PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Which Shooter Should We Target?



LoneGranger33
07-31-2006, 09:51 PM
It is widely purported that the Pacers are "also hoping to add a center or power forward and perhaps a perimeter shooter" to their roster before the upcoming season...I started this thread to see who we, the fans, think is available and what it will take to get him.

So...in your opinion, what player should we target and what realisticallly should we prepare to give up in order to make the trade for a perimeter threat?

rexnom
07-31-2006, 09:55 PM
Although he doesn't really play D, I like the suggestion of going after Mo Pete...I'm fairly sure he is available too.

I know Saras might seem like the obvious choice to trade away but I don't want to part with him just yet.

rel
07-31-2006, 09:58 PM
http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/writers/kelly_dwyer/03/04/western.thoughts/t1_miller.jpg

Frank Slade
07-31-2006, 10:09 PM
Mo Pete does seem logical.


Mike Miller would be a great addition.

Jackson + Williams would match up Salary wise although not sure why Jerry West would do that specific trade.

I would really like Luther Head ,not sure if Houston would part with him though either.

Will Galen
07-31-2006, 10:13 PM
Although he doesn't really play D, I like the suggestion of going after Mo Pete...I'm fairly sure he is available too.

What makes you think that?

Evan_The_Dude
07-31-2006, 10:24 PM
Kyle Korver

Jose Slaughter
07-31-2006, 10:24 PM
Luke Jackson would be my first choice.

rexnom
07-31-2006, 10:26 PM
What makes you think that?
I'll try to find it but I'm fairly sure I read somewhere that he is being semi-shopped simply because he might not fit into the new plan. They did also add two new guys that I expect to get significant minutes at the 2 (Parker, Freddie).

Anyone who knows more could prove me wrong though.

As for Mike Miller, it's not a bad thought but why would the sixth man of the year be available?

kidthecat
07-31-2006, 10:33 PM
What is this obsession with shooters? If the Pacers were to get a shooter, it should be a marquee name, and involve moving some other pieces. I really don't think role-playing shooters as in themselves are that important anymore. Even Phoenix, a shooting team, has guys who were not known for their shooting before the Nash era. This team needs an actual identity first.

DisplacedKnick
07-31-2006, 10:39 PM
I've posted my thoughts on Rashard Lewis before. You don't think of him as a pure shooter but he's close to 40% from 3. Does one or two other things too and at least a few months ago it sounded like he was available.

LoneGranger33
07-31-2006, 10:40 PM
I like the idea of Mike Miller too...but I'm really not sure what they're looking for...they just re-signed Chucky Atkins and Damon Stoudemire remains the number one option, I doubt we could pawn off any of our point guards for him...They don't seem to be active on the trade scene or free agent radar at all

I've liked Kareem Rush for awhile but he doesnt seem to be the big minute guy we need...

I don't really like Wally Szczerbiak (I spell checked that) but given Boston's lack of experience, the injury prone shooter might be available at a decent price...I'm pretty sure a defensive-minded SG (Jackson?) would better match up with Light's Out Pierce (when he's hot)



Let's get Travis Diener too...

kidthecat
07-31-2006, 10:42 PM
I'd rather keep Jackson than any of the names mentioned, save Lewis.

rexnom
07-31-2006, 10:48 PM
What is this obsession with shooters? If the Pacers were to get a shooter, it should be a marquee name, and involve moving some other pieces. I really don't think role-playing shooters as in themselves are that important anymore. Even Phoenix, a shooting team, has guys who were not known for their shooting before the Nash era. This team needs an actual identity first.
That's why my number one guy would be Delonte West, followed by Ben Gordon. Unfortunately, those guys are a tad unrealistic.

