# Positives out of the Gay trade



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

Look, guys, I was as positive about getting Gay as everyone else here, and was thrilled that he was still around when it was our pick.... but don't you guys think there's a reason why 7 other teams passed up on him? Everyone talks about Gay's "potential", but would he be able to help us right away? With Yao and T-Mac healthy we are ready to make a run at the title again, and a raw 19yr old kid who gets by with his athleticism is not what we need right now. Remember the next T-Mac from last year's draft Gerald Green? Or heck, even #2 pick Marvin Williams? 

Battier IS a great fit for this team. He's not exciting to watch, but he gets the job done. Go talk to Memphis fans, and try to find one that is thrilled about losing Battier. He is THE SF we have been long looking for.

And what IF we didn't draft Gay - what if we traded our pick prior to the draft? Would it make you feel better if it was our #8 pick + Stro for Battier? That sounds like a sweet deal to me, and that's probably CD's perspective on the trade as well. Stro brings nothing to our team, he was a disappointment and he ain't gonna get any better. 

Its so easy to compare this to the Kobe Bryant trade just because it was also made by Jerry West. But JW has had many misses as well. In the ultra strong 2003 draft, JW traded #13 pick Marcus Banks and #27 Kendrick Perkins to Boston for:
#16 Troy Bell
#20 Dahntay Jones

Jones averaged a whopping 13mpg in his 3rd season for Memphis last season, and Troy Bell is no longer on the NBA.com player's directory. Other players taken after #13 in the same draft:
#14 Luke Ridnour
#18 David West
#21 Boris Diaw
#24 Brian Cook
#28 Leandrinho Barbosa
#29 Josh Howard
Conclusion? Jerry West's assessment of talent is very overrated. 

I think most people are bitter because they feel we could have gotten much more with this trade. But aren't you surprised that no other offers for Gay were made to us by other teams? 

Look, Gay can come out and play like a 1st team all rookie next season, that remains to be seen. But short term, this trade hurts our division rivals, as they've lost a great teammate and a core part of their team, and in return they get back the bad memories of Stromile Swift and a rather raw 19yr old Gay. Our line-up for next season as it stands:

Yao/Deke
Howard/Hayes/Novak
Battier/Bogans
T-Mac/Head
Alston/Sponaulis :gopray:

dump Bowen, dump Wesley, sign a decent back-up PG and a back-up for Yao (Deke's getting too old to be productive) and we have ourselves a very solid team ready to compete. Let go of losing Gay guys, its not the end of the world


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

YM is this why you are the CM?
I am hoping Novak is our next better Padgett.
The team looks good now. 
We need to sign a good 5 to back up Yao that's all.


----------



## Dream Hakeem (Apr 20, 2006)

I never lost faith


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

DH, make up you mind, stop swinging.


----------



## some1x (May 24, 2006)

I agree that Battier is a solid player, and would have loved getting him for Swift + something. If CD really shopped around for trades involving Gay, he most likely could have done better. If this is the best deal he could get, then he shouldn't trade at all. Either way, we feel short-changed.

Did our team improve after draft night? Yes, but not up to expectations.


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

How was this trade appealing?


----------



## Dream Hakeem (Apr 20, 2006)

It wasnt

Rockets are done until they trade Tmac and Yao


----------



## hitokiri315 (Apr 30, 2004)

Yao Mania said:


> Look, guys, I was as positive about getting Gay as everyone else here, and was thrilled that he was still around when it was our pick.... but don't you guys think there's a reason why 7 other teams passed up on him? Everyone talks about Gay's "potential", but would he be able to help us right away? With Yao and T-Mac healthy we are ready to make a run at the title again, and a raw 19yr old kid who gets by with his athleticism is not what we need right now. Remember the next T-Mac from last year's draft Gerald Green? Or heck, even #2 pick Marvin Williams?
> 
> Battier IS a great fit for this team. He's not exciting to watch, but he gets the job done. Go talk to Memphis fans, and try to find one that is thrilled about losing Battier. He is THE SF we have been long looking for.
> 
> ...



Dude after a good nights sleep i have finally accepted our fate. Lets hope we get some decent backcourt help free agent wise. Maybe bonzi wells and mike james would make me happy.

you are a shining ray of light and your words calm the soul. Ym you are a great mod.


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

Gay with T-Mac and Yao wouldve won championships. Now u give up him and swift, for a guy who averages 10 ppg.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

We still have time to work out Gay, you know. If CD realizes he was doing a stupid thing he can always cancel the trade by saying Battier doesn't pass the physical.


----------



## Pasha The Great (Apr 9, 2005)

We could have atleast traded Gay for somebody much better than Battier. Stro for Battier would have been a good trade.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

I dont think anyone argues the utility of Shane Battier, its the cost that is bothersome.

If CD/JVG could have gotten any one of an 07 1st, Kyle Lowry, or somehow stole Mike Miller in addition with the deal, I would have been somewhat satisfied. The problem now is that we only have the MLE and Luther Head (as our only tradable asset with the TEs) to make moves. What do we do now when we have an obvious need for a banger in the post, a pointguard, and a backup to McGrady?

I have a feeling that were not done getting older, either... David Wesley will need to come back for the VE. We definitely need Bobby Sura back at 100% (but back at all would be helpful). I think were set on spending the entire MLE on Mike James. And Im certaine were going to have to swing Luther Head and our TE for an overpaid, over-the-hill, post player (best/middle/woste case scenario: Antonio McDyess, PJ Brown, or Jeff Foster).

PG: Mike James | Rafer Alston | Bobby Sura
SG: Tracy McGrady | David Wesley | Keith Bogans
SF: Shane Battier | Keith Bogans | Steve Novak
PF: Juwan Howard | PJ Brown | Chuck Hayes 
CN: Yao Ming | PJ Brown | Dikembe Mutombo

(and the off-chance of bringing in V-Span and Badiane)

I can hardly get excited....


----------



## Ninjatune (May 1, 2006)

I think you guys will be pleasantly pleased with this trade. Battier is a great player. Like Yao said, not flashy, but he will get the job done for you. You have to admit that Stromile was a bust last year and Gay will need some time to adjust. 

 Don't worry, be happy.


----------



## mff4l (Dec 31, 2004)

Yao Mania said:


> Look, guys, I was as positive about getting Gay as everyone else here, and was thrilled that he was still around when it was our pick.... but don't you guys think there's a reason why 7 other teams passed up on him? Everyone talks about Gay's "potential", but would he be able to help us right away? With Yao and T-Mac healthy we are ready to make a run at the title again, and a raw 19yr old kid who gets by with his athleticism is not what we need right now. Remember the next T-Mac from last year's draft Gerald Green? Or heck, even #2 pick Marvin Williams?
> 
> Battier IS a great fit for this team. He's not exciting to watch, but he gets the job done. Go talk to Memphis fans, and try to find one that is thrilled about losing Battier. He is THE SF we have been long looking for.
> 
> ...


rockets management screwed up. that trade was horrendous and there's no silver lining to it.


----------



## hitokiri315 (Apr 30, 2004)

At least we won't be dissapointed when they get thier *** handed to them nite after nite. It will be expected.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

Pain5155 said:


> Gay with T-Mac and Yao wouldve won championships. Now u give up him and swift, for a guy who averages 10 ppg.


