PDA

View Full Version : Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal



Frank Slade
10-16-2006, 09:51 AM
A Sam Smith article so really so just throwing things out there.

Sam Smith
On Pro Basketball

Big Ben could use this helper
Time may be ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers' O'Neal

October 16, 2006


I'm not even sure about this one. So let's think about this together. What if the Bulls made a run at Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal in a package that would include Luol Deng and the Bulls' rights to New York's first-round draft pick next year?

This presumes that the troubled Pacers would change course and go for a major rebuilding in the face of the strip-club ruckus at which Stephen Jackson fired a gun into the air. Jackson was booed by the home fans Saturday night in his first game since the incident that resulted in felony charges.

Jackson, his disguise not working—he shaved his head—said he merely was protecting his teammates. That would be a more reasonable explanation had he not said the same thing when he went into the stands in Auburn Hills, Mich., two years ago and attacked fans.


There's no question the Pacers have big image problems in a community growing embarrassed by its team. For now, it appears they'll forge ahead with their team as comprised, if not compromised. But they may have to reach a compromise.

It's becoming increasingly hard in conservative Indiana to embrace Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley, whose car was found to contain marijuana the night of the incident. If the team also starts slowly, it's quite possible it could look to trade. O'Neal would be the only player who could bring them value to rebuild.

If a team is going to rebuild through the draft, 2007 may be the year. Pacers general manager Larry Bird knows about the Boston Celtics' success through the draft with Bill Russell, Dave Cowens and then himself.

This next college class could be one of the best ever for big men. Eligible players include Indianapolis native Greg Oden from Ohio State, Spencer Hawes from Washington, Joakim Noah and Al Horford from Florida, Tyler Hansbrough from North Carolina and Josh McRoberts from Duke.

Giving up a season by going into the lottery always is painful. But a team can come out with talent that can carry the team for a decade. It's hard to see how these Pacers, with a core of O'Neal, Jackson and Tinsley, can be much more than a .500 team on the edge of the playoff race. It's the road to nowhere the Pacers were on in the 1980s.

And perhaps no one could offer a better package then the Bulls, for both talent and financial relief.

O'Neal, a perennial 20-point and 10-rebound low-post threat, makes $18 million this season. The Bulls would have to match salary, which would require Deng, P.J. Brown, Michael Sweetney and probably Chris Duhon. The only true core player lost would be Deng, and the Bulls will have to make a decision at some point on that issue.

Does anyone really believe that Andres Nocioni, who will be one of the most sought-after free agents next summer, will re-sign with the Bulls to be a backup?

This is a good problem to have, but inevitable when a poor team begins to emerge as a power after years of top draft picks. It's just a matter of making the right decisions. If you don't, you become the old Clippers. O'Neal would replace Brown at power forward and Duhon probably is the fourth guard, anyway, with the addition of the impressive

Thabo Sefolosha. Brown and Sweetney are in their final contract seasons, and Duhon has only one more left, giving the Pacers substantial salary-cap relief to pursue free agents.

The Pacers also would get the right to swap picks with the Knicks, which the Bulls have from the Eddy Curry deal last year. That means the Pacers, assuming they miss the playoffs, could have two lottery picks to begin rebuilding and Deng, an emerging young star.

Sure, one could argue that Deng and Nocioni could play together for the Bulls. But that would make for an awfully small lineup with Ben Wallace, none of them exceeding 6 feet 9 inches. And, sorry, but the Knicks look like they'll be better. Whomever the Bulls could get for that pick probably wouldn't help much until Wallace is done.

Watching the unbeaten Bulls in the brief exhibition season thus far, a low-post presence opposite Wallace would look awfully good. Why not go for it all now while Wallace still is Big Ben?

The Bulls look like a 50-win type regular-season team. But what about in the slower playoff games? Wallace figures to be at his best only for the next year or two. Why not try to add an offensive force to complement him now instead of waiting for Tyrus Thomas to emerge, and perhaps add another young big man in the draft?

