# Excellent Trade for Rockets - Wells/James to Hornets for basically nothing.



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

for Bobby Jackson, injury old man.

I don't need to tell you why is really good trade. 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3255700


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Hmm... Interesting...

And sign Wells next season? Could we if this deal goes through?

Not sure about Butler, but if we could dump James for Jackson straight up, I would be all over it.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

I'm really hesitant about giving up Bonzi though, we need him if we want to get anywhere in the playoffs... I'm gonna have to say no to this one


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Yao Mania said:


> I'm really hesitant about giving up Bonzi though, we need him if we want to get anywhere in the playoffs... I'm gonna have to say no to this one


I was just sitting here thinking about this. The loss of Bonzi would really hurt our depth. But dumping that James contract, and getting a player in return who knows Ricks system with only one year on his contract is really tempting though...

Question is, what are we going to do with Bonzi after this year anyway? I don't know what kind of money he wants, and not sure if we should attempt to resign him in the offseason, or possibly spend that money elsewhere. This could be a good way to package both Bonzi & James's contract without the risk of losing Bonzi for nothing in the offseason anyway, thus keeping us stuck with James.

You guys understand what I am saying?


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Also, what if were clearing up cap space and gaining a back up PG (Jackson) in order to land Miller or Artest by giving up Snyder + Brooks + filler? Its been reported that the Kings want Brooks badly, or the Grizz would be getting youngins for Miller.

Bonzi's an important figure for us and I dont think Morey is going to just deal him unless he knows we'll be getting a bigtime player on the backside.

like I said, Bobby has played for Adelman. Yes, he is injured a lot, but he's a product of the system and a decent defensive player. Also his contract becomes a great asset next season. (would be 6 mil expiring deal)

Pretty much, Artest or Miller better be in a Rockets uniform this season if this deal goes down.


...


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

And here I was ready to bash BS, but he provided a link this time. Good job.


This move could also mean more time for Snyder, and see if he can fill Bonzi's shoes. And to see if he's worth resigning next year.


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

OneBadLT123 said:


> Also, what if were clearing up cap space and gaining a back up PG (Jackson) in order to land Miller or Artest by giving up Snyder + Brooks + filler? Its been reported that the Kings want Brooks badly, or the Grizz would be getting youngins for Miller.
> 
> Bonzi's an important figure for us and I dont think Morey is going to just deal him unless he knows we'll be getting a bigtime player on the backside.
> 
> ...



agree. diff. don't want to give up Wells since he has been good for us and diff. not give him to the the Hornets, but getting rid of James contract is nice.

heres my question, if we dump the contract of MJ, does it help us out with more Cap. space to use on a decent Free agent?


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

lingi1206 said:


> heres my question, if we dump the contract of MJ, does it help us out with more Cap. space to use on a decent Free agent?


Nope, we'd still be over the cap.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

lingi1206 said:


> agree. diff. don't want to give up Wells since he has been good for us and diff. not give him to the the Hornets, but getting rid of James contract is nice.
> 
> heres my question, if we dump the contract of MJ, does it help us out with more Cap. space to use on a decent Free agent?


Well, Bobby Jackson would be good expiring bait, and could possibly get him off the books in the offseason, then with Suras's contract off the books, Dikembe's off, Lucas's off, and depending what else happens we might have some space.

I don't know if Bonzi is going to return anyway. If this deal does not go down, and assuming we don't unload James's contract, all we would have to offer Bonzi is the MLE.


----------



## Legend-Like (Mar 25, 2006)

Yao Mania said:


> I'm really hesitant about giving up Bonzi though, we need him if we want to get anywhere in the playoffs... I'm gonna have to say no to this one


Yeah I agree with you on this one. You think we could just give Mike James :whistling:


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

OneBadLT123 said:


> Well, Bobby Jackson would be good expiring bait, and could possibly get him off the books in the offseason, then with Suras's contract off the books, Dikembe's off, Lucas's off, and depending what else happens we might have some space.


