How great of an indictment is KPJ on Rockets GM Rafael Stone?

A front office under fire

In light of the horrific Kevin Porter allegations, people are furious at the Rockets front office right now. Questions like “Why did the Rockets bother with this guy in the first place?”, “Why didn’t they cut bait sooner?”, and most importantly, “How big of an indictment is this on Rockets GM Rafael Stone?” are prominently being asked by the fanbase. I tried my best at answering some of those questions in my article from last week. However, I don’t believe I sufficiently tackled that last one.

How badly did the front office screw this one up?

I think the answer here is more complicated than many believe because I’m not sure if I buy the very premise that the Rockets completely screwed this one up. Here are four things that need to be remembered when analyzing this:

1. The Rockets traded nothing for Kevin Porter.

2. They signed Porter to a contract that guaranteed him almost nothing.

3. As far as we know, the Rockets never made a roster decision during their rebuild with Kevin Porter in mind. They drafted Jalen Green knowing full-well the skill and position overlap with Porter. Hell, they even drafted three other guards in Josh Christopher, Daishen Nix (technically undrafted), and TyTy Washington. They signed Fred VanVleet to a 2+1 max contract knowing it would likely result in a bench role for Porter.

4. For all the bad press they’re getting about shopping Kevin Porter’s contract, we have yet to receive one piece of reporting that says teams aren’t engaging with the Rockets on this matter. Meaning even after the allegations, teams are still entertaining the prospect of acquiring Porter because of how appetizing the non-gaurantees in his contract is.

These are simply facts that can’t be disputed or overlooked.

However, as discussed in last week’s article, there are a three criticisms that indeed have plenty of merit:

1. It didn’t have to reach this point. The Rockets had multiple opportunities to cut bait with Porter earlier and instead chose to ride it out.

2. Porter was given far too much free rein over the team on and off the court. They could have kept him on a tighter leash (excuse the crude metaphor) and disciplined him more during his tenure with the team. Their laissez faire approach only further enabled him.

3. The Rockets prioritized Porter on the floor far too much. In doing so, opportunities were taken away from more promising prospects (Jalen Green, Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith, etc…).

These three things also can’t be disputed. Beyond a certain point, the time and energy placed into Porter could’ve been better allocated to the rest of the roster. It’s up to Houston’s discretion what that breaking point would’ve been. Whether that’s the locker room confrontation with then assistant coach John Lucas, the recently-reported DJ incident, or something else, there were off-ramps that Houston ignored before this point.

If Porter was a prospect with All-NBA potential, perhaps greater leeway was justified, but that wasn’t the case here. Porter has already played four NBA seasons and hasn’t shown the potential to be anything more than a fringe starter. This was a clear case of talent overvaluation. Even if the Rockets ultimately didn’t jeopardize their future with this gamble, they wasted precious time and energy that they can’t get back.

This is clearly some indictment on the Rockets front office.

However, I don’t believe this is the type of indictment that illustrates a greater problem with the front office. For the bulk of their rebuild, the Rockets have done a good job of managing assets, evaluating talent, and remaining financially flexible. They have a deep young core with a ton of upside, a respectable war chest of draft assets, and loads of financial flexibility.

Has Stone been as good as Sam Presti or Danny Ainge during their recent rebuilds in Oklahoma City and Utah respectively? Certainly not, but that’s an extremely high bar to clear. Presti and Ainge are arguably two of the best lead executives of our lifetime and have considerably more experience at the helm than Stone. On a recent podcast episode with Bleacher Report’s Dan Favale, I said that the Rockets should give Stone a reasonable contract extension and this recent misstep hasn’t changed my stance.

The Rockets certainly deserve criticism, but to imply that this incident should call into question the competence of Stone is, in my opinion, a gross overreaction.