PDA

View Full Version : Would you take Al back as a starting PF...



Anthem
05-09-2006, 11:20 AM
... if we got Joe Johnson at the same time but gave up Jermaine?

Nothing really to add, that's it. Not a trade proposal, really, but a gauge of interest.

Jermaine and somebody else for Al Harrington and Joe Johnson.

Thoughts?

Jermaniac
05-09-2006, 11:23 AM
Maybe, thats as far as I can go.

wooolus
05-09-2006, 11:35 AM
i wouldn't do it in a heart beat, but it's a fair trade never the less. It's a guard dominated league now, so...

PacerMan
05-09-2006, 11:39 AM
Don't want to move Jermaine particularly.

But I'd do that deal in a heartbeat.

bmac
05-09-2006, 11:43 AM
That would give us a tough 2 guard in Johnson and a forward line-up of Granger and Harrington. Lineup holes would still be present at the 5 spot and at the point, but I would most definetly do that trade. I believe Atlanta also has a promising young euro big man that I would substitute for Harrington.....(Zachulia) is his name.

indytoad
05-09-2006, 11:48 AM
Hells yes.

But would Atlanta?

I'd think not.

IndyToad
Ink on his face

Los Angeles
05-09-2006, 11:59 AM
Sure - as long as we want to have Atlanta's record.

bulldog
05-09-2006, 11:59 AM
YES, immediately.

But I don't think you can package a sign-and-trade player with another player, so it wouldn't work under league rules, I think. Not 100% on that though.

Gamble
05-09-2006, 12:03 PM
I would if we could also get a defensive Center.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:08 PM
Lineup holes would still be present at the 5 spot and at the point, but I would most definetly do that trade.
Probably not at the point... if you've got Joe Johson in your backcourt, then Anthony Johnson would be fine as a point guard (since JJ would initiate the offense).

DisplacedKnick
05-09-2006, 12:08 PM
I'm not sure Atlanta would trade JJ for JO straight up - not with JO's injury history.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:09 PM
I'm not sure Atlanta would trade JJ for JO straight up - not with JO's injury history.
Really? Interesting.

From Atlanta's perspective, they are trading for him straight up. They're losing Al one way or another.

We'd have to throw another player in to make it work... think they'd take Tinsley and JO?

Kegboy
05-09-2006, 12:10 PM
Eh. Al at the 4 instead of Jermaine would just make the problems we have at the 5 even worse.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:11 PM
But I don't think you can package a sign-and-trade player with another player, so it wouldn't work under league rules, I think. Not 100% on that though.
Now that is a kick in the pants. Where can I look that up?

EDIT: Just checked the FAQ... it didn't say one way or another.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:12 PM
Eh. Al at the 4 instead of Jermaine would just make the problems we have at the 5 even worse.
Absolutely true. But if that forced TPTB to fix the problem at the 5, I'd be okay with it.

I still like that Foster/Jax for PJ Brown trade.

Kegboy
05-09-2006, 12:19 PM
Absolutely true. But if that forced TPTB to fix the problem at the 5, I'd be okay with it.

I still like that Foster/Jax for PJ Brown trade.

I don't see how "forcing" them will make any difference. You can't just wave a magic wand and get somebody to give us a starting-caliber Big, especially if we've already used our best chip in JO.

If we're gonna trade JO, we have to get a quality Big in return. And while Al's a nice player, he's not a Big (i.e. low-post player.)

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:25 PM
I don't see how "forcing" them will make any difference. You can't just wave a magic wand and get somebody to give us a starting-caliber Big, especially if we've already used our best chip in JO.
I haven't seen our problem as a lack of available guys out there. I've seen our problem as the management consistently saying "well, we can always play JO at center, so let's not worry about it."

Moses
05-09-2006, 12:32 PM
Are you sure Atlanta wouldn't bite on that deal? They are DESPARATE for a dominate low post player. But I doubt they would be willing to give up Joe Johnson.

Kegboy
05-09-2006, 12:33 PM
I haven't seen our problem as a lack of available guys out there. I've seen our problem as the management consistently saying "well, we can always play JO at center, so let's not worry about it."

We tried to get Magloire, and we almost did, for a steal, really. TPTB need to either decide Hulk is the man or get somebody else. Then, if JO is gonna stay, get him to lose some bulk this summer and go back to the player he was under Isiah.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 12:40 PM
We tried to get Magloire, and we almost did, for a steal, really. TPTB need to either decide Hulk is the man or get somebody else. Then, if JO is gonna stay, get him to lose some bulk this summer and go back to the player he was under Isiah.
True.

I'm not really sold on this deal, honestly. I want a big man that rebounds more than Al. Like you said, we'd still have the problems at center. And as much as I respect the guy, I question having AJ distribute the ball to Peja, Al, and JJ.