Not enough. Without counting James' contract for next season, we'd still be at $59.055.199



OneBadLT123 said:


> I don't know if Bonzi is going to return anyway. If this deal does not go down, and assuming we don't unload James's contract, all we would have to offer Bonzi is the MLE.


We also have to resign Landry.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

I just hate salary-dumping trades. Yes, it makes sense, but in the end we lose a valuable player in our rotation for this grind heading into the end of the season. If this can lead to another trade bringing in someone better than Bonzi? Sure I'm up for it. But if this is the only move we make until the end of the season, no way. 

Bobby Jackson is washed up. I'd much rather have Head coming off the bench than Bobby. And as much as we'd like to think that Snyder can replace Bonzi, he can't. Bonzi's a scrapper, he can create his own scoring opportunities, and he has experience. I refuse to give him up for nothing.

Btw, whatever happened to Juwan Howard? Looks like we got rid of him just at the right time.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

****, that 1 year Landry deal is going to bite us in the ***. Whats the max Landry could ask for? Can he only get the rookie contracts still, or no?


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

Yao Mania said:


> I just hate salary-dumping trades .


yea...like giving Gasol away...


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

Done deal



> The Rockets reached agreement on a deal that will send Bonzi Wells and Mike James to New Orleans to get guard Bobby Jackson, individuals with knowledge of the talks said.
> 
> The deal, which has grown to include minor involvement of the Memphis Grizzlies, is pending league approval, with a conference call is scheduled for today for the NBA to review the trade.
> 
> ...


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

****... well, good luck in NO Bonzi and Mike, I'll be rooting for you guys there. Bobby Jackson did have a pretty good game against Dallas tonight, so hopefully he can keep that up here. 

But man... this team just got weaker at a time where we can't afford to get weak. I seriously hope this will lead to another trade...


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

I hope Jackson can play tomorrow. Lat time against the Heat, he went like 11-11 from the field.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

From Feigen's blog:



> Jonathan - have you heard anything about the ESPN rumored deal of Wells + Bonzi to the Hornets for Bobby Jackson and another player? If so, who would that other player be? Is this a salary dump?
> 
> _(Yeah, I have something written on that, too. There are a lot of moving parts, but *Jackson* for *James* are the primaries. The Rockets would rather *Kirk Snyder* be in the deal than Wells, but they want Alston to have a veteran backup point, and to have one less season on his contract than they have on James'. Adelman thinks a great deal of Jackson. The way I worded it in my story is that it has been tabled until tomorrow, but they are still talking to someone tonight, so things could change. *It's not something to trigger a different deal, though.* -- Jonathan)_


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Am I the only one who sees this retarded logic? So, Houston wants a veteran PG to back up Rafer. Mike James isn't good enough. NO wants a backup for Chris Paul, but Bobby Jackson wasn't the answer. So, to fix their problems, they SWAP these incompetent point guards, and all of a sudden, they're set at that position.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

dammit, I was hoping this would lead to another deal..... 

sigh, well, I hope Adelman knows what he's doing


----------



## gi0rdun (May 31, 2007)

Bobby Jackson used to play for Adelman right?


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Sickeningly bad trade. Bonzi has been very underrated this season. With the way T-Mac is playing, Bonzi looks almost as potent a scorer. He's a better defender than McGrady too, and is a good passer. He is terrific on the boards, having the second-best rebounding season of his career. I'd much rather Bonzi come off the bench in the playoffs than Head, who was awful last time. A terrible move.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

However, we do need a legit backup PG who knows the offense. James wasn't doing it. Brooks has looked pretty bad recently. And we know how Head is there.


----------



## bronx43 (Dec 9, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> However, we do need a legit backup PG who knows the offense. James wasn't doing it. Brooks has looked pretty bad recently. And we know how Head is there.


Well, Jackson is shooting worse than Mike James, so the only thing we gain is 8-10 minutes/game of a 36 year old guard who is familiar with the Kings' old offense.


