PDA

View Full Version : Croshere for Maurice Taylor??



Unclebuck
02-15-2004, 08:36 PM
Just was watching NBATV.

Peter Vescey mentioned that the Rockets and Pacers have discussed a possible traded of Cro for Taylor.


What do you think?

What is the length of Taylor's contract?

I don't really think Taylor is better than Cro.

zxc
02-15-2004, 08:42 PM
Looks like they are both the same length, Croshere makes just a little bit less. So that would really be stupid for us. Taylor not really a player we need, he is alot like Al Harrington kind of so not sure where he would fit in for us. Least Croshere has the outside shot something we don't have much of on the bench.

Unclebuck
02-15-2004, 08:46 PM
Here are the numbers


Croshere:

04 -- 7.8
05 -- 8.4
06 -- 9.1
07 -- 9.8



Taylor

04 -- 7.6
05 -- 8.3
06 -- 8.9
07 -- 9.6



So basically there is no difference.


Cro is a better rebounder and three point shooter.

Taylor is a better midrange shooter

Hicks
02-15-2004, 09:07 PM
I know nothing about Taylor, so I really don't know.

However, going just by stats it looks like we clearly get an upgrade.

Isn't this guy their "Al Harrington"? I thought when we played them here in Indy the ESPN guys were making it sound like he was their best bench guy/6th man.

Cactus Jax
02-15-2004, 09:09 PM
The only problem I have with this talk is I think there's something bigger going on with apparent talks although it is rat boy. My guess would be the talks are a Harrington and Croshere for Mobley and Taylor trade. Basically the tams switch shooters and post-up players with the Pacers getting a guard that can shoot, and the post up player to replace Al, and the Rockets get two solid big guys. It makes sense and it wouldn't blow me away nor kill me but I seriously doubt it would happen for chemistry reasons.

Hicks
02-15-2004, 09:16 PM
I know nothing about Taylor, so I really don't know.

However, going just by stats it looks like we clearly get an upgrade.

Isn't this guy their "Al Harrington"? I thought when we played them here in Indy the ESPN guys were making it sound like he was their best bench guy/6th man.

He's by no means a bad player. But that's just the thing. We HAVE our Al Harrington. If you trade Croshere for someone, it shouldn't be another 6'9 PF who makes as much money over the same length of time who plays the same style of basketball as Harrington. I'd rather just keep Croshere, since he can at least shoot from the outiside, and it wouldn't provide any short or long term salary relief, and Taylor isn't big enough to play anything but PF.

I agree with that. Maybe it's what AZ's thinking then? Cro/Al for Taylor/Mobley. If Houston would do that, we'd have to think about it. Taylor would essentially give us what Al does, but we'd be swapping Cro for a legit 2-guard with (albiet streaky) 3 point range. Something to ponder. It'll be interesting to see if anything happens.

Natston
02-15-2004, 09:20 PM
Mo Taylor rebounds like a 5'11" PG... :unimpressed:

Hicks
02-15-2004, 09:23 PM
Mo Taylor rebounds like a 5'11" PG... :unimpressed:

He averages 5.6rpg to Al's 6.6rpg

Natston
02-15-2004, 09:33 PM
Mo Taylor rebounds like a 5'11" PG... :unimpressed:

He averages 5.6rpg to Al's 6.6rpg

Look at Taylor's stats for when he was starting and getting major minutes... :flirt:

5.3 98-99
6.5 99-00
5.5 00-01

:unimpressed:

Natston
02-15-2004, 09:33 PM
Mo Taylor rebounds like a 5'11" PG... :unimpressed:

C'mon, Travis was better than THAT.

:blush:

Hicks
02-15-2004, 10:47 PM
Any updates, Buck?

wintermute
02-16-2004, 06:19 AM
i can't imagine harrington going for a 1-dimensional player like mobley. a harrington deal would have to bring back francis, imo.

cro for mo is a wash. i imagine mo taylor would have as much difficulty getting off the bench as cro, maybe more. his rebounding sucks, his defense is not much either.