ESutt7
07-31-2006, 10:51 PM
I like Mo Pete and Mike Miller. Rashard Lewis would be great, but that's not realistic IMO. A report this morning said SA was interested in getting Bonzi...so maybe Finley or Brent Barry would be available? Jackson for Finley works straight up, Jack for Barry/Orberto (a big guy) works too. Maybe SA would welcome back an athletic wing who had success there whether they get Bonzi or not?:shrug:

purdue101
07-31-2006, 10:51 PM
miller, crawford, or turkoglu

pizza guy
07-31-2006, 10:53 PM
What is this obsession with shooters? If the Pacers were to get a shooter, it should be a marquee name, and involve moving some other pieces. I really don't think role-playing shooters as in themselves are that important anymore. Even Phoenix, a shooting team, has guys who were not known for their shooting before the Nash era. This team needs an actual identity first.

That makes a difference.

Any of the mentioned would be great. I don't know who's available, necessarily, but, I'd love to have a guy in the Steve Kerr mold, whoever it may be. That doesn't need to dominate the ball, or dominate a game - just be there when he's needed. A guy who understands his role, and plays within his means.

Oh yeah, and is lights out from distance.

LoneGranger33
07-31-2006, 10:53 PM
Delonte West is the man up in Boston (I go to school there and I watch the Celtics when they're on) but he's just like Marquis Daniels in my opinion. Do you really think he's untouchable now that they have Telfair, Rajon Rondo, Allan "I Think Might Have Just Poked My Eye Out, No, I'm Sure You Did" Ray, and Tony Allen is returning??

I bet you they'd take Jackson

SoupIsGood
07-31-2006, 10:58 PM
A PG that can shoot.

skyfire
07-31-2006, 11:19 PM
Delonte West. Ainge has been struggling to get things done and supposedly the buzz surrounding his young guns isn't as strong as might have been predicted.
Ainge might be get desperate for some more veteren help for Pierce as the end of the off season nears.

Anthem
07-31-2006, 11:22 PM
I've said for a while that I'd like MoPete.

Jack and a future first? Works for me.

grace
07-31-2006, 11:28 PM
The one on the grassy knoll.

:rimshot:

Eindar
07-31-2006, 11:30 PM
It's a tough situation, because we're running out of pieces to trade. There'd be no point in trading Jax for a shooter, because it's highly unlikely you're going to find a team that wants SJax that also has a shooter that we need. That leaves trading Jax and something that someone needs for a shooter that we need and a crapper version of whatever we gave up.

If DW manages to have a balanced roster that also includes a 38%+ shooter, I'll be shocked, because the trade would have to be something like Jax and Foster for Miller and Tsakalidis. The fact is, we have a lot of guys that can't be traded due to their restrictions. O'Neal, Jackson, Tinsley, Sarunas, Danny, Foster and Harrison are the only guys that can be traded right now, and Jeff's got that Trade Kicker. Trading O'Neal opens a whole other can of worms, so let's shelve that one. Jackson is trading a SG for a SG, like I said. You can trade Tinsley or Sarunas, but it's already a position of weakness for us. I think Danny is pretty much untouchable, so that leaves Foster and Harrison. Trading one of them for a shooter gives us too much depth at SG and not enough at C, which is what leads me to believe the only way to get a SG that can shoot is to pawn off Jeff or Harrison along with Jax for some big stiff who gets about 5ppg and 5rpg and a shooter that can shoot.

My guess is that we'll go into the season as-is, and hope that somebody shows some flashes, that way we can make a trade deadline deal for a shooter.

Evan_The_Dude
07-31-2006, 11:45 PM
I guess the memory of how we lost the New Jersey series is a bit too short here. We got killed on the break because we fell in love with the 3-point shot and couldn't run. I've said this a million times and I'll say it again. We don't need a long range 3-point bomber, we just need guys that can hit shots. If we have enough guys that can create, pass, run, jump, finish, and defend, the shooter becomes just a luxury.

The problem is that teams feel like they need true shooters, and those true shooters many times get them in trouble. Launching shot, after shot, after shot. Miami had one true guy that could shoot in James Posey, but he was there because he was one of their best defenders, not because he was a shooter. The fact that they had guys that could hit shots is what won them a championship.