----------



## AllEyezonTX (Nov 16, 2006)

Never thought Rick would give up Wells, but Bobby Jack played for him too. I'm not sure how I feel about this trade, but I do hope Synder gets some playing time with Wells out.


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

Losing Wells is horrible, but I guess I need to give Bobby a chance.


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

giordun said:


> Bobby Jackson used to play for Adelman right?


Yes in Sactown.

I think its a decent deal.

Either Luther or Bonzi was going to get less minutes anyway. Luther will be with us next year.. Bonzi was a rental. There was no way we were going to pay him next year. So give Luther the minutes to grow.

Now we have more room to deal in the off season and get rid of the albatross that is MJ's contract.

Someone on the radio was talking about how MJ and Bonzi could mess up the Hornets chemistry, which is entirely possible. If it does that would be a bonus.

Bobby Jackson isn't "the answer" but at least he's familiar with Adelman's system and can hit from the outside.


----------



## jdiggidy (Jun 21, 2003)

> Also, what if were clearing up cap space and gaining a back up PG (Jackson) in order to land Miller or Artest by giving up Snyder + Brooks + filler? Its been reported that the Kings want Brooks badly, or the Grizz would be getting youngins for Miller


Damn, you beat me to it. Aside from riding us of James and losing a proven playoff scorer, there has to be more to this trade than meets the eye. The only problem is Daryl has only a few more hours to spark a deal.

As long as Battier isn't part of any Artest or Miller deal then I am open to anything.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Man... If Artest or Mike Miller isn't in a Rockets uniform by the end of today, I am going to be ROYALLY PISSED


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

jdiggidy said:


> Damn, you beat me to it. Aside from riding us of James and losing a proven playoff scorer, there has to be more to this trade than meets the eye. The only problem is Daryl has only a few more hours to spark a deal.
> 
> As long as Battier isn't part of any Artest or Miller deal then I am open to anything.


All I do is hope, because I am starting to get sick...


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

HayesFan said:


> Someone on the radio was talking about how MJ and Bonzi could mess up the Hornets chemistry, which is entirely possible. If it does that would be a bonus.


What about the Rockets chemistry? Anyone remember the T-Mac-Jackson "fight"?


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

Using our bird rights to re-sign Bonzi was our only chance to bring him back next season. We are basically going to have just part of the MLE to sign new players next year
Earlier this year the Feigen from the Chron said the only moves the Rockets were really pursuing were to dump James and save on the luxury tax and it looks like that is all we did


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

1 hour 15 mins left...


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Pimped Out said:


> Using our bird rights to re-sign Bonzi was our only chance to bring him back next season. We are basically going to have just part of the MLE to sign new players next year
> Earlier this year the Feigen from the Chron said the only moves the Rockets were really pursuing were to dump James and save on the luxury tax and it looks like that is all we did


Great move IMHO. Gain an above-average perimeter defender and opportunity to dump MJ's contract.

Next move should be Luther Head, Kirk Snyder and Steve Novak for Gerald Green & Michael Doleac.


----------



## Yao Man.. (Jul 19, 2007)

I woke up on the wrong side of the bed hearing this news. To me this is a freakin horrible move(wrong timing). This move better be followed up with a spectacular move, because by trading bonzi we lose alot alot of toughness. I mean i see everyone on here talkin about freeing up cap space and such, but to me a 9 game winning streak and good chemistry means more entering the playoffs. I guess this trade hits me more then some of you guys, because I personally always wanted him at the 2 gaurd and trade T-mac for a pg or something decent in return and build our offense around Yao.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

TManiAC said:


> Great move IMHO. Gain an above-average perimeter defender and opportunity to dump MJ's contract.
> 
> Next move should be Luther Head, Kirk Snyder and Steve Novak for Gerald Green & Michael Doleac.


Getting rid of James' contract was a business move, not a basketball moves. As a _basketball_ fan, I don't care about business moves


----------



## Yao Man.. (Jul 19, 2007)

Yeah i could careless about a business move right now considering we are entering the playoffs with a winning streak and chemistry. And i think mike james and wells will make the hornets so much stronger then they are now.

