Rockets after Baze

[Final_quest]

I think the cap space is usable.  If you can’t sign a free agent it allows you to do more with trades.  

If we keep securing draft picks and keep our cap open, we could make some franchise altering moves.  Every team needing to trade a Kawhi or Paul George is looking for young talent and draft picks.  

We can form our own super team.  Trae, John Collins, and one of next year’s picks has to show all star level play.  Then we have a staple of young players, draft picks, and cap space to form a team.  You keep a couple of your players, trade for one, and then sign a top level guy.

Super teams can be formed in one off season.  The Celtics went from losers to championship in a single off season.  As long as we keep cap available, continue to acquire draft capital, and make good draft picks we can become a super team when the situation aligns.  It could be as early as next year. 

[KB21]

The fumes are strong this morning if some really believe the Hawks can use their cap space to form a "super team".  LOL!!

[terrell]

9 hours ago, KB21 said:

The cap space is essentially unusable.  No free agent is going to choose to sign with a sub 20 win team.  

Len and Lin came here as FA's after only winning 24 last year, so..................................................   If Trae, Collins, Prince, etc  play well this year, You never know....

[macdaddy]

23 minutes ago, terrell said:

Len and Lin came here as FA's after only winning 24 last year, so..................................................   If Trae, Collins, Prince, etc  play well this year, You never know....

We traded for Lin.

[sturt]

My two pennies...

1) I think Baze brings value as a veteran leadership presence, but I don't consider that a particularly important asset at this juncture. There will come a time when it is important, but not so much right now.

So, it makes a lot of sense to explore opportunities like what has been reported w/ HOU.

Add to that, we really are overloaded in the backcourt right now anyhow.

2) I don't see us getting that much in return, but I for one will be satisfied with any 1st round pick, and if from HOU, even better if it's 3-4 years out.

 

[KB21]

43 minutes ago, sturt said:

My two pennies...

1) I think Baze brings value as a veteran leadership presence, but I don't consider that a particularly important asset at this juncture. There will come a time when it is important, but not so much right now.

So, it makes a lot of sense to explore opportunities like what has been reported w/ HOU.

Add to that, we really are overloaded in the backcourt right now anyhow.

2) I don't see us getting that much in return, but I for one will be satisfied with any 1st round pick, and if from HOU, even better if it's 3-4 years out.

 

I completely disagree with this.  It is far more important to have the veteran mentors now when these guys are young and just starting out.  

[sturt]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

I completely disagree with this.  It is far more important to have the veteran mentors now when these guys are young and just starting out.  

Overrated.

And even granting the benefit of a doubt to that sentiment, it's not like Baze is the only veteran on the roster.

Rather have another asset, assuming it's not merely future 2nd rounders.

I'd be open to a Euro-stash, and if I recall correctly, HOU has a few of those as well.

[JayBirdHawk]

47 minutes ago, sturt said:

My two pennies...

1) I think Baze brings value as a veteran leadership presence, but I don't consider that a particularly important asset at this juncture. There will come a time when it is important, but not so much right now.

So, it makes a lot of sense to explore opportunities like what has been reported w/ HOU.

Add to that, we really are overloaded in the backcourt right now anyhow.

2) I don't see us getting that much in return, but I for one will be satisfied with any 1st round pick, and if from HOU, even better if it's 3-4 years out.

 

Then why bring in Lin and Carter if veteran leadership presence not required.  I understand that Baze makes a lot of money but an Anderson trade does nothing to relieve our cap burden in a Baze trade. I get that we acquire a late 1st - it just depends on which 1st it is. Like I said previously, I'd take the Hartenstein kid and a future 1st.

[EazyRoc]

7 minutes ago, sturt said:

Overrated.

And even granting the benefit of a doubt to that sentiment, it's not like Baze is the only veteran on the roster.

Rather have another asset, assuming it's not merely future 2nd rounders.

I'd be open to a Euro-stash, and if I recall correctly, HOU has a few of those as well.

Having positive veteran leadership is immensely more important than a late first rounder or some “Eurostash” that will never play in the NBA. Baze, Carter, and Lin are the only veterans on this roster. The more experienced vets we have, the better it will be for the youth we bring in.

[JayBirdHawk]

Just now, EazyRoc said:

Having positive veteran leadership is immensely more important than a late first rounder or some “Eurostash” that will never play in the NBA. Baze, Carter, and Lin are the only veterans on this roster. The more experienced vets we have, the better it will be for the youth we bring in.