One issue could be O'Neal, not generally known for his work ethic. But maybe that could change by being around the Bulls and Wallace, who always has scared O'Neal, and having a chance to finally win a championship. Certainly, it's something for both teams to consider

Chicago Tribune (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-061015smith,1,2377983.column?co%20ll=cs-bulls-utility)

FrenchConnection
10-16-2006, 09:59 AM
Did he forget about Al? How can you write about the Pacers and not mention him as part of the group around which the Pacers plan to build?

Diamond Dave
10-16-2006, 10:01 AM
Well, I like the idea of moving JO on. I have for a long time. But there'd be no way in hell I trade him to a division rival for Luol Deng and a 1st round pick. That would be more dumb than signing Stephen Jackson to a lifetime contract.

Now I would trade JO for Kirk Hinrich and their new rookie so fast it would make your head spin.

Isaac
10-16-2006, 10:17 AM
Sam Smith may actually be a worse sports writer then Jay Marrioti...

ChicagoJ
10-16-2006, 10:21 AM
Its Monday, isn't it.

Time for Sam's one-sided, if I were GM of the Bulls, what would I do column.

Next Monday, I'll bet he explains why Ben Wallace plus Sweetney and PJ Brown for Kobe Bryant is a good trade for the Lakers because it gives them more size inside.

Unclebuck
10-16-2006, 10:25 AM
I enjoy Sam Smith, he's been covering the NBA for a lot of years and he knows the league very well.

But unless the Bulls first include Hinrich, I wouldn't consider trading to the Bulls about JO.

If the Bulls would trade Hinrich, Deng, Tyrus Thomas and the Knicks first round pick then I'd consider trading JO to the Bulls.

I would not consider trading JO unless we get a future allstar point guard. Hinrich is IMo a future allstar, so is Shawn Livingston

FrenchConnection
10-16-2006, 10:26 AM
Its Monday, isn't it.

Time for Sam's one-sided, if I were GM of the Bulls, what would I do column.

Next Monday, I'll bet he explains why Ben Wallace plus Sweetney and PJ Brown for Kobe Bryant is a good trade for the Lakers because it gives them more size inside.

Thank you. I forgot about Sam's patterns. However, forgetting about Al, a free agent in which the Bulls had interest, is just lazy on his part.

BlueNGold
10-16-2006, 10:53 AM
We don't need Deng with Quis and Granger on the team. I would trade JO for Hinrich, the draft pick (or Thomas) and filler. Hinrich would resolve our PG problems for years to come. Thomas will be a solid player in this league and next year's draft is gonna be awesome. The Bulls could win a championship with JO and Big Ben, but we would be moving up.

JayRedd
10-16-2006, 11:02 AM
There are probably very few people out there that are higher on Luol Deng than I am. I think the kid is going to be really, really good for some time.

But is this guy aware that we just drafted Danny Granger, who pretty much brings all the exact same skills to the table? Not to mention we just signed Al Harrington and traded for Marquis Daniels. And we're supposed to trade our franchise player for a guy who may end up being the 3rd best SF on our team?

This may have been the worst article I've ever read. Can't wait for the next one about trading Tyrus Thomas and Chris Duhon for Elton Brand.

FlavaDave
10-16-2006, 11:04 AM
Danny Granger? I mean, clearly the Pacers are rebuilding around JO/Harrington/Granger.