Yall dont think we could have gotten away with jus trading james alone? WHY BONZI!


----------



## Krimzon (Feb 26, 2007)

Bonzi being traded caught me by surprise. I didn't expect him to be traded. Chances are he'll leave when his contract is up. Still if we're going to trade him, let's get someone else. The Hornets really got the good end of the deal in this trade. I really hope something good happens for us before the deadline.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Pimped Out said:


> Getting rid of James' contract was a business move, not a basketball moves. As a _basketball_ fan, I don't care about business moves



Foresight is necessary. When you got Yao, TMac and Battier gobbling up as much cap space as they do, it would be foolish to try and pull a trade that hand-cuffs us, financially, when the West is looking as tough as they ever have. Face it, the Rockets can't compete with San Antonio, Phoenix, or the Lakers... so why strap your franchise for the next several years? There's a reason why DM was brought on to be GM... its cuz its becoming increasingly difficult to find wiggle room with the salary required to retain our core players.

Additionally, who knows what kind of negative impact Bonzi and MJ are having in the locker-room? The only thing that makes me antsy about this trade is that Bonzi is a superior rebounder for his position... then again we _are_ leading the league in rebounding... so we have a bit of a cushion there whereas our perimeter defense has been sucking. Adding BoJax helps tighten our perimeter defense and helps to alleviate the cap pressure we are seeing at the expense of rebounding.


----------



## Yao Man.. (Jul 19, 2007)

just heard on espn that this trade might not fall through.


----------



## edyzbasketball (Nov 16, 2005)

We dumped MJ's big contract, that's good. We get a pick, that's fine. But we lose Bonzi, THAT'S NOT FINE. What do we get? Bobby Jackson. Shoots the 3, but old. Backup for Rafer? Don't think so. He can't keep up.

We'll see.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Makes sense now that we acquired Gerald Green. I am sure were trying to keep him around long-term.

BoJax & Gerald Green >> Mike James & Bonzi Wells.

We just effectively improved our salary situation AND improved our long-term prospectus.

Way to go Morey!


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

http://blogs.chron.com/nba/2008/02/bonzi_for_bobby_why_the_rocket.html

*



Bonzi for Bobby. Why the Rockets made the deal
People wanted the Rockets to make a deal with the Grizzlies and so they did.

There is, however, a pretty good chance that this was not the deal anyone had in mind.

Instead of shopping in the Memphis fire sale that apparently ended with the discount pricing that sent Paul Gasol to LA - it looks like Mike Miller will stay on Beale Street for this season - the Rockets picked up Bobby Jackson from the Hornets for Bonzi Wells and Mike James. The Grizzlies involvement was only minor.

The league conference call is scheduled for this morning, but it will get done.

My initial reaction was that the price was too high for a veteran backup at the point who has struggled this season. I understand the motivation, though rookie Aaron Brooks is coming along nicely. The Rockets are thrilled with the pick and will let him grow into the job. But it is smart to get a veteran to help out Rafer Alston at the position. If Jackson was the best they could get, and James could not get off the Rockets bench anyway, it was wise to get Jackson.

It just seemed that giving up James and Wells for him was too pricey.

Long-term it is the move to make. The Rockets could not get in on all those made-up trades, and some of the ones that actually happened, because they did not have a sizable expiring contract. Next summer and next season, they will.

After having their hands tied to one too-long contract or another for most of this decade, the last burdensome contract is gone. (The Rockets got James for Juwan Howard, whom they took on in the Tracy McGrady deal because of the Kelvin Cato contract, one of the many contracts they handed out in those days that were just too long.)

They also moved under the luxury tax line by enough that they could release a player and then sign a veteran (Brent Barry?) without triggering the tax.

Even short-term, the way things have gone with James since getting him back, exchanging James for Jackson was a no-brainer. It might not stack up with getting Mike Miller for spare parts or renting Ron Artest and never have him step out of line again. But moving James was a trade-deadline goal the Rockets got done.

