PDA

View Full Version : Villanueva to Pacers rumor not going away.



Will Galen
06-09-2006, 01:41 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?name=katz_andy

This is a blurb from Andy Katz's blog today, 06-09-06.

The hot rumor among the NBA personnel in the Milkhouse Gym on Thursday was Indiana shipping the No. 17 pick and Jermaine O'Neal to Toronto for the No. 1 pick and Charlie Villanueva. Some folks thought it had no shot and others said it made a lot of sense. This is one of many proposed deals that will circulate in the next few weeks. Sifting through fact and fiction will be the chore.

Hicks
06-09-2006, 01:42 PM
Is Toronto over or under the salary cap?

Will Galen
06-09-2006, 01:48 PM
Is Toronto over or under the salary cap?

Hoopshype has them at $37.6 million next year.

I think this particular rumor was started by Chad Ford. He said in a recent blog, "The Pacers seem to be a team that might have to rethink how they're going to play in the future. Would Larry Bird trade Jermaine O'Neal for the No. 1 pick, Villanueva and cap relief?"

I think Katz was just filling space by repeating it. Of course basketball people would give their opinion on whether they thought it would be a good trade or not, and I think that's all it is, talk. Not a rumor at all.

purdue101
06-09-2006, 01:48 PM
yes, toronto could absorb most of JO's contract b/c they are under the cap. in other words, we wouldn't have to take back equal salary.

this is an intriguing deal if we are looking towards the future instead of "win now". CV, the #1 pick, and a ton of cap space is pretty appealing.

if portland is indeed willing to part with jack & the #4 pick for the #1....imagine having a young core of jack, roy, granger, CV, & harrison. on top of that, we would be miles under the cap by shedding the contracts of JO, cro, bender, pollard, and reggie by next summer.

Hicks
06-09-2006, 01:49 PM
37.6mm for the 2006-07 year? Hmm. And I think the cap is around 50mm. This trade is actually do-able in that case, I think.

Lord Helmet
06-09-2006, 01:52 PM
Wow.

I think this off-season will be interesting.

I'd do this with Bosh instead of Charlie. I still really don't want to give up JO, yet.

pizza guy
06-09-2006, 01:52 PM
That's one I'd probably do.

efx
06-09-2006, 01:55 PM
As somone who don't think JO will pan out in the way most people thought he would back when he got his mega contract, I'd say I could get behind this trade.

Will Galen
06-09-2006, 01:56 PM
Wow.

I think this off-season will be interesting.

I'd do this with Bosh instead of Charlie. I still really don't want to give up JO, yet.

Rumor is we tried to trade JO for Bosh last year and Toronto wouldn't do it. No way would they now give us Bosh and the #1 pick for JO.

I have to admit like Purdue said, JO for Charlie V. and the #1 would be an intriguing deal.

Doug
06-09-2006, 01:56 PM
Isn't Charlie a 3?

If so, that's our deepest position, assuming Peja resigns. And we're very solid there with Granger even if he doesn't.

317Kim
06-09-2006, 01:58 PM
I would have thought that you guys wanted the #1 pick next year :-p

I think I'd stay out of this one. IF it were Bosh instead of Villanueva, I'd look at it differently though.

EDIT: Charlie is a forward. He's 6'11 and 240 lbs.

Leisure Suit Larry
06-09-2006, 01:58 PM
Isn't Charlie a 3?

If so, that's our deepest position, assuming Peja resigns. And we're very solid there with Granger even if he doesn't.

He's 6'11" I'm pretty sure he's a PF. I can't decide if I like this trade or not. CV and 2007 pick would be good.

Lord Helmet
06-09-2006, 01:59 PM
Rumor is we tried to trade JO for Bosh last year and Toronto wouldn't do it. No way would they now give us Bosh and the #1 pick.
Yeah, I remember that. I guess I'm not digging this proposed trade, then.

Unclebuck
06-09-2006, 02:03 PM
Who would the Pacers take at number 1 then

Will Galen
06-09-2006, 02:06 PM
Who would the Pacers take at number 1 then

Trade down like Purdue said. Maybe not do the #1 for Jack and the #4 like he said, but they could still trade down and get Roy or Williams.

FrenchConnection
06-09-2006, 02:11 PM
I don't want the future of this team tied to anyone in this draft. We can debate the strengths and weaknesses of the players, but no one in this weak draft will be as good as JO is right now at anytime in their career. Of course I don't know this, but thats the way it seems to me. Now if we could really get Jack and the #4, that would be another matter. But I still feel as if we would be like Golden State if we did that. Young and all potential.

CV is a nice player and I would like to have him, but he is not a back to the basket player so he does not replace JO. Now, what I don't know about is his passing.

blanket
06-09-2006, 02:12 PM
I think I'd make this trade. Trading with a team under the cap is the only way we're going to rid ourselves of JO's contract (9th highest paid NBA player) without taking another bloated salary or two back. And trading for a pick is a lot more palatable for the other team, as they're still an unproven commodity, as opposed to, say, Bosh.

The only thing I don't like about is we'd lose our team "leader" without getting back a real proven team leader in return.

McKeyFan
06-09-2006, 02:16 PM
Is there anyone at the top of the draft that could revolutionize our team? I haven't been following the draft choices this year.

Young
06-09-2006, 02:16 PM
I don't expect this JO for Charlie/#1 to go down but if it is really a possiable trade I like it.

I think we have found out that it will be hard to win with JO as our best player. JO is a very good player, but not a franchise player to build around.

Now Charlie is by no means a franchise talent. But he will be a very good player, like JO. I like Charlie's game. He won't be a guy who dominates the game but he will be a very good player. He has some nice skills already and he proved last year that he can contribute. (Averaging 13 pts. and 6 rebs.) So he is only going to get better.

As for the #1 pick, everyone talks about Aldrige and Bargnani but I wouldn't count out Adam Morrison. I know that Bird would love to have a competitor like him leading this team. Sure he does have his faults, but I think that Morrison's strengths are something that the Pacers might have a hard time passing up.

owl
06-09-2006, 02:19 PM
I believe it is highly unlikely this happens. Peja being resigned and then
trading JO makes little sense. First I believe the trade is unbalanced.
JO is a proven all star in the prime of his career.

owl

Young
06-09-2006, 02:20 PM
I believe it is highly unlikely this happens. Peja being resigned and then
trading JO makes little sense. First I believe the trade is unbalanced.
JO is a proven all star in the prime of his career.

owl

When was Peja re-signed?????

I think that as of right now, the plan is to re-sign Peja but if the Pacers made this trade, I highly doubt that Peja gets re-signed.

Kegboy
06-09-2006, 02:25 PM
Is there anyone at the top of the draft that could revolutionize our team.

No.

Now, next year's a different story.

Frank Slade
06-09-2006, 02:30 PM
Although this potentially was just Ford's idea.. this Rumor certainly has grown legs over the past week(s) or so...

Usually a rumor this prevalent is eventually shot down by the Pacers Brass, directly or through the media..?. I guess we will find out.


You immediately get younger, which has it's advantages and disadvangtes..

You do however get your pick of anyone in the draft, although it would appear this year no cornerstone or franchise player... although
that's hard to say at this point..

Trading one proven starter.. and could potientally get two good, very young starters, with a good dose of upside in return..

At this point I think I would take the gamble..

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 02:45 PM
No way this trade happens.

I'm not saying I'm for or against it, because I don't really know. Charlie V had a nice rookie year, but it's just one season. He's a freak of an athlete, but what's our frontcourt gonna be, Villanueva and Foster? Yeah that'd work out REAL well in the East.

Mourning
06-09-2006, 02:46 PM
I think I would do this trade also with my mind set on next years draft.

Getting CV gives us a PF/SF who is only going to get better for several years and has a rookie contract for sometime to run.

We get the number one pick for this years draft, which is not a very good draft, but it's not dramatic either, so we should be able to get a future all-star out of the number one pick.

Add in Danny and Harrison and I can see a nice young core arising.

Without JO we are going to lose a lot more games, but with next years draft beying as strong as it appears to be I don't really mind that THAT much as it could speed up our rebuiling process with a higher pick in a very good draft class. And on top of this we also get rid of JO's mega-contract.

Then next year Cro's deal will also be gone or traded, either way providing us with some nice additional flexibility to re-sign our younger players without getting near luxurytax land for a while and/or trade for a decent player.

I say this is not a bad deal though I don't like to give up this years pick. Maybe, we could trade one of our "less popular" players to a team which drafts 20-30 in the draft? That way we get an additional decent building block.