Evan_The_Dude
10-16-2006, 11:08 AM
Train wreck!!

gph
10-16-2006, 11:41 AM
jay mariotti is worse, no question.

i dreaded when i lived in chicago and he would be on the local sports radio. terrible. his speaking made his columns seem bearable in comparison.

i actually am not a huge sam smith guy either, but...BUT...this article was really interesting to me. i dislike the trade, but thought it was interesting at the same time.

three things jump out:

one...he mentions that JO is known for a poor work ethic. When you add in that he didn't work with the team's training staff before, and he wasn't always on site, i think you get to it being true.

two...i know i am biased here as a fan...but...i think danny granger is a three that you build around. given that nocioni is still taking minutes from deng, why would we take a guy that hasn't even gotten his minutes straight?

three...as enamored as i am with oden, horford, noah, hawes,etc...i would prefer JO for the next 4 years. in year 5, i probably would go with fresh blood, but for now, i still think we are a quality PG away from a championship building around al/granger/jo. true, i feel shaky about SG, but i think we have talent. if we can ship out tinsley, jackson, foster and turn it into a PG, great. if we can terminate a contract and use that space on a pg, great. but shipping JO for a pu pu platter, while still having no point, makes no sense.

indyman37
10-16-2006, 11:45 AM
If Ben Gordon was included in the trade I might concider it, but I probably wouldn't end up doing it.

BlueNGold
10-16-2006, 11:53 AM
If Ben Gordon was included in the trade I might concider it, but I probably wouldn't end up doing it.

I would take Hinrich over Gordon, but I would still do a Gordon/Thomas/Filler for JO trade. I think that would be a good move for the Bulls. Not as sure for us. Gordon would give us 3pt shooting and he can play PG. He is also clutch. Thomas is a future star IMO.

Anthem
10-16-2006, 12:10 PM
It would be almost impossible to trade JO to the bulls... they don't have enough players that make money.

Kegboy
10-16-2006, 12:17 PM
If we did this, with our luck, Isiah would get the Knicks into the playoffs. Plus, the last thing we need is another swingman who can't shoot.

Evan_The_Dude
10-16-2006, 12:23 PM
If we did this trade, we'd have too many players. We already have too many now. Somebody wasn't looking or paying attention to our roster.

Kegboy
10-16-2006, 12:37 PM
If we did this trade, we'd have too many players. We already have too many now. Somebody wasn't looking or paying attention to our roster.

We'll split the team in two. One will play at Conseco and the other at the Coliseum. That way, we'll get 3 lottery picks! :woohoo:

Destined4Greatness
10-16-2006, 12:41 PM
Well I fully support the trading of JO, Tinsley, and Jackson in a rebuilding effort. That trade flat out sucks, Hinrich and the First, and i would do it.

Anthem
10-16-2006, 12:50 PM
Well I fully support the trading of JO, Tinsley, and Jackson in a rebuilding effort.
I'm not in favor of a rebuilding effort, but I'm not against trading those three.

Will Galen
10-16-2006, 12:50 PM
I'f I'm trading JO, I would want Hinrich, the New York pick, and they have to take Tinsley off our hands. *

Then what ever they want to throw in to match salaries.

*They don't want or need Jackson.

bulldog
10-16-2006, 12:58 PM
I don't think Bulls would do Hinrich for JO straight up, much less start throwing around draft picks and prospects.

Athletic, talented forwards who have probably already peaked are less valuable than young, talented PGs with their best years are ahead of them, particularly in today's NBA and particularly since JO hasn't shown himself to be the kind of player that will lead a team to a championship.

Pacesetter
10-16-2006, 01:04 PM
I'd keep JO put. The season hasn't even started yet, the guy's have apparently been working very hard in preseason, and we've finally got Al back in house together with JO. No WAY would I do a deal with the Bulls for JO!

Team Indy
10-16-2006, 01:08 PM
If we did this trade, we'd have too many players. We already have too many now. Somebody wasn't looking or paying attention to our roster.

It might make sense if they offered us a new backcourt for JO, thus opening up minutes for Harrison, Baston and Powell to develop into rotation players or future trade assets. It could also help the team protect this year's pick in the deepest draft in years by making the team worse in the short term. But as has been said, the Pacers have too many players to be trading one for two or one for three. Maybe the Bulls can sweeten the deal by throwing in a roster spot or two.

pacerDU
10-16-2006, 01:29 PM
Smith saying that JO has a poor work ethic is downright ignorant.