And you say that based on the assumption that Gay's the next Lebron James? T-Mac's got about 3 yrs of all-star calibre play left in him. Yao will dominate the league in the next 3 years. Rudy Gay will AT BEST be at Andre Iguodala's level by his 3rd season. Shane Battier is going to be our starting SF for our next 3 years. Stromile Swift will never contribute anything positively to any team in the next 3 years, or his entire career. 

Quit drooling over potential and youth guys. We're ready to win NOW.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

TManiAC said:


> I dont think anyone argues the utility of Shane Battier, its the cost that is bothersome.
> 
> If CD/JVG could have gotten any one of an 07 1st, Kyle Lowry, or somehow stole Mike Miller in addition with the deal, I would have been somewhat satisfied.


Exactly. The fact that Memphis has never won a playoff game and is on the verge of imploding, along with a guy who West thought was a top 2 talent dropping to 8... and Dawson couldn't negotiate anything more than Battier? NOTHING? Tell me there is more to it, because I know JVG would be content with Battier alone. If it was solely up to JVG he would have included Luther in the deal as well.


----------



## tang (Mar 1, 2006)

Team Jurassic 2: The Lost Years


----------



## Dream Hakeem (Apr 20, 2006)

Bah

I really wanted to get gay

I mean its like trading water for gatorade

Water is good but you expect more from gatorade and it tastes good


----------



## Pain5155 (May 28, 2006)

T-mac 3 yrs left yea rite, hes young and is entering his prime. Yao will dominate till hes 34, so with those two and rising star Gay, this team wouldve been could. I wouldnt be suprised if T-Mac asks for a trade after this season if they dont make the playoffs, or lose i nthe 1st round.


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

I am not at all sorry to see Swift traded, he is a whiner, and underachiever in the NBA (didn't realize that about him in college). From what I remember of Battier.. keep in mind I only remember him from college at Duke and the few games I saw him play this year.. he seems like a consistant player... has a good jump shot and plays with defensive intensity. Could be a spark and take some of the pressure off T-mac??

The only flaw to this deal in my opinion is the potential for Gay to come back and bite us in the arse! He was a good player in college and he has the potential to be successful at this level. In the bright light of morning and calmer heads, the Gay trade seems like we didn't get completely robbed, but we could have gotten more from Memphis on the deal. Maybe a future 1st rounder or something. 

Though I do think its interesting that Rudy fell to 8 in the draft.. might there be a reason that he fell from the earlier predicted 5 (I know he was predicted all over the place, but that is where I remember him being placed most often)??


----------



## OneBadLT123 (Oct 4, 2005)

I dont know, it seems as if we gave up too much. I mean if it were Gay, Swift for Battie and their 26th pick(i think) then i wouldnt mind it so much. But it seems as if we just got too little in return. 

Too many what-ifs to make this trade sit well with me


----------



## TRACIELOVESCOMETS (May 14, 2003)

Bad move


----------



## Chalie Boy (Aug 26, 2002)

Really no matter how you look at it its a TERRIBLE move.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

The Rockets got a solid player that fills a couple of major needs: a very good defensive swingman and a solid three-point shooter. The Rockets are a significantly better team, on both sides of the ball, than they were yesterday at this time.

But in Gay the Rockets had a chance for that third star. No guarantees, but Gay pretty much comprises the perfect package of skills and talent, which is why he was considered the uber-prospect prize of this draft a year ago. He was knocked this year for "lack of desire," but I think that's overstated considering he led his team in scoring, despite being a junior on a talented and veteran team.

The Rockets truly made the "spectacular risk" for "safe improvement" trade. I don't like it because I think that NBA championships are so hard to win, you need to take a few risks and go for the special talent, rather than try to make good but slow improvement.

Also, I guess this shifts McGrady back to two-guard. I like it, since I think McGrady is an even greater matchup nightmare at shooting guard, but I was under the impression that JVG preferred McGrady at small forward.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Also, some might find this comforting, though I personally don't think it's a great article. Still, a columnist takes a whack at why this trade was absolutely the right move:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/justice/4011218.html


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

Yao Mania said:


> And you say that based on the assumption that Gay's the next Lebron James? T-Mac's got about 3 yrs of all-star calibre play left in him. Yao will dominate the league in the next 3 years. Rudy Gay will AT BEST be at Andre Iguodala's level by his 3rd season. Shane Battier is going to be our starting SF for our next 3 years. Stromile Swift will never contribute anything positively to any team in the next 3 years, or his entire career.
> 
> Quit drooling over potential and youth guys. We're ready to win NOW.


I think Gay is more polished offensively than your giving him credit for. I dont expect him to explode this year but I think hes more than ready to contribute as rookie...more than Head was last year and more than Iggy was as a rookie.

This team to me is slighty better than the 04-05 team so exactly what are we ready to win???


----------



## debarge (Nov 13, 2005)

TManiAC said:


> I dont think anyone argues the utility of Shane Battier, its the cost that is bothersome.
> 
> If CD/JVG could have gotten any one of an 07 1st, Kyle Lowry, or somehow stole Mike Miller in addition with the deal, I would have been somewhat satisfied. The problem now is that we only have the MLE and Luther Head (as our only tradable asset with the TEs) to make moves. What do we do now when we have an obvious need for a banger in the post, a pointguard, and a backup to McGrady?
> 
> ...


Well brother, I certainly aggree with most of what you've said except some glaring mistakes the Rockets need to rectify to make this team a winner. My best buddy who now lives in Atlanta just made me feel alot better by stating to me the obvious: We have two #1 nba players Yao and Tmac are super at their respective positions. We don't have a old Shaq or and Old David Robinson + a stud, we have 2 studs - two MVP type guys. That being said we need to reconstruct our 2nd yr championship team 2 stars - plus solid team guys who play at or above their abilities/
Kenny Smith  (_didn't have speed or youth, shot the ball clutch_) Rafer (_great passer, smart player - just needs to be more aggressive all around, be more selfish by taking the ball to the basket_)
Cassell  (_scorer, animated great team motivator_) Mike James/Spanoulis (_they need to score wh/ ever one end up getting)_
Robert Horry/Bullard _(clutch shooters, played hard made all the right decisons_) Shane/Howard (_both need to improve their rebounding, both have up their game/game scoring)_Bullard/Brown/Elie  (_again made the open shots, didn't try to do too much_) Hayes/Head /Novak (the only youth, have to bring energy and consistency)
If these guys do "their part" our stars will carry and cover us in the long-run. If you really look at the big picture its not bad at all, we only need a 4th seed to make a title run? :clap: Tmac/Yao are superior trained athletes, and have been working and resting the 'perfect' amount. Stop all this Tracy "hating" he will have a healthy year next year, I believe that! :clap: *Shane is not Stromile! He will 'bring it' every night, we've been missing Consistency guys, He Will Show up.*Shane - 6'8 good shooter, can play 3/4 very vesatile. We really just have to sign Mike James now, he's our Sam Cassell we need his fire and scoring.


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

Mike James isnt getting any younger


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

The only positive about trading Gay is you guys won't have to deal with the redundant jokes centered around Rudy's last name. Sorry.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

What I dont understand is why we wasted our 2nd round pick on Novak... We just traded RUDY GAY for Shane Battier, whos supposed to be our 3/4 depending on how JVG wants to utilize our size and speed. Novak doesnt bring anything that Battier, Howard, or TMac dont already bring and could have easily gotten a player like Novak via FA for the bare minimum. I think Hassan Adams, Mike Gansey, Bobby Jones, Will Blalok, Daniel Gibson, any of those guys could have been a better fit and would have addressed our sorely lacking athleticism and quickness issues... Instead, we have no athleticism, no real rebounder, no quicks, our talent level isnt as high as it could have been...