Again, I'm liking the deal, but not TOO much which probably means its reasonably balanced. The deciding factor for me in the end would be that JO doesn't come across to me as someone who can lead us to the Conference Finals in the coming years, especially with the talent level rising in the East in general and the Central Division in particular.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

BigDawg44
06-09-2006, 02:54 PM
you know, if we combined the two trade rumors....tinsley to minny and jo to toronto...we could potentially have the 1st and 6th pick in the draft and only lose jo and tinsely

Mourning
06-09-2006, 02:57 PM
you know, if we combined the two trade rumors....tinsley to minny and jo to toronto...we could potentially have the 1st and 6th pick in the draft and only lose jo and tinsely

AND get CV! Sounds too good to be true though I would want to place caution on saying "only lose JO and Tinsley". Giving up JO is unquestionably a GREAT loss.

I do think that we will probably end up better at the end of the day though.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Doug
06-09-2006, 03:06 PM
Toronto's pick next year won't be so hot with Graham/Bosh/JO, especially if they resign James.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:07 PM
Toronto's pick next year won't be so hot with Graham/Bosh/JO, especially if they resign James.

It'd be a top 10.

Leisure Suit Larry
06-09-2006, 03:08 PM
you know, if we combined the two trade rumors....tinsley to minny and jo to toronto...we could potentially have the 1st and 6th pick in the draft and only lose jo and tinsely

No because we only have ONE #17 pick to give up.

Ultimate Frisbee
06-09-2006, 03:10 PM
Draft Roy :cool: !!

I'm not sure if this is worth it... there is no clear cut #1 pick and no guaranteed stars (Roy excluded :-) ). I like CV, but JO is too good.

beast23
06-09-2006, 03:14 PM
Trade down like Purdue said. Maybe not do the #1 for Jack and the #4 like he said, but they could still trade down and get Roy or Williams.If I were doing this trade and we were getting Charlie and not Bosh in return, then Toronto would have to sweeten the deal. If JO were in this draft, he would be a certain #1 pick... no ifs, ands or buts. He would be a certainty as a talent, and would not present the risk that an unproven draft choice brings, even if the #1 pick in the draft.

Therefore, if they get JO then we get Charlie and a swap of this year's AND next year's first round picks.

And then if Portland wanted the #1 pick, they'd have to part with a hell of a lot more than Jack (who is way down in their depth chart) and their #4 pick. Maybe something like Webster or Skinner and their #4. If it would make them feel any better, we could even find a way to throw in Tinsley or a re-signed/traded Freddie as an added "bonus".

But I think the rumor is just a bunch of bunk anway.

Will Galen
06-09-2006, 03:14 PM
No because we only have ONE #17 pick to give up.

You're thinking we are giving up our #17 to Toronto and that hasn't been mentioned. Both trades are possible.

Leisure Suit Larry
06-09-2006, 03:18 PM
uhh, why don't you go ahead and re-read what you posted


The hot rumor among the NBA personnel in the Milkhouse Gym on Thursday was Indiana shipping the No. 17 pick and Jermaine O'Neal to Toronto for the No. 1 pick and Charlie Villanueva. Some folks thought it had no shot and others said it made a lot of sense. This is one of many proposed deals that will circulate in the next few weeks. Sifting through fact and fiction will be the chore.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:19 PM
If I were doing this trade and we were getting Charlie and not Bosh in return, then Toronto would have to sweeten the deal. If JO were in this draft, he would be a certain #1 pick... no ifs, ands or buts. He would be a certainty as a talent, and would not present the risk that an unproven draft choice brings, even if the #1 pick in the draft.


Do you not remember anything about JO coming out of high school? He weight about 130, had basically no back to the basket game, and rode the pine for years until coming hear. If JO were in this draft, as a straight from high school rookie (even though it's not allowed anymore), there's no way he'd be the #1 pick over guys like Thomas and Aldridge.

sweabs
06-09-2006, 03:23 PM
I'm not one to back up JO, but I really can't get behind this deal. Charlie is a 3...we definitely don't need a guy at that position. Sure, he can play the PF spot if you need, but his back-to-the-basket game is not his strong-suit and he certainly isn't an aggressive presence. He would only really work at the 4 if we were to play some style of small ball...in which case the whole Carlisle stuff comes back into question again.

beast23
06-09-2006, 03:25 PM
Do you not remember anything about JO coming out of high school? He weight about 130, had basically no back to the basket game, and rode the pine for years until coming hear. If JO were in this draft, as a straight from high school rookie (even though it's not allowed anymore), there's no way he'd be the #1 pick over guys like Thomas and Aldridge.What the heck are you talking about?

If you are going to trade a player, you are trading him as is, with the talent that he NOW has.

Therefore, if you are gauging JO's value in this draft, against other players that are in the draft and where he would rank, you do it not as the 18-year old that he once was, but as the player that he currently is.

If the JO that we have on our roster today were in the draft, he would be the #1 pick. Period. He is clearly and significantly better than any player in the present draft AT THIS TIME.

naptownmenace
06-09-2006, 03:25 PM
No way this trade happens.

I'm not saying I'm for or against it, because I don't really know. Charlie V had a nice rookie year, but it's just one season. He's a freak of an athlete, but what's our frontcourt gonna be, Villanueva and Foster? Yeah that'd work out REAL well in the East.


That's what I initially thought as well. My second thought was how good JO and Bosh could be for the Raptors.

I like CV but I hate this trade idea. If there was a Dwight Howard or Emeka Okafor prospect out there I'd understand the temptation to pull the trigger. This trade only makes sense if it's follow by another trade to a team that wants to swap picks and throw in a useful starter while their at it.

Leisure Suit Larry
06-09-2006, 03:26 PM
I'm not one to back up JO, but I really can't get behind this deal. Charlie is a 3...we definitely don't need a guy at that position. Sure, he can play the PF spot if you need, but his back-to-the-basket game is not his strong-suit and he certainly isn't an aggressive presence. He would only really work at the 4 if we were to play some style of small ball...in which case the whole Carlisle stuff comes back into question again.

Right, they may be trying to go the direction that these winning teams are. Shawn Marion plays PF for the Suns and he's 6'7" and they had 6'8" Diaw playing center. While Charlie V is 6'11"

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:27 PM
What the heck are you talking about?

If you are going to trade a player, you are trading him as is, with the talent that he NOW has.

Therefore, if you are gauging JO's value in this draft, against other players that are in the draft and where he would rank, you do it not as the 18-year old that he once was, but as the player that he currently is.

If the JO that we have on our roster today were in the draft, he would be the #1 pick. Period. He is clearly and significantly better than any player in the present draft AT THIS TIME.

Well no s***.

But talk about an unfair comparison.

dynamis22
06-09-2006, 03:27 PM
I like this deal for us. We get out of JO's max deal and get another young talent in the process.

I don't understand it from Toronto's side though. Why would Colangelo tie himself to JO when he has so much flexibility?

If it does go through, I agree that we'd probably choose Morrison. They would probably play him at 2 and use alot of zone defense ala european style basketball. That is would they did at Gonzaga to hide his lax defense.

sweabs
06-09-2006, 03:29 PM
Right, they may be trying to go the direction that these winning teams are. Shawn Marion plays PF for the Suns and he's 6'7" and they had 6'8" Diaw playing center. While Charlie V is 6'11"

I'm sure they could (Larry in particular) be looking in that direction. But this is why we need some sort of vision or direction for this future team to take. If you're going to play that style of basketball and put those types of players on the floor, then you can't have Rick as the head coach. It just doesn't make sense.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:31 PM
The Euroball teams are fun to watch, and they're sort of a breath of fresh air with their run'n'gun offenses and high scoring outputs.

But what have any of them ever won?

bread
06-09-2006, 03:32 PM
uhh, why don't you go ahead and re-read what you posted

It is possible:

Pacer send:
JO and #17 to Raps

Pacers get:
CV and #1

Pacers send:
Tins and #1 to Blazers

Pacers get:
Jack and #4


So Pacers send out JO, Tins and #17 and get CV, Jack and #4.

Raps get JO and #17

Blazers get Tins and #1

See, it all works out.:D Although we had better get a lot more than Jack from the Blazers for the #1.

EDIT: I realize this isn't the same deal but this deal could be done and I would be OK with it as long as we got more than Jack from Portland.

dynamis22
06-09-2006, 03:34 PM
The Euroball teams are fun to watch, and they're sort of a breath of fresh air with their run'n'gun offenses and high scoring outputs.

