PDA

View Full Version : For the right deal, would you want Allen Iverson on the Pacers?



Shade
12-09-2006, 10:35 PM
Simple poll, but feel free to expand on your reasons why or why not.

Destined4Greatness
12-09-2006, 10:39 PM
As long as JO is traded with him, because if people thought their was tension between O'neal and Artest, the tension AI and JO would have would blow their minds. Hell we could trade a Draft pick(if it were possible for AI) and we would get worse, because they just won't work together.

Eindar
12-09-2006, 10:41 PM
I'd prefer if Jack were involved in the trade, but as long as we're getting a good deal, lets get him. The team would improve, and attendance would jump.

Cactus Jax
12-09-2006, 10:42 PM
I say yes, and especially this trade, cause Peck would "love" it so much.

Indiana Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Incoming
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, -14.5 rpg, and -0.7 apg.


Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Incoming
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Change in team outlook: +1.0 ppg, +1.8 rpg, and -0.5 apg.


Philadelphia Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Incoming
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Change in team outlook: -7.6 ppg, +12.7 rpg, and +1.2 apg.



Successful Scenario
Due to Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia being over the cap, the 25% trade rule is invoked. Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia had to be no more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Trader Joe
12-09-2006, 10:42 PM
Yes, a thousand times yes. As long as the deal did not include JO and only one of AL or Danny then I would do it. This team has desperately needed a go to, slashing, scoring guard who can get to the rim whenever he wants for so long. I will cry tears of great joy if we get AI.

Jermaniac
12-09-2006, 10:43 PM
Just look at my avatar.

odeez
12-09-2006, 10:43 PM
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS... Trade anyone you like, just please get someone in here who plays with heart!

tora tora
12-09-2006, 10:45 PM
Indiana Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes


not gonna happen

Shade
12-09-2006, 10:46 PM
As long as JO is traded with him, because if people thought their was tension between O'neal and Artest, the tension AI and JO would have would blow their minds. Hell we could trade a Draft pick(if it were possible for AI) and we would get worse, because they just won't work together.

I admit, this thought has crossed my mind. As much as I hate to admit it, AI is a better player than JO, and I'm not sure if he would be able to handle that.

If the two could co-exist, that would be one hell of an inside-out tandem.

Cactus Jax
12-09-2006, 10:47 PM
If you looked at that trade, and only saw that as unrealistic, you need a new pair of glasses.

AesopRockOn
12-09-2006, 10:49 PM
I say yes, and especially this trade, cause Peck would "love" it so much.

Indiana Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Incoming
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, -14.5 rpg, and -0.7 apg.


Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Incoming
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Change in team outlook: +1.0 ppg, +1.8 rpg, and -0.5 apg.


Philadelphia Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Incoming
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Change in team outlook: -7.6 ppg, +12.7 rpg, and +1.2 apg.



Successful Scenario
Due to Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia being over the cap, the 25% trade rule is invoked. Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia had to be no more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

:lol:

#31
12-09-2006, 10:52 PM
FOR THE RIGHT DEAL !?!?!?!?!??! PPFFFFT!! I WOULD TRADE THE ENTIRE TEAM FOR HIM!

pizza guy
12-09-2006, 10:54 PM
Just look at my avatar.

It doesn't happen too often, but I am in complete agreement with you. ;)

If there's a way to get AI here without losing JO, it's an absolute no-brainer to me. We're not going anywhere with the team we've got now, and if this risk doesn't pan out, both JO and AI are tradeable. If it does pan out, the Pacers are NBA Champs very soon. Some folks have issues with AI because of his personality or character, but I simply don't see how he has anything to worry about in that regard. If ALLEN IVERSON is available, you do whatever you can to get him.

Moses
12-09-2006, 10:54 PM
Marquis and Tinsley + a few young guys and some cash for AI.

Aw Heck
12-09-2006, 10:55 PM
I'd prefer if Jack were involved in the trade, but as long as we're getting a good deal, lets get him. The team would improve, and attendance would jump.
If there's a reasonable deal for Iverson, I'd be fine getting him. But I don't think attendance would jump. I think there are a lot of people like Peck and ABADays out there who would turn in their Pacer fan cards if Iverson was traded here.

Of course, if the deal turned the Pacers around, a lot of people would start coming back. But there probably would still be some people who would be turned off.

I just think it would be great to have a legitmate backcourt threat again. And by that I mean someone that defenses have to respect. Iverson would be great at drawing fouls and creating for the team with his dribble penetration.

And I do think JO and AI could coexist. JO could respect a former MVP and multiple time All-Star. JO has an ego, but it's not going to prevent him from recognizing what AI could bring to the team. If JO wants to win, he'll share.

I just think there needs to be a change. Be it players, coaching, or style of play. Because I'm not seeing any improvement in this team. We're just looking at a mediocre team here.

Iverson and Garnett probably aren't going anywhere for a least a month. If the Pacers are still treading water a month from now, it's time to take a nice, hard look at a change.

Shade
12-09-2006, 10:56 PM
Honestly, I am absolutely stunned at how lopsided this poll is early on. Wow.

Aw Heck
12-09-2006, 10:59 PM
Honestly, I am absolutely stunned at how lopsided this poll is early on. Wow.
Granted, this poll did just go up after 30+ point thumping.

But 6 months ago I would've loved to get Iverson if we didn't have to give up anything too major. Tonight's loss hasn't affected my judgment. Although it probably helped a little.

Quis
12-09-2006, 11:04 PM
155% yes.

Gaining an all-time great like Allen Iverson without giving up too much would take us up at least two levels, most likely to being best team in the East. But really, who wants to be the best team in the East if it means taking on a player with evil, evil tattoos?

I think AI would realize he's in a different position and would gladly change his game a bit. He'll still be a top-tier scorer, but instead of being a 32/7 player he could become a 25/9 player here. And if a certain shot chucker as well as Tinsley/Quis were shipped out with him, JO's touches would go down little to nil.

Destined4Greatness
12-09-2006, 11:08 PM
155% yes.

Gaining an all-time great like Allen Iverson without giving up too much would take us up at least two levels, most likely to being best team in the East. But really, who wants to be the best team in the East if it means taking on a player with evil, evil tattoos?

I think AI would realize he's in a different position and would gladly change his game a bit. He'll still be a top-tier scorer, but instead of being a 32/7 player he could become a 25/9 player here. And if a certain shot chucker as well as Tinsley/Quis were shipped out with him, JO's touches would go down little to nil.

This is beyond wishful thinking.

#31
12-09-2006, 11:37 PM
2 people voted for NO!? :crazy:

Leisure Suit Larry
12-09-2006, 11:52 PM
Yes because it is ALLEN IVERSON!

wickedstick
12-09-2006, 11:58 PM
I say yes, and especially this trade, cause Peck would "love" it so much.

Indiana Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Incoming
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Change in team outlook: +6.6 ppg, -14.5 rpg, and -0.7 apg.


Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Ron Artest
6-7 SF from St. John's
17.6 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.6 apg in 39.4 minutes
Incoming
Al Harrington
6-9 SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
18.6 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.1 apg in 36.6 minutes
Change in team outlook: +1.0 ppg, +1.8 rpg, and -0.5 apg.


Philadelphia Trade Breakdown
Outgoing
Allen Iverson
6-0 PG from Georgetown
33.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 7.4 apg in 43.0 minutes
Incoming
Jeff Foster
6-11 C from Southwest Texas State
5.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 0.8 apg in 25.1 minutes
Jamaal Tinsley
6-1 PG from Iowa State
9.3 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 5.0 apg in 26.7 minutes
Marquis Daniels
6-5 SG from Auburn
10.2 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.8 apg in 28.4 minutes
Change in team outlook: -7.6 ppg, +12.7 rpg, and +1.2 apg.



Successful Scenario
Due to Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia being over the cap, the 25% trade rule is invoked. Indiana, Sacramento, and Philadelphia had to be no more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.


Could we trade for Rasheed Wallace and Zach Randolph?

BlueNGold
12-09-2006, 11:58 PM
2 people voted for NO!? :crazy:

They must have wanted him with the wrong deal...;)

The only way you say no to this poll, is if you would not want him on the team even if the Sixers gave him to us.

For those who do not want him, I can understand the drawbacks. However, he or another player like him is rarely available. It only happens every few years at best. He is much better than anyone on our team. Heck, he was better than Miller....at least on the court....and Miller was better than JO will ever be.