But it's pretty interesting, nonetheless.

Foster+Jack for PJ Brown and JR Rider?
JO+Tinsley+Rider for Al+JJ+Future protected pick?
Re-sign Peja, Pollard, and Freddy?
Pick up a big guy in the draft?

PJ - Harrison - Pollard
Al - Cro - Rookie
Peja - Granger
JJ - Fred
AJ - Saras

Meh. I don't know if that teams really much better than our current one. But it's interesting.

rexnom
05-09-2006, 12:51 PM
No way Atlanta does this deal. In some twisted way they view Johnson as their franchise guy.

beast23
05-09-2006, 12:52 PM
I think it's a pretty good trade JO + Tinsley for Al + JJ, and using AJ at PG.

That would enable some combination of Jackson, Peja and others to acquire a decent big man to fill the center position.

1 - New big man / Harrison / Foster
4 - Al / Foster / Croshere
3 - Danny
2 - JJ
1 - AJ

We'd still have to use the MLE to bring back a decent PG, and re-signing Freddie would become pretty important to back up the 2.

Croshere could be traded at the trading deadline to a team looking for cap space. Under those circumstances, he'd bring back either a pretty decent rotational player or at least a mid-first round or higher draft choice.

That would certainly put a rebuild into high gear.

bread
05-09-2006, 01:16 PM
I don't think Al would be a good replacement for JO unless they did include JJ but I doubt they would do that.

In this thread by RWB it suggests that the Wiz are looking for a post player and mention JO.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21187

Jamison is durable and will give you the same numbers as JO plus he can step out and hit the 3. See if we can get Haywood included and maybe a pick while we throw in Harrison if TPTB decide he won't pan out. :whoknows: Jamison and Haywood are both good lockerroom guys also.

jcouts
05-09-2006, 01:37 PM
I would love every bit of that trade, but I'm a big JJ fan.

I wouldn't worry that much about Al taking over JO's spot. JO doesn't play that "big" nowadays, so Al's size doesn't worry me. 2 or 3 years ago, I would have been concerned about the help side shot blocking that we'd be losing, but JO only seems to do that when he wants to nowadays.

If we could work a second deal to bring in a help-side shot blocking specialist, I wouldn't have any worries about it.

Arcadian
05-09-2006, 01:44 PM
No. Down grading your PF to upgrade your SG isn't a good move.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 01:58 PM
No. Down grading your PF to upgrade your SG isn't a good move.
Right. That's my view as well.

But we really need to improve at SG. And that's gonna be hard.

Since86
05-09-2006, 02:12 PM
No. Down grading your PF to upgrade your SG isn't a good move.


Depends on the SG you get back. I'd definately downgrade the Pacers PF for a player of Kobe's caliber.

(I can't bring myself to say that I'd actually want Kobe the person, but I'd take the player.)

DisplacedKnick
05-09-2006, 02:25 PM
Are you sure Atlanta wouldn't bite on that deal? They are DESPARATE for a dominate low post player. But I doubt they would be willing to give up Joe Johnson.

I'm not sure of anything but they're very high on JJ - at least from everything I've read.

Peck
05-09-2006, 02:26 PM
No. Down grading your PF to upgrade your SG isn't a good move.

I don't think it's much of a downgrade at the powerforward spot.

It is a downgrade, but not as much as some people would like to think.

Anthem
05-09-2006, 02:38 PM
It is a downgrade, but not as much as some people would like to think.
I can't figure you out. The stuff you dislike about Jermaine (especially rebounding) is even worse with Al, and Al's biggest strength (scoring) is the thing you don't care about with Jermaine.

What's up?

Arcadian
05-09-2006, 02:42 PM
Obviously trading a big man for a great, great SG is fine.

Peck, I remember when you were arguing that Cro would make a better back up than Al.

PacerMan
05-09-2006, 03:10 PM
True.

I'm not really sold on this deal, honestly. I want a big man that rebounds more than Al. Like you said, we'd still have the problems at center. And as much as I respect the guy, I question having AJ distribute the ball to Peja, Al, and JJ.

But it's pretty interesting, nonetheless.

Foster+Jack for PJ Brown and JR Rider?
JO+Tinsley+Rider for Al+JJ+Future protected pick?
Re-sign Peja, Pollard, and Freddy?
Pick up a big guy in the draft?

PJ - Harrison - Pollard
Al - Cro - Rookie
Peja - Granger
JJ - Fred
AJ - Saras

Meh. I don't know if that teams really much better than our current one. But it's interesting.

If you get JJ, Al and have Danny, you sign and trade Peja for sure. Along with someone else or two to get a decent big man. I agree that AJ would be fine with a dominating 2 guard. Draft a pg prospect
Peja/Foster or Harrison, maybe a pick get you a decent center?