But what have any of them ever won?

It has worked out pretty well for Phoenix. They probably would have won the title this year had Amare been healthy.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:36 PM
It has worked out pretty well for Phoenix. They probably would have won the title this year had Amare been healthy.

And the Pacers probably would have won the title had Ron and Jax not gone crazy.

beast23
06-09-2006, 03:36 PM
Well no s***.

But talk about an unfair comparison.
What's unfair about it? If you're going to do this trade that's all that's important. I'm giving up "x" amount of talent and I'm getting back what in return?

In this instance, we do get back a boatload of cap space, and that certainly has a value. But we are also reducing the level of talent on our roster significantly.

You then ask yourself a lot of other questions. Can I get a player in the draft, along with having Charlie, that comes anywhere close to making up for the talent that I'm losing. Can I do that trade, and will the talent levels of the two players possibly pick up in one or two years such that the loss in talent is made up. And so forth.

IMO, our fans will not stand for a significant drop off in wins. Losing JO and finding a way to make the playoffs would probably be acceptable to our fan base. For that reason, I think that the CURRENT talent levels of the players involved is a very important thing.

But I certainly could care less about JO's talent level as an 18-year-old. It is totally irrelevant.

Shade
06-09-2006, 03:37 PM
We do this deal, and we're back in the lottery for the next few years.

dynamis22
06-09-2006, 03:39 PM
And the Pacers probably would have won the title had Ron and Jax not gone crazy.

The difference is Phoenix has great chemistry as do the great European teams i.e - Gold-medal Argentina. Good chemistry is something we never would have had with Artest and won't have as long as Jax is still on the roster.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:39 PM
What's unfair about it? If you're going to do this trade that's all that's important. I'm giving up "x" amount of talent and I'm getting back what in return?

In this instance, we do get back a boatload of cap space, and that certainly has a value. But we are also reducing the level of talent on our roster significantly.

You then ask yourself a lot of other questions. Can I get a player in the draft, along with having Charlie, that comes anywhere close to making up for the talent that I'm losing. Can I do that trade, and will the talent levels of the two players possibly pick up in one or two years such that the loss in talent is made up. And so forth.

IMO, our fans will not stand for a significant drop off in wins. Losing JO and finding a way to make the playoffs would probably be acceptable to our fan base. For that reason, I think that the CURRENT talent levels of the players involved is a very important thing.

But I certainly could care less about JO's talent level as an 18-year-old. It is totally irrelevant.

I understand what you're saying. And no one knows if JO's production could be made up through this year's draftee's production down line the line.

What I'm saying is, you're comparing a player who's been in the league for what, 8 years now, to college kids who no one knows what they'll be on the pro level and saying he'd be the #1 pick. Of course he would.

tdubb03
06-09-2006, 03:41 PM
The difference is Phoenix has great chemistry as do the great European teams i.e - Gold-medal Argentina. Good chemistry is something we never would have had with Artest and won't have as long as Jax is still on the roster.

Touche. PHX has won a lot of games, but until they win a title I won't be a full-fledged believer in Euroball.

And am I the only one who thinks dealing Jax could be a bad thing? Yes, he's a headcase. Yes, he's a horribly streaky shooter. Yes, he's got multiple things wrong with his game blah blah blah. But name one other guy on the roster who's got his dedication and desire. I can't think of one. I'm not sure losing something like that would be a good thing.

ChicagoJ
06-09-2006, 03:43 PM
Well no s***.

But talk about an unfair comparison.

If you're going to trade JO for the #1 pick, the number one pick better have the potential to at least be as good as JO. How's that unfair?

There's no "JO" in this year's draft. Does anybody think there's a possible MVP-candidate in this draft?

Think of it this way, we traded AD for the #5 pick and a guy with a bunch of potential that didn't turn out. And AD was never our team's #1 option/ top-five to ten player in the league.

We'd need to believe the #1 pick was a LOCK to be an MVP candidate in the future.

That ain't happening. At least not this year.

Besides, I'd rather see what happens if the Pacers ever tried to build a team around JO, a team that compliments him, instead of this crappy, mis-matched roster we've had for a few years now. I think the doubters and critics would be loudly on the JO bandwagon again.

dynamis22
06-09-2006, 03:45 PM
Touche. PHX has won a lot of games, but until they win a title I won't be a full-fledged believer in Euroball.

And am I the only one who thinks dealing Jax could be a bad thing? Yes, he's a headcase. Yes, he's a horribly streaky shooter. Yes, he's got multiple things wrong with his game blah blah blah. But name one other guy on the roster who's got his dedication and desire. I can't think of one. I'm not sure losing something like that would be a good thing.

You make some good points, but I will never be able to get behind Jax.
He does play hard most games, but his attitude towards the fans, Indiana, and his teammates is too-anti-Reggie if that makes any sense.

Slick Pinkham
06-09-2006, 03:49 PM
It is possible:

Pacer send:
JO and #17 to Raps

Pacers get:
CV and #1

Pacers send:
Tins and #1 to Blazers

Pacers get:
Jack and #4


So Pacers send out JO, Tins and #17 and get CV, Jack and #4.

Raps get JO and #17

Blazers get Tins and #1

See, it all works out.:D Although we had better get a lot more than Jack from the Blazers for the #1.

EDIT: I realize this isn't the same deal but this deal could be done and I would be OK with it as long as we got more than Jack from Portland.

I hate this deal but I could get a little more interested if the Portland half was:

Tins & #1 for
Webster or Telfair plus Travis Outlaw plus #4.

I still don't like dealing JO for anyone but a legit top ten player.

But Villanueva, Webster or Telfair, Outlaw, and Roy or Thomas or Bargnini would change the makeup of the team for sure and add a lot of offensive firepower.

ChicagoJ
06-09-2006, 03:53 PM
And the Pacers probably would have won the title had Ron and Jax not gone crazy.

:spitout:

Probability of Ron not going crazy: 0%.

Combined probability of Ron and SJax not going crazy: 0%.

This team was lucky to get to the ECFs once. Everything that could go right did (Tinlsey benched for thirty games in November and December so he didn't break down until May; Ron coddled all season and he didn't melt down until May; JO's body had not yet suffered the wear and tear from playing alongside a wimp like Foster; Al - for all his faults - was much better for team chemistry than SJax... everything was going perfectly.

It was unreasonable to think that everything would go perfectly again. There was a one-season window, but all the usual problems still crept in during the playoffs in spite of a nearly perfect regular season.

bread
06-09-2006, 03:59 PM
Touche. PHX has won a lot of games, but until they win a title I won't be a full-fledged believer in Euroball.

And am I the only one who thinks dealing Jax could be a bad thing? Yes, he's a headcase. Yes, he's a horribly streaky shooter. Yes, he's got multiple things wrong with his game blah blah blah. But name one other guy on the roster who's got his dedication and desire. I can't think of one. I'm not sure losing something like that would be a good thing.

If he has so much dedication and desire then he should have been able to overcome all of those negatives you listed. If the best thing you can say about him is that he plays every game then that to me is an indictment of the number of injury-prone players we have more than it is an endorsement of Jack.

Anthem
06-09-2006, 04:02 PM
:spitout:

Probability of Ron not going crazy: 0%.

Combined probability of Ron and SJax not going crazy: 0%.

This team was lucky to get to the ECFs once. Everything that could go right did (Tinlsey benched for thirty games in November and December so he didn't break down until May; Ron coddled all season and he didn't melt down until May; JO's body had not yet suffered the wear and tear from playing alongside a wimp like Foster; Al - for all his faults - was much better for team chemistry than SJax... everything was going perfectly.

It was unreasonable to think that everything would go perfectly again. There was a one-season window, but all the usual problems still crept in during the playoffs in spite of a nearly perfect regular season.
We're going to be 90 years old, posting on PacersDigestV, and you're still going to be complaining about Ron Artest.

Let go of your hate... embrace the light side...

Will Galen
06-09-2006, 05:18 PM
uhh, why don't you go ahead and re-read what you posted

Sorry, I'm the dummy, not you! I was going by what Chad Ford said, and he didn't mention the 17th pick.

ABADays
06-09-2006, 05:18 PM
The only thing I don't like about is we'd lose our team "leader" without getting back a real proven team leader in return.

We have a leader. It just isn't JO.

blanket
06-09-2006, 05:24 PM
We have a leader. It just isn't JO.

so who is it? Croshere? I'd like for my team leader to at least be a starter...
I don't see any players on our team who qualify as real leaders -- otherwise, this past season might've turned out differently.

