Read on Twitter
Anyway, main point of what I was trying to convey in the podcast: I think "how good will the future Brooklyn picks be?" debate is missing the point of the deal. Sure, it's possible that the Nets could be in a rebuild by 2024 and beyond. However...
... When you trade an elite NBA player, there's almost no such thing as a guaranteed draft asset. Because the team you're trading with could be really good, at least in the short-term, since they're getting the elite player. That's how it works. It's always a calculated gamble.
With that said, my guess is that most of these future picks aren't actually made by the Rockets. Think of this as similar to the 2009 to 2012 "rebuild," when Morey went into asset accumulation mode (i.e. reverse protection from Toronto for Lowry) to position themselves for Harden
Houston isn't LA, but it's a very good NBA market and a franchise with pedigree. Probably in the 6-10 range in terms of "desirability," if all factors are equal.
If Wood pans out as they hope, and early returns are good, he could be a very nice running mate for someone.
If Wood pans out as they hope, and early returns are good, he could be a very nice running mate for someone.
My guess is that the vast majority of these future draft assets get traded at some point (not now) for the next disgruntled star that they believe could be the best player on a legit contender. (i.e. what Harden was)
I've seen some framing the trade as though the Rockets traded a Top 5 guy without getting a blue-chip asset back.
Ironically, IMO, that's why they did it (relative to Simmons, Siakam, etc). They saw ceilings on those guys. Higher floors, but probably not the guy on a title team.
Ironically, IMO, that's why they did it (relative to Simmons, Siakam, etc). They saw ceilings on those guys. Higher floors, but probably not the guy on a title team.
In many ways, it's similar to going from Covington to Wood and adding those two future picks. It's about replenishing the warchest and gambling that they will do something with that.
One potentially significant part of today's trade: By recouping the 2024 and 2026 1sts that Houston lost in the Westbrook/OKC trade, the Rockets now have 1sts in every year moving forward. This also allows them to TRADE future 1sts in every year.
Prior to today, since they didn't have picks in 2024 and 2026, they were totally strapped after 2023. Not only were they missing picks in two years, but they also couldn't trade picks in 2025 or 2027 due to Stepien. Now, everything is back on the table.
Long story short: the essence of the decision (IMO) is this: The Rockets think they can probably *trade* that future draft capital for a player with a better shot at being The Guy on a contender, relative to Simmons or Siakam.
I'm sure some will ask, "So, who will it actually be?"
It is a risk! I don't think Morey knew in 2010 that it was going to be Harden. It took a lot of things aligning. It's just about positioning the team to be opportunistic and pounce.
It is a risk! I don't think Morey knew in 2010 that it was going to be Harden. It took a lot of things aligning. It's just about positioning the team to be opportunistic and pounce.
So, yes, it is a gamble! There's never going to be certainty when you're the side giving up the Top 5 player. It sucks. But I think this is what they're considering in their analysis and projections.
And I think this is what a lot of the immediate thinkpieces are missing. The type of blue-chip asset to potentially replace Harden in the formula simply wasn't available today, so they're trying to best position themselves to acquire it in the future. That's the gamble.
