PDA

View Full Version : Star] Walsh: Pacers keep their options open



Will Galen
08-03-2006, 04:35 AM
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060803/SPORTS04/608030410/1088

August 3, 2006

Walsh: Pacers keep their options open
With agent change, Harrington deal unlikely to happen anytime soon
By Mark Montieth

mark.montieth@indystar.com

Al Harrington hopes a change of agents will be the agent of change that brings a resolution to his free agency.

Just how that affects the Indiana Pacers' status as the leading contender for Harrington remains to be seen. CEO Donnie Walsh, however, remains hopeful even as he considers possible backup plans.

"We do think about that," Walsh said. "We'll spend the rest of the summer developing something I think will be good. If (the Pacers lose Harrington), we still have the trade exception.

"I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills (the need for a starting forward) other than Al. At the same time, I think through trades there may be somebody out there who fits our team. I've got some people in mind. We'll have to see."

Harrington's status became murkier after he dropped agent Andy Miller in favor of Arn Tellem earlier this week, arousing speculation that the bidding will be reopened. Harrington has said he would like to return to the Pacers, where he played his first six NBA seasons.

The Pacers were the only team negotiating for Harrington in recent weeks, and had reached a standstill with Atlanta, his most recent team.

For Tellem to bring significant change to the negotiations, he'll have to convince the Hawks to take back contracts that would add to their payroll, something they have not wanted to do.

If he achieves that, the Pacers could use their trade exception in a three- or four-team deal to acquire Harrington, or look elsewhere for frontcourt help.
The Pacers also have the mid-level exception, which would allow them to offer a free agent contract starting at $5.2 million, and the biannual exception of $1.8 million.

They could use their trade exception and the mid-level without having to pay the luxury tax, but Walsh indicated that would be done only if a special opportunity arises. They also can use a portion of the mid-level exception.
Tellem did not return a telephone call to his office. Harrington has been unreachable since changing his cell number.

According to NBA rules, Tellem cannot officially become Harrington's agent for two weeks after the termination letter was sent to Miller. A trade can be made during that period, however, with the National Basketball Players Association acting on Harrington's behalf. Tellem still can negotiate the trade and receive a fee for his work.

"I'm sure there will be a period where Arn is going to go back over the steps taken by Andy, so there will be a delay," Walsh said. "Other than that, there shouldn't be a difference. I've dealt with both men. I thought Andy did everything he should have done. Arn will do everything he should do."

The Pacers had offered their $7.5 million trade exception and a first-round draft pick to the Hawks for Harrington, who averaged 18.6 points and 6.9 rebounds last season. They might have been willing to take back former Pacers center John Edwards in the deal, but the talks stalled over whether the Pacers would include a cash payment.

That all could change now that Tellem is representing Harrington. Walsh, however, is comfortable working with Tellem, who represented former Pacers Reggie Miller, Mark Jackson and Jonathan Bender, and now represents Jermaine O'Neal.

Tellem already has talked with Walsh a few times regarding Harrington as well as members of Atlanta's ownership group in an attempt to recharge the process.

"There's a lot of time yet," Walsh said.

Mourning
08-03-2006, 04:46 AM
Argh!!! We give up a first round pick. The stalling is over the cash payment!!! :mad:

This better not be next years first rounder!

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

rexnom
08-03-2006, 05:39 AM
You know, I'm not going to be horribly disappointed if this doesn't go through. I think we might be able to use that TE still.

Mourning
08-03-2006, 06:00 AM
Aggreed, Rexnom. I never was a big favorite of getting back Al. I could live with him coming back as he would obviously reenforce our team, but I don't think he's what our team is missing. I also don't see him as a necessary vital piece for a championship team here.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

BlueNGold
08-03-2006, 06:08 AM
The TE and a 1st round pick was a fair deal for Al. The Hawks are being very greedy unless you assume the Pacers are going to the finals and will have the 20 something pick. Even then, we would get a good player particularly in next year's draft. That pick combined with the TE is fair for a tweener who was not even the best player on a crappy team....and could not crack our starting line up and had to be shipped out...and who should not start on our current team with Granger and JO.

The Hawks were lucky to get the offer they did. In fact, I would prefer using the TE on someone who would fit the team better AND use our 1st round pick next year on a particularly deep draft.

rexnom
08-03-2006, 06:15 AM
The TE and a 1st round pick was a fair deal for Al. The Hawks are being very greedy unless you assume the Pacers are going to the finals and will have the 20 something pick. Even then, we would get a good player particularly in next year's draft. That pick combined with the TE is fair for a tweener who was not even the best player on a crappy team....and could not crack our starting line up and had to be shipped out...and who should not start on our current team with Granger and JO.