Pig Nash
02-16-2004, 09:54 AM
Indiana trades: PF Austin Croshere (5.1 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.5 apg in 12.8 minutes)
PF Al Harrington (13.5 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 1.7 apg in 31.2 minutes)
Indiana receives: PF Maurice Taylor (11.9 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 1.3 apg in 28.1 minutes)
SG Cuttino Mobley (15.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg in 39.6 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +8.7 ppg, +0.3 rpg, and +2.5 apg.

Houston trades: PF Maurice Taylor (11.9 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 1.3 apg in 28.1 minutes)
SG Cuttino Mobley (15.4 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 3.4 apg in 39.6 minutes)
Houston receives: PF Austin Croshere (5.1 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 0.5 apg in 49 games)
PF Al Harrington (13.5 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 1.7 apg in 50 games)
Change in team outlook: -8.7 ppg, -0.3 rpg, and +2.5 apg

This isn't a bad trade IMO but the only one that's left out in the cold on this one is Freddie. We'd have a back up 2 for Reggie and wouldn't really need Jones anymore. I also don't like getting rid of Al. I wouldn't be mad at this trade but it leaves something to be desired.

Will Galen
02-16-2004, 10:49 AM
I think if the Pacers are talking with Houston they have interest in Frances. I think that's the only way they give up Al.

I'll see what trade I can come up with.

Ragnar
02-16-2004, 11:34 AM
Please no Francis :mad: he is a shoot first pg and that is not what we need on this team.

Will Galen
02-16-2004, 12:01 PM
Here's two trades that work


[1]
Indiana trades:
PF Al Harrington
C Scot Pollard
PG Jamaal Tinsley

Indiana receives:
PG Steve Francis
SF Eric Piatkowski

[2]
Indiana trades:
C Scot Pollard
PF Austin Croshere
PG Jamaal Tinsley
PF Al Harrington

Indiana receives:
PG Steve Francis
PF Maurice Taylor
SF Eric Piatkowski

There's a lot to say about these two trades. First I don't think the Pacers would do a major trade like this mid season. Well, lets say Donnie probably wouldn't, we don't know about Bird.

Trading for Frances does make sense. He's an all star under contract for the next 5 years. He gives us a point guard to play against Jason Kidd, he
negates NY's acquiring of Marbury, and gives us 3 all stars all under contract for several years.


The trade would make our lineup look thus, if Croshere and Taylor were included.

PF ..... JO/Taylor
SF..... Artest/Piatkowski or Bender
C....... Foster/Brezac
SG..... Reggie/F. Jones/J. Jones
PG..... Frances/Johnson/Anderson/Brewer

Why would Houston do it? They wouldn't, but some reasons they would.

They are unhappy with Frances. He doesn't give the ball to Ming as much as they want, plus he's fighting with Van Gundy. So the first requirement would be a replacement for Frances, someone who will pass to Ming. Tinsley would do that, plus they upgrade their power forward spot with Al.

They also only have one listed center on their roster, Ming. Cato although he's plays backup center is listed as a forward. So getting Pollard would give them some depth at the position.

One other thought. The trade would clear up who the Pacers would protect in the upcoming expansion draft.

PROTECTED
JO
Frances
Artest
Foster
Reggie
Bender
F. Jones
Brezac

FREE AGENTS
Anderson
Brewer

UNPROTECTED
Taylor
Johnson
J.Jones*
Piatkowski

*J.Jones might be restricted. If so Johnson would probably be taken.

indygeezer
02-16-2004, 12:09 PM
Wow, a little rumor sure gets complicated huh?