The question is the Bonzi Wells part.

Basically, the deal is Jackson for Wells, with the Hornets accepting the James contract. On the court, that's what this will be. James didn't play. Adam Haluska is not likely to play, though he does have a nice shooting stroke.

On the court, the Rockets subtract Wells and add Jackson.

Wells has been a key part of the Rockets rotation. But with Luis Scola and Carl Landry emerging rapidly, Wells' minutes at the four were likely to shrink to close to zero. Tracy McGrady is back from his injuries. Luther Head is back from his. Wells' playing time there was going to be sliced, too. Wells is not a guy you want around when he is not playing, and the Rockets were likely to be headed that way.

So it all makes sense, except...

There is a gamble there. Wells was insurance, just as Jackson now is at the point. If McGrady gets hurt again, if the rookie fours struggle, if the Rockets face a team in the playoffs too big and physical for Head and Jackson to be your backup guards, then Wells could have been key.

The questions then are whether those things will happen and whether the Rockets needed a veteran backup point more than a veteran backup guard/forward.

By summer and again next season, this will be a good deal for the Rockets. But this season, the Rockets are gambling.

They are not, however, gambling on Jackson as much as the guys that were going to take over Wells' minutes. If they excel, Wells won't be missed, at least that's what the Rockets are counting on.

Click to expand...

*


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Looks to be a business move...


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

the Hornets just got better..DAMN


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

TManiAC said:


> Foresight is necessary. When you got Yao, TMac and Battier gobbling up as much cap space as they do, it would be foolish to try and pull a trade that hand-cuffs us, financially, when the West is looking as tough as they ever have. Face it, the Rockets can't compete with San Antonio, Phoenix, or the Lakers... so why strap your franchise for the next several years? There's a reason why DM was brought on to be GM... its cuz its becoming increasingly difficult to find wiggle room with the salary required to retain our core players.
> 
> Additionally, who knows what kind of negative impact Bonzi and MJ are having in the locker-room? The only thing that makes me antsy about this trade is that Bonzi is a superior rebounder for his position... then again we _are_ leading the league in rebounding... so we have a bit of a cushion there whereas our perimeter defense has been sucking. Adding BoJax helps tighten our perimeter defense and helps to alleviate the cap pressure we are seeing at the expense of rebounding.


We're handcuffed. We don't have wiggle room. None of that changed. Mike James' contract, along with pretty much anyone we would trade, will expire before the Rockets are in any position to use cap space. This doesn't provide us with any actual flexibility we didn't have before. The difference is that Alexander saves money.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

Not happy about this.

PS Jackson's contract expires at the end of this season right?

I want Brooks to get minutes next season.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Pimped Out said:


> We're handcuffed. We don't have wiggle room. None of that changed. Mike James' contract, along with pretty much anyone we would trade, will expire before the Rockets are in any position to use cap space. This doesn't provide us with any actual flexibility we didn't have before. The difference is that Alexander saves money.


True, in a very narrow-minded kinda way.

if you were $4 Mill over the cap as opposed to $1 Mill over the cap and you signed a player for the MLE, you would be paying $6 Million more for the MLE player (and thats just the first year). That kind of situation significantly cuts into your options for using the MLE (meaning short-term contracts for washed up veterans) as opposed to a long-term fit.

If all GMs saw it your way, no one would be trading for expiring contracts if they were above the luxury threshold... they would just sit on all their crap contracts like the Knicks. Do you want us to be the Knicks?


----------



## Legend-Like (Mar 25, 2006)

WEll im kinda questionable about this trade. Bonzi's dunks and lost post presence and rebounding skills were very important to us. Bobby Jackson on the other has played through Adelmans systems before and if Rafer goes through a slump we have Bobby to back us up.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

hroz said:


> Not happy about this.
> 
> PS Jackson's contract expires at the end of this season right?
> 
> I want Brooks to get minutes next season.