The Hawks were lucky to get the offer they did. In fact, I would prefer using the TE on someone who would fit the team better AND use our 1st round pick next year on a particularly deep draft.
While I don't agree with you're sentiment that the Hawks were lucky to get the offer they did (I think they could have done better), I do agree with the bolded part. My only question is, can we find such a player? How attractice is it for any given team to do a salary dump of near 7.5mil?

Will Galen
08-03-2006, 06:27 AM
Argh!!! We give up a first round pick. The stalling is over the cash payment!!! :mad:

This better not be next years first rounder!

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

I think Bird and Walsh are thinking if JO doesn't get it done this next season they will push him out the door and trade him for the highest first rounder they can get. (plus other considerations of course) Then they would still have Al to play PF.

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 08:02 AM
CEO Donnie Walsh, however, remains hopeful even as he considers possible backup plans.

"We do think about that," Walsh said. "We'll spend the rest of the summer developing something I think will be good. If (the Pacers lose Harrington), we still have the trade exception.

"I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills (the need for a starting forward) other than Al. At the same time, I think through trades there may be somebody out there who fits our team. I've got some people in mind. We'll have to see."



I wonder who he has in mind, interesting.

One thing I really worry about as Bird takes over is Bird's relationship and reputation with player agents. Donnie has always had an excellent relationship and reputation with the agents and that is so important in todays NBA and I just don't see Bird having that. In fact that is what worries me most about Bird taking over for DW.

DisplacedKnick
08-03-2006, 08:06 AM
I do like the spin in the article that the Pacers primary need is a starting PF. Guess Jermaine O'Neal just doesn't cut it.

Rather than say that what you REALLY need is a starting center ...

Of course the DWIG crowd will take that and run with it which I'm sure is what he's counting on.

RWB
08-03-2006, 08:11 AM
I wonder who he has in mind, interesting.

One thing I really worry about as Bird takes over is Bird's relationship and reputation with player agents. Donnie has always had an excellent relationship and reputation with the agents and that is so important in todays NBA and I just don't see Bird having that. In fact that is what worries me most about Bird taking over for DW.

I'll be surprised if Donnie completely retires. There are alot of consultants in the world and I could see Pacer Consultant affixed to DW's name.

rexnom
08-03-2006, 08:11 AM
I wonder who he has in mind, interesting.

One thing I really worry about as Bird takes over is Bird's relationship and reputation with player agents. Donnie has always had an excellent relationship and reputation with the agents and that is so important in todays NBA and I just don't see Bird having that. In fact that is what worries me most about Bird taking over for DW.
Yeah, but that's unavoidable. Frankly, I'd like to keep DW forever but that's just impossible. We're just lucky we had him for so long.

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 08:15 AM
I do like the spin in the article that the Pacers primary need is a starting PF. Guess Jermaine O'Neal just doesn't cut it.

Rather than say that what you REALLY need is a starting center ...

Of course the DWIG crowd will take that and run with it which I'm sure is what he's counting on.


At first I read it the same way as you did, but on a reread, I see the quote as a starting forward and not necessarily a starting power forward. In fact DW didn't mention anything about a forward either, the part in ( ) was added by MM to interpret what DW was saying



"I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills (the need for a starting forward) other than Al. At the same time, I think through trades there may be somebody out there who fits our team. I've got some people in mind. We'll have to see."

rexnom
08-03-2006, 08:28 AM
At first I read it the same way as you did, but on a reread, I see the quote as a starting forward and not necessarily a starting power forward. In fact DW didn't mention anything about a forward either, the part in ( ) was added by MM to interpret what DW was saying
Regardless, I'm pretty sure that Donnie understands that we have two positions solidified. One is SF and the other one is either PF or C...it depends on where you really think JO can be more effective.

DisplacedKnick
08-03-2006, 08:51 AM
At first I read it the same way as you did, but on a reread, I see the quote as a starting forward and not necessarily a starting power forward. In fact DW didn't mention anything about a forward either, the part in ( ) was added by MM to interpret what DW was saying

Yeah - except you can at least argue that Harrington could be a starting SF (I think you'd lose the argument) but calling Al Harrington anything but an F would gain you entrance into the NBA equivalent of the loony bin.

I don't want to word-smith here but the problem is the Pacers need a center far, far more than they need someone at either forward position. Getting Al means one of three things - the Pacers are paying a guy close to $10 million per year to be a 6th man, they plan to move JO to C, or they plan on trading JO.