THe only real benefit I can see long term is the comment about Francis already being locked up contract wise. JT will be ending his rookie contracts soon and will command a raise, if we can work a deal to get a locked in number for unknown contract(s) w/o going over the cap, we would benefit.

bulletproof
02-16-2004, 02:32 PM
THose of you that continue to minimize Al (for whatever twisted reasons) are going to look REALLY silly in a few years when he's an all star. Al has had MONSTER games, where he scored big, rebounded big, was an absolute beast on defense. Taylor had those kind of games? I don't see the defensive ability being even close. Or overall value. Al's not going anywhere, ESPECIALLY for the same type player. It would take a huge offer of a talent or type that we don't have now, to get Al. 2 is no longer a weakness. :pepper:

Ron Artest and Freddie Jones are going to handle the 2 spot just fine post-Reggie. Start thinking about point guards. ;)

Continue to ignore that Al is the spiritual leader of this team at your own risk. (and the emotional health of this team)


You're right. Al has had several monster games this season where he was the critical difference. But therein lies the problem with Al. When he plays within his role, he plays extremely well. When he begins to play extremely well, he has a tendency to forget what his role is and starts playing as if he should be the go-to guy. And when that happens, the team suffers. It's a well-established pattern. And if that happens during the playoffs, we won't get very far.

Make no mistake, Al wants to be a star player. And you're right again. If Al were to play for another team as a starter, he would in most likelihood become an all-star. But guess what? That's what Al wants. Would I feel silly if we traded him and that happened? Hell no. I'd be happy for the guy. Why prevent a man from being what he wants to be.

Also, I'm torn as to whether or not we should make a trade right now involving Al. A part of me thinks we should just leave well enough alone and see how far this team can get. But another part of me thinks that we wouldn't win a 7-game series against the West with the team as it is. If we could get someone like Francis, Allen or Terry in return for Al, it would be mighty tempting to say the least.

waxman
02-16-2004, 02:36 PM
Vecsey is full of it... and the other trade scenerios are crazy talk. Why would Houston want Croshere in the first place...?

Suaveness
02-16-2004, 02:39 PM
Vecsey is full of it... and the other trade scenerios are crazy talk. Why would Houston want Croshere in the first place...?

Yeah. Plus we lose a lot of size, and some shooting. I don't liek this trade. I feel as though our team is fine, and we don't need to do anything with it.

We need to wait and see how this team does. If we do not do well in the playoffs, then obviously something needs to change.

If we go to the finals? Nothing needs to be changed, unless we get swept or do very poorly, which will not happen, unless its the lakers at full strength. Honestly, I see no problem.

Why fix something that works?

waxman
02-16-2004, 02:51 PM
Agreed Suave.... if anything we should be adding a shooter...not getting rid of one. But i wouldn't want to shake anything up right now.... seems like the chemistry is solid...everybody seems to be pulling in the same direction and supporting each other regardless of who's on the floor... that is an extremely difficult thing to build and is a sign of a contender.

kerosene
02-16-2004, 03:14 PM
Vecsey is full of it... and the other trade scenerios are crazy talk. Why would Houston want Croshere in the first place...?

Not that I advocate this trade, but Houston and Toronto were the other players in the Croshere stakes when he was a FA after the finals. Van Gundy has also always spoken highly of Cro when he was an analyst last year. It's not that farfetched.

fishman
02-16-2004, 06:10 PM
I agree with the fact that its probably best not to pull any blockbuster trades considering our success so far this season, but we've still gotta address the Artest/Harrington problem some day.
I'm sure Harrington has plenty of potential, and verywell could become an allstar someday, but the way things stand right now, somethings going to have to give.

We're very lucky to have these two talented young players, but I think they can only co-exist for so long. Artest really isn't a shooting guard, and Harrington really doesn't deserve to be a bench player. It reminds me of the Davis debates back in the 90s.

We've got some of the most talented forwards in the league, but at some point we need to trade either Artest or Harrington to balance out the team. I like things how they stand now, but its not gonna last.

sixthman
02-17-2004, 12:32 AM
Croshere for Maurice Taylor has been talked about for several years. I don't see where we benefit by an even up trade one bit. Cro accepts his role; Taylor is more a volatile player and less likely to be a happy camper if he gets little PT.

