Rooscooter wrote:I was just wondering how and why you sift players into and out of catigories. Of the four Howard has the least team accomplishments. Nash has to MVP's, Gasol two Chips...... He does however have a phone booth!
For the record I count 2 or 3 "superstars" in the league. Kobe, Duncan and Bron.
ok, then basically nobody has them. thus it really doesn't matter if you do or not. also, it means Houston's guaranteed not to get one.
As for the the Houston GM stuff.... I couldn't care less who the GM is.... They have done a good job in positioning themselves for this summer and just had a season as good as ours. How you can marginalize that is getting a little petty it seems. Harden is incomplete but he's also pretty good. I'd say he's led a team of players worse than Howard teams the last two years just as far..... So he's a flawed young player on a first round playoff team.... Nothing more or less. Houston has room to sign a top player.... Sounds like they did a decent job running the team wouldn't you?
being unimpressed is petty? sorry, a slew of 8th and 9th place finishes doesn't get my blood pumping. why aren't we giving props to Utah? they've got tons of cap space (enough to get howard whilst retaining millsap and maybe getting more) and a "young core" (favors, Hayward, kanter, burks) that is on par with or better than Houston's recently exalted trifecta (asik, parsons, lin). if not for some injury issues, perhaps they win the extra two games it would have taken to make the playoffs ahead of Houston. btw, I can play this game with more teams. no one answered my similar point about Atlanta several pages ago.
my general point is that 10 teams have cap space to sign a top player (too bad only two are available and likely to stay with their teams), and most could claim to be pretty darn good if they just add that top player. does that mean the management is excellent? to me, that's akin to saying "if I won a million dollars, i'd be in an awesome financial position, therefore i'm excellent with money". sure, there are a precious few who still wouldn't be in a good position, and there are those already there (whom I think you'd disparage for not being in the position to win it?) and thus don't need it. but 95% don't fall in either group.
the original point was that people were saying Houston was better managed than the lakers. I don't think losing a lot over the past 8 years to the point where you finally nab a second or third tier star is where anyone here would want to be. I actually can't believe that people are jealous of their position. the time to be jealous is if and only if they get howard or paul. failing that, the lakers will be in better position than them, and all they've done is put themselves in a position to overpay josh smith. it's howard/paul or bust, and people (including me, btw) scoff at the idea that the lakers might try to play that game with LeBron in the next couple of years. i'm being consistent: hope is not a plan. lightning struck once for Houston when okc decided it couldn't afford harden and another team turned down a harden deal. they need another lightning strike. I hope the lakers don't end up in that spot.
tldr: if the lakers want to be where Houston was last summer, they can do it in one year, and may be forced to if howard walks in FA. then we can all be happy to root for youth and perpetual mediocrity (at best). i'm wondering if the fans around here will view mitch and company through the same rosy glasses that serve as filter for morey and company right now.