Personally, whatever they pay him I think Al's best suited for the first choice but I have a feeling that's not why the Pacers are getting him.

In fact, IMO the Pacers are getting him more because the fans will do cartwheels over it than because he'll actually help the team.

SoupIsGood
08-03-2006, 09:17 AM
Regardless, I'm pretty sure that Donnie understands that we have two positions solidified. One is SF and the other one is either PF or C...it depends on where you really think JO can be more effective.
:qft:

blanket
08-03-2006, 09:41 AM
I do like the spin in the article that the Pacers primary need is a starting PF. Guess Jermaine O'Neal just doesn't cut it.

Rather than say that what you REALLY need is a starting center ...

Of course the DWIG crowd will take that and run with it which I'm sure is what he's counting on.

I think they consider the PF and C positions to be more interchangable. If we don't get Al, I could see them pursuing a C or a PF with the TPE. Either way, I think they want someone who can replace some of Peja's scoring, something you typically don't get from the C position.

blanket
08-03-2006, 09:46 AM
Yeah - except you can at least argue that Harrington could be a starting SF (I think you'd lose the argument) but calling Al Harrington anything but an F would gain you entrance into the NBA equivalent of the loony bin.

You're not getting it.

No one said Al is anything other than a forward. The speculation is whether the alternative players DW is targeting if the Al deal falls apart are forwards, just power forwards, centers, or if MM just made up his own interpretation of what DW meant.

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 09:46 AM
In Rick's system (at least until now) the power forward and center were interchangable and the shooting guard and small forward were interchangable (offensively). Rick always made a big deal about how Granger was able to pick up and play two totally different positions last season.

I use the past tense because I expect some changes in this system

blanket
08-03-2006, 09:50 AM
I found this to be the most interesting and revelatory part:


According to NBA rules, Tellem cannot officially become Harrington's agent for two weeks after the termination letter was sent to Miller. A trade can be made during that period, however, with the National Basketball Players Association acting on Harrington's behalf. Tellem still can negotiate the trade and receive a fee for his work.

So something might get done earlier than the 15 days.

3 things that still have to be answered:

1) Is Al changing agents because he wants more $ (more than the TPE)?

2) Is Al open to being traded to more teams that GS and Indy?

3) Would Atlanta take back contracts in compensation for Al?

The answers to these could dramatically change the landscape for any Al Harrington trade.

Shade
08-03-2006, 10:08 AM
I would like Al back, but I'm still not willing to give up our first rounder next year for him. There's a decent chance that player will end up being at least as good as Al, if not better.

DisplacedKnick
08-03-2006, 10:36 AM
You're not getting it.

No one said Al is anything other than a forward. The speculation is whether the alternative players DW is targeting if the Al deal falls apart are forwards, just power forwards, centers, or if MM just made up his own interpretation of what DW meant.

He put Donnie's remarks in quotes. That's not interpretation.

And I already said I'm not going to word-smith.

As to what Donnie MEANS - nobody knows except maybe Bird.

But since Al won't help you much anyway, my opinion is this trade is mainly being pursued for PR reasons, something to keep the fan base happy.

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 10:39 AM
I would like Al back, but I'm still not willing to give up our first rounder next year for him. There's a decent chance that player will end up being at least as good as Al, if not better.



What if it were lottery protected which is now the top 14, or what if it were even top 20 protected. You still wouldn't give up that pick.

rexnom
08-03-2006, 10:55 AM
What if it were lottery protected which is now the top 14, or what if it were even top 20 protected. You still wouldn't give up that pick.Top 20 protection definitely...top 14...probably...anthing less...iffy

Shade
08-03-2006, 11:21 AM
What if it were lottery protected which is now the top 14, or what if it were even top 20 protected. You still wouldn't give up that pick.

Top 20? Yeah. Top 14? Nope.

bulletproof
08-03-2006, 11:21 AM
Of course the DWIG crowd will take that and run with it which I'm sure is what he's counting on.

So Donnie has a God complex?

Since86
08-03-2006, 11:33 AM
He put Donnie's remarks in quotes. That's not interpretation.

Parentheses inside of a quoted statement is the author's addition, and not part of the quoted text. Often times it replaces some of the original words.

He could be interpreting it, or clarifying exactly what he was talking about, but those words inside the parentheses aren't Donnie's.

DisplacedKnick
08-03-2006, 12:16 PM
Parentheses inside of a quoted statement is the author's addition, and not part of the quoted text. Often times it replaces some of the original words.