Of course, if they are part of a wider trade, that's another story.

Hicks
02-17-2004, 10:55 AM
If we could get Cato for Cro (sounds fishy to me, but who knows), I wouldn't mind.

I think we'd miss Cro's outside 3's though.

But at least no one could whine anymore that we need "one more big man". Foster, Pollard, and Cato is plenty of beef (don't judge that on talent, just size and strength).

Will Galen
02-17-2004, 11:26 AM
If we could get Cato for Cro (sounds fishy to me, but who knows), I wouldn't mind.

It is fishy. As I said in another post Houston isn't gonna trade Cato for Cro 1 on 1. It works, but they only have 3 big guys, Ming, Cato, and Taylor, to play center. Thus if they trade one of them for Cro it would have to be part of a bigger trade with them getting a big man back too.

(Cro can't play center in the West)

This is probably the reason the trade talks went from Cro for Cato, to Cro for Taylor. Don't know that the Pacers would do that though.

Thus I think if we trade Cro to Houston it will be more than a 1 for 1 trade. Trouble is nothing looks good to me for both teams unless Frances would be included. Rumors are that if Frances is traded it will be this summer.

HOUSTON
Kelvin Cato F 6-11 275
Steve Francis G 6-3 200
Adrian Griffin G-F 6-5 230
Jim Jackson F-G 6-6 220
Mark Jackson G 6-3 195
Cuttino Mobley G 6-4 215
Bostjan Nachbar F 6-9 221
Scott Padgett F 6-9 240
Eric Piatkowski G-F 6-7 215
Maurice Taylor F 6-9 255
Clarence Weatherspoon F 6-7 270
Mike Wilks* G 5-11 180
Yao Ming C 7-6 310

indytoad
02-17-2004, 11:38 AM
Some Rockets fans are discussing the trade as well. I found that the general consensus is that Taylor for Croshere would be a massive rip-off for them.

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73124

Their value of Taylor seems to be much higher than ours, a couple going so far to say he should be considered for the sixth man and most improved awards, and that he should have been an All-Star.

IndyToad
Maddeningly inconsistent

indygeezer
02-17-2004, 12:34 PM
Just a reminder. WE're in 1st place...everyone is trying to CATCH UP TO US. They can try but we should still have the advantage of our guys having played together as a unit for so long. Like it or not, Tins already knows where Reggie (JO, Ron, Al et al) like to catch a pass...Jo already knows where Ron, JT, or Al will be if he makes an outlet pass. These things will have to be learned by the new guys on other teams.


Having said that, I'd still take the Cro for Cato deal.

Will Galen
02-17-2004, 12:42 PM
Having said that, I'd still take the Cro for Cato deal.

So would the rest of us. Houston won't do that though!

indygeezer
02-17-2004, 12:45 PM
Having said that, I'd still take the Cro for Cato deal.

So would the rest of us. Houston won't do that though!




Killjoy :finger:

Kegboy
02-17-2004, 01:17 PM
Taylor's had a nice year, though he's not 6th man and definitely not All-Star material. He has a more well-rounded game than Austin, but I don't see this happening, unless Al is on the way out as well, which again, I don't see happening. IMO Mo's a better player than Austin, but he still wouldn't move up the depth chart, or change the rotation at all.

Mourning
02-17-2004, 04:10 PM
I would definitely be interested in a Maurice Taylor for Austin Croshere and throw in (Brezec? Brewer) swap.
I think it would give us more room to move Al NOT NOW, but in the off-season, for a good to great SG or throw in Pollard and try to collect a decent Center. I think it would be good as it could very well balance our team a little more.
Artest could play SF more, Fred could play a little more and Bender would be sort of fullfilling the roll Al has been doing this year, but with a little less minutes.
Further, Taylor is usable not only as a PF, but more importantly as a C too, which we could very well need in the later stages of the play-offs (that is IF we get to those stages :unimpressed: ).

Regards,

Mourning :cool: