGrady's value to the Rockets this past season and in season's past is undeniable. As for the 1st round exit, you can't deny he wasn't a reason the Rockets were even in the series for 6 games. I prefer T-Mac over Manu, you like Manu over T-Mac, I can respect that.