He could be interpreting it, or clarifying exactly what he was talking about, but those words inside the parentheses aren't Donnie's.

What other need would Al fill? Laundry service?

Anthem
08-03-2006, 12:18 PM
"I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills (the need for a starting forward) other than Al. At the same time, I think through trades there may be somebody out there who fits our team. I've got some people in mind. We'll have to see."
Anybody still think Larry's doing anything but scouting?

Since86
08-03-2006, 12:37 PM
What other need would Al fill? Laundry service?

Ugh, this is getting confusing.

In your original post, you said Donnie was spinning that we needed a starting power forward, when the article said just plain "foward."

That particular part of the quote wasn't Donnie's words, but MM's. But no where did it mention Al as a PF.

CableKC
08-03-2006, 12:49 PM
Frak....I would much rather pay the 3mil cash, the TE and take back Edwards then give up the 1st round draft pick.

Does the 3mil go against the Salary cap?

I know that its 3mil....but a 1st round draft pick >>> 3 mil cash. At least we would have a pick in the 1st round next season....3 mil in cash comes and goes ( of course...its not my money...so I don't really care ).

blanket
08-03-2006, 12:52 PM
Parentheses inside of a quoted statement is the author's addition, and not part of the quoted text. Often times it replaces some of the original words.

He could be interpreting it, or clarifying exactly what he was talking about, but those words inside the parentheses aren't Donnie's.

thank you for saving me the time on explaining this one.

Or so I thought...


What other need would Al fill? Laundry service?

Re-read that part of the article. It's not in direct reference to Al, but to a team need that Al or other players might fill. Here's the passage from the article:


"I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills (the need for a starting forward) other than Al. At the same time, I think through trades there may be somebody out there who fits our team. I've got some people in mind. We'll have to see."

As Since86 explained, the part in parentheses is not a direct quote, but an interpretation/clarification by Montieth. Either Donnie said "I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills other than Al" or he said "I don't see anybody in the free agent market that fills [some excluded word or words, e.g., "our needs"] other than Al" -- either way, Mark added the part in parentheses in an attempt to make DW's thoughts more clear to the reader, but his addition of "(the need for a starting forward)" could be strictly Mark's interpretation of what DW was trying to say, or it could be a rewording of what DW actually said.

Either way, it's an unknown.

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 12:54 PM
I would like Al back, but I'm still not willing to give up our first rounder next year for him. There's a decent chance that player will end up being at least as good as Al, if not better.

sorry, but the odds of that are extremely unfavorable.

Hicks
08-03-2006, 01:11 PM
I still want this deal to happen, even if it does mean giving up a 1st rounder. I'm not sold on the idea that we're trading away a future 19+ ppg, 9+ rpg player (which is what he'd have to be to be better than Al), someone who MIGHT get there, and we do not know them. I'd rather take the guy who's proven he can do 18 and 8, and we know exactly who were getting in terms of ability and personality.

"Toss out that gold statue, there's a less than 50% chance I may get a slightly larger one in 2-4 years."

Since86
08-03-2006, 01:14 PM
I still want this deal to happen, even if it does mean giving up a 1st rounder. I'm not sold on the idea that we're trading away a future 19+ ppg, 9+ rpg player (which is what he'd have to be to be better than Al), someone who MIGHT get there, and we do not know them. I'd rather take the guy who's proven he can do 18 and 8, and we know exactly who were getting in terms of ability and personality.

"Toss out that gold statue, there's a less than 50% chance I may get a slightly larger one in 2-4 years."

Al doesn't put the Pacers over the hill. Next years draft is going to produce players that are going to be the man on their respected teams.

The chance of missing the gravy boat is worse than going from round 1 of the playoffs to round 2.:twocents:

rexnom
08-03-2006, 01:21 PM
Al doesn't put the Pacers over the hill. Next years draft is going to produce players that are going to be the man on their respected teams.

The chance of missing the gravy boat is worse than going from round 1 of the playoffs to round 2.:twocents:
You are completely right. I used to agree with Hicks's point of view but I've made a total 180. If we land in the lottery we are not only missing out on an at least Al-level player from the draft but also on whatever else we could have netted for the TE. That's two players. Two that could fit in with this team better than Al. How about getting some backcourt help? And bottom line, like Since86 is saying, Al is not a panacea. Since we're rebuilding, why not get pieces that fit the puzzle and are going to fit our future puzzle?

Hicks
08-03-2006, 01:30 PM
Al doesn't put the Pacers over the hill. Next years draft is going to produce players that are going to be the man on their respected teams.