I'd kill the get a shooter talk until I see what Danny Granger gives us this season. It's one thing to shoot 56% beyond the arc. But it's another thing for a Rookie to do it during his first post-season experience. That has to be promising enough to take a chance on. But even after the Playoffs, what was Bird's criticism of Granger? "Danny fell a bit too in love with the three-pointer".

That should tell you alone that getting a shooter isn't on the list. You'd think the way thing's are now that there was never an era where a three-point line didn't exist.

rexnom
07-31-2006, 11:52 PM
I guess the memory of how we lost the New Jersey series is a bit too short here. We got killed on the break because we fell in love with the 3-point shot and couldn't run. I've said this a million times and I'll say it again. We don't need a long range 3-point bomber, we just need guys that can hit shots. If we have enough guys that can create, pass, run, jump, finish, and defend, the shooter becomes just a luxury.

The problem is that teams feel like they need true shooters, and those true shooters many times get them in trouble. Launching shot, after shot, after shot. Miami had one true guy that could shoot in James Posey, but he was there because he was one of their best defenders, not because he was a shooter. The fact that they had guys that could hit shots is what won them a championship.

I'd kill the get a shooter talk until I see what Danny Granger gives us this season. It's one thing to shoot 56% beyond the arc. But it's another thing for a Rookie to do it during his first post-season experience. That has to be promising enough to take a chance on. But even after the Playoffs, what was Bird's criticism of Granger? "Danny fell a bit too in love with the three-pointer".

That should tell you alone that getting a shooter isn't on the list. You'd think the way thing's are now that there was never an era where a three-point line didn't exist.
I could agree with this but that doesn't mean that our backcourt couldn't use another shooter, which it sorely does IMO.

AnotherBirdCreation
07-31-2006, 11:53 PM
I like Mo Pete and Mike Miller. Rashard Lewis would be great, but that's not realistic IMO. A report this morning said SA was interested in getting Bonzi...so maybe Finley or Brent Barry would be available? Jackson for Finley works straight up, Jack for Barry/Orberto (a big guy) works too. Maybe SA would welcome back an athletic wing who had success there whether they get Bonzi or not?:shrug:

Love the Finley idea. He still has it and San Antonio is the one team that would likely welcome Jackson back. IMO, he was huge in the team's 2003 title run. SA is aging a bit, so they might do this. Adding Finley and dropping Jack would instantly change our chemistry.

Evan_The_Dude
08-01-2006, 12:05 AM
I could agree with this but that doesn't mean that our backcourt couldn't use another shooter, which it sorely does IMO.

In Birds mind, Saras can shoot, as can Darrell Armstrong (though both had off years last season). James White has shown some promise, Jackson hit's now and then, and Tinsley is a pass-first guy. Hell, if our point guard's do their job, that back court shooter won't be necessary.

Jay Ohh
08-01-2006, 12:31 AM
Morris Peterson would be my number one choice. Pretty good defender, not just a one dimensional shooter, durable, hard worker. Almost seems like an anti Pacer.

Realistically, I doubt we get him. People overrate Jack's value way too much if they think Toronto would trade Peterson for him.

We should get Rush.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
08-01-2006, 01:02 AM
Id love to have Finley, I think he can still be a good starting SG.

I dont think that its really possible to get him though.

BoomBaby31
08-01-2006, 01:17 AM
I don't see why Mihm isn't the most realistic choice available. BUT he is injured and that is probably why he won't be in Pacers gear next year. If he is healthy and the surgery is successful we should make a push for him. The Lakers would probably take Jax, or Granger (just kidding about the granger part haha) Jax straight up. Realistically we probably wouldn't even have to give up Jax and could get him super cheap because of the injuries. The Nets are shopping HARD, for a shooter to back up RJ and Vince maybe we could make a push for Kristic (I got ripped on the Trade section for suggesting Kristic but it is realistic). Jax would be the perfect shooter as a back up. We'd probably have to give Jax and Foster for Kristic and a filler guy to make the deal right.

As a shooter Mike Miller is nice, i'm not a huge Korver fan, Ben gordon is very realistic because the Bulls seemed to want to move him.