How does somebody become one of the best low-post players in the league without a work ethic? His abilities in the post are not due to a size or athleticism advantage, it's low-post moves and skills that take a lot of time to develop. The fact he built his body up to be relatively muscular (hard to do on a thin frame), is also another indication of a good work ethic.

It really annoys me when reporters just make stuff up to support a weak argument.

BoomBaby31
10-16-2006, 01:37 PM
My dream would be Hinrich and Gordon and the pick for Jax and O'neal. Never going to happen but nice to dream Right?

sweabs
10-16-2006, 01:42 PM
The fact he built his body up to be relatively muscular (hard to do on a thin frame), is also another indication of a good work ethic.
I've always felt as though Jermaine was never skinny to begin with. He was always muscular, and had clear definition when you looked at his body. But he just seemed more fit than what he has shown the past 3-4 years. It was just a bad idea to bulk him up in the first place. He seemed to have lost all focus on cardio, and the improvements in terms of shear upper body strength did not seem to be improvements at all (especially for a player who spends a lot of time taking outside jumpshots in the first place).

But I digress. JMO.

larry
10-16-2006, 02:01 PM
He forgot about Al!!
No snow mobiles & no skis!!
All that comes out his pen is just a bunch of jibberish.

He knows about Al it just would make his argument
(or this febile attempt to start a rumor) lose steam.
I also want to point out only a FEW big men look like great prospects!!
Quit trying to tank a whole season for a chance
to get the 1 player every team wants.
I mean come on Josh McRoberts down low instead of J.O. ??? :laugh:
Finally, When has J.O. ever been scared of Big Ben ???
Never to my knowledge. J.O. is the hardest working dude on the squad!!
Saying he's lazy is just :bs2: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The truth is that the Pacers have a team that could be as good if not better than Chicago this year.
Sure, the Jackson trial(SSSS) looming like a dark cloud are going to be a huge distraction. You would think after 2 F------G Years !!!
WTF??? :censored:

After the Jack news I've tried to just avoid the Pacers all together which is why I've not been on. Oh well, I'm sure you've seen that get beat like a dead horse last week.
:2deadhors

Hicks - I must admit you have the greatest Smilies on the InterWeb.

Los Angeles
10-16-2006, 02:09 PM
Time may be Ripe for Pacers to deal for Miami's Wade and Cleveland's Lebron James.

We have pieces that Cleveland and Miami need.

Anthem
10-16-2006, 02:09 PM
Harrington's presence makes a JO trade more palatable, not less.

CableKC
10-16-2006, 02:23 PM
If he suggested that we move SJax...then that would totally make sense...but JONeal? Any speculation on anybody's end on moving JONeal is too premature. We haven't even played a single Regular season game....and because of SJax....this guy already has decided that we have no chance in the East?

I don't even know how much filler that would have to be included from the Bulls end in any such trade that would make a Deng for JONeal trade work.

Also...I don't think the Knicks are gonna end up cr@pping out like they did last season...so I doubt that their draft pick is gonna be a Lottery Top 3 pick. I think at best...they are a 7th to 10th team in the Eastern Conference ( meaning if the universe and stars align )...and at worst a 20 to 25th place team in the League....but I don't think that they are gonna do as bad as they did last year.

Now...if we could figure out a way to do a SJax+JONeal for Nocioni ( or Gordon )i+PJ Brown+filler+Knicks Draft pick.....or a Tinsley+JONeal for Kirk+Nocioni+PJ+filler+one of the 2007 draft picks...since PJ Brown is the only expiring Contract that is big enough to match salaries...then I would definitely consider it.

I know that Nocioni plays SF/PF....and we have Granger/Harrington/Shawne...but I would figure out a way to get Nocioni ( for his defense, 3pt shooting and rebounding ).

Okay...I'm back in reality...I know that would never happen.