The chance of missing the gravy boat is worse than going from round 1 of the playoffs to round 2.:twocents:

You don't make every move based on if it "puts you over the hill" or not. We're adding talent for cheap (not giving up our players). Good, proven talent. I'm not hot to pass that up because of a "maybe" "someday".

Hicks
08-03-2006, 01:34 PM
You are completely right. I used to agree with Hicks's point of view but I've made a total 180. If we land in the lottery we are not only missing out on an at least Al-level player from the draft but also on whatever else we could have netted for the TE. That's two players. Two that could fit in with this team better than Al. How about getting some backcourt help? And bottom line, like Since86 is saying, Al is not a panacea. Since we're rebuilding, why not get pieces that fit the puzzle and are going to fit our future puzzle?

Two players that could also not do jack; the point is it's an uncertainty. With Al we have something concrete right here. Some of you don't like him, but it's not about if you like him or not. He's proven, he's young, and he's not a cancer. And $57 over 6 years isn't breaking the bank for someone in their prime either.

Yes, the draft pick COULD be better, but I think there's too much hype being put into that draft (people will be busts, people will drop out of the draft or not even enter that people are expecting to be there), and we've never drafted a true stud when we have the opportunity to anyway (Reggie's probably the closest, but I feel he was our star in spite of his talent, not because of it). Jonathan Bender anybody? I have 0 faith that we'd score a home run on draft night.

And I don't think we'll get anyone close to Al's level with the TE if this deal falls through.

able
08-03-2006, 01:39 PM
uhh we are talking about a "future" draftpick, when did it become certain it would be next year's ?

and as for proven talent: sorry to burst bubbles but please do look at the front line Jeff/JO/Al which we had or Ron/Al/JO

neither worked.

rexnom
08-03-2006, 01:40 PM
Two players that could also not do jack; the point is it's an uncertainty. With Al we have something concrete right here. Some of you don't like him, but it's not about if you like him or not. He's proven, he's young, and he's not a cancer. And $57 over 6 years isn't breaking the bank for someone in their prime either.

Yes, the draft pick COULD be better, but I think there's too much hype being put into that draft (people will be busts, people will drop out of the draft or not even enter that people are expecting to be there), and we've never drafted a true stud when we have the opportunity to anyway (Reggie's probably the closest, but I feel he was our star in spite of his talent, not because of it). Jonathan Bender anybody? I have 0 faith that we'd score a home run on draft night.

And I don't think we'll get anyone close to Al's level with the TE if this deal falls through.
Hey, I'm with you...if it's a top 20 protected pick and Al isn't getting paid Peja money...I'm just afraid that we'll get screwed into overpaying...again.

Since86
08-03-2006, 01:44 PM
The US didn't win the space race, by taking the proven way.

The pacers are at a crossroad, and the decision they make will shape their franchise for the next 4-5years atleast. Getting Al won't make that big of a difference. He means an exit in round 1 compared to an exit in round 2.

I'd rather swing for the fence and strike out, then single and then have the guy behind you make the last out. Something big needs to happen for this franchise, either a trade for a major player, or drafting one.

We don't have the pieces to make a big time trade, especially when our biggest chip is going to be used to play 4extra games next year.

btowncolt
08-03-2006, 01:46 PM
I'd give them a 1st rounder if it was top 30 protected for the next 230 years (it's Atlanta, don't tell them).

Since86
08-03-2006, 01:47 PM
uhh we are talking about a "future" draftpick, when did it become certain it would be next year's ?


they're offering their 2007 first-round pick and are willing to take back John Edwards' salary from Atlanta. http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23124

SoupIsGood
08-03-2006, 01:54 PM
and as for proven talent: sorry to burst bubbles but please do look at the front line Jeff/JO/Al which we had or Ron/Al/JO

neither worked.

No. Ron/Al/JO worked great. It was the backcourt that let us down.

SoupIsGood
08-03-2006, 01:55 PM
Two players that could also not do jack; the point is it's an uncertainty. With Al we have something concrete right here. Some of you don't like him, but it's not about if you like him or not. He's proven, he's young, and he's not a cancer. And $57 over 6 years isn't breaking the bank for someone in their prime either.

Yes, the draft pick COULD be better, but I think there's too much hype being put into that draft (people will be busts, people will drop out of the draft or not even enter that people are expecting to be there), and we've never drafted a true stud when we have the opportunity to anyway (Reggie's probably the closest, but I feel he was our star in spite of his talent, not because of it). Jonathan Bender anybody? I have 0 faith that we'd score a home run on draft night.