Now for a little rant after that joke of a game. This team is going nowhere with the current roster. JO, whether a good or great PF, is not leading us anywhere. He is just not at the level of an AI, Kobe, Garnett, Lebron, Duncan, Wade, Shaq, Arenas etc. He would be lucky to get a shot off in a clutch situation. ...but it's not really his fault. We have dropped a tremendous amount of talent over the last few years. Miller and Artest were both better than JO. We also got smaller and softer in the middle over the last 10 years...moving from a contender to a pretender. I really think the true problem is mismanagement of this franchise. One way or another, it needs to go back to them

indygeezer
12-09-2006, 11:59 PM
There is too much jock kissing around here the way it is...imagine what this place would be like with him here???

Quis
12-10-2006, 12:01 AM
2 people voted for NO!? :crazy:

Some people are content with mediocrity.

Shack80
12-10-2006, 12:37 AM
Anyone remamber Highlander? There can be only one? JO and Ai would not peacfully coexist. There would be sword fights and lightining bolts flying all around in time. It sounds awesome in theory, I just don't buy that they would coexist. It it happend I would root for them like any good fan, but I am very doubtful. I also think what we give up would furthur kill the future of this franchise.

J_2_Da_IzzO
12-10-2006, 12:38 AM
Al hasnt been the right fit for this team. He is still the black hole everyone calls him. IF we get AI then we MUST put Al in the package because having Al and AI would be playing with fire.

Foster, JO, Granger, Jax/Quise, Iverson. That starting 5 looks very dangerous. We have someone that can penetrate and give us 25+ ppg. We have someone that is an elite player in the post and can give us 20/10/3/3. We have a rebounding machine in Foster. An incredible talent in Granger. Jax at the top of his game is also a very good player as is Quise.

brich
12-10-2006, 12:47 AM
AI is a great player, but he has major baggage and a long history of issues. It is easy to fall in love with his talent, and I do think he has matured since he has been in the league, but I don't think this would be a good fit for the Pacers or AI. Can you imagine AI playing for Carlisle?

Some coaches seem to do better with challenging players like AI. Phil Jackson has that knack, Chuck Daly did, and on the football field, Parcells seems to get the job done. Carlisle isn't going anywhere, and as long as he is here, a marriage with AI would be disastrous.

I think AI will wind up somewhere else, and I think the Pacers are going to make some major moves, but I think those will be mutually exclusive occurences. I would be absolutely shocked if AI wound up here.

Eindar
12-10-2006, 12:51 AM
AI is a great player, but he has major baggage and a long history of issues. It is easy to fall in love with his talent, and I do think he has matured since he has been in the league, but I don't think this would be a good fit for the Pacers or AI. Can you imagine AI playing for Carlisle?

Some coaches seem to do better with challenging players like AI. Phil Jackson has that knack, Chuck Daly did, and on the football field, Parcells seems to get the job done. Carlisle isn't going anywhere, and as long as he is here, a marriage with AI would be disastrous.

I think AI will wind up somewhere else, and I think the Pacers are going to make some major moves, but I think those will be mutually exclusive occurences. I would be absolutely shocked if AI wound up here.

Give me a list of his baggage and "issues" over the last 4 years.

IOW, quit crucifying the guy because of the person he was 5 years ago.

Swingman
12-10-2006, 12:54 AM
How exactly do we match Allen Iverson's salary without trading JO?

If we do a 3 for 1 trade, then do we have money to pick up a couple extra players to fill the roster?

Eindar
12-10-2006, 12:56 AM
We still have the MLE, as far as I know. I don't know if we would use it, or if there's anyone worth grabbing, but it's there.

brich
12-10-2006, 01:04 AM
Give me a list of his baggage and "issues" over the last 4 years.

IOW, quit crucifying the guy because of the person he was 5 years ago.

I am not crucifiying the guy, and I even give him credit for maturing over the years. That being said, I will not completely dismiss his past. Some folks did that with Artest, and they were as wrong as wrong could be.

I don't keep a detailed history of his past, but he has been accused, quite a bit, of requiring preferential treatment and having a questionable work ethic (by this I mean missing practices and team meetings...maybe work ethic isn't the right words). I have not been witness to this of course, but there is enough smoke there for me to lend validity to these comments. His effort on the court has never been questioned, however, he plays hard and he plays hurt. He is definitely a warriror.

I think AI had the most issues working under a control freak coach, Larry Brown. Guess what kind of coach the Pacers have.

I also think there is a certain reality that you have to consider. The Pacers have a serious issue with their fan base right now. They have taken some gambles in the last few years with some talented guys who have had "issues" in the past, such as Artest and Jax. In light of that, even if AI has been a complete model citizen recently, I think the Pacers would likely pass on a trade for him.