No, he has another year on his contract.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

Cornholio said:


> No, he has another year on his contract.


I really dont understand this deal at all. 
Totally confused by it.
No idea how you can make this a positive....................


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

hroz said:


> I really dont understand this deal at all.
> Totally confused by it.
> No idea how you can make this a positive....................


What is so hard to understand? Do you understand $13 Million ($6.5 Mill X 2 for luxury tax... For MIKE JAMES for that matter)? What would you do with an extra $13 Million? You know this money doesnt grow on trees... as much as we hate Les for trying to cut down on his luxury taxes, this is coming out of his own pockets. Don't tell me this is a stupid move.... if James or Bonzi gave us a legit chance of winning a title... I'm sure Les would have ponied up that extra $13 Million just so he could put a smile on our faces.

Dont call this a stupid move, cuz its far from it.


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

James's contract is the same size as Jackson and is only a year less. And that is only if James chooses to extend it for a year.

It also means we lose BONZI who has been playing amazingly. Bonzi is seriously talented. 

I undertsand the salary dump just not happy about it especially the fact Morey said we werent a chance with that rotation. We are a really good chance with the rotation we had. Dallas & the Suns got weaker. Lakers were the only team to improve significantly.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

hroz said:


> James's contract is the same size as Jackson and is only a year less. And that is only if James chooses to extend it for a year.
> 
> It also means we lose BONZI who has been playing amazingly. Bonzi is seriously talented.
> 
> I undertsand the salary dump just not happy about it especially the fact Morey said we werent a chance with that rotation. We are a really good chance with the rotation we had. Dallas & the Suns got weaker. Lakers were the only team to improve significantly.



James would not opt out of a guaranteed $6.5 Million... you think others would offer him better?

I wouldnt say Bonzi was playing "Amazingly," not even "Reasonable" to the point where he justified the extra $13 Mill we were about to pay for Mike James to sit on the bench. If Bonzi was playing amazingly, we probably had no shot of signing him in the offseason... at least now we save the $13 Mill due to Mike James and we have a prospect in Green who we own Bird rights to.


----------



## AZNoob (Jan 21, 2006)

TManiAC said:


> ... at least now we save the $13 Mill due to Mike James and we have a prospect in Green who we own *Bird rights* to.


What does that mean?


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

Rockets salaries, next season:


```
Tracy McGrady   $19,614,000
Yao Ming 	$15,070,550
Shane Battier 	$6,373,900
Bobby Jackson  	$6,090,000
Rafer Alston 	$4,900,000
Luis Scola 	$3,150,000
Steve Francis 	$2,634,480
Chuck Hayes 	$1,933,750
Justin Reed * 	$1,573,000
Luther Head 	$1,962,378
Aaron Brooks 	$1,045,560
Steve Novak 	$797,581

[B]Total        $65,145,199[/B]
```
*Green - Player Option
Blue - Team Option*


And we'll have $10,567,621 in expiring contracts. (Jackson, Francis, Brooks and Novak)


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

AZNoob said:


> What does that mean?


The Bird exception simply says a team can exceed the cap to sign certain players.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

AZNoob said:


> What does that mean?


We can sign him to any deal without worrying about the cap.


----------



## Pimped Out (May 4, 2005)

TManiAC said:


> True, in a very narrow-minded kinda way.
> 
> if you were $4 Mill over the cap as opposed to $1 Mill over the cap and you signed a player for the MLE, you would be paying $6 Million more for the MLE player (and thats just the first year). That kind of situation significantly cuts into your options for using the MLE (meaning short-term contracts for washed up veterans) as opposed to a long-term fit.
> 
> If all GMs saw it your way, no one would be trading for expiring contracts if they were above the luxury threshold... they would just sit on all their crap contracts like the Knicks. Do you want us to be the Knicks?


The problem with the Knicks isn't that they have large contracts, it's that none of those guys are even close to being all stars right now. The Mavs have several huge contracts but they still manage to find flexibility in trading and signing players


----------



## darkballa (Sep 19, 2003)

I just really hate this trade right now. Fine call it business, but the point is our team just got weaker. We lost bonzi who was our 4th leading scorer. He was the one who can give matchup problems since he would eat up smaller weaker guards in the post. ALl we get is bobby jackson, who has little left in his tank, and once i thought that we could get snyder more playing time, we go and trade him for a guy that can ONLY dunk. Whats worse is, we just made the hornets a lot stronger, as much a ball hog mike james is, he can score and bonzi will provide a strong boost off their bench. Seriously, we just imporved the hornet's only weakness, their bench. Way to go, we better have a strong impact player in here next year because we just threw away our chances in the playoffs unless Mac and yao start scoring 25 ppg, rafer keeps up his 15 and 7 averages, Landry turns into Amare, Scola turns into something of Tim Duncan, Jackson get back some of his fire and Luther burn up the 3-point line.


----------



## mtlk (Apr 25, 2005)

darkballa said:


> I just really hate this trade right now. Fine call it business, but the point is our team just got weaker. We lost bonzi who was our 4th leading scorer. He was the one who can give matchup problems since he would eat up smaller weaker guards in the post. ALl we get is bobby jackson, who has little left in his tank, and once i thought that we could get snyder more playing time, we go and trade him for a guy that can ONLY dunk. Whats worse is, we just made the hornets a lot stronger, as much a ball hog mike james is, he can score and bonzi will provide a strong boost off their bench. Seriously, we just imporved the hornet's only weakness, their bench. Way to go, we better have a strong impact player in here next year because we just threw away our chances in the playoffs unless Mac and yao start scoring 25 ppg, rafer keeps up his 15 and 7 averages, Landry turns into Amare, Scola turns into something of Tim Duncan, Jackson get back some of his fire and Luther burn up the 3-point line.



*Sometimes it is better to tweak than to make major changes.*


----------



## darkballa (Sep 19, 2003)

This was a major trade, Bonzi was an important part of the rotation and our 4th scorer and our Trump card when it came to small guards.


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

Link



> With the ink barely dried on two trade-deadline deals, the Rockets on Thursday began moving towards two more deals they hope to complete.
> 
> The Rockets plan to begin a pursuit of guard *Brent Barry*, who was dealt to the Seattle SuperSonics on Wednesday but will be released, a person with knowledge of the Rockets’ intentions said on Thursday. The Suns and Spurs are also expected to chase Barry. The Spurs can offer the largest contract, having not spent their mid-level exception, but Barry would have to sit out 30 days before returning to the team that just traded him.
> 
> ...





> The Rockets also plan to sign former Wizards and Nuggets guard/forward *Bobby Jones to a 10-day contract*, a move that would provide a 6-7 defender for matchups in which the Rockets would be small off the bench after trading Bonzi Wells along with Mike James to New Orleans to get Jackson.
> 
> To make room for Jones, the Rockets will release *Adam Haluska*, who was acquired with Jackson. The Rockets will also receive a second-round pick, either their own or New Orleans’ (whichever is better) in the deal. They were to send the pick to Seattle to complete the trade for Carl Landry.





> “The goals we had going into this trade deadline was to add some veteran playoff leadership,” Morey said. “We’re especially excited to get that at the point guard spot where we feel that’s very important and a lot to ask a very promising rookie like Aaron (Brooks). We wanted to create that flexibility this year to add a player. With these moves, we’ll be able to add one or two players. We created significant cap flexibility as the season heads down the stretch if that’s possible.
> 
> “In the future, we obviously set ourselves up after a deep playoff run this year to upgrade our team in a significant way.”
> 
> ...


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

oh man, seems like our guys aren't that happy with the trade...
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/recap;_ylt=Ausqb04M43g3Ywn2sDCXZMy8vLYF?gid=2008022110&prov=ap



> “Everything happens for a reason and we’ve got to understand that this is a business,” Carl Landry said. “We’ve got to be positive about the situation and try to go on and continue the winning streak.”