And I don't think we'll get anyone close to Al's level with the TE if this deal falls through.

I think I tend to agree with you Hicks. It's just the thought of a draft night without a first makes me wanna hit somebody. I love the draft. So If I'm being selfish, I'd say don't give up the pick. If I want what's best for the team, I'd say give it up.

Rinuven
08-03-2006, 02:57 PM
In Rick's system (at least until now) the power forward and center were interchangable and the shooting guard and small forward were interchangable (offensively). Rick always made a big deal about how Granger was able to pick up and play two totally different positions last season.

I use the past tense because I expect some changes in this system

This is right on the money. Looking at the players we've picked up this summer, it is clearly a roster of interchangeable parts. I fully expect guys to be playing multiple positions regularly based on how we match-up with opposing teams.

Get this deal done, I say. Teams will have to guard Harrington, they don't guard Foster. Harrington is a proven NBA player. The draft is always a gamble. Yeah, there is potential, but I don't feel like gambling when I have a player I know will positively impact a team that already has an All-Star in his prime on the roster. It sounds like the cash is the hang-up with TPTB anyway. I'm not a number's guy, what sort of effect would handing over the $3 mil have?

Unclebuck
08-03-2006, 03:08 PM
Top 20? Yeah. Top 14? Nope.


Top 17?

Peck
08-03-2006, 03:31 PM
Hicks is on the money here.

The Bulls traded away Elton Brand for a player that they one day thought might be as good as.....well, Elton Brand.

However that bit them in the @ss.

Al will give you #'s now, not 3-4 years from now. Also to many of you are assuming lottery pick.

Well # 14 is also a lottery pick so no way in hell would I bet that anybody picked after the top 10 next season will come in & do what Al could do for the next 3-4 years.

I hate giving up draft picks as well, but in this case I certainly would make the move. If you can make it a top 5 protected pick then great but if not, then it's a roll of the dice.

BTW, Anthem good call on the Bird thing.

Am I the only person who ever wonders why Montieth always is the one to interview Walsh & not Wells?

Bball
08-03-2006, 03:36 PM
Am I the only person who ever wonders why Montieth always is the one to interview Walsh & not Wells?

Have you not seen Walsh's office door?

http://www.turkishfencingfoundation.org/HTM/AyiyiKafesineSokmak_dosyalar/image002.jpg


-Bball

Mourning
08-03-2006, 03:58 PM
sorry, but the odds of that are extremely unfavorable.

Yes, because Danny was taken with what pick? And Al was taken with what pick again?

With next years lottery beying projected to be one of the deepest in recent history I don't want us to miss out because of Al.

I'm ok with giving Atlanta the TE, taking back Veep and giving them up to about $2.5 mil aswell as our 2008 second rounder, but that's about it for me. He simply isn't worth more IMO.

I might even give up a second 2nd rounder IF I had a gun put to my head, but that first rounder has to stay, ESPECIALLY because after this summers dealing is done we are CLOSE again to the luxury tax, therefor the room for getting better are mainly the draft and/or trading (and, offcourse our own players progressing).

I don't know if other teams are willing to give up the pieces we want to give up and give us something we like in return. Or better I think it's very unlikely that will be the case. So, that mainly leaves the draft, oops, I forgot ... we gave that one up. So, how are we EVER going to fix our PG position then?

A nice PG next year is something we could use very well. We are too full at that position now, but next summer there could be room enough.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 04:34 PM
I still want this deal to happen, even if it does mean giving up a 1st rounder. I'm not sold on the idea that we're trading away a future 19+ ppg, 9+ rpg player (which is what he'd have to be to be better than Al), someone who MIGHT get there, and we do not know them. I'd rather take the guy who's proven he can do 18 and 8, and we know exactly who were getting in terms of ability and personality.

"Toss out that gold statue, there's a less than 50% chance I may get a slightly larger one in 2-4 years."

Absolutely right. An 18 and 8 guy in hand is worth 2 "maybe in a few years".
Guess those guys have forgotten about Bender. And Haskin. And McCloud. etc etc etc

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 04:35 PM
You are completely right. I used to agree with Hicks's point of view but I've made a total 180. If we land in the lottery we are not only missing out on an at least Al-level player from the draft but also on whatever else we could have netted for the TE. That's two players. Two that could fit in with this team better than Al. How about getting some backcourt help? And bottom line, like Since86 is saying, Al is not a panacea. Since we're rebuilding, why not get pieces that fit the puzzle and are going to fit our future puzzle?