If the Rockets dont make some dope moves via trade or FA, nothing will make me forgive the F.O. for losing Rudy but winning a championship THIS YEAR.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

All Novak gives you a Ryan Bowen that can actually shoot. This will make the defender not sag back towards Yao. I don't see it as a bad pick.


----------



## debarge (Nov 13, 2005)

OneBadLT123 said:


> I dont know, it seems as if we gave up too much. I mean if it were Gay, Swift for Battie and their 26th pick(i think) then i wouldnt mind it so much. But it seems as if we just got too little in return.
> 
> Too many what-ifs to make this trade sit well with me


I think that is what is so damn shocking about this deal? ITS A BAD DEAL? WE SHOULD'VE GOTHEIR 26THpck. That's what is amazing to me? Swift and Shane essentially have the same contract amount, so why then didn't we get "something" for Gay? Future pks, Cash anything? And then ontop of that we get an Isralei player that Jeff won't play, but We Sent Cash to ORL??? :curse: WTF was going on in that draft room? These are just plain Ridiculous moves IMO. They don't make any sense at all. I'd rather keep the kid than just cut him, which is what Jeff will do.... :curse: 

We all know the team doesn't have any cap room, doesn't have tradeable pieces, now we would have to Trade Battier to get anybody good w/ a sign'trade deal??? What sense does that make? MJ wants like 6mil per over 5 yrs (30million$$$), how are we gonna find that kinda money now?  I'm not seeing a way to do that with TOR, Head/Bogans/Israeli??? How are we signing anybody in FA???? TEs are worth anything really, you can't combine them>ie. one mil, maybe two, that's nothing....MJ or anyone else would have to take "less money" to come here, nobody's gonna do that man...


----------



## CbobbyB (Feb 16, 2006)

debarge said:


> I think that is what is so damn shocking about this deal? ITS A BAD DEAL? WE SHOULD'VE GOTHEIR 26THpck. That's what is amazing to me? Swift and Shane essentially have the same contract amount, so why then didn't we get "something" for Gay? Future pks, Cash anything? *And then ontop of that we get an Isralei player that Jeff won't play*, but We Sent Cash to ORL??? :curse: WTF was going on in that draft room? These are just plain Ridiculous moves IMO. They don't make any sense at all. I'd rather keep the kid than just cut him, which is what Jeff will do.... :curse:
> 
> We all know the team doesn't have any cap room, doesn't have tradeable pieces, now we would have to Trade Battier to get anybody good w/ a sign'trade deal??? What sense does that make? MJ wants like 6mil per over 5 yrs (30million$$$), how are we gonna find that kinda money now?  I'm not seeing a way to do that with TOR, Head/Bogans/Israeli??? How are we signing anybody in FA???? TEs are worth anything really, you can't combine them>ie. one mil, maybe two, that's nothing....MJ or anyone else would have to take "less money" to come here, nobody's gonna do that man...


i cant believe they did that, lol..our future doesnt look to good either.


----------



## MightyReds2020 (Jul 19, 2002)

Count me in as another guy who love this trade for the Rockets. Stromile Swift has pretty much a negative trade value so giving up Gay along with Swift for Battier, a truely awesome defensive gem, is a 'no brainer' to me, especially if the Rockets want to contend for the title in the next 2, 3 years.

It is a typical solid-but-unspectacular-for-talented-but-raw trade that might benefited both sides after all is said and done. But I personally would take the solid and immediate productions over a 'project' (plus a bust who will never panned out in the Rockets uni).


----------



## NJ Grand NJ (Feb 22, 2005)

Yao Mania said:


> Look, guys, I was as positive about getting Gay as everyone else here, and was thrilled that he was still around when it was our pick.... but don't you guys think there's a reason why 7 other teams passed up on him? Everyone talks about Gay's "potential", but would he be able to help us right away? With Yao and T-Mac healthy we are ready to make a run at the title again, and a raw 19yr old kid who gets by with his athleticism is not what we need right now. Remember the next T-Mac from last year's draft Gerald Green? Or heck, even #2 pick Marvin Williams?


I won't argue about the fact that you think this trade helps your team but I will argue with this first paragraph. 

Just because 7 teams pass on him doesn't mean he can't play. If 7 teams passed on Lebron because he was a high schooler with no jumpshot, does it mean Lebron can't play? Or that those 7 teams are stupid? I'd go with the latter. 

I'll admit, I don't watch Houston much but from what I've seen, Rudy would fit quite well with you guys. Rudy could be a very good defender even his first season. He can shoot it, that's not going to leave when he gets to the league, he can rebound, that's not leaving, and I'll bet his athleticism is NBA ready. Rudy Gay wasn't going to be your savior, he was probably going to be at best, the 3rd option. If I can get a kid with THAT kind of talent as a 3rd option(well, as a Net fan Kidd, VC, and RJ is pretty good), I wouldn't want to trade that. His 'weakness' assertiveness and consistancy wouldn't be that big of an issue because of TMac and Yao. Plus, you have a guy of Rudy Gay's talent, learning from his favorite player.

I know you're trying to find the positives out of this trade, but as a 3rd option, IMO, Rudy Gay would be very good with Houston.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

MightyReds2020 said:


> Count me in as another guy who love this trade for the Rockets. Stromile Swift has pretty much a negative trade value so giving up Gay along with Swift for Battier, a truely awesome defensive gem, is a 'no brainer' to me, especially if the Rockets want to contend for the title in the next 2, 3 years.
> 
> It is a typical solid-but-unspectacular-for-talented-but-raw trade that might benefited both sides after all is said and done. But I personally would take the solid and immediate productions over a 'project' (plus a bust who will never panned out in the Rockets uni).


That might be true if there were no consideration for foresight. If Rudy Gay turns out remotely close to a Shawn Marion or Carmelo Anthony (for Shane Battier), that would be a giant sht-pie to our face.

We all like Battier, but not for Rudy Gay.

Also, debarge is absolutely correct about the Grizz 24. The entire time before the 24th pick, I was convinced that it was our pick from the trade. I was screaming for the Rockets to pick Maurice Ager, Shannon Brown or Sergio Rodgriguez. Then they took Lowry and thought it turned out to be a **** trade... then things got worse and I learned that 24 wasnt even ours giving way to the uglier realization that it was Rudy Gay for Shane Battier straight up. Things didnt even stop there, I came online and read that we gave back Stro, too.

MRC says that if it were solely up to JVG, he would have thrown Head in there and after this crap I believe it.

PS: Even if the trade went through and we had the 24th pick, look how much better our team could have looked:

PG: Mike James (MLE) | Rafer Alston | Bobby Sura 
SG: Tracy McGrady | Maurice Ager (24) | David Wesley (VE)
SF: Shane Battier | Steve Novak (32) | Chuck Hayes
PF: Juwan Howard | James Singleton | Maceij Lampe (TO)
CN: Yao Ming | Zeljko Rebraca | Dikembe Mutombo

*Trade Luther Head for James Singleton and Zeljko Rebraca


----------



## MarvinWilliams#1in05 (Feb 13, 2005)

You guys got NO MASKED CURSING -YM by Jerry West. There's no way to sugar coat it.


