Kyrie Irving would kill the Rockets vibe

Karma. Juju. Vibes.

This stuff matters. It’s hard to put a finger on it, but you know it matters.

It’s got to feel right. If it feels wrong, follow that intuition. There are machinations at play that we don’t understand. Whatever your cosmic alignment, you’re naive to assume that cold, hard logic dictates everything.

Kyrie Irving.

Logic dictates that the Rockets should pursue him. That’s why the rumors have persisted (other than Ted Cruz’s omnipresent influence, of course). He’s very good, and he does everything the Rockets need.

In 2024-25, Irving averaged 24.7 points and 4.6 assists per game with a Box Plus/Minus (BPM) of 3.4. The assists were down, but he spent most of the year playing alongside Luka “Usage” Doncic. Irving is a solid passer and a fine defender, along with being a prolific, efficient scorer.

He scored 1.06 Points Per Possession (PPP) in isolation, good for the 85.7th percentile. He was even better as a pick-and-roll ball-handler, scoring 1.07 PPP (92nd). He’s good, and he’d make the Rockets better:

But doesn’t it feel wrong?

To get more specific, logic dictates that acquiring Irving would be difficult. The Rockets would need Fred VanVleet to waive his implied no-trade clause.

Already, we’re getting off on the wrong foot. Bringing in Irving, whose many foibles we’ll discuss later, for consummate professional* Fred VanVleet feels like a negative tonal shift for this team. Convincing the President of the National Basketball Players’ Association (NBPA) to waive a contractual protection to accommodate the President of the Flat Earth Society is at least a questionable decision.

*Side note: Why is consumate the adjective we always use for professionals? Can we get a perspicacious professional? Where are all the assiduous professionals?

When VanVleet signed with the Rockets, he infamously gifted his teammates a copy of Chop Wood, Carry Water: How to Fall in Love with the Process of Becoming Great. Would Irving gift them a copy of…

You know what, never mind.

Listen: Politics and sport have a tenuous relationship. The “shut up and dribble” crowd is dehumanizing, but there are certain views that everyone, athletes and laymen alike, ought to shut up about. At least, that’s my opinion - and that’s where it gets murky.

I’ve belaboured this point recently regarding Ja Morant. I don’t like to cast aspersions on people I’ve not met. Yet, it’s a variable in sports. It’s fairly undeniable that trouble has followed Irving. His personal proclivities already seemed to have sabotaged a situation with Durant.

Why should the Rockets take a risk on his seemingly volatile personality? They don’t need a point guard that badly. Frankly, Reed Sheppard is rounding into form anyway. The sophomore guard is averaging 12.2 points per game and hitting an astonishing 50.0% of his 5.6 threes per game.

It feels like a specious argument. It’s almost anti-empericism. I’m suggesting that even though Irving is a great basketball player, the Rockets should avoid him for normative reasons.

Well, I’m sticking to it.

Rule of thumb: If Ted Cruz is for it, be against it. Even most Republicans will agree with that. Irving has baggage that isn’t worth shouldering, even for the basketball value he brings.

Things feel good in Space City, and it matters. The Rockets have seemingly made a point of targeting team-minded, drama-free guys, and it has paid dividends.

If it turns out that the Rockets need a point guard so badly, they can target someone who doesn’t kill their vibe.