Great job Morey...


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

I agree. This is a bad trade. I am hoping there is more coming. I heard they are trying to bring in Brent Barry. I wish that's true.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

TManiAC said:


> What is so hard to understand? Do you understand $13 Million ($6.5 Mill X 2 for luxury tax... For MIKE JAMES for that matter)? What would you do with an extra $13 Million? You know this money doesnt grow on trees... as much as we hate Les for trying to cut down on his luxury taxes, this is coming out of his own pockets. Don't tell me this is a stupid move.... if James or Bonzi gave us a legit chance of winning a title... I'm sure Les would have ponied up that extra $13 Million just so he could put a smile on our faces.


As basketball fans we don't care how much it costs the owner as long as it doesn't hurt our cap flexibility. Seriously, why would you care that Les saves $13 million? It's not like he can't afford any players.

Just because our chances of winning the title are small doesn't mean we shouldn't try our best. Bonzi was valuable.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Hakeem said:


> As basketball fans we don't care how much it costs the owner as long as it doesn't hurt our cap flexibility. Seriously, why would you care that Les saves $13 million? It's not like he can't afford any players.
> 
> Just because our chances of winning the title are small doesn't mean we shouldn't try our best. Bonzi was valuable.



Of course you dont care because youre not even trying to understand. The more over the luxury threshold you are, the more it hurts to pay an MLE player, meaning shorter, crappier contracts. Meaning we'll be limiting our options to older, much more mediocre free agents. No one cares what you want, you have to be a realist in these situations.


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

I can't believe so many people hate this trade. Bonzi is replaceable. From within our own team for crying out loud.

Not only that, we now have the ability to be a player in the FA market in the off season without hurting our team now.

This was smart management. You wanna see stupid management, come follow the Cincinnati Reds for a year or two. You will have a great respect for what Morey is doing then.


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

Calderon?


----------



## Cornholio (Feb 13, 2005)

> JCF: Let’s talk a little about the trades you made. To me, the Bonzi move seems as if it’s at least as much a money/future move, as it is a basketball move. I think some people look at the effect it will have on the court right now, and they don’t understand the rationale behind it. But when you factor in the money you save by getting rid of the Mike James contract, and the inherent value that comes with Jackson’s deal which expires next year, it’s easy to see how this trade could prove very beneficial down the line.
> 
> *DM: Yeah, I mean this was a trade forward trade. The hard ones are the ones where you don’t improve both now and your [future] flexibility. This trade came together in a very positive way in that our focus was to upgrade this year, and we feel like we were able to do that; upgrading the spot we’re most concerned about in the playoffs—back-up point—with a guy who can step right in and provide the veteran leadership that we wanted, and playoff-tested experience, and the guy Rick [Adelman] knows who can step right in.*





> JCF: Do you have any reservations about dealing Bonzi to a division rival?
> 
> *DM: Again, all else equal, I think that’s a factor. But I think that’s a minor factor in the overall look at the deal; especially this year in the West where it’s a dogfight one through nine to get in, and we’re not going to play a particular team more than a few times. So we need to focus on getting ourselves better dramatically more than how it impacts one of nine teams we’re fighting with to make the playoffs.
> 
> ...


Link


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

TManiAC said:


> Of course you dont care because youre not even trying to understand. The more over the luxury threshold you are, the more it hurts to pay an MLE player, meaning shorter, crappier contracts. Meaning we'll be limiting our options to older, much more mediocre free agents. No one cares what you want, you have to be a realist in these situations.


Forums such as these are all about what we as basketball fans want. No one is arguing that we would definitely have acted differently if we owned the team. The point is that from a basketball standpoint, this has probably made us worse. The only way that we might have been worse off not doing this trade is in the event of the far-fetched combination of Wells proving no more valuable than Bobby Jackson and Les Alexander suddenly becoming too stingy to sign a player next offseason because of the extra money he is spending on Mike James for one year.


----------