----------



## chn353 (Mar 12, 2006)

the only positives out of the gay trade is that we dont have to spend about 12 million resigning gay after 3 years cause of his potential

and i will miss the stro show in houston


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

Yao Mania said:


> And you say that based on the assumption that Gay's the next Lebron James? T-Mac's got about 3 yrs of all-star calibre play left in him. Yao will dominate the league in the next 3 years. Rudy Gay will AT BEST be at Andre Iguodala's level by his 3rd season. Shane Battier is going to be our starting SF for our next 3 years. Stromile Swift will never contribute anything positively to any team in the next 3 years, or his entire career.
> 
> Quit drooling over potential and youth guys. We're ready to win NOW.



we really *can;t* win now with just Battie or whatever our mid level can get us, ok so we do get mj then what? i mean we really don't have a deep team we're getting older and less athletic also Rudy PLUS stro is cheaper then Battie also to say that they both could be traded easier isn't it stro's contract year next season, he would had been a great trade bait for better players and T-mac injuried, bottom line we are less athletic, less talented, older and we have more salery with battie our future still seems very dim


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

lingi1206 said:


> we really *can;t* win now with just Battie or whatever our mid level can get us, ok so we do get mj then what? i mean we really don't have a deep team we're getting older and less athletic also Rudy PLUS stro is cheaper then Battie also to say that they both could be traded easier isn't it stro's contract year next season, he would had been a great trade bait for better players and T-mac injuried, bottom line we are less athletic, less talented, older and we have more salery with battie our future still seems very dim


Houston got Shane Battie*r* not Tony Battie.

Does that cheer you up any?


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

Minstrel said:


> Houston got Shane Battie*r* not Tony Battie.
> 
> Does that cheer you up any?



haha sry for the spelling and yes that cheer me up a little


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Battier is a great role player, the only thing Im concerned about is his athleticism. Ive heard hes not very athletic. That really sucks cause you need good athletes around a guy like Yao. Plus, assuming Mike James signs with Houston, you need to take advantage of James, McGrady, and Howard's (he runs the floor well for a big) speed. 

I dont know, but if hes good in transition then the trade sounds good to me.


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

I can't stop smiling. As a Grizzlies fan that wanted more excitement and a faster pace, this was a wonderful start to the offseason. Rudy Gay...of all the bull**** scenarios I have run through since the end of the season, this was to out there for me even to imagine. I am in shock.

Rudy Freakin' Gay...don't pinch me!


EVEN THE GRIZZLIE FANS THOUGHT WE GOT ROBBED AND SCRE# IN THE A#$ I MEAN COME ON!!! :curse:


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

shane battier is a good addition to the rockets team. he will be a nice role player that can play good defense and shots when he gets them. he will be a good starter for this team.

but there is no way he is equal value to rudy gay and stromile swift. that's the main problem. the rockets should be better next year because of health reason and because battier is a better player than swift, but they got horrible value for the guys they traded in this deal. there is no excuse to not get battier and the 24th pick for rudy gay.


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

rocketeer said:


> shane battier is a good addition to the rockets team. he will be a nice role player that can play good defense and shots when he gets them. he will be a good starter for this team.
> 
> but there is no way he is equal value to rudy gay and stromile swift. that's the main problem. the rockets should be better next year because of health reason and because battier is a better player than swift, but they got horrible value for the guys they traded in this deal. there is no excuse to not get battier and the 24th pick for rudy gay.


YOU TELL THEM :curse: :clap:


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

TManiAC said:


> What I dont understand is why we wasted our 2nd round pick on Novak


novak is scott padgett/matt bullard. he is there to hit shots when teams double tmac and yao. we didn't seem to have many guys that could make shots last year(even open ones), so i don't see this pick as a waste.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

I wouldn't think it a very bad trade had it been Gay for Battier and a pick (though I still wouldn't have been in favor). But Stromile Swift, as much as everyone loves to criticize him, should have started at PF for us next season. I like Howard, but he is 33 and steadily declining. He can't rebound, get to the line, pass or defend well. And he just had the worst season of his career, despite getting plenty of opportunities to score. Seriously, are there any starting power forwards in the league who are worse than him? Van Gundy should have played Swift more and not damaged his confidence. What a waste.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

i thought the subject title would be followed by "none"


----------



## WhoRocks (Feb 24, 2005)

I get the feeling Dawson regards making Memphis take back Stro and his contract as one of Houston's positives from the trade, unlike many of the people on the board here who viewed Stro as one of our few tradeable assets. I guess I would have traded Luther Head, Stromile Swift and maybe even a second round pick just for Battier, but not the 8th pick once it was clear Gay was available there. I wonder if management will ever explain why Gay wasn't on Houston's fancied list of 5 players.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> novak is scott padgett/matt bullard. he is there to hit shots when teams double tmac and yao. we didn't seem to have many guys that could make shots last year(even open ones), so i don't see this pick as a waste.


I know what Novak does, but no one is answering my question as to why we needed Shane Battier, Novak, and Lior in addition to Juwan Howard... Isnt there a redundancy of unathletic shooters playing the PF/SF position? 

Battier was supposed to be Padgett, David Wesley and Ryan Bowen rolled in one. If Battier was picked up to be the PF/SF shooter (in exchange for Gay), then what do we need Novak for when we have gaping holes at backup PG, backup to TMac, backup C and a serious need for a banger in the post? Look at our current lineup, its notoriously soft. Couldnt we have just picked up Padgett from FA with the min?


----------



## lingi1206 (Jun 2, 2006)

TManiAC said:


> I know what Novak does, but no one is answering my question as to why we needed Shane Battier, Novak, and Lior in addition to Juwan Howard... Isnt there a redundancy of unathletic shooters playing the PF/SF position?
> 
> Battier was supposed to be Padgett, David Wesley and Ryan Bowen rolled in one. If Battier was picked up to be the PF/SF shooter (in exchange for Gay), then what do we need Novak for when we have gaping holes at backup PG, backup to TMac, backup C and a serious need for a banger in the post? Look at our current lineup, its notoriously soft. Couldnt we have just picked up Padgett from FA with the min?



maybe our front office has already another trade set up to get those kinds of people :banana:


----------



## AZNoob (Jan 21, 2006)

^^ I strongly second that. Then again, it IS Carroll Dawson....


----------



## Demiloy (Nov 4, 2005)

Why does everybody just automatically assume that JVG made this deal? I mean, come on, it's like every bad trade is "JVG's fault" (not that this is a bad deal).


----------



## xray (Feb 21, 2005)

Battier may help in the rebounding department; Yao's shown a recent strength in that area, but I think Shane may help. He has a little mid-range game, too. 

But I'll echo previous comments about the consistancy vs. potential for greatness. Star power is hard to come by, and Gay would draw fans - as well as potentially becoming a really nice player, nicer than Stro and Shane.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

Demiloy said:


> Why does everybody just automatically assume that JVG made this deal? I mean, come on, it's like every bad trade is "JVG's fault" (not that this is a bad deal).


Well, it's not that Battier isn't good or we got a bad deal, but the fact is that the Rockets gave away too much leverage, not even asking for their first round of this year or a future first round, or maybe even a Mike Miller or Hakim Warrick to balance out that damn trade!! It was lopsided, that's all anyone's saying.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

Well, the trade is not official yet, so we don't know if there is more players involved. I wish we can trade away Howard, and take Mike Miller who I think is an offensive Battier. 
Or, we get a futrue picks.