NYpacer
05-09-2006, 03:15 PM
haven't we made this mistake before?

Didn't we trade for an overhyped guard/forward combo from atlanta before?
Playing with such a bad team inflates your stats, JJ is overrated. Atlanta should do this in a second.

Bball
05-09-2006, 03:21 PM
I can't figure you out. The stuff you dislike about Jermaine (especially rebounding) is even worse with Al, and Al's biggest strength (scoring) is the thing you don't care about with Jermaine.

What's up?


Maybe Al is a better fit for chemistry reasons? :shrug:

-Bball

ChicagoJ
05-09-2006, 03:42 PM
Upgrading our SG position should be easy. There are plenty of good candidates out there.

Upgrade our C and PG positions, if necessary, going to be awfully difficult.

SoupIsGood
05-09-2006, 04:38 PM
NO! And I like JJ

Anthem
05-09-2006, 06:05 PM
Upgrading our SG position should be easy. There are plenty of good candidates out there.
Tease that out for me. Who is available that would be a significant upgrade at SG?

Anthem
05-09-2006, 06:35 PM
Maybe Al is a better fit for chemistry reasons? :shrug:
If chemistry's the biggest problem, then Jermaine's not the guy at the top of my list. I think a new backcourt and a coach that doesn't force slowball and smallball would go a long way towards fixing any chemistry problems.

BoomBaby31
05-09-2006, 08:16 PM
we'd basically be the Hawks no I wouldn't do that. Al wasn't that good here and to trade Jermaine to get him and Joe to me isn't a good deal. Bring in Joe for Jax and Tins maybe but, I'm not a Harrington Fan personally

Anthem
05-09-2006, 08:18 PM
we'd basically be the Hawks no I wouldn't do that. Al wasn't that good here and to trade Jermaine to get him and Joe to me isn't a good deal. Bring in Joe for Jax and Tins maybe but, I'm not a Harrington Fan personally
A package of Jax and Tinsley isn't going to get you Joe Johnson or anybody in his league.

sixthman
05-09-2006, 10:15 PM
YES, immediately.

But I don't think you can package a sign-and-trade player with another player, so it wouldn't work under league rules, I think. Not 100% on that though.

You can package a sign-and-trade with other players. You can even do a trade where there is more than one sign and trade, as long as the rules of the cba, including byc restrictions, are followed.

Since Atlanta is so far below the cap, they can do whatever they want in terms of taking salary back.

For Indiana, since JO is not byc, we could take back over 22.5 million in salary for JO and still be okay with the league. That's easily enough to take both Al Harrington and Joe Johnson's contract.

But, from a practical standpoint, if JO was the only player going to Atlanta, we would pick up 3 or 4 million in new team salary when Al and Joe Johnson arrive, so we would probably need to forget about re-signing Peja because of the luxury tax.

Anthem
05-10-2006, 12:48 AM
But, from a practical standpoint, if JO was the only player going to Atlanta, we would pick up 3 or 4 million in new team salary when Al and Joe Johnson arrive, so we would probably need to forget about re-signing Peja because of the luxury tax.
In my trade, I included Tinsley...

Bball
05-11-2006, 01:27 AM
If chemistry's the biggest problem, then Jermaine's not the guy at the top of my list. I think a new backcourt and a coach that doesn't force slowball and smallball would go a long way towards fixing any chemistry problems.

It depends on the leadership issue. If JO continues to play lazy ball, if stories about him using his cell during team meetings/practices, etc are true then no amount of system changes are going to change that... Of course maybe a new coach would 'lay the law' down to JO and have the cajones to call him out, sit him, suspend him, take his starting role, etc then maybe some of his on court laziness would subside.

But can a coach treat the alleged and intended leader of the team that way?


-Bball

Anthem
05-11-2006, 09:21 AM
It depends on the leadership issue. If JO continues to play lazy ball, if stories about him using his cell during team meetings/practices, etc are true then no amount of system changes are going to change that...
You tend to take every one-time rumor and make it systemic. JO gets a phone call during practice and suddenly he's disinterested in team meetings.

I don't even have kids yet, but I can easily imagine lots of situations where I'd take a call during an important meeting.

Bball
05-11-2006, 11:00 AM
You tend to take every one-time rumor and make it systemic. JO gets a phone call during practice and suddenly he's disinterested in team meetings.

I don't even have kids yet, but I can easily imagine lots of situations where I'd take a call during an important meeting.

It was said to be about his club, not a sick/injured family member. There should be very few calls accepted during an important meeting. Very, very few. In fact, it's next to unacceptable in my book. Your cell phone should be required to be OFF.