Kristic and Ben Gordon first choice
Mihm is good for the right price.

denyfizle
08-01-2006, 01:42 AM
do we really need a shooter that bad? Granger can shoot. Runi can shoot... what the heck, i'd go for a guy we can definitely get under the circumstances and can run as well. Kareem Rush. i really hope we could've snagged Martin from Sacto in the Artest trade.

Jay Ohh
08-01-2006, 01:45 AM
Runi can shoot

Since when?

denyfizle
08-01-2006, 01:55 AM
Since when?

hayterrrr....

Leisure Suit Larry
08-01-2006, 02:32 AM
Although he doesn't really play D, I like the suggestion of going after Mo Pete...I'm fairly sure he is available too.

I know Saras might seem like the obvious choice to trade away but I don't want to part with him just yet.

I wouldn't bet on it, I hear him and Al don't get along.

Kamiyohk
08-01-2006, 03:01 AM
Trade Tinsley to New York
Get Jamal Crawford?

#31
08-01-2006, 05:09 AM
Kyle Korver

avoidingtheclowns
08-01-2006, 09:44 AM
Antonio Daniels (PG/SG great defender and ball handler, not a lights out shooter but better than Jack i think)

Finley would be interesting if he can stay healthy but i get the feeling Spurs are going to hang on to him.

what about a shooter like Donyell Marshall? has size and is fairly consistant.

Evan_The_Dude
08-01-2006, 10:08 AM
Trade Tinsley to New York
Get Jamal Crawford?

If this is about a shooter, have you seen Crawfords shooting percentage? Might as well keep Tinsley and Jack.

SoupIsGood
08-01-2006, 10:13 AM
Antonio Daniels (PG/SG great defender and ball handler, not a lights out shooter but better than Jack i think)

Finley would be interesting if he can stay healthy but i get the feeling Spurs are going to hang on to him.

what about a shooter like Donyell Marshall? has size and is fairly consistant.

I would love to have Marshall, I really like his game, but why would the Cavs part with him?

LoneGranger33
08-01-2006, 10:31 AM
Krystic is not leaving Jersey...he's their only big man not named Collins...

Slick Pinkham
08-01-2006, 10:55 AM
Juan Dixon is apparently expendable in Portland. He can shoot. He makes 2.7 mill and we don't have a good salary match for him unless Portland has a trade exception, though.

And we would be getting up to about a 6 PG rotation.

Frank Slade
08-01-2006, 10:57 AM
I would love to have Marshall, I really like his game, but why would the Cavs part with him?

Because he is a FA and supposedly contract negotiations are not going well.
One option they are looking at is a sign and trade.

SoupIsGood
08-01-2006, 11:20 AM
Marshall is a FA? :confused:

Slick Pinkham
08-01-2006, 11:28 AM
Marshall has 3 years left, somehting like 16.8 mil.

Gooden is the free agent they are haveing problems coming to an agreement with.

Donyell would be nice, but they aren't going to part with him unless perhaps they decide to keep Gooden

Frank Slade
08-01-2006, 11:31 AM
Marshall has 3 years left, somehting like 16.8 mil.

Gooden is the free agent they are haveing problems coming to an agreement with.

Donyell would be nice, but they aren't going to part with him unless perhaps they decide to keep Gooden

Yes I thought the question was about Gooden, Marshall is a different story.

blanket
08-01-2006, 11:34 AM
Juan Dixon is apparently expendable in Portland. He can shoot. He makes 2.7 mill and we don't have a good salary match for him unless Portland has a trade exception, though.

And we would be getting up to about a 6 PG rotation.

We have a TPE of roughly that amount from the AJ trade, so it could work.

Robertmto
08-01-2006, 11:45 AM
Daniels is available. :D

And Dixon isn't a PG as previously stated - the SG crop is actually kinda thin in Portland.