If not Mike Miller, I am hoping Novak can puts up Kyle Korver's number. I think Steve can be a better Korver because he has a better mechanic, according to draftexpress, and he is taller. 
Anyway, we just need to find a great big man in the FA.
Line up at this point:
Alston/Head
McGrady/Bogans/Head
Battier/McGrady/Bogans
Howard/Hayes/Novak
Yao/Mutombo
----
I just heard JVG is knocking Mike James' door for the Free Agent thing,
I am wishing we can do sign and trade with other team so that we can get rid of Howard, but if we can't Howard is still good for me. 
Potencial Line UP:
James/Alston/Head/V-Spain, questionable
McGrady/Bogans/James/Head
Battier/McGrady/Bogans
Howard/Battier/Hayes/Novak
Yao/Mutombo


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Maybe Houston can sign Reggie Evans to be the banger, hustle guy.
(which could also open up the option of trading Howard for James, but i doubt veeeeeery much Toronto would want him)

Novak's a good piece to have, one of the top shooters in the draft.
Sura is all but done, is that true? he might retire, giving you a lil more capspace.

N i could see Battier playing SG on offence, if T-Mac fits better at the 3..

All things considered though, Jerry West raped whoever made this trade.
Appalling for the Rockets, simply because it's 2 for 1. almost ANY other piece the Grizzlies could have thrown in would have made it a lot better, even if it was Alexander Johnson, or some future 2nds. Hell, Houston add 31 but get 24 in return, which seems reasonable.

Another question - everyone's saying, Get Mike James - where's he gonna play? unless you find a trade partner for Rafer Alston, as there's Luther Head at guard, and with any luck Spannilis (sp?)
as well. N you can forget trading Alston back to TO entirely now, with Ford there.
3-way trade? Toronto needs a swingman..
Alston to Atlanta
Harrington to TO
James to Houston typa thing?

Alston to Washington (Arenas at 2guard)
Hayes or Jeffries to TO
James to Houston?


----------



## tone wone (Jan 30, 2003)

Since I think Tracy CANT play SG these days the biggest and only positive is that he now has an excellent backup at SF.

Battier cant play SG.


----------



## Yao Mania (Aug 4, 2003)

tone wone said:


> Since I think Tracy CANT play SG these days the biggest and only positive is that he now has an excellent backup at SF.
> 
> Battier cant play SG.


Battier might even play a little PF.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

tone wone said:


> Since I think Tracy CANT play SG these days the biggest and only positive is that he now has an excellent backup at SF.
> 
> Battier cant play SG.


?!

Cmon man, TMac can play any position to 4. He might be more advantageous defensively at 3, but that doesnt mean he CANT play SG.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I think McGrady can play SG. Against small and quick twos, the Rockets can switch the point guard (Alston or James or Head) onto the shooting guard, defensively. Teams with two quick and talented guards in their backcourt would cause problems defensively, but also have problems defending McGrady.

I don't think it would be a real problem to have McGrady at shooting guard. He played it for years and well.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> I think McGrady can play SG. Against small and quick twos, the Rockets can switch the point guard (Alston or James or Head) onto the shooting guard, defensively. Teams with two quick and talented guards in their backcourt would cause problems defensively, but also have problems defending McGrady.
> 
> I don't think it would be a real problem to have McGrady at shooting guard. He played it for years and well.


Theres been some concern that if McGrady played SG full-time, he'd be worn out by the playoffs because of chasing quicker guards through the regular season.

I dont think that should stop JVG from utilizing the obvious height advantage McGrady possesses at 2.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

TManiAC said:


> Theres been some concern that if McGrady played SG full-time, he'd be worn out by the playoffs because of chasing quicker guards through the regular season.


Yes, I know, but I think those concerns should be alleviated a bit by Yao's emergence. McGrady would be worn out by defending quicker guards all season long if he also had to carry the offense all the time. But if he can rely on Yao to carry the offense for stretches of the game, that will be less energy expended on the offensive end.


----------



## TManiAC (Dec 19, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> Yes, I know, but I think those concerns should be alleviated a bit by Yao's emergence. McGrady would be worn out by defending quicker guards all season long if he also had to carry the offense all the time. But if he can rely on Yao to carry the offense for stretches of the game, that will be less energy expended on the offensive end.


McGrady is the point of offense for the Rockets. The ball goes to TMac 90% of the time.

Anyway, I agree with you. I think he is still one of the best SGs in the game.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Our starting frontcourt is set IMO: 

McGrady / Novak / Bowen
Battier / Howard / Hayes
Yao / Deke / Howard


McGrady isn't switching back to the 2 at this point in his career, it would be detrimental to the Rockets if he did so. All reports indicate the Rockets are chasing penetrating guards with their MLE (James, Claxton, Fred Jones) to play in a small backcourt. Dawson likes the idea of playing with a small, quick backcourt... you just have to hope Jerry West doesn't pick up the phone and ask for Rafer + 2007 1st for Anthony Roberson.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Mr. Predictable said:


> Our starting frontcourt is set IMO:
> 
> McGrady / Novak / Bowen
> Battier / Howard / Hayes
> Yao / Deke / Howard


That would be interesting, but I question whether Battier's defense would be wasted against power forwards in the post, when he's much better against swingmen. Also, Battier would be a poor rebounder for a power forward. Who wins the rebounding battle is a big indicator of who wins the game. McGrady at shooting guard, Battier at small forward and Howard at power forward would be much better in terms of rebounding.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> That would be interesting, but I question whether Battier's defense would be wasted against power forwards in the post, when he's much better against swingmen. Also, Battier would be a poor rebounder for a power forward. Who wins the rebounding battle is a big indicator of who wins the game. McGrady at shooting guard, Battier at small forward and Howard at power forward would be much better in terms of rebounding.


 IMO the Rockets are putting alot of faith in Yao Ming dominating in the post. They've given up on making this team younger and more athletic realizing that creating spacing and adding perimeter shooting is much easier and "win now-ish". Does JVG know how to create spacing on the offensive end? No, but he'll start with the ball on the left side of the court and swing it to the right, ending with a post feed. That isn't brilliant but when you have individual talent like McGrady and Yao, it's not going to be stopped easily. JVG values team defense over individual defense, so I don't think he has any problem playing Battier at the 4 (who can still hold his own against most PF's). Down the stretch we'll see McGrady on the longer, more athletic PF's (Garnett, Duncan). 

Statistically, Battier was equally effective guarding SF's and PF's last year. Durvasa has some pretty interesting stats he posted elsewhere, I'll try to find those and paste them here.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Mr. Predictable said:


> IMO the Rockets are putting alot of faith in Yao Ming dominating in the post. They've given up on making this team younger and more athletic realizing that creating spacing and adding perimeter shooting is much easier and "win now-ish". Does JVG know how to create spacing on the offensive end? No, but he'll start with the ball on the left side of the court and swing it to the right, ending with a post feed. That isn't brilliant but when you have individual talent like McGrady and Yao, it's not going to be stopped easily. JVG values team defense over individual defense, so I don't think he has any problem playing Battier at the 4 (who can still hold his own against most PF's). Down the stretch we'll see McGrady on the longer, more athletic PF's (Garnett, Duncan).
> 
> Statistically, Battier was equally effective guarding SF's and PF's last year. Durvasa has some pretty interesting stats he posted elsewhere, I'll try to find those and paste them here.


The offensive implications of the set don't worry me and if Battier was equally effective against power forwards, that's definitely a good thing.