But if JONeal is ever on the trading block.....I would pretty much figure that SJax or Tinsley is tacked on as a condition to moving him. BTW.....I'm not going to go into any "Tinsley is our best PG or why move SJax" debates....if there were ever any consideration for moving them in the past...it would be as part of a greater deal involving JONeal or Foster.

pacerDU
10-16-2006, 02:33 PM
I've always felt as though Jermaine was never skinny to begin with. He was always muscular, and had clear definition when you looked at his body. But he just seemed more fit than what he has shown the past 3-4 years. It was just a bad idea to bulk him up in the first place. He seemed to have lost all focus on cardio, and the improvements in terms of shear upper body strength did not seem to be improvements at all (especially for a player who spends a lot of time taking outside jumpshots in the first place).

But I digress. JMO.


There's a difference between muscle definition and a frame that naturally and easily promotes muscle growth. A person with a slender build can often be defined and toned, but putting on muscle-mass is very difficult ( I know this from personal experience). Looking at JO's frame, he's naturally wirery and defined, but not built for large muscle growth.

I totally agree with you on it being a bad idea for him to put the extra mass on however. It took away much of his speed, agility and leaping ability. This I think was the reason for him looking sluggish sometimes, not a lack of cardiovascular fitness.

With a thinned down body, he should be much more mobile... and effective.

Tony Valente
10-16-2006, 02:34 PM
Wasn't our 2007 first round pick given to Atlanta already? I dont get it. Do we still have it or what was added on top of the exception to get Al?

Pacesetter
10-16-2006, 02:36 PM
Harrington's presence makes a JO trade more palatable, not less.

Part of the reason for bringing Al back was to inject a fresh spirit in the lockeroom and on the court. Having Al in the mix will take double teams off of JO, and vice versa. If you left Al on the court without JO, the opponents would eat him for dinner. He's a great player, no question, but you'd see a big change in what he could do without JO. Also this isn't only about xx's and oo's, the idea was to bring these two friends back together so that the whole atmosphere in Conseco would change, and it will, just wait until the season starts and progresses. JMO.

JayRedd
10-16-2006, 03:39 PM
I don't think Bulls would do Hinrich for JO straight up, much less start throwing around draft picks and prospects.


I think you're all over-valuing Kirk Hinrich just a little bit here.

Seriously...you don't think the Bulls would trade Hinrich for JO? Of course they do that. (I know the salaries don't work.)

No way do we do anything close to that though. Unless yall want to have to drive all the way to Oklahoma City for home games, that is.

You can't follow up two horrendous seasons and a pre-season PR nightmare by trading your best player for an non-marquee PG that looks like a Lord of the Rings extra.

Naptown_Seth
10-16-2006, 04:54 PM
Giving up a season by going into the lottery always is painful. But a team can come out with talent that can carry the team for a decade. It's hard to see how these Pacers, with a core of O'Neal, Jackson and Tinsley, can be much more than a .500 team on the edge of the playoff race. It's the road to nowhere the Pacers were on in the 1980s.
Or a team can come out with a bunch of busts and end up very much like the Bulls, Magic, Clippers and many other teams that were going to turn it around in one year with a great high draft pick(s).

Actually, it was basically the 90's in which the Pacers were stuck at .500, effectively Bob Hill's 2.5 seasons come to mind. And what magic high draft pick got them out of that rut....um....it was....hold on I know it....no, not Sealy...not McCloud...oh, it had to be someone...maybe Haskin?

It wasn't Reggie or Dale or Rik because they were ALREADY there during those .500 going nowhere runs.

The Pistons weren't even a playoff team and got instantly better. What draft pick did it? None. Hired Rick, huge improvement. Traded for average players who became greater as a unit. Got Rasheed for free. Done.


Fixing yourself in the lottery is the most retarded GM strategy myth ever created. It's promoted by Stern's office to sell fans of bad teams on the idea that next year can instantly be the year with just one pick (or two). That didn't even work for Jordan.