PacerMan
08-01-2006, 12:28 PM
Delonte West is the man up in Boston (I go to school there and I watch the Celtics when they're on) but he's just like Marquis Daniels in my opinion. Do you really think he's untouchable now that they have Telfair, Rajon Rondo, Allan "I Think Might Have Just Poked My Eye Out, No, I'm Sure You Did" Ray, and Tony Allen is returning??

I bet you they'd take Jackson

Jackson and a pick for Rondo.

PacerMan
08-01-2006, 12:32 PM
I guess the memory of how we lost the New Jersey series is a bit too short here. We got killed on the break because we fell in love with the 3-point shot and couldn't run. I've said this a million times and I'll say it again. We don't need a long range 3-point bomber, we just need guys that can hit shots. If we have enough guys that can create, pass, run, jump, finish, and defend, the shooter becomes just a luxury.

The problem is that teams feel like they need true shooters, and those true shooters many times get them in trouble. Launching shot, after shot, after shot. Miami had one true guy that could shoot in James Posey, but he was there because he was one of their best defenders, not because he was a shooter. The fact that they had guys that could hit shots is what won them a championship.

I'd kill the get a shooter talk until I see what Danny Granger gives us this season. It's one thing to shoot 56% beyond the arc. But it's another thing for a Rookie to do it during his first post-season experience. That has to be promising enough to take a chance on. But even after the Playoffs, what was Bird's criticism of Granger? "Danny fell a bit too in love with the three-pointer".

That should tell you alone that getting a shooter isn't on the list. You'd think the way thing's are now that there was never an era where a three-point line didn't exist.

Very good. I wouldn't care if we were last in the league in 3's if that means we are taking good, easy, 2 pt shots instead.
The BEST shooters in the league miss more 3's than they make.

PacerMan
08-01-2006, 12:37 PM
IF we end up keeping Jackson, they get his head on straight, he becomes the 3-4 option that he rates and thus shoots open jumpers instead of trying to create, and we get an improved interior game (which I expect) then Jackson will likely be a much improved shooter % wise. And could fit in very well.

LoneGranger33
08-01-2006, 04:48 PM
Its really less about making the 3-pointers than it is about stretching the defense...

Anthem
08-01-2006, 04:59 PM
Its really less about making the 3-pointers than it is about stretching the defense...
Right. Otherwise the other team packs the lane, which limits JO's effectiveness and takes away our guards' ability to drive.

LoneGranger33
08-01-2006, 05:11 PM
^ That's why he's the best detective on TV.

Anthem
08-01-2006, 05:13 PM
^ That's why he's the best detective on TV.
:laugh:

Young
08-01-2006, 05:28 PM
Delonte West, but I don't know how avaliable he is. Of course though with the trade for Telfair and the drafting of Rondo could West be on his way out of Boston?

Kyle Korver, one of the best pure shooters in the game. Excellant shooter, just excellant.

Damon Jones, cheap, avaliable, and he can shoot. A good spot up shooter who would get open looks off of Jermaine.

Mike Miller, the Grizzles are looking to revampe their team so could Miller be on his way out? I don't know that we have what it would take to get him though but who knows?

Troy Hudson, we need a point who can shoot and he might be the only one we can get but he doesn't exactly excite me due to his many injuries.

Mo Williams, with the addition of Steve Blake could Mo be expandable in Milwuakee? IDK but if he is I think that we can put together a nice offer for him.

Travis Diener, i'd love to get him and I think he could be avaliable with Nelson and Arroyo also at the point in Orlando. I don't know what we can offer Orlando for him though, they could opt to keep him over Arroyo.

avoidingtheclowns
08-01-2006, 06:44 PM
well and with D. Jones / T. Hudson you've got two guards that can shoot but they essentially make Jack's decision-making seem brilliant. plus they both have tinsley-like reputations where attitude is concerned. i'd much rather have snow from the cavs but that seems unlikely.

i've asked in a few other threads but haven't gotten an answer...

what does anyone know about Jumaine Jones? i hear he's a strong defender and has a great 3point shot, but he's bounced around the league quite a bit. a sign and trade for him from Charlotte for Jack?