ABADays
06-09-2006, 05:57 PM
Yes - it is Austin. Unfortunately, the players would feel the same as you. My feeling is that a leader is a leader. And hell - with the crap we saw on the floor last year why not make Austin a starter.

Jermaniac
06-09-2006, 06:07 PM
If Jermaine gets traded I'm gonna cry. This better not happen.

Anthem
06-09-2006, 07:01 PM
I'm not against trading Jermaine in theory. But this draft is weak enough at the top that Charlie V and a #1 isn't that appealing to me. I suppose Toronto could sweeten it a bit, but I don't know what they'd offer.

EDIT: The only two Toronto players I'd be interested in are Joey Graham and MoPete. I'm not sure either one makes me feel a ton better, but there's no way Toronto gives both.

EDIT 2: Wait, we're supposed to be including the #17 as well? What planet are these people from?

owl
06-09-2006, 08:21 PM
We're going to be 90 years old, posting on PacersDigestV, and you're still going to be complaining about Ron Artest.

Let go of your hate... embrace the light side...


Poking each other with your walking canes.... :-)

Anthem
06-09-2006, 09:38 PM
Poking each other with your walking canes.... :-)
Well, Jay's got like 10 years on me, so when he's 90 I'll be 80.

And all the girlies say he's pretty spry for an old guy.

Frank Slade
06-09-2006, 11:17 PM
A few observations on this .. as far as the point that there is not guaranteed MVP or Franchise Caliber players in this year's draft, agreed as far as most can tell there is not.... however if there was Lebron , D-Wade type talent at the top would any team really even consider trading it?, You do have potential to get a very good number 2 guy in this draft who could blossom into your number 1 guy on this team.. Bargnani , Morrison, Thomas... Roy perhaps

It's a roll of the dice that is to be certain, but with Apologies to
Mr. Eintstein . "Madness equals continuing to do the same thing in the same way and expecting a different outcome."

Maybe JO needs a fresh start just as much as this teams does, nothing personal just business. Perhaps a clean break is what is needed for all involved... I am not sure, this team certainly needs changes, do you start at the top with JO or do you change the parts around him.. I guess that is The offseason question.....

Anthem
06-09-2006, 11:17 PM
Hey, I just thought of a cool side effect of trading Jermaine to Toronto.

It ties up all of Toronto's cap space. If Chicago goes after Ben, then Peja will have no high-dollar suitors! He'll be forced to sign with us at a reasonable price, meaning we can trade him easier in a year or two!

Yeah, I'm reaching.

Robertmto
06-09-2006, 11:28 PM
Well this all fits in perfectly with all the other rumors/conspiracies on thsi board. Pacers trade JO for CV and the #1 pick. Then they draft DG's worout partner Adam Morrison. And then they trade up from the 17 spot and draft Douby!!!


:sarcasm:

Kegboy
06-10-2006, 12:01 AM
You do have potential to get a very good number 2 guy in this draft who could blossom into your number 1 guy on this team.. Bargnani , Morrison, Thomas... Roy perhaps

It's a roll of the dice that is to be certain

That's too many qualifiers for getting rid of our best player and biggest bargaining chip. If we want to trade JO, we can get plenty of real, proven talent, instead of someone who's potentially not that good.

Young
06-10-2006, 12:03 AM
That's too many qualifiers for getting rid of our best player and biggest bargaining chip. If we want to trade JO, we can get plenty of real, proven talent, instead of someone who's potentially not that good.

Kinda what the Lakers got with Shaq? Odom/Grant/pick? Good player, bad contract, crappy pick?

SoupIsGood
06-10-2006, 12:07 AM
Donnie's tasklist for the next few years should look like this -

1) Blow team up

2) Draft Oden

3) Once 1 and 2 are done: :alcohol:

Kegboy
06-10-2006, 12:13 AM
Kinda what the Lakers got with Shaq? Odom/Grant/pick? Good player, bad contract, crappy pick?

You forgot Butler. :-p

Look, if it were any other year, I'd be fine with it. But frankly, the top of this draft just isn't worth it.

Sollozzo
06-10-2006, 01:29 AM
Kinda what the Lakers got with Shaq? Odom/Grant/pick? Good player, bad contract, crappy pick?


The Lakers didn't have many options.

The Lakers could have gotten alot more than what they got, but unfortunately for them, it would have come from a team that Shaq wouldn't have played for. Let's just say we would have put JO on the table. It wouldn't have mattered, because Shaq would have pouted and said he wouldn't play in Indiana, so the Pacers would then obviously pull out.

There were only a couple of plausible options. Miami, Dallas(wouldn't give dirk up)....maybe Orlando

The Pacers would have alot more options if they shopped JO

Arcadian
06-10-2006, 02:14 AM
This is a ridiculously bad trade. A player who had a good rookie season on a bad team and a 6th pick in a non-star studded draft?

Diesel_81
06-10-2006, 02:53 AM
Personally I'm not too thrilled with this deal.One of the major reasons why I think this is a poor draft class. If there was ever a bad year to own a #1 pick this would be the year. There is no bonna fide superstar, and couple of players who I think can be stars play the same position were already stacked at which is smallforward. I'm also not a fan of Villanueva, I still look at him more as a tweener then a pure powerforward.He had a good and very surprising rookie year but I would be shocked if he became a star on this level. I would hope if we trade Jermaine Oneal we could get somebody who has potential to be a star in this league.

Robertmto
06-10-2006, 03:23 AM
Personally I'm not too thrilled with this deal.One of the major reasons why I think this is a poor draft class. If there was ever a bad year to own a #1 pick this would be the year. There is no bonna fide superstar, and couple of players who I think can be stars play the same position were already stacked at which is smallforward. I'm also not a fan of Villanueva, I still look at him more as a tweener then a pure powerforward.He had a good and very surprising rookie year but I would be shocked if he became a star on this level. I would hope if we trade Jermaine Oneal we could get somebody who has potential to be a star in this league.

CV a tweener? the 6'11 250 pound CV? The CV who played center in college? are you sure?

Ara
06-10-2006, 10:23 AM
CV a tweener? the 6'11 250 pound CV? The CV who played center in college? are you sure?

In SportingNews, I read sometime that CV was shooting 33% from the 3-point line (in game) and took a whole lot more shots there than in his college career. Maybe that's where people think he's a tweener/3.

Here's his stats from NBA.com


YEAR TEAM G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
05-06 TOR 81 36 29.1 .463 .327 .706 2.2 4.2 6.4 1.1 .74 .78 1.22 3.00 13.0

bulldog
06-10-2006, 03:55 PM
I'd take it, and draft another big guy. A Granger, Harrison, Villanueva, Aldridge frontcourt, we'd be set for a decade.

I'd sure you could find a taker for a Jackson/Foster package, and get something valuable in return. Perhaps a defensive SG?

And if we get rid of Tins, that's the team right there.

BlueNGold
06-10-2006, 05:44 PM
In SportingNews, I read sometime that CV was shooting 33% from the 3-point line (in game) and took a whole lot more shots there than in his college career. Maybe that's where people think he's a tweener/3.

Here's his stats from NBA.com

CV is a tweener notwithstanding his measurements on paper. CV is not even close to the interior presence of Bosh or JO. He is listed bigger in height AND weight than Bosh, but two measurements do not make the player. Most true PF's would dominate him on the block.

Now, if he played for a Phoenix-style team, perhaps he could play PF or C, but that would be the exception.

Robertmto
06-10-2006, 06:11 PM
Just because he can shoot and hit the 3 doesn't mean he's a tweener. It means he's a weaker 4 that can strect the floor effectively.

Doug
06-11-2006, 03:38 PM
Just because he can shoot and hit the 3 doesn't mean he's a tweener. It means he's a weaker 4 that can strect the floor effectively.

Great. He's Austin.

Got one, thanks.

bulldog
06-11-2006, 04:07 PM
This is a ridiculously bad trade. A player who had a good rookie season on a bad team and a 6th pick in a non-star studded draft?

How many chances do you get to make a clean break from a guy earning superstar money with subpar output? Cap space is one of the keys to this deal.

A chance to let a few young guys gel for a year, then sign a veteran or two the next offseason? Count me in.

Arcadian
06-11-2006, 05:39 PM
Cap space does not win games. Generally all it does is allow teams to over pay the Larry Hughes' of the league and give message boards something to talk about.

I don't know that the Pacers would be under the cap anyway.

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 05:57 PM
Great. He's Austin.

Got one, thanks.

Yes but u get a younger Cro-type player with better potential and a hell of a lot lower salary.

Knucklehead Warrior
06-11-2006, 06:07 PM
We have a leader. It just isn't JO.
Other than this, I'm not seeing a discussion on why we need to get rid of JO. If TPTB make some trades this summer, won't they be doing it to get rid of problems? If so, then is jermO a problem? It seems to me that we have to assume anybody that isn't just thrown in to make a trade work was a problem last year. Was he or wasn't he? Nobody is saying he was, so this trade just doesn't make much sense to me, UNLESS we are using the number #1 pick to package up some of our true problems like Jax2 or tinman.

Just some gar-BAGE off the top of my head.

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 06:14 PM
If Toronto is losing Mike James to free agency, would they take JO & Tins for CV3 and #1? It seems to me like that's not a bad deal. They'd have to throw in filler to even out the numbers though. It sounds good to me...

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 06:26 PM
If Toronto is losing Mike James to free agency, would they take JO & Tins for CV3 and #1? It seems to me like that's not a bad deal. They'd have to throw in filler to even out the numbers though. It sounds good to me...

I don't know if they would want to take on the extra cap of Tins when they could sign a healthy PG during FA.
--- Edited Follow-Up ---
Maybe JO isn't a problem. Maybe TPTB have realized that he isn't the player they need to build around. Maybe they want a fresh start, a youth movement.

Unclebuck
06-11-2006, 06:34 PM
Shoot me dead right now, but I'm now going to quote something that was on an ESPN message board. Sorry for the horrible grammar

http://forums.espn.go.com/espn/thread?forumID=640&threadID=3809731&lastPostID=24420079


there is supposivley actually some truths to the rumours of jermaine oneal coming to toronto which is on realgm.com and insidehoops.com but i was just waiving that to rumours but 30 mins ago i turned on fan 590 and they had peter vescey who was present at draft camp and he said that that colangelo was in a meeting with doniie walsh and lary bird for 2 days talking about a blockbuster trade that would send j-oneal to raps but right now they are stuck negotiated the pieces raptors have to give up and reportivlye there is a 75 percent chance accoring to peter that this trade will happen in next 2 weeks.

Rite now according to him pacers want mo,charlie,****** and 1rst round pick for oneal and raps offered charlie,eric williams,****** and 1rst pick for j-oneal so according to him they will negotiate over next 2 weeks and you can expect news comign on this between now and june 28th

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 06:36 PM
Whats withe the ****** s? And hey I didn't do that to my above post...


:confused:

Hicks
06-11-2006, 06:43 PM
Interesting if true, to say the least. Who's ******?
--- Edited Follow-Up ---
You know, this would add to the idea of why we're seemingly keeping Rick. He gets teams in the playoffs. Period. Even ones with less talent. So if we "go young" with a trade like this, we still have plenty of talent along with Rick to stay in the playoffs to please the fans that care about that, while we are actually rebuilding around Granger, Charlie V, and whomever we pick at #1 (presumably Morrison).

By the way, I think the ****** is Matt Bonner. Probably some goofy "censored" word on ESPN, thinking it's "boner" (har har).

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 06:48 PM
I'm all for the Pacers drafting Morrison, but if they're trading their only post presence and getting a 3 point shooting 4 in return, why wouldn't they draft LA to play in the middle?

Hicks
06-11-2006, 06:50 PM
From what I've seen of Charlie, he doesn't just float on the perimeter like you guys are making him out to be.

dynamis22
06-11-2006, 06:54 PM
I'm all for the Pacers drafting Morrison, but if they're trading their only post presence and getting a 3 point shooting 4 in return, why wouldn't they draft LA to play in the middle?

Because Morrison plays with a ton of hustle and toughness. Something our team, with the exception of Granger, lacks. I for one think Morrison would be the greatest thing to happen to the Pacers since the drafting of Reggie.

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 06:55 PM
Well, it's an ESPN board, but Vescey usually knows the Pacers, so...which do we believe? Mo, CV3, another player (Bonner), and #1 for O'Neal? That sounds good to me. Of course, the Raps want a different deal, but hey, maybe Toronto will take my advice and say, "Well, if you get Mo, we want Tins because we're losing Mike James because of JO's HUGE contract."

I guess we'll hear in a couple weeks, huh?

Hicks
06-11-2006, 06:56 PM
Sounds like it's fake, guys. From RealGM's Toronto board:

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=524003&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=324


The ESPN thing is BS. jaryd40 is a poster here at RealGM and he posted fake fan590 trade rumours on this board.

Quote:
i was driving home tonite and turnin on the fan 590 and they were reportinh that talks between toronto and portland that would send miles and ratliff to toronto for our first rounder which we do have rose, and eric williams


Link (http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=436527&highlight=)

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 06:58 PM
Because Morrison plays with a ton of hustle and toughness. Something our team, with the exception of Granger, lacks. I for one think Morrison would be the greatest thing to happen to the Pacers since the drafting of Reggie.

Me too, for sure. CV3 has the size to play inside, but it's whether or not he wants to. And if we're going youth-movement, how about starting Hulk for our inside presence. Oh yeah, remember what Bird said about Granger having fallen in love with the 3? In case you don't, it was that LB would like to see more of Danny's inside game. So, that gives us DG playing tough like he does, Hulk being an inside presence, CV3 having the versatility to do both, and Morrison who's not afraid to take it to the hoop.

Kegboy
06-11-2006, 07:02 PM
By the way, I think the ****** is Matt Bonner. Probably some goofy "censored" word on ESPN, thinking it's "boner" (har har).

Damn, and here I thought we were getting Richard Stabone.

http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/ydkd/images/koenig.jpg

(Btw, did anybody know he was Walter Koenig's son?)

Unclebuck
06-11-2006, 07:02 PM
I have no idea who the ****** is

Arcadian
06-11-2006, 07:08 PM
If this trade is true then we should package Hulk, Cro and our pick for Garnett. I mean why wouldn't Minni do that they get a great center prospect, a first round pick and and expiring contract. These two trades are in the same realm of plausiblity. And one doesn't even work salary wise.

FrenchConnection
06-11-2006, 07:11 PM
If this trade is true then we should package Hulk, Cro and our pick for Garnett. I mean why wouldn't Minni do that they get a great center prospect, a first round pick and and expiring contract. These two trades are in the same realm of plausiblity. And one doesn't even work salary wise.

I soooo agree with you on this, but maybe Bird likes Morrison that much. I have no idea otherwise.

dynamis22
06-11-2006, 07:16 PM
Me too, for sure. CV3 has the size to play inside, but it's whether or not he wants to. And if we're going youth-movement, how about starting Hulk for our inside presence. Oh yeah, remember what Bird said about Granger having fallen in love with the 3? In case you don't, it was that LB would like to see more of Danny's inside game. So, that gives us DG playing tough like he does, Hulk being an inside presence, CV3 having the versatility to do both, and Morrison who's not afraid to take it to the hoop.

I agree with Larry. I would like to see Granger play inside more as well. He has shown to be a good offensive rebounder and can pick up some points there. Also, CV3 will definitely play inside at 4 or maybe even 5. I wont be surprised, if this trade goes down, that, as others have noted, Granger will be logging minutes at 4 and we play a lot of zone.

Hicks
06-11-2006, 07:19 PM
Hello??

The rumor is FAKE.

Unclebuck
06-11-2006, 07:24 PM
Hello??

The rumor is FAKE.



This is starting to remind me of the Artest trade rumor season. You know with fake rumors and all.

The Vescey on Fan radio is fake, but I don't think the idea that Raptors and Pacers have spoken about a possible trade is fake. Or is all this coming from the Chad Ford speculation of a week ago, see I thought there was some independent reporting that gave Chad's speculation some validity.

But who knows at this point. Things spiral pretty quickly these days

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 07:25 PM
I was about to post that UB until I refreshed my page. Just the guy was proven to be fake, but Chad Ford's info is still up in the air.

dynamis22
06-11-2006, 07:31 PM
Hello??

The rumor is FAKE.

This actually started with Andy Katz reporting it from draft camp. The JO and Tor rumor itself is not FAKE. The vescey thing might be, but the initial rumor was legit.

Hicks
06-11-2006, 07:35 PM
True enough. But the Chad Ford part from last week was just speculation. I wouldn't be shocked if the rest was just taken from that, and that there's no truth to it.

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 07:38 PM
:banned:

We're having too much fun to stop talking about it!

