# Rumor: Battie and Daniels to Rockets



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

1. Cavs are planning to dump Battie to Rockets. Rockets need Back-up Center.

2. Sonics were losing B Barry and were trying to dump A Daniels to Rockets.


----------



## HeinzGuderian (Jun 29, 2004)

I dont think either happens. 
Without Barry, Seattle will keep Daniels.
Without Boozer, I would think that Cleveland would want to keep Battie since he can play either PF or C.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>HeinzGuderian</b>!
> I dont think either happens.
> Without Barry, Seattle will keep Daniels.
> Without Boozer, I would think that Cleveland would want to keep Battie since he can play either PF or C.


I agree on Barry. However, I have heard the Cavs want to dump some contracts so they can match Boozer's offer.


----------



## Starks (Feb 22, 2004)

Cleveland needs to dump Wagner. Silas really likes him but he is still a work in progress and has enough talent to get something important in return. Some team would take him.

I wouldn't mind seeing Battie with the team.

I would be surprised if Seattle trades Daniels. Then they would only have one natural point, Ridnour.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

Cleveland is not planning on dumping salary. In fact in order to dump enough to get Boozer they'd have to get rid of Battie, Wagner Diop and I believe one more player with no compensation. The Cavs don't have nearly enough depth to deal with that kind of purging.


----------



## RocketFan85 (Jun 8, 2003)

Daniels will be Rocket. They will use the TE to trade for him, and I've heard that they might throw in a 1st round pick too. Seems like too much for Daniels, but maybe they are going more in return?


----------



## Starks (Feb 22, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>RocketFan85</b>!
> Daniels will be Rocket. They will use the TE to trade for him, and I've heard that they might throw in a 1st round pick too. Seems like too much for Daniels, but maybe they are going more in return?


Why would Seattle do that? If Luke isn't ready to start, although I think he will, they would have to start Murray. I don't think so!

I don't think the Rockets would want anything else but Daniels. We could use another big man but Seattle's aren't worth trading for.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Starks</b>!
> 
> 
> Why would Seattle do that? If Luke isn't ready to start, although I think he will, they would have to start Murray. I don't think so!
> ...


You say that as if starting Ronaly Murray is a bad thing. He had the same identical stats that Ray had before Ray came back. hes better than Luke Ridnour anyway


----------



## Starks (Feb 22, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> You say that as if starting Ronaly Murray is a bad thing. He had the same identical stats that Ray had before Ray came back. hes better than Luke Ridnour anyway


Flip is a very talented player, I just don't think he is a natural point. If he starts it would be at the two and he could be the second point guard. Either way, I still don't think Seattle should trade Daniels.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Starks</b>!
> 
> 
> Flip is a very talented player, I just don't think he is a natural point. If he starts it would be at the two and he could be the second point guard. Either way, I still don't think Seattle should trade Daniels.


oh you are definitley correct about that. He has the ability to, his talent just needs to be harnassed


----------