And Dedmon.

[JayBirdHawk]

Think about this....I know we call Baze and Ded vets but they've only been in the league 6 and 5 years respectively. Compare that to Carter's 20 YEARS in the league - that's amazing.

[sturt]

I said "over-rated."

Not "meaningless."

Particularly for a rookie PG, I perceive great value to having a veteran player-coach there.

How many vets do you need, though?

I'm not persuaded that having 4 instead of 3 makes a whole lotta difference... you have a vet at PG, wing, and post... that's enough from my perspective.

 

14 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Like I said previously, I'd take the Hartenstein kid and a future 1st.

I'm up for that. In fact, I would be excited about that.

 

And, if it went down, Anderson would be another buyout, imo.

[EazyRoc]

6 minutes ago, sturt said:

I said "over-rated."

Not "meaningless."

Particularly for a rookie PG, I perceive great value to having a veteran player-coach there.

How many vets do you need, though?

I'm not persuaded that having 4 instead of 3 makes a whole lotta difference... you have a vet at PG, wing, and post... that's enough from my perspective.

 

I'm up for that. In fact, I would be excited about that.

 

And, if it went down, Anderson would be another buyout, imo.

The Anderson trade would be absolutely terrible. We don’t know how he would respond coming to a locker room that’s definitely going to lose a lot of games. At least, we know that Baze has a upbeat, positive outlook that the rest of the young guys can feed off. Not to mention Anderson is a defensive liability with 2 years left on his contract. 

The trade for the young guy makes a little bit more sense but would still be a bad move. We don’t need to make this team any worse than it is. You start trading off proven players for “prospects” and you’ll really find yourself on the lottery hamster wheel. Baze is a player that contributes to winning games. Why trade him for late first/2nd round prospects ?

[Spud2nique]

I don’t really want Anderson and a 25-30 pick with 2-3 million salary added on. I mean, to have 4 potential first round picks is unheard of but it almost seems like Schlenk is going draft pick crazy, which btw don’t get me wrong I love, but this Anderson trade rubs me funny.

[DBac]

FWIW sounds like the Rockets are calling around more than other teams.

[AHF]

Anderson is a downgrade in talent and more salary.  Don’t want him for Baze unless we get more than a late first as Jay outlined.

[kg01]

53 minutes ago, DBac said:

FWIW sounds like the Rockets are calling around more than other teams.

Yeah, Zach Lowe said they also inquired about JR Smith.  Smacks of desperation .... maybe we should pounce.

[macdaddy]

2 hours ago, EazyRoc said:

The Anderson trade would be absolutely terrible. We don’t know how he would respond coming to a locker room that’s definitely going to lose a lot of games. At least, we know that Baze has a upbeat, positive outlook that the rest of the young guys can feed off. Not to mention Anderson is a defensive liability with 2 years left on his contract. 

The trade for the young guy makes a little bit more sense but would still be a bad move. We don’t need to make this team any worse than it is. You start trading off proven players for “prospects” and you’ll really find yourself on the lottery hamster wheel. Baze is a player that contributes to winning games. Why trade him for late first/2nd round prospects ?

I like Baze and don't want to trade him for just a future 1st without getting an asset or cap relief.  But i feel like we're overrating him and his impact on the court.   On a team like the Rockets I think he's a 15 minute a night player.   

[kg01]

.... honestly, the more I think about it.  This Baze-for-RAnderson+1st deal might not be all bad.  It'd be contingent on potentially flipping him to a team needing shooting at the deadline this year or next. 

Could net us another future 1st or prospect from a team like NOP who's not really a contender but has to kinda 'go for it' due to circumstances like tricking ADavis into thinking they're not wasting his prime.

[JayBirdHawk]

4 minutes ago, kg01 said:

.... honestly, the more I think about it.  This Baze-for-RAnderson+1st deal might not be all bad.  It'd be contingent on potentially flipping him to a team needing shooting at the deadline this year or next. 

Could net us another future 1st or prospect from a team like NOP who's not really a contender but has to kinda 'go for it' due to circumstances like tricking ADavis into thinking they're not wasting his prime.

Thing is, Houston has been trying to move him since they gave him that contract. There are a ton of teams that can use a 3 point shooting stretch 4, just not at $20 mil and one dimensional. 

In any trade, I think we'd just be taking back bad salary but probably in two smaller deals and for longer than the 2 years remaining.