Hey, I could be wrong, that is just my opinion.

Just
12-10-2006, 01:12 AM
Hell yes! I would do anything that lets us keep Danny and Jermaine. I love Al, but his scoring is not needed if The Answer is here.

jjbjjbjjb
12-10-2006, 01:22 AM
Well... JO straight-up works.

or any three of Jackson, Tinsley, Daniels, and Jasikevicius.

Eindar
12-10-2006, 01:34 AM
I am not crucifiying the guy, and I even give him credit for maturing over the years. That being said, I will not completely dismiss his past. Some folks did that with Artest, and they were as wrong as wrong could be.

I don't keep a detailed history of his past, but he has been accused, quite a bit, of requiring preferential treatment and having a questionable work ethic (by this I mean missing practices and team meetings...maybe work ethic isn't the right words). I have not been witness to this of course, but there is enough smoke there for me to lend validity to these comments. His effort on the court has never been questioned, however, he plays hard and he plays hurt. He is definitely a warriror.

I think AI had the most issues working under a control freak coach, Larry Brown. Guess what kind of coach the Pacers have.

I also think there is a certain reality that you have to consider. The Pacers have a serious issue with their fan base right now. They have taken some gambles in the last few years with some talented guys who have had "issues" in the past, such as Artest and Jax. In light of that, even if AI has been a complete model citizen recently, I think the Pacers would likely pass on a trade for him.

Hey, I could be wrong, that is just my opinion.

I beg to differ. As far as I know, AI hasn't had any serious dust-ups since his "practice" comments 4.5 years ago. I think he's butted heads with some of the riff-raff coaches he's had to play for since Larry Brown left, but I think that's mainly because he didn't respect them.

I think there's a big difference between Larry Brown and Rick Carlisle. Rick wants to control you on the court, as a player. Larry wants to control you on the court, as a player and as a person . That's a big difference. I think that's why Larry butted heads with AI so much. Larry was trying to get him to play "the right way", and at the time, AI didn't see it. I think he sees it now, as he's matured and realized that he can't do it alone. Larry also has a tendency to ride his best player a lot harder than he rides everyone else, as he did with Reggie when he was here. I could see that being a problem with AI, who probably felt "disrespected". Again, this was 4.5 year ago, and Larry Brown burns bridges faster than any coach in the league. I don't think I'd put Carlisle in that same camp.

In fact....

I'd say that Carlisle is part of the problem we have all these disciplinary problems. He seems to be very unwilling to punish players for their misdeeds. Some players, you have to take a very strong stance with. Jax is one of those guys. Jax didn't have any sort of character issues before he came here. More importantly, he didn't really start acting out until Mike Brown left. I don't count the brawl, because that was a special circumstance. Jax did the wrong thing by throwing haymakers, but I don't know how I'd react if my friend were about to be mobbed by 20,000 spectators, so I don't hold it against Jax.

Anyways, my point is that if AI has a problem with Carlisle, it'll be because Carlisle lets AI walk all over him, and AI loses respect for him as a coach, and not neccessarily because Rick is trying to tell him how to live his life. Now, Scott Skiles....I could definitely see some problems there.

avoidingtheclowns
12-10-2006, 02:13 AM
someone made the comment in another thread that AI making as much news off the court as on was a reason not to bring him here. i beg to differ i would be thrilled to have a player make as much news on the court as off in a pacer uniform for sjax

maragin
12-10-2006, 04:02 AM
Harrison, Tins, Jax, and Quis for Iverson and Iguodala

Don't think they'd bite, but who knows.

Peck
12-10-2006, 04:54 AM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.

maragin
12-10-2006, 05:07 AM
I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

Actually, I'd like to hear what you have to say. I don't agree with some of your most notable opinions, but you present them in a logical fashion. (and you're still awake)

I certainly don't think Iverson is the answer for us (pun intended), but I do think that someone of his talent is worth consideration.

The running line I have with the guy at work (76rs fan) is not how much AI will score, but how many shots he will take. We both have a brief laugh, and then realize that he doesn't have many other people to defer to.

I'm intrigued by the Iverson situation, but not sold one way or another on it.

Mourning
12-10-2006, 07:19 AM
I'm not the biggest Iverson fan, but IF the price is right (which to me means JO and Danny not beying involved) then I would support it. Iverson could be the leader of this team.