But I'd still worry greatly about the rebounding. Essentially, that set replaces Juwan Howard's double-digit Rebound Rate with the almost surely very small (unless Houston's getting Steve Francis back) Rebound Rate of a guard. Especially if we go with a two small guard backcourt.

Losing the rebound battle constantly is a good way to waste the talent the team has.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> The offensive implications of the set don't worry me and if Battier was equally effective against power forwards, that's definitely a good thing.
> 
> But I'd still worry greatly about the rebounding. Essentially, that set replaces Juwan Howard's double-digit Rebound Rate with the almost surely very small (unless Houston's getting Steve Francis back) Rebound Rate of a guard. Especially if we go with a two small guard backcourt.
> 
> Losing the rebound battle constantly is a good way to waste the talent the team has.


For the last 2 years Battier's rebounding rate has hovered just under 10, Juwan Howard's has been steady at 12.4. I expect Battier's RbR to increase next year as he spends more time at the 4, even SF's who crash the boards extremely hard like Devean George barely have a RbR higher than 10. McGrady's is 10.3, surprisingly higher than LeBron who is a 9.8. And when you have a guy like Yao who will always be up in the 17+ range, in addition to using that large frame to keep other big men out of position, I would not call rebounding a weakness. Not yet.


----------



## edyzbasketball (Nov 16, 2005)

Congratulations CD. Apart from defence, where he knows his stuff really well, Battier is kinda useless, IMHO.

I wonder if we can get Devean George in the team...


----------



## darkballa (Sep 19, 2003)

Everybody keeps on saying things about the FUTURE with Rudy Gay, our future is now. We got t-mac and yao at 27 and 26. they got about 3-5 years in their prime. Unless gay is the next lebron james i doubt he could average more than 15 points with yao and mac next to him. And it is official that CD is actually looking to use the MLE on James. That guy' 33 and hes averagin 20 and 6. Rafer's turning 30 in a few weeks and hes averaging 12 and 7 and those are actually much higher than that because Rafer got better as the season progressed (he was averaging around 7 and 4 at the first 30 games of the season and let's hope Sura can come back as well evven not at 100%). I still think Rafer will start because Rafer is a better playmaker and James only got that 20ppg cause there wasnt too much scoring. If it comes down to it, that Mac get's tired at the 2 spot guarding the guards, JVG can ask battier to guard them and T-mac can guard the SF. We definitely need help in the frontcourt as without swift we only got howard and yao (and novak?) as decent defenders in that area. Deke's getting a teeensy bit too old for us. If JVG and CD can swing it Denver is loaded wtith frontcourt players, they got nene,martin and evans who all play the same position. It would be really great if we can get evans or nene in here (both are FA). Martin i think is an overrated post player, look at his stats after he left NJ without J-kidd by him he's nothin but a PF with hops. 

Depth Chart Prediction
PG: Alston/Head
SG: McGrady/James(most likely)
SF: Battier/Novak
PF: Howard/Bowen
C: Yao/Deke

I really wanna get a big in that rotation somewhere preferrably Evans or Nene backing up (or starting over) Howard and another C. Among C's that i wanna ge tto backup Yao are, Jarron Collins (just back-up), Olowakandi (believed to be a bust but still just a back-up) and Possibly Lorenzen Wright.
Please take-note that im not including salary issues. I believe we only have the MLE left and i think CD's gonna use that for James so i hope that we can get a sign-and trade for anyone of those C's and Pf's and perhapes resigning keithbogans.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Mr. Predictable said:


> McGrady isn't switching back to the 2 at this point in his career, it would be detrimental to the Rockets if he did so.


Why? Would it really take that much of a toll on his body? (I believe you that the Rockets are looking for SGs; I just don't understand why McGrady at that spot is such a bad idea.)

JVG may stress team defense, but that didn't seem to help us a whole lot last season when we couldn't guard anyone on the perimeter. That's why Battier is so valuable to this team. It seems like a waste of his talent to have him at PF. There are plenty of ordinary defenders there who can make open threes. Why give up Gay and Swift just for that?



> For the last 2 years Battier's rebounding rate has hovered just under 10, Juwan Howard's has been steady at 12.4. I expect Battier's RbR to increase next year as he spends more time at the 4, even SF's who crash the boards extremely hard like Devean George barely have a RbR higher than 10. McGrady's is 10.3, surprisingly higher than LeBron who is a 9.8. And when you have a guy like Yao who will always be up in the 17+ range, in addition to using that large frame to keep other big men out of position, I would not call rebounding a weakness. Not yet.


To add to that, last season Battier averaged 6.4 rebounds per 48 mins at SF and 8.6 at PF. Also, Yao's rebound rate was 19.5 in the post-break stretch.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Ugh... wrote a very long response and closed my browser. Will cliffnotes it.



Hakeem said:


> Why? Would it really take that much of a toll on his body? (I believe you that the Rockets are looking for SGs; I just don't understand why McGrady at that spot is such a bad idea.)


Offensively, there is no fine line between playing the 2 or the 3, maybe height. Ideally you want your 2 guard to have a good handle, range on his shot, and the ability to create shots for himself at the very least (via off the ball movement or isolation). While TMac has all these attributes, he has played like **** at SG over the last 3 years.

Defensively is why I think McGrady is destined to be a 3 for the rest of his career. With his length and rebounding ability, JVG wants him close to the basket. Not out on the perimeter chasing 2 guards around screens (which McGrady is terrible at), constantly arching his back to guard shorter opposition, wearing out his legs at a rapid pace guarding quicker opposition, getting in foul trouble with handchecks... he can do it for short stretches of time, or if Kobe is threatening to go off for 81. But I see him as a 3. Which makes Battier a 4 by elimination (not a SG). 



> JVG may stress team defense, but that didn't seem to help us a whole lot last season when we couldn't guard anyone on the perimeter. That's why Battier is so valuable to this team. It seems like a waste of his talent to have him at PF. There are plenty of ordinary defenders there who can make open threes. Why give up Gay and Swift just for that?


Perimeter defense is ALL about lateral movement. That is the one aspect of Battier's game that he is below average at. The Grizzlies gave up playing him at the 2 spot at the end of the 04-05 season, and he didn't play a single minute there last year. Battier isn't going to be a shut down defender at the 3 or 4 spot, but he will make opponents work very hard to get their shot off. Pound for pound, one of the strongest guys in the league... won't get pushed around in the post. The intangibles on this guy are amazing, crafty defender who will make you pay for showing him the ball. Check out these stats: 

*Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production*
<table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#33cc33"><td valign="top">Name
</td> <td valign="top"> ____
</td> <td width="80"><center>*Position*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*FGA*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*eFG%*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*FTA*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*iFG*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*Reb*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*Ast*</center></td> <td width="50"><center>*T/O*</center></td> <td width="50"><center>*Blk*</center></td> <td width="50"><center>*PF*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*Pts*</center></td> <td width="50"><center>*PER**</center></td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">Battier
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.5 </td> <td align="right">*0.454* </td> <td align="right"> 5.9 </td> <td align="right"> 34% </td> <td align="right"> 11.1 </td> <td align="right"> 2.5 </td> <td align="right"> 3.0 </td> <td align="right"> 1.5 </td> <td align="right"> 5.0 </td> <td align="right"> 19.4 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">16.7 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">RaWallace
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.4 </td> <td align="right">*0.460 * </td> <td align="right"> 3.9 </td> <td align="right"> 46% </td> <td align="right"> 11.4 </td> <td align="right"> 2.6 </td> <td align="right"> 2.8 </td> <td align="right"> 1.0 </td> <td align="right"> 4.3 </td> <td align="right"> 17.9 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">16.2 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">garnett
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.2 </td> <td align="right">*0.460 * </td> <td align="right"> 4.4 </td> <td align="right"> 46% </td> <td align="right"> 11.3 </td> <td align="right"> 2.2 </td> <td align="right"> 2.0 </td> <td align="right"> 1.0 </td> <td align="right"> 4.7 </td> <td align="right"> 17.9 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">16.1 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">EBrand
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.4 </td> <td align="right">*0.468 * </td> <td align="right"> 4.5 </td> <td align="right"> 39% </td> <td align="right"> 11.2 </td> <td align="right"> 3.1 </td> <td align="right"> 2.0 </td> <td align="right"> 1.1 </td> <td align="right"> 5.4 </td> <td align="right"> 18.5 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">15.7 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">JuwHoward
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 15.6 </td> <td align="right">*0.484* </td> <td align="right"> 5.1 </td> <td align="right"> 34% </td> <td align="right"> 11.7 </td> <td align="right"> 2.9 </td> <td align="right"> 2.4 </td> <td align="right"> 1.3 </td> <td align="right"> 4.3 </td> <td align="right"> 18.5 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">16.4 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">nowitzk
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.0 </td> <td align="right">*0.498 * </td> <td align="right"> 5.5 </td> <td align="right"> 41% </td> <td align="right"> 10.7 </td> <td align="right"> 2.9 </td> <td align="right"> 2.3 </td> <td align="right"> 0.9 </td> <td align="right"> 5.1 </td> <td align="right"> 19.9 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">18.0 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">K Brown
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 17.1 </td> <td align="right">*0.518* </td> <td align="right"> 4.5 </td> <td align="right"> 43% </td> <td align="right"> 13.5 </td> <td align="right"> 3.1 </td> <td align="right"> 2.7 </td> <td align="right"> 2.1 </td> <td align="right"> 4.4 </td> <td align="right"> 20.7 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">19.2 </td></tr></tbody> </table> <table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="720"> <tbody><tr bgcolor="#ffffff"><td valign="top">ChrBosh
</td> <td><center>PF</center></td> <td align="right"> 16.0 </td> <td align="right">*0.544 * </td> <td align="right"> 4.5 </td> <td align="right"> 39% </td> <td align="right"> 11.0 </td> <td align="right"> 4.3 </td> <td align="right"> 3.2 </td> <td align="right"> 1.5 </td> <td align="right"> 6.0 </td> <td align="right"> 20.7 </td> <td align="right" bgcolor="#99ff00">18.1 </td></tr></tbody> </table> 
Obviously I don't expect him to be at the top of the field once he spends more time guarding elite PF's, but he is a very capable option.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Mr. Predictable said:


> For the last 2 years Battier's rebounding rate has hovered just under 10, Juwan Howard's has been steady at 12.4. I expect Battier's RbR to increase next year as he spends more time at the 4, even SF's who crash the boards extremely hard like Devean George barely have a RbR higher than 10. McGrady's is 10.3, surprisingly higher than LeBron who is a 9.8. And when you have a guy like Yao who will always be up in the 17+ range, in addition to using that large frame to keep other big men out of position, I would not call rebounding a weakness. Not yet.


The problem is that Battier doesn't really replace Howard in your scenario, because Battier is in my scenario as well. In your scenario, Howard's rebounding is replaced by a the rebounding of a "small guard."

McGrady's Rebound Rate is very nice for a small forward and great for a shooting guard. Battier's Rebound Rate would be below average for a power forward. If Howard's rebounding is replaced by a guard like Head/James/Alston, I think team rebounding would be a problem. Or, at least, make a team that should be great at rebounding (with McGrady and Yao) and make them mediocre.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Minstrel said:


> The problem is that Battier doesn't really replace Howard in your scenario, because Battier is in my scenario as well. In your scenario, Howard's rebounding is replaced by a the rebounding of a "small guard."
> 
> McGrady's Rebound Rate is very nice for a small forward and great for a shooting guard. Battier's Rebound Rate would be below average for a power forward. If Howard's rebounding is replaced by a guard like Head/James/Alston, I think team rebounding would be a problem. Or, at least, make a team that should be great at rebounding (with McGrady and Yao) and make them mediocre.


This probably isn't the best approach, but let's compare the potential new lineup to last year's squad that was the 10th best rebounding team in the league *despite* not having Yao and McGrady for an extended period of time. 

<table bgcolor="#cccccc" border="0" cellspacing="1" height="243" width="417"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#33cc33"> <td width="80"><center>*2005-06 lineup (RbR)
*</center></td> <td width="60"><center>*2006-07 lineup (RbR)
*</center></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#ffffff"> <td align="center"><center>Alston (6.1)
</center></td> <td align="center">Alston (6.1) 
</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#ffffff"> <td align="center"><center>Wesley (4.4)
</center></td> <td align="center">Mike James (5.5)
</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#ffffff"> <td align="center">Tracy McGrady (10.3)
</td> <td align="center">Tracy McGrady (10.3)</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#ffffff"> <td align="center"><center>Juwan Howard (12.4)
</center></td> <td align="center">Shane Battier (9.1, 9.8)</td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#ffffff"> <td align="center"><center>Yao Ming (17.5)</center></td> <td align="center">Yao Ming (17.5+)</td> </tr></tbody></table>
As long as Yao is in the post, Houston is going to be an above-average rebounding team. Would this team be a better rebounding team with an Alston-TMac-Battier-Howard-Yao lineup? Definitely, but they simply wouldn't be as good an overall team for the reasons I explained in post above yours.


----------



## reno2000 (Aug 23, 2005)

I think we have to get versatile with our line-up. In that I mean, we should adapt to opposition, because all this discussion has shown that we will have some versatility. Say for example, the Suns. Last season and prior to that, we always get killed by the Suns because of their pace and match up problems. Thus a line-up of Alston-James-Tmac-Battier-Yao would be by far the most efficient. This would also work against a team like Dallas or Miami who likes to play small. Now against a team such as the Clippers, or a San Antonio, then we too need to go big. Having a line-up of Alston-Tmac-Battier-Howard-Yao would be our best option. 

I don't completely buy into the notion of having a starting line-up set in stone that you always play with even though logic says that it isnt the best line-up. And I think they whole league is moving towards this as well, just look at all the versatile players that are so coveted these days.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Mr. Predictable said:


> Perimeter defense is ALL about lateral movement. That is the one aspect of Battier's game that he is below average at. The Grizzlies gave up playing him at the 2 spot at the end of the 04-05 season, and he didn't play a single minute there last year.


I meant Battier at the 3 spot. From what I've seen of him, defensively, he's far better there than anywhere else. He's one of the best defenders in the league at that position, IMO. McGrady is more suited to guarding small forwards, too, but I think he'd do all right against most SGs. At least, I think the defensive (and rebounding) benefit of having Battier at SF (rather than at PF) outweighs the cost of having T-Mac at SG. Though I'm not factoring in the physical toll, which, if you're right, would make it not worth it. Also, I only saw around eight Grizzlies games last season, so I could be quite a bit off.



> Check out these stats:
> ...