You guys REALLY can't grasp that this team can be decent next year????????

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 04:36 PM
uhh we are talking about a "future" draftpick, when did it become certain it would be next year's ?

and as for proven talent: sorry to burst bubbles but please do look at the front line Jeff/JO/Al which we had or Ron/Al/JO

neither worked.


Burst bubbles???
Maybe you should do the looking, like at some tapes of when those guys played together.
Hint: (it worked just fine)

rexnom
08-03-2006, 04:38 PM
You guys REALLY can't grasp that this team can be decent next year????????
I mean, I hope we will be decent, but just in case we aren't...let's protect this pick. That is all I'm saying.

EDIT: hasn't it already been determined that a pick will go?

Frank Slade
08-03-2006, 04:39 PM
Have you not seen Walsh's office door?

http://www.turkishfencingfoundation.org/HTM/AyiyiKafesineSokmak_dosyalar/image002.jpg

-Bball

:lmao:

I was just thinking yesterday, the Star has it figured out. Good Cop/ Bad Cop
With Wells and Montieth.

Wells a relative newcomer, has nothing to lose , he shoots from the hip and has no reason to hold back due to any long rooted ties with the Pacers.

Montieth on the other hand can tow the company line, stay in the good graces of Walsh and has his front row seat reserved for all the Press Conferences, and interviews.

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 04:41 PM
Yes, because Danny was taken with what pick? And Al was taken with what pick again?



Right, and Danny is such big news BECAUSE?????????? Because he's a 17 that's actually going to be GOOD.
See it's newsworthy, as in, 'doesn't happen every time'.
Do we REALLY need to make the list of lottery draft BUSTS again to convince some of you that it's not guaranteed??!!

Jon Theodore
08-03-2006, 04:45 PM
We should CLEARLY just tank this season. Trade Jermaine for some young guys and some future draft picks and get Greg Odens.

Or we could be mediocre and let New York get him.

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 04:45 PM
I mean, I hope we will be decent, but just in case we aren't...let's protect this pick. That is all I'm saying.

EDIT: hasn't it already been determined that a pick will go?

Ok, but AL IS 'the' piece that AT THIS POINT has the best chance of making us from a non playoff to a playoff team. NOT because he's so awesome, but because he fits into this lineups needs. And that's not even touching on his leadership qualities, which I bet you LARGE are a very big factor in us wanting him back. That might not be enough for some of you wanting to blow it up for a prayer at some future result, but I guarantee you it's enough for TPTB.

Since86
08-03-2006, 04:48 PM
Ok, but AL IS 'the' piece that AT THIS POINT has the best chance of making us from a non playoff to a playoff team. NOT because he's so awesome, but because he fits into this lineups needs. And that's not even touching on his leadership qualities, which I bet you LARGE are a very big factor in us wanting him back. That might not be enough for some of you wanting to blow it up for a prayer at some future result, but I guarantee you it's enough for TPTB.

With, or without, they'll make the playoffs.

He doesn't fit this lineup needs. A guard would fit the bill, not another forward who's a tweaner. A center would be better.

The biggest glaring need is a PG. Plain and simple.

avoidingtheclowns
08-03-2006, 05:18 PM
Have you not seen Walsh's office door?

http://www.turkishfencingfoundation.org/HTM/AyiyiKafesineSokmak_dosyalar/image002.jpg (http://www.turkishfencingfoundation.org/HTM/AyiyiKafesineSokmak_dosyalar/image002.jpg)


-Bball
interesting fact: Donnie Walsh has a giant Stephen Colbert tattoo on his inner thigh

BEARS AND WELLS ARE ON NOTICE!

BlueNGold
08-03-2006, 06:33 PM
While I don't agree with you're sentiment that the Hawks were lucky to get the offer they did (I think they could have done better), I do agree with the bolded part. My only question is, can we find such a player? How attractice is it for any given team to do a salary dump of near 7.5mil?

Lucky to get the deal they were offered from the Pacers, that is. ...and I'm not so sure they could get a better offer considering they have no interest in taking on other players.

PacerMan
08-03-2006, 08:06 PM
With, or without, they'll make the playoffs.

He doesn't fit this lineup needs. A guard would fit the bill, not another forward who's a tweaner. A center would be better.

The biggest glaring need is a PG. Plain and simple.

This team, as configured now, won't make the playoffs.
He does fit this teams needs.

Sollozzo
08-04-2006, 12:25 AM
Hicks is on the money here.

The Bulls traded away Elton Brand for a player that they one day thought might be as good as.....well, Elton Brand.