IIRC the phone example itself was used as an example of a systemic problem with JO and so wasn't meant to be thought of as a one time thing or as phone only issue. It was meant to be an example of JO not taking things as seriously as he should while running out in front of the team and proclaiming himself the team leader.

-Bball

bmac
05-11-2006, 11:45 AM
Are you sure Atlanta wouldn't bite on that deal? They are DESPARATE for a dominate low post player. But I doubt they would be willing to give up Joe Johnson.

They are more desperate for a point than a big man. Their 5 man, Zachulia is developing nicely, but they have no one to distribute the ball.

Anthem
05-12-2006, 12:09 AM
They are more desperate for a point than a big man. Their 5 man, Zachulia is developing nicely, but they have no one to distribute the ball.
Tinsley and Jermaine, baby.

larry
05-12-2006, 02:09 AM
No, I think Jermaine will have his best year when our new season begins.

Anthem
06-27-2006, 10:06 PM
Given some of the recent conversation, I thought this was worth a bump. Anybody feel differently?

Tim
06-27-2006, 10:16 PM
Maybe Al is a better fit for chemistry reasons? :shrug:

-Bball

Exactly. People will never admit it here but the team went down hill since Al left. You can point to suspensions, injuries and attitudes all you want, we had them when Al was here and we still looked like a strong team.

If we didn't have Danny I would be in the middle of a bring Al home campaign right now.

Slick Pinkham
06-27-2006, 10:39 PM
Not a chance.

Joe Johnson is overrated and overpaid.

Jermaine >> Al

I'm not opposed to trading JO if it's for another top 30 player that fills a need. Joe & Al are not top 30 players, not even close.

Just to review:

top 10:

LeBron
Wade
Kobe
Dirk
Garnett
Carmelo
McGrady (if healthy)
Yao
Brand
Nash

second 10:
Marion
Stoudemire (if healthy)
Duncan
Shaq
Iverson
Billups
Pierce
Ginobili
Bosh
Arenas

third 10:
Jermaine O'Neal
AK47
Dwight Howard
Chris Paul
Gasol
Artest
Hinrich
Vince Carter
Jason Kidd
Ben Wallace

Jermaniac
06-27-2006, 10:45 PM
second 10:
Billups
Pierce
Ginobili
Bosh
Arenas


Not better then Jermaine.

PacerMan
06-27-2006, 11:11 PM
I can't figure you out. The stuff you dislike about Jermaine (especially rebounding) is even worse with Al, and Al's biggest strength (scoring) is the thing you don't care about with Jermaine.

What's up?

For one thing, Granger will get #4 numbers in rebounding. So all Al has to do is get #3 numbers and it's all good.
I don't want to trade Jermaine, but I'd do that deal in a minute. We get a VERY good 2 where we've been barely adequate, a good 4 where we had a very good 4 and now minutes open for a very good young 3.

Kegboy
06-27-2006, 11:57 PM
second 10:
...
Duncan
...


Wha-wha-what!

One injury plagued year and you got him in the teens?! :crazy:

jjbjjbjjb
06-28-2006, 12:04 AM
I wouldn't take Al back. His foul shooting is weak, he shoots 2 1/2 threes per game for no apparent reason, and for a PF he's a bit small and is not really much of a rebounder. If you wanted to play him at SF and have a tough defensive team, I could see it. But we are loaded at SF. If I was back there, I'd absolutely trade him for Jackson all over again. (Then again, I am nowhere near as down on Jackson as most people here are.)

Robertmto
06-28-2006, 01:19 AM
second 10:
Pierce
Ginobili
Bosh


not better than Arenas

Shade
06-28-2006, 01:30 AM
Exactly. People will never admit it here but the team went down hill since Al left. You can point to suspensions, injuries and attitudes all you want, we had them when Al was here and we still looked like a strong team.

If we didn't have Danny I would be in the middle of a bring Al home campaign right now.

Actually, we looked like an even stronger team the following season, before the brawl.

Anthem
06-28-2006, 02:09 AM
I don't even have kids yet, but I can easily imagine lots of situations where I'd take a call during an important meeting.
What a stupid statement.

I hate foreshadowing.

jcouts
06-28-2006, 02:12 AM
I would do it in a second, but I'm a big Joe Johnson fan.
He's the modern day Dumars.

Al gets his shot blocked under the basket a lot, but Jermaine just shoots fade aways all day and rarely dunks unless he has a completely clear path to the hoop (I can't remember the last time I saw him dunk on someone), so I guess it's give and take.

able
06-28-2006, 04:13 AM
you all seem to be in a hurry to become a 20-62 team.

No thanks, I'm happy if Al "black hole" H plays on the opposing team.

And a SG for an AS PF, no thanks to.

rexnom
06-28-2006, 06:27 AM
Atlanta would never do this so it doesn't really matter. Even if it is a great deal for us.