Interesting, and I certainly hope you're right, but I'm not sure I'd put too much faith in those opponent PER figures. That stat made Damon Stoudamire and Shaq look like an excellent defenders last season, didn't it? And I can't help noticing that Juwan Howard is right up there with Rasheed and Garnett. It's also worth noting that Battier's opponent PER at SF last season was 13.9. Battier is definitely crafty, and I'm sure he'd do at least a decent job, but he's 6'8" and 220 lb, meaning he'd be giving up 20 lb and a couple of inches on most power forwards.


----------



## TracywtFacy (Mar 29, 2005)

http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_17944.shtml

"The Houston Rockets have hit a glitch in their attempts to finalize the trade that would send Rudy Gay and Stromile Swift to the Memphis Grizzlies in exchange for veteran swingman Shane Battier. The glitch? *Swift told the Rockets point blank that he would not report to Memphis*."


----------



## jzmagik (Nov 29, 2005)

if this is true, its Jim jackson all over again


----------



## TracywtFacy (Mar 29, 2005)

jzmagik said:


> if this is true, its Jim jackson all over again



meaning what exactly?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

TracywtFacy said:


> http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_17944.shtml
> 
> "The Houston Rockets have hit a glitch in their attempts to finalize the trade that would send Rudy Gay and Stromile Swift to the Memphis Grizzlies in exchange for veteran swingman Shane Battier. The glitch? *Swift told the Rockets point blank that he would not report to Memphis*."


Could Swift save Houston from itself? That would be amusing and nice.

From the wording "attempts to finalize," it appears the deal isn't done. I guess Swift can tank it himself, because if he doesn't report, he can't pass a physical.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

If Swift single handly stop the trade, then Swift will earn himself into All-Star game 2007 because all the Rockets fans would keep voting for him.
Who says Swift is stupid and low IQs?


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

We Love Stromile Swift!


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Dean the Master said:


> Who says Swift is stupid and low IQs?


He's a little stupid, but it's endearing. He always has the team's best interests in mind.


----------



## Dean the Master (Feb 19, 2006)

Swift, do whatever you need to do to help us out of this trade.
Tank the physical, and you will earn yourself a Vegas locker room spot! Sweet deal right?


----------



## darkballa (Sep 19, 2003)

lol it's hoopsworld, there's a high possibilty its just a rumor. Anyways even if we do get Gay, that's basically the same position as battier so that means either Mac shifts to the 2 and Gay starts or he's our 6th man alongside Mike James.


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

what the hell were ya'll thinking trading a prospect like gay for a guy that, altough is as tough as nails and is a great role player, but has already reached his prime in battier?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

sac23kings said:


> what the hell were ya'll thinking trading a prospect like gay for a guy that, altough is as tough as nails and is a great role player, but has already reached his prime in battier?


Wow, good question. None of us had considered any of that in the many, many posts on this forum dedicated to the deal.


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

Minstrel said:


> Wow, good question. None of us had considered any of that in the many, many posts on this forum dedicated to the deal.



i hope u werent being sarcastic cause do u honestly think i have the time to read all the posts in this thread?


----------



## Demiloy (Nov 4, 2005)

sac23kings said:


> i hope u werent being sarcastic cause do u honestly think i have the time to read all the posts in this thread?


 Yes, we do. This is only 6 pages, that should be no more than 10 or 12 minutes.

To those who say the this has "Jeff Van Gundy all over it"
http://blogs.chron.com/nba/2006/06/the_day_after.html


> Since draft night, I've also been told that *this was not a Jeff Van Gundy decision.* He was not even consulted on Rudy Gay because management had no intention of keeping Gay.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

sac23kings said:


> i hope u werent being sarcastic cause do u honestly think i have the time to read all the posts in this thread?


If you actually care to read discussion on that topic, then why wouldn't you read the posts already written about it?

if you don't care to read discussion on it (or "don't have time"), then why did you even bother asking the question?


----------



## sac23kings (Mar 31, 2005)

whatevers ya'll got too much time on your hands... i asked a question and instead of answering it, you guys come up with sarcastic remarks... what is it about people on message boards??? they always have the urge to make snide and sarcastic comments... whatevers, you guys have a good life!


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Demiloy said:


> Yes, we do. This is only 6 pages, that should be no more than 10 or 12 minutes.
> 
> To those who say the this has "Jeff Van Gundy all over it"
> http://blogs.chron.com/nba/2006/06/the_day_after.html


 Everyone in Houston is calling this damage control.

Dawson: "I would be an idiot if I didn't run this stuff through Jeff Van Gundy." Add to that he has been a puppet the last 6 years, never solely responsible for any decisions.

JVG: "I would trade the draft pick if I could, but CD and Morey won't let me do that." Followed by Dawson asking him not to be so straight-forward in talking with the press.


----------



## TracywtFacy (Mar 29, 2005)

Dean the Master said:


> We Love Stromile Swift!



in all seriousness he had a few mindblowing highlights when he was with us last season, a few jawdropping dunks and rejections that had to be seen to believed, i will miss those if he leaves Houston... I just can't understand why he is so inconsistent and lacks a few basic fundamentals that would make him a superstar? I think maybe he's an ultra-late bloomer or something, and one day he will just 'get it', and become a great player, justifying his draft position?


----------



## jworth (Feb 17, 2006)

TracywtFacy said:


> in all seriousness he had a few mindblowing highlights when he was with us last season, a few jawdropping dunks and rejections that had to be seen to believed, i will miss those if he leaves Houston... I just can't understand why he is so inconsistent and lacks a few basic fundamentals that would make him a superstar? I think maybe he's an ultra-late bloomer or something, and one day he will just 'get it', and become a great player, justifying his draft position?


Maybe, but something tells me that he would have already started to show signs of an upward change.


----------



## HayesFan (Feb 16, 2006)

TracywtFacy said:


> in all seriousness he had a few mindblowing highlights when he was with us last season, a few jawdropping dunks and rejections that had to be seen to believed, i will miss those if he leaves Houston... I just can't understand why he is so inconsistent and lacks a few basic fundamentals that would make him a superstar? I think maybe he's an ultra-late bloomer or something, and one day he will just 'get it', and become a great player, justifying his draft position?


I think his problem is probably attitude and work ethic... if he's unhappy instead of working to improve he gets sulky.. or if he doesn't get what he wants he doesn't give 100% effort on the court as a petty revenge.

But who knows for certain, we don't get to see behind the scenes to know for sure. He has talent, but its that whole don't talk the talk if you aren't going to walk the walk scenerio.


----------



## WhoRocks (Feb 24, 2005)

TracywtFacy said:


> in all seriousness he had a few mindblowing highlights when he was with us last season, a few jawdropping dunks and rejections that had to be seen to believed, i will miss those if he leaves Houston... I just can't understand why he is so inconsistent and lacks a few basic fundamentals that would make him a superstar? I think maybe he's an ultra-late bloomer or something, and one day he will just 'get it', and become a great player, justifying his draft position?


From watching him this season, I feel that he just has no idea/recognition of his own offenisve limitations. It's why he tries to dunk everything he touches within 10 feet of the basket, which may guarantee 1 highlight worthy dunk a game, but more often than not led to a missed shot with no one in position to get the offensive rebound. I also remember him shooting the ball into the side of the backboard this season with uncomfortable regularity. 
And then sometimes he would receive the ball wide open from 20 feet and he would oblige with the defence's wishes by shooting the jumper. Stromile think about why you are left open in that position?!


----------