Heck, that didn't even work for the Spurs. They got Robinson and he was awesome and they jumped in their stock...but they also added Elliot the same season because after drafting the Admiral they had to wait on him to finish his naval duty which meant they continued to stink.

And with Duncan they lucked out and had Robinson out all season, but they were great with David and would have been again when he returned regardless of picking Duncan.


Heck the Bulls being mentioned already dealt some of the Baby Bulls away...I thought being great just took a bunch of top draft picks. Guess a first round knocked out in the 2nd season of the BB got them thinking a lot more about the FA market, and according to Smith yet another trade.

WTF would the Pacers want to use a strategy that even Smith himself effectively calls a failure when he suggests the Bulls need to make a run at JO? Shouldn't the Bulls just be riding out their lottery picks right to the top, just like Bird saw happen in Boston, just like the Pacers could do now too?

Whoops, little bit of a contradiction in logic there Sam. Idiot.

bulldog
10-16-2006, 05:15 PM
I think you're all over-valuing Kirk Hinrich just a little bit here.

Seriously...you don't think the Bulls would trade Hinrich for JO? Of course they do that. (I know the salaries don't work.)


I still don't think they do that. Salaries matter, of course, although Hinrich will soon get a hefty paycheck as well. I just look at their team, see how young they are, and question whether they would give up their best young prospect for a player whose best years may be behind him and has an injury history.

pacerDU
10-16-2006, 07:19 PM
I agree with you Jay Redd. Hinrich is a nice player for sure, but he's not at JO's level. Just think about this team, as is, with JO gone and Hinrich added. That would be a middle-of-the-road team.

PG is the most skilled position on the floor, however it is easier to get a good PG than it is to get a quality big-man, who is good on both O and D.

Some might say the team we have right now is middle-of-the-road. I don't necessarily agree. I think it'll depend on the team chemistry and no one can predict that.

Trading JO would be a mistake, especially to a division rival. Sam Smith has been writing for a long time, but this article is highly ambitious. He's wearing his red and black goggles at the moment.

BlueNGold
10-16-2006, 07:23 PM
A Hinrich-JO straight up deal if it were financially possible would be a mistake. That should be obvious. You add a first round pick to that, and it gets more interesting.

grace
10-16-2006, 09:32 PM
Hinrich would resolve our PG problems for years to come.

And that's why the Bulls won't yet you have him.

grace
10-16-2006, 09:39 PM
I think you're all over-valuing Kirk Hinrich just a little bit here.

Seriously...you don't think the Bulls would trade Hinrich for JO? Of course they do that. (I know the salaries don't work.)

I don't think the Bulls would do it.

speakout4
10-16-2006, 09:56 PM
The Bulls would be crazy to take on JO's salary when they have to sign Deng, Hinrich, and Gordon to bigger salaries.

Jermaniac
10-16-2006, 09:58 PM
Time may be ripe for Sam Smith to shut his mouth

Pacesetter
10-17-2006, 12:58 AM
Time may be ripe for Sam Smith to shut his mouth

Now THAT was funny! :D

spazzxb
10-17-2006, 01:23 AM
Did he forget about Al? How can you write about the Pacers and not mention him as part of the group around which the Pacers plan to build?


Maybe Sam gets his roster info from ESPN2K. Their roster updates are ridiculasly late.:-)

spazzxb
10-17-2006, 01:32 AM
Wasn't our 2007 first round pick given to Atlanta already? I dont get it. Do we still have it or what was added on top of the exception to get Al?

I believe we gave alanta our pick.

Kingsfanbmiller
10-17-2006, 05:20 AM
This would work financially:

Duhon+PJ Brown+Deng+Knicks pick

which could be: Duhon+PJ Brown+Deng+Oden

and the Pacers would end up with a lottery pick themselves probably.

Starting line up of 2007-2008:

Duhon/Daniels/Granger/Harrington/Oden

That looks pretty good to me. Keep in mind that JO has been rather injury prone the past few years and you're getting twice the shot at Oden with 2 lotto picks. You'd suck for 1 season but be pretty good the next, and you could market Oden as a hometown hero type guy right?