However that bit them in the @ss.

Al will give you #'s now, not 3-4 years from now. Also to many of you are assuming lottery pick.

Well # 14 is also a lottery pick so no way in hell would I bet that anybody picked after the top 10 next season will come in & do what Al could do for the next 3-4 years.

I hate giving up draft picks as well, but in this case I certainly would make the move. If you can make it a top 5 protected pick then great but if not, then it's a roll of the dice.

BTW, Anthem good call on the Bird thing.

Am I the only person who ever wonders why Montieth always is the one to interview Walsh & not Wells?



Elton Brand is at a higher level than Al Harrington is. It is much easier to get an Al Harrington type of player than it is to get an Elton Brand, someone who is one of the top big men in the league.

The Bulls trading him was stupid, but deciding to take a draft pick over Al Harrington could possibly pay off.

Anthem
08-04-2006, 12:31 AM
This team, as configured now, won't make the playoffs.
He does fit this teams needs.
Man, I don't think I've ever been as emotionally attached to a player (including Reggie) as you are to Al Harrington. It's crazy.

Mourning
08-04-2006, 07:03 AM
This team, as configured now, won't make the playoffs.
He does fit this teams needs.

He fits A need, not our primary need though.

Adn this will be a "first round and out" play-off's team with Al. I rather not make it next year if we are going to be structurally a first round team, which is what we will be IF we get Al. Ok, occasionally a "second round and out", maybe.

I rather waite a little to be structurally better in a year.

Oh, and PacerMan, what pick did we get Antonio with?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

ESutt7
08-04-2006, 07:50 AM
I thought some were saying that the plan was to get a proven secondary scorer (Al) before shipping Jackson out. Jack had a poor season-ending meeting with management, and after we are sure that we have Harrington we are going to be shopping Jackson hard. Maybe that will answer a question at C or PG. So be patient, this Al deal is NOT going to be the final deal this summer. There will probably be one or two more.

Naptown_Seth
08-05-2006, 03:28 AM
Shouldn't all debates about the value of banking on a lottery pick be instantly ended by the Latin phrase "Jonathan Bender", which means "don't count your chickens before they hatch".

;)


I'm with Hicks, bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.

Bball
08-05-2006, 03:32 AM
I'm with Hicks, bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.

What's a Bird in Europe worth?

-Bball

MagicRat
08-05-2006, 08:11 AM
What's a Bird in Europe worth?

-Bball

2 Maccabi's and a Lorbek?

PacerMan
08-05-2006, 05:55 PM
Man, I don't think I've ever been as emotionally attached to a player (including Reggie) as you are to Al Harrington. It's crazy.

Emotion has absolutely nothing to do with it.
This team has missed him since he left, if you can't see it, I'm sorry if it bugs you.

PacerMan
08-05-2006, 05:56 PM
He fits A need, not our primary need though.

Adn this will be a "first round and out" play-off's team with Al. I rather not make it next year if we are going to be structurally a first round team, which is what we will be IF we get Al. Ok, occasionally a "second round and out", maybe.

I rather waite a little to be structurally better in a year.

Oh, and PacerMan, what pick did we get Antonio with?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

When are you guys going to grasp that laying down is NOT an option. Ever.

PacerMan
08-05-2006, 05:57 PM
Oh, and PacerMan, what pick did we get Antonio with?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:


Don't know. Why?

Anthem
08-05-2006, 05:58 PM
Emotion has absolutely nothing to do with it.
This team has missed him since he left, if you can't see it, I'm sorry if it bugs you.
Oh, I've missed him too. I'd love to have him back.

As for your attachment to him, it doesn't bug me. But it's pretty obvious.

Naptown_Seth
08-05-2006, 06:19 PM
What's a Bird in Europe worth?

-Bball
Jack squat according to at least one player.

He needs to spend more quality time around the team this year, especially if he is going to call them out on the leadership and maturity themes. He says he will be more involved. I hope he backs that up. Not as coach, but showing his support and leadership, as well as understanding the players needs and the locker room dynamic.

Peck
08-05-2006, 06:28 PM
He really screwed the pooch last season IMO, when it came to defending the coach.

It was obvious to everybody that Rick was losing the team from about Feb. on. Larry didn't bother to even aknowledge the problem till the late part of April when it was to late.

He should have come out strong early on for Rick or he should have fired him. But that is in the past so let's hope this season is totally differant from him.

Shade
04-20-2007, 11:23 PM
:bump:

One more oldie, but goodie, about the draft pick-for-Al swap, before the fact.