Frank Slade
06-11-2006, 07:41 PM
This is starting to remind me of the Artest trade rumor season. You know with fake rumors and all.

The Vescey on Fan radio is fake, but I don't think the idea that Raptors and Pacers have spoken about a possible trade is fake. Or is all this coming from the Chad Ford speculation of a week ago, see I thought there was some independent reporting that gave Chad's speculation some validity.

But who knows at this point. Things spiral pretty quickly these days

Yes agreed, A Toronto Newspaper had referenced this trade previously And Just today the Boston Herald made mention of it as well..

Unclebuck
06-11-2006, 07:43 PM
Well here is the whole Boston Herald article. Is he just rehashing what he read elsewhere or does he have independent sources. That is what I don't know. But he is a Boston reporter and we have for two years now gotten some inside info about Bird out of Boston.


http://celtics.bostonherald.com/celtics/view.bg?articleid=143110&format=text

Love him or hate him, Riley good for league2-10576
By Mark Murphy/ NBA Notes
Sunday, June 11, 2006 - Updated: 10:12 AM EST

You can’t blame Stan Van Gundy for his glum silence, or his brother, Jeff, for his outward resentment toward Pat Riley’s latest grab for glory.

Stan, who stepped down as Miami’s coach so his celebrated boss could drive this expensive chariot into the NBA Finals, hadn’t done a bad job.

And it wasn’t nice when the Heat’s Alonzo Mourning said, essentially, that it was better to have a Cadillac instead of a nice economy model. But there’s no denying that when Riley chooses to dust off his own legend, the league benefits, and rejoices.

Consider where he ranks with Shaquille O’Neal, who allegedly considered the Lakers’ Phil Jackson to be his closest coaching ally.

“One, one, one,” Shaq said last week of where Riley stood in his book. “I didn’t say he was better than Phil. You asked me where he was ranked.

“I don’t think we should get into comparisons on him and Phil. It’s just that he’s been good to me my last couple of years. He’s a great guy, and we have a great relationship.”

Shaq being Shaq, there was also the following comment, believed by some to be a pot shot at Jackson:

“A lot of guys you deal with aren’t always straight, and Pat is always straight. I appreciate someone that’s 100 percent straight, not just 95 percent straight.”

That old bromide about absence making the heart grow fonder is obviously at play here.

The coach who eventually wore out his Lakers to the point where they called him Captain Queeg, and the guy who was reviled for ushering in an ugly, defense-obsessed era of basketball as coach of the Knicks, is now more popular than Toscanini’s latest ice cream flavor.

Celtics coach Doc Rivers, who played 2 1/2 years under Riley during that gruesome Knicks era, can understand the man’s power.

“You can tell that they like each other on that team, and that is Riley,” said Rivers. “At least some of that has to be Riley. The one thing he does is to get you to believe that it’s you against the rest of the world.”

As absurd as that old tactic may sound.

“I don’t scoff at that, because it’s real to them - the players who are under him,” said Rivers. “And let me tell you - it works.”

Consider Riley’s affect on New York.

“It was awesome,” said Rivers, who was near the end of his career when he played for the Knicks. “I wished I could have got to him when he was younger, but I caught him at the extreme.

“But with him there is the coaching part and the motivational part,” he said. “And with that Knicks team, everyone hated us and we liked it. We didn’t want anyone else on our wagon.

“With Miami, you can see that mentality, and (Riley) has brought it,” said Rivers. “That team has fit perfectly for what he does. Jason Williams has been criticized. Antoine (Walker) has been booed and criticized all year. That’s why what he’s done has worked so well.

“Riles talked about defense all year and how he was disappointed that they didn’t buy into it, and guess what - they did. No one has given credit to Miami for their defense, but that’s why they’re (in the finals) now.”

Pickin’ and choosin’

The Celtics, like most teams, seem to agree that the six players who will be selected before Bostonin the June 28 draft - barring a true surprise - will be (not in any order) Andrea Bargnani, LaMarcus Aldridge, Tyrus Thomas, Adam Morrison, Brandon Roy and Rudy Gay.

Barring a slider out of this sextet, the Celtics are considering a seven-player group at No. 7 that includes combo guard Randy Foye, power forwards Shelden Williams and Cedric Simmons, center Patrick O’Bryant, point guards Marcus Williams and Rajon Rondo, and - somewhat surprisingly - shooting guard J.J. Redick.

Opinions are divided on the best option - with Marcus Williams’ stock dwindling - though Foye and Shelden Williams appear to be the most popular options.

All sliders are welcome, naturally, though UConn’s Gay is already posing a potential dilemma. The athletic, still-growing small forward would be a tough fit on team overloaded with swingmen.

Blowing up the Pacers?

The hottest rumor to break out of the draft camp in Orlando, Fla., had Indiana looking to break up the ship.

The Pacers reportedly have talked to Toronto about trading Jermaine O’Neal to the Raptors for some sort of package that would include the No. 1 pick. The Pacers, clearly looking to make a fresh start, would then take Morrison.

Indiana may also be talking with the point guard-starved Timberwolves about a Jamaal Tinsley-for-Ricky Davis swap.

No love here

Some might not have considered this possible, but Larry Brown actually left Orlando without talking to Isiah Thomas.

The Knicks coach sat in the lower bowl during workouts while his estranged boss sat up in an isolated, boxed-in area.

Brown - still waiting for word that he’s been fired - left a day early, and reportedly ticked off his superiors. Perhaps they’ll use this as an argument that Brown, due $40 million over the next four years, broke his contract.

No such luck, probably.

Even if the “dead man walking” routine in Orlando was said to drive him crazy, Brown tried hard to fill his contract to the letter.

“I’ve seen them all and I know them all,” he said of the gaggle of second-rounders and low first-rounders in Orlando. “I can tell you everything about them.”

bulldog
06-11-2006, 08:35 PM
Cap space does not win games. Generally all it does is allow teams to over pay the Larry Hughes' of the league and give message boards something to talk about.

I don't know that the Pacers would be under the cap anyway.

You're right...Phoenix had a nice, young nucleus, but then blew it by overpaying an aging PG that couldn't play defense. Wait a minute...

Anthem
06-11-2006, 08:59 PM
Indiana may also be talking with the point guard-starved Timberwolves about a Jamaal Tinsley-for-Ricky Davis swap.
Nobody's said anything about this, so let me be the first.

This trade would make me violently angry.

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 09:06 PM
Indiana may also be talking with the point guard-starved Timberwolves about a Jamaal Tinsley-for-Ricky Davis swap.

So that is the second mention of a *pacer* for Ricky Davis rumor.

grace
06-11-2006, 09:08 PM
http://www.fscwv.edu/users/rheffner/ydkd/images/koenig.jpg

(Btw, did anybody know he was Walter Koenig's son?)


:wave:

pizza guy
06-11-2006, 09:57 PM
Nobody's said anything about this, so let me be the first.

This trade would make me violently angry.

Let me be the first to second that.

Young
06-11-2006, 10:06 PM
So that is the second mention of a *pacer* for Ricky Davis rumor.

I'm curious if we did swap Tinsley for Davis, who would we trade Jackson to? I would think that Bird would already have a deal lined up for Jackson, if we did trade Tinsley for Ricky.

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 10:06 PM
What about Jack for Davis?

Anthem
06-11-2006, 10:33 PM
What about Jack for Davis?
Trading arsenic for tetrodotoxin.

If Indiana hates Jack, it will hate Davis.

Trader Joe
06-11-2006, 10:35 PM
I heard the Tinsley for Davis swap could also involve a few other things like draft picks. Also if we did this before the draft which is apparently when we want Tins outta here by we would have to throw in another guy to compensate for Tinsley's BYC. I am not sure I love the idea of Ricky Davis but for the right price he is decent.

Anthem
06-11-2006, 10:36 PM
I heard the Tinsley for Davis swap could also involve a few other things like draft picks. Also if we did this before the draft which is apparently when we want Tins outta here by we would have to throw in another guy to compensate for Tinsley's BYC. I am not sure I love the idea of Ricky Davis but for the right price he is decent.
BYC doesn't matter. The trade could be agreed to on draft night, and go through the day Tinsley's BYC ends.

indytoad
06-11-2006, 10:38 PM
Nobody's said anything about this, so let me be the first.

This trade would make me violently angry.

Ricky Davis is way more than I thought we could possibly get for Tinsley at this point in his career. I wouldn't want to keep Davis permanently, but he might be a good piece for a trade down the road.