FlavaDave
10-17-2006, 09:00 AM
This would work financially:

Duhon+PJ Brown+Deng+Knicks pick

which could be: Duhon+PJ Brown+Deng+Oden

and the Pacers would end up with a lottery pick themselves probably.

Starting line up of 2007-2008:

Duhon/Daniels/Granger/Harrington/Oden

That looks pretty good to me. Keep in mind that JO has been rather injury prone the past few years and you're getting twice the shot at Oden with 2 lotto picks. You'd suck for 1 season but be pretty good the next, and you could market Oden as a hometown hero type guy right?


We traded our pick to get Harrington.

cariocapacer
10-17-2006, 10:15 AM
If we were going to do this we should have done it in the off season and moved everybody - JAx, Tins, etc. - and gone for cap space. I thought that is what we should have done then but at this point its probably too late.

Frank Slade
10-17-2006, 10:34 AM
I believe we gave alanta our pick.

I think what Sam Smith was referring to was if the Pacers just decide to just scrap this year and rebuild. Then we might miss the playoffs and hold onto our '07 Pick since it's protected through the first 10 picks this year.

FlavaDave
10-17-2006, 10:38 AM
I think what Sam Smith was referring to was if the Pacers just decide to just scrap this year and rebuild. Then we might miss the playoffs and hold onto our '07 Pick since it's protected through the first 10 picks this year.


Oh yeah. Good call.

Kingsfanbmiller
10-17-2006, 05:18 PM
Well honestly if the Pacers were gonna tank for a year you might as well make some more moves. Like trade Tinsley+Jackson(or waive him, he makes your team worse). Trade guys like Foster for expiring contracts. Then you would have cap room to go after a top free agent also.

So you would have:
Knicks pick(possibly Oden)
Pacers pick(possibly someone like Kevin Durant)
Cap room, maybe you could sign someone like Vince Carter or Chauncey Billups
Deng
Duhon
PJ Brown(expiring, ends up being cap room)

Starting five the year after can possibly be: Billups/Daniels/Granger/Harrington/Oden
bench of: Duhon/Deng/Durant/Harrison
give it a year or 2 and it's a contender, maybe a dynasty for years. Honestly though I don't think you'll get that much in a deal for JO though, he's not really worth that much.

spazzxb
10-17-2006, 05:29 PM
I think what Sam Smith was referring to was if the Pacers just decide to just scrap this year and rebuild. Then we might miss the playoffs and hold onto our '07 Pick since it's protected through the first 10 picks this year.

Your right, i completly forgot it was lottery protected.

JayRedd
10-17-2006, 05:44 PM
Your right, i completly forgot it was lottery protected.

Was it Lottery- or Top 10-protected?

Does anyone have an official ruling on this?

ChicagoJ
10-17-2006, 06:10 PM
Isn't there still a rule that you can't trade your pick in consecutive years.

I assume next year there's no such lottery protection, and we can't trade this pick twice.

Its impossible.

Naptown_Seth
10-17-2006, 06:34 PM
I think what Sam Smith was referring to was if the Pacers just decide to just scrap this year and rebuild. Then we might miss the playoffs and hold onto our '07 Pick since it's protected through the first 10 picks this year.
I'm betting that Smith totally forgot about that aspect and it's just dumb luck that the pick would be protected in his plan, though only if they stunk bad enough.


As I said in my rant, where is the logic behind the Pacers going to the lottery when Smith is admitting with this plan that the lottery alone is not enough for the Bulls to return to contention. They were a first round and out team last year. Since then they signed Ben Wallace and a trade for JO would be a 2nd major vet addition, 2 players getting way over $10m a year.

Sorry, that's not exactly inspirational support for the lottery plan that he expects the Pacers to buy into. He might as well tell us that his swamp cottage isn't the right fit for him, but for us it would be a vacation paradise.