Which would be good for JO too, because he can let that rope go and focus on what he's best at, beying a frontcourt threat. I also think that leadership wouldn't go from JO to Allen from the get-Go, but more gradually. I think JO would accept Iverson taking over his role.

IF it all doesn't work out we are not in a bad position to trade both of them in the summer and start a real rebuilding project.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

_PD_
12-10-2006, 07:39 AM
What a dream world this is.

Mourning
12-10-2006, 07:40 AM
What a dream world this is.

Then wake up!

indygeezer
12-10-2006, 08:32 AM
Sorry...I see Ivy ending up ina place like Detroit, Chicago, New Jersey.

But how about......IVY for Rashad Lewis, Earl Watson, and fillers.


Giving up quality they gonna want quality back (and ANY Indiana trade talks would begin and end with JO)

speakout4
12-10-2006, 11:08 AM
I believe that AI has more heart than any pacer we have. I have seen him bring his team back by himself when everyone has given up. He would be on the flour for 48 minutes in a game like yesterdays. The man is a competitor . So what exactly do the Pacers have to lose by bringing him in? Can someone tell me the downside of our season if we have AI and not JT, Harrington, Jax, Harrison or Quis. I know that AI has baggage but if he has tow or three good years left then the Pacers have a bargain because who wants to keep JT, Harrinnton, or Jax beyond their present contracts?

Evan_The_Dude
12-10-2006, 11:14 AM
I think it would take a guy like J.O. to convince the Sixers to give us Iverson. "Never trade big for small" is what they always say. However when you have a guy like Iverson as the small, I think that rule be thrown out the window. You have to know that in order to make this happen, either Al or J.O. would have to go, because they're not working out too well together. I know which one I'd choose and I'll keep that to myself.

The only reason why I keep talking about this is because I see a legitimate need for us to look at bringing in Iverson. This team desperately needs a guy that has the courage to put up shots like he does, plays with the heart that he does, wants to win like he does, score like he can, and someone that we can count on in crunch time like him.

I have confidence that TPTB can put together a deal that works and makes sense for our team whether it means getting Iverson or someone else. But like I said before, in the off-season we became more athletic at every position except for point guard. Now is our chance to fix that.

FlavaDave
12-10-2006, 11:28 AM
I think it would take a guy like J.O. to convince the Sixers to give us Iverson.


Remember, the Sixers are trading him no matter what. He is getting the Artest treatment (ie he is staying at home until he has a new address).

I would be more worried about AI's shot selection if the Pacers didn't have a huge problem with scoring droughts and slow starts. I've been saying that the Pacers biggest problem is the lack of a guy in the backcourt who can a) pick up the slack and score in bunches when the team offense grinds to a halt, and b) be a good perimeter defender against point guards. Doesn't AI sound like that type of player?

I say trade for AI under two conditions:

-JO and Granger aren't involved.
-SJax is involved (because SJax plus AI could equal trouble).

Moses
12-10-2006, 11:47 AM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.
I think people want a change. Is Iverson the answer? (No Pun Intended) Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. What is the point of just sitting around as a mediocre .500 team in the East? We either need to hit the lottery and rebuild, or get some talent and win right now. We have some great players, but team chemistry is awful and it's becoming painstakingly clear to everyone that this team simply wont go far if it does make it to the playoffs. We can all sit around and say, They've only played so an so many games, it takes time for chemistry..but that excuse only works for so long. I would deal Jackson, Tinsley, MLE, and Harrison for Iverson in a heartbeat. I'd even be willing to give up Quis as well. Worst comes to worst, Iverson comes here and plays horrible and we get lottery picks. If we don't do anything, then we are going to stay in the middle of the pack in a terrible Eastern Conference.

Kegboy
12-10-2006, 12:04 PM
Anyone remamber Highlander? There can be only one? JO and Ai would not peacfully coexist. There would be sword fights and lightining bolts flying all around in time. It sounds awesome in theory, I just don't buy that they would coexist. It it happend I would root for them like any good fan, but I am very doubtful. I also think what we give up would furthur kill the future of this franchise.

:cool: I'd totally have to get tickets again. :cool:

indygeezer
12-10-2006, 12:29 PM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.

Preach it bro. I think it is more recent than 6 years tho. I go back to RA fracturing this into team oriented vs. player oriented fans.