IndyToad
No different from anyone

Anthem
06-11-2006, 10:39 PM
Ricky Davis is way more than I thought we could possibly get for Tinsley at this point in his career. I wouldn't want to keep Davis permanently, but he might be a good piece for a trade down the road.

IndyToad
No different from anyone
I'd much prefer Jaric and the #6 pick.

Diesel_81
06-11-2006, 10:40 PM
I don't know why in the world we would want Ricky Davis.Hes kinda like having a quicker version of Steven Jackson on the perimeter and he carries that stigma of not being a team player/bad attitude every where he has been whether it was in Cleveland/ Boston and now Minnesota. I would stay clear of him.

Arcadian
06-11-2006, 10:41 PM
You're right...Phoenix had a nice, young nucleus, but then blew it by overpaying an aging PG that couldn't play defense. Wait a minute...

If we are going by examples let's mention Utah, Denver, Atlanta and New Orleans. The Suns are certainly not the norm. Also I'm not sure that this deal does put us under the cap. Especially if we resign Peja.

indytoad
06-11-2006, 10:42 PM
I'd much prefer Jaric and the #6 pick.

Well, I would too. But I'd still jump on the Davis trade if I couldn't get the above.

IndyToad
Mike Breen on hand

Trader Joe
06-11-2006, 10:42 PM
BYC doesn't matter. The trade could be agreed to on draft night, and go through the day Tinsley's BYC ends.

True, but don't you think Davis is worth more than Tins?

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 11:00 PM
True, but don't you think Davis is worth more than Tins?

He's been alot helathier, but trading him for Tins would clog the 2 position and make it hard to distribute minutes. Unless of course Peja is not resigned and DG and Davis split minutes at the 3 while Jack and Jones play the 2 (if he's kept)

Trader Joe
06-11-2006, 11:07 PM
He's been alot helathier, but trading him for Tins would clog the 2 position and make it hard to distribute minutes. Unless of course Peja is not resigned and DG and Davis split minutes at the 3 while Jack and Jones play the 2 (if he's kept)

I think that if a trade for a guy like Davis is made Jack is almost certainly on the way out.

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 11:10 PM
I think that if a trade for a guy like Davis is made Jack is almost certainly on the way out.

I've seen TPTB do odder things...*cough*Brad Miller*cough*

Young
06-11-2006, 11:15 PM
I've seen TPTB do odder things...*cough*Brad Miller*cough*

I hate to get off top but how was trading Brad Miller odd? They didn't want to pay him big bucks, and they got a solid center to replace him. (it is just unfourtunate that Pollard can't stay healthy.)

Robertmto
06-11-2006, 11:23 PM
I hate to get off top but how was trading Brad Miller odd? They didn't want to pay him big bucks, and they got a solid center to replace him. (it is just unfourtunate that Pollard can't stay healthy.)

When was Pollard a solid center? He was a decent back up. Brad Miller was an all star caliber center. Its just odd, i'm not gonna say nething else!

Unclebuck
06-11-2006, 11:38 PM
Pollard is a solid NBA center when healthy

Hicks
06-11-2006, 11:39 PM
For the hell of it, I emailed Vecsey about this rumor and have already heard back:



Off the top, purely common sense, I'd say there's every reason to believe Jermaine is exceedingly touchable.Don't believe the No. 1 pick and CV would be nearly enough to get Indy's attention. The draft has no one to make that deal worthwhile

Trader Joe
06-11-2006, 11:42 PM
Jeez, Vescey seems to think highly of JO. I love me some JO, but I think I would do CV and the number 1 MoPete would be gravy IMO.

Bball
06-12-2006, 12:37 AM
I think we'll be lucky to get a 6 pack of domestics for Tinsley. I think we take the best offer and consider ourselves lucky to be rid of his pouting, illness, and injuries.

Harsh? Yeah... probably...

-Bball

Unclebuck
06-12-2006, 08:13 AM
For the hell of it, I emailed Vecsey about this rumor and have already heard back:


Some of the wacky Raptors fans need to read this

able
06-12-2006, 08:17 AM
Jeez, Vescey seems to think highly of JO. I love me some JO, but I think I would do CV and the number 1 MoPete would be gravy IMO.
Goes to show why he makes his money writing about basketball.

Anyone thinking that a kid like CV and draft pick in a weak draft (sic) would be enough to pry away a franchise player and perennial all star like JO has got to be at least partially delusional.
Yes he is not untouchable, but the right deal is perhaps one of 10 options, and none are available as far as we know or at this moment.

Be glad if we only trade Jax, and very very maybe Tins, though I doubt the latter, and are looking to what we need after the draft and rookie camp, that is when they will decide on whether and who to re-sign and who to trade for what position we then need.

Going for CV and a draftpick for JO is a sure fire way to end up in the lottery next year, which is not something I see either the Simons, Donnie Walsh OR Larry Bird condoning.

PacerMan
06-12-2006, 08:23 AM
Because Morrison plays with a ton of hustle and toughness. Something our team, with the exception of Granger, lacks. I for one think Morrison would be the greatest thing to happen to the Pacers since the drafting of Reggie.


And I for one,, think Morrison will be a major disappointment at the next level. More like Bender.

SoupIsGood
06-12-2006, 08:25 AM
Some of the wacky Raptors fans need to read this

RealGM Raps fans are some of the dumbest fans in sports.

Just my observation.

Hicks
06-12-2006, 08:38 AM
I think we'll be lucky to get a 6 pack of domestics for Tinsley. I think we take the best offer and consider ourselves lucky to be rid of his pouting, illness, and injuries.

Harsh? Yeah... probably...

-Bball

Maybe I'm confusing you with Jay (imagine that), but that's what you said about Artest and we got Peja Stojakovic. A far cry from the garbage that some (and I thought you were one of them) were declaring and warning the rest of us about.

We'll get something decent for Tinsley.

Will Galen
06-12-2006, 09:12 AM
RealGM Raps fans are some of the dumbest fans in sports.

Just my observation.

I've come to the conclusion that every team in every sport has their share.

Not only that, while some seem to have had a membership in DFISC from the cradle, just about everyone else has spent a few minutes as an honorary member.

Kegboy
06-12-2006, 09:16 AM
The draft has no one to make that deal worthwhile

****, when even he knows that, it's pretty bad.

Bball
06-12-2006, 09:59 AM
Maybe I'm confusing you with Jay (imagine that), but that's what you said about Artest and we got Peja Stojakovic. A far cry from the garbage that some (and I thought you were one of them) were declaring and warning the rest of us about.

We'll get something decent for Tinsley.

My biggest problem with the Artest debacle was it was taking too long.

-Bball

microwave_oven
06-12-2006, 11:13 AM
What if the Raptors gave us the right to switch draft picks in 2007?

Sollozzo
06-12-2006, 11:40 AM
Maybe I'm confusing you with Jay (imagine that), but that's what you said about Artest and we got Peja Stojakovic. A far cry from the garbage that some (and I thought you were one of them) were declaring and warning the rest of us about.

We'll get something decent for Tinsley.


Teams know that Artest can play, though.

Teams knew that if they got Artest, that it would spark some interest in their team. Any team that got Artest was bound to get some press.

I can see why teams would trade something decent for Artest. I can't see why any team would want to trade something good for Tinsley unless the Pacers were packaging some other players, which they'll have to do.

ChicagoJ
06-12-2006, 11:47 AM
Maybe I'm confusing you with Jay (imagine that),

Hey... I just walked in here...

:disturbed

Doug
06-12-2006, 12:35 PM
What if the Raptors gave us the right to switch draft picks in 2007?

I'm not sure how good that pick would be if they get JO to go with Bosh...

A resigned James, SG, Graham, Bosh, JO would be a very good team.

microwave_oven
06-12-2006, 01:37 PM
I thought about that, but I don't see a team that would mesh well. Granted, it looks good on paper, but James, Oneal, Bosh all on the same team? That is a lot to go around.

Trader Joe
06-12-2006, 03:18 PM
Goes to show why he makes his money writing about basketball.

Anyone thinking that a kid like CV and draft pick in a weak draft (sic) would be enough to pry away a franchise player and perennial all star like JO has got to be at least partially delusional.
Yes he is not untouchable, but the right deal is perhaps one of 10 options, and none are available as far as we know or at this moment.

Be glad if we only trade Jax, and very very maybe Tins, though I doubt the latter, and are looking to what we need after the draft and rookie camp, that is when they will decide on whether and who to re-sign and who to trade for what position we then need.