Coop
12-10-2006, 12:42 PM
Yes, but I'd rather get Gerald Green from Boston. Maybe a three way with Boston and Philly??

aceace
12-10-2006, 12:47 PM
I think it would take a guy like J.O. to convince the Sixers to give us Iverson. "Never trade big for small" is what they always say. However when you have a guy like Iverson as the small, I think that rule be thrown out the window. You have to know that in order to make this happen, either Al or J.O. would have to go, because they're not working out too well together. I know which one I'd choose and I'll keep that to myself.

The only reason why I keep talking about this is because I see a legitimate need for us to look at bringing in Iverson. This team desperately needs a guy that has the courage to put up shots like he does, plays with the heart that he does, wants to win like he does, score like he can, and someone that we can count on in crunch time like him.

I have confidence that TPTB can put together a deal that works and makes sense for our team whether it means getting Iverson or someone else. But like I said before, in the off-season we became more athletic at every position except for point guard. Now is our chance to fix that.

I think your probablt right on. The only way Iverson comes here is probably a deal like Iverson/Dalembert for JO/Jackson. Its not a deal I'm proposing but its a deal that Philly would need. Not even sure if it works. Al can play the 4 and Dalembert would be great at the 5 with his shot blocking ability. I'm not even sure if we would get better, stay the same. I doubt we would become a lottery team due to the talent coming back. Would it really solve our problems though. Iverson will be good for the remainder of his contract after that he will start to fade due to being 34, 3 years from now. I have no idea what to do. I'm sick of the slow starts, getting blown out. Teams that win championships do not get blown out more once or twice a year. We already have 4 of them 22 games into the season. We are not going to win a championship with what we have now. Would a lineup of Iverson, Tinsley, Al, Granger(maybe Quis) and Foster or Dalembert be enough. Who knows but its a thought. I'm writing from the heart here, so don't take this post to seriously. Like everyone else I want to win games.

brich
12-10-2006, 12:48 PM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.

I am with you. To quote Will Ferrel "I feel like I have been taking crazy pills." I mean, even under the best of situations, Iverson is a risk although he is a very talented player with many positive attributes. But when you consider what this team has been through, the Indiana Pacers (we are talking about the Pacers aren't we?), how anybody considers bringing AI here as being what we need...it literally sprains my brain. Not to mention, although anything is possible, I don't even remotely see TPTB making a move like this.

SycamoreKen
12-10-2006, 01:16 PM
Can we make a deal for Iverson that will make us continders? While everyone wants some kind of change, change for the sake of change doesn't mean much to me. If we have to give up JO to get him then it is a lateral move, at best. Our team would be no more talented than Philly's is, some would argue it has less.

I also agree that getting Iverson would not be a boost at the box office if the team doesn't win. I don't think Iverson would sell in Indy like he would in New York, LA, or Chicago. I also think people won't go to games just to see him if we are losing. I want to see the team play well and win, not go to see someone play well individually, but we lose.

I still haven't voted yes or no, and I'm not sure I will. I just not sure it would matter.

aceace
12-10-2006, 01:28 PM
I don't think anyone knows where we are going. We have 8 players with 3 years or less experience. We are relying on those other 7 for the bulk of playing time. We are not getting the job done. Your not very good when you get beat by 20+ on 4 different occasions regardless of an 11-11 record.

Arcadian
12-10-2006, 01:36 PM
Not really. People like to talk about how JO can't co-exist with other players, but Iverson is the poster child. He has had trouble even existing with moderately talented players like Stackhouse. When Webber first got to Philly it was said that he wanted traded.

I don't believe that AI is everything wrong with the NBA. He just wouldn't going to make everything all right with the Pacers.

ABADays
12-10-2006, 01:38 PM
Preach it bro. I think it is more recent than 6 years tho. I go back to RA fracturing this into team oriented vs. player oriented fans.

This is also my landmark on the timeline.

avoidingtheclowns
12-10-2006, 02:00 PM
I think it would take a guy like J.O. to convince the Sixers to give us Iverson. "Never trade big for small" is what they always say. However when you have a guy like Iverson as the small, I think that rule be thrown out the window. You have to know that in order to make this happen, either Al or J.O. would have to go, because they're not working out too well together. I know which one I'd choose and I'll keep that to myself.

The only reason why I keep talking about this is because I see a legitimate need for us to look at bringing in Iverson. This team desperately needs a guy that has the courage to put up shots like he does, plays with the heart that he does, wants to win like he does, score like he can, and someone that we can count on in crunch time like him.

I have confidence that TPTB can put together a deal