Going for CV and a draftpick for JO is a sure fire way to end up in the lottery next year, which is not something I see either the Simons, Donnie Walsh OR Larry Bird condoning.

Ok so Im partially delusional because I think that CV and a number 1 is a pretty decent starting offer? That makes sense. :rolleyes:

bulldog
06-12-2006, 03:44 PM
Ok so Im partially delusional because I think that CV and a number 1 is a pretty decent starting offer? That makes sense. :rolleyes:

CV, number 1, and not having to take back salary is a darn fine starting offer. If they throw in MoPete, I'm sold.

Robertmto
06-12-2006, 05:08 PM
And I for one,, think Morrison will be a major disappointment at the next level. More like Bender.

And I for one believe that youare the only one that believes that.

Slick Pinkham
06-12-2006, 05:38 PM
I don't believe that Morrison is garbage. But I do think that people expecting him to be all all star type player are expecting too much.

I'm thinking that he will be on the level of a Mike Miller/Wally Sczerbiak/Mo Peterson/Donyell Marshall

That isn't bad, but it ain't all that incredible. And if the Pacers were to trade JO for the #1 pick and use it on Adam, I will quite possibly go PFFL on this board.

Mourning
06-12-2006, 05:56 PM
I don't see why the hell we would have to give up our own first rounder aswell? They can get our second rounder and hell we could throw in Phoenix's 2nd round pick in 2087 in the JJ sign & trade, but giving up by far the best player aswell as our own first rounder for a good talent in CV, who's not nearly there though he seems like something nice to have for sure and the number one pick in not too good of a draft makes me say: no!

Why would we want the number one pick btw? Seems trying to acquire a pick somewhere between 4-6, maybe 7th pick would be better for us and cost us less.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

PacerFreak31
06-12-2006, 06:27 PM
The reason I would want the number one pick is because I do think a team like Portland would want it. Just imagine if we picked up say CV, Number one pick, and either Mo Pete and/or Mike James. Then we traded the number one pick to Portland for their number 4 pick and say Martel Webster. I think Webster will be a stud and he could be our future sg. Then we could use the pick on a point gaurd or big man.

Our lineup would look like this for the future

PG AJ, Sars, James (Pick number 4 or 17)
SG Sjax, Webster
SF Granger, Peja
PF CV, Croshere, (pick number 4 or 17)
C Harrison, Foster, (pick number 4 or 17)

But a core or Webster, Granger, CV and then whom ever we draft at 4 and 17 would make our future look brighter than most other teams. But I in no way give up our 17th pick when trading JO.

Pig Nash
06-12-2006, 06:42 PM
And I for one believe that youare the only one that believes that.

That's a lie and you know it, because I told you I didn't think Morrison would pan out.

Mourning
06-12-2006, 07:12 PM
The reason I would want the number one pick is because I do think a team like Portland would want it. Just imagine if we picked up say CV, Number one pick, and either Mo Pete and/or Mike James. Then we traded the number one pick to Portland for their number 4 pick and say Martel Webster. I think Webster will be a stud and he could be our future sg. Then we could use the pick on a point gaurd or big man.

Our lineup would look like this for the future

PG AJ, Sars, James (Pick number 4 or 17)
SG Sjax, Webster
SF Granger, Peja
PF CV, Croshere, (pick number 4 or 17)
C Harrison, Foster, (pick number 4 or 17)

But a core or Webster, Granger, CV and then whom ever we draft at 4 and 17 would make our future look brighter than most other teams. But I in no way give up our 17th pick when trading JO.

I don't believe for a second Portland would trade their number 4 pick in this shallow draft and then also throw in Webster (a high pick from last year, which was a good draft) for a number one pick in, again, a shallow draft. They aren't the brightest at the Trailblazers, but they aren't THAT stupid IMO.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Robertmto
06-13-2006, 02:01 AM
That's a lie and you know it, because I told you I didn't think Morrison would pan out.


But is he another Bender? no, No, NO!!!

J_2_Da_IzzO
06-13-2006, 10:28 AM
PG AJ, Sars, James (Pick number 4 or 17)
SG Sjax, Webster
SF Granger, Peja
PF CV, Croshere, (pick number 4 or 17)
C Harrison, Foster, (pick number 4 or 17)

But a core or Webster, Granger, CV and then whom ever we draft at 4 and 17 would make our future look brighter than most other teams. But I in no way give up our 17th pick when trading JO.

Seems like that team intrigues you. Why? Its not like we all of a sudden trade JO and for whatever reason Jackson will lose his wrong ways, Harrison will stop his foul trouble, Saras will stop with the turnovers. Seems like people will do this trade jus tfor the heck of seeing what would happen.

beast23
06-13-2006, 11:48 AM
I keep going back to the proposed Tinsley trade.

Tinsley for Jaric + #6? I could get excited about that. Still a long-term contract, but we would be getting a better defender and a decent young player at #6.

Tinsley for Davis? There is a risk with Davis' personality, but we'd be getting a proven scorer that slashes and finishes well. Not a great 3 point shooter at SG, but has decent defensive skills if he can be coaxed to use them. But most of all, we dump the last 5 years of Tinsley's contract and his questionable health for the last 2 years of Davis' contract while also getting a player that can definitely help us with scoring.

I think I'd go with the Davis trade. New players to a roster, even problematic ones, are almost always better behaved for at least the first year. If we saw signs of a problem with Davis "behind the scenes", we would be in great position to trade him, his fantastic offensive production and his expiring contract NEXT summer.

Mourning
06-13-2006, 12:00 PM
Tinsley for Jaric AND the number 6 pick? Anyone on the Pacers should jump on that even with this shallow draft, which is why it won't happen like this, it's totally lopsided in our favour.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Shade
06-13-2006, 12:01 PM
We don't need to trade JO, we need to compliment him with another scoring big man. A JO/Bosh frontcourt would tear up the East. I would seriously become a closet Raptors fan, and I don't want to be a Raptors fan.

What we need to do is package Foster with somebody to bring in a big who can score (Mags?).

Diesel_81
06-14-2006, 01:28 AM
We don't need to trade JO, we need to compliment him with another scoring big man. A JO/Bosh frontcourt would tear up the East. I would seriously become a closet Raptors fan, and I don't want to be a Raptors fan.

What we need to do is package Foster with somebody to bring in a big who can score (Mags?).

I don't think we need to complement him with another scoring big man we just need another big man who can defend centers, rebound, block shots and not be an offensive liability.I have major questions about Harrison, his work ethic and Basketball IQ but he has all the physical tools I listed above.

Obviously pg is a big issue and I don't really have any answers on how to upgrade this spot teams just don't deal good pgs because there so hard to find, but maybe we take a chance on a Jay Williams and we strike lightning in a bottle, maybe Saras after a season under his belt starts playing more like the playmaker he was in Europe.I do think we need to trade both AJ and Tinlsey and start fresh. I give AJ a ton of credit he's improved so much but if he is your only playmaker your in trouble. Its very difficult to run a smooth offense when you pg is not exceptionally quick, has trouble penetrating defenses and not a very good ball handler.

We also need to figure out what to do at 2 guard.We could bring in a two guard in a trade (Tinsley for Ricky Davis) which would give us a legit two guard who can break guys off the dribble and get to the rim or we can sign Peja and have him play the role of two guard on offense and defensively will guard the weaker of the perimeter players. I know people say this won't work but Im not convinced. If Pheonix can get away playing a sg at center then anything is possible. How many of you thought Borris Diaw playing center would work??

NBA is about creating mismatches I would love to see how opposing two guards match up with Peja or Granger for that matter. I think we would cause a ton of problems for our opponents with this big lineup. So basically instead of copying other teams formulas why don't we try to create our own mismatches on the court.

owl
06-14-2006, 07:00 AM
Diesel81 said..."I don't think we need to complement him with another scoring big man we just need another big man who can defend centers, rebound, block shots and not be an offensive liability.I have major questions about Harrison, his work ethic and Basketball IQ but he has all the physical tools I listed above. "


I believe the player that could most help the Pacers is Shelden Williams.
He is everything that Harrison is not. He rebounds, blocks shots(without fouling), scores and has a mind for the game.


owl

Robertmto
06-14-2006, 07:15 AM
I believe the player that could most help the Pacers is Shelden Williams.
He is everything that Harrison is not. He rebounds, blocks shots(without fouling), scores and has a mind for the game.


owl

But he's not a center, he's a power forward. And a small one at that. JO would be forced to play center and thats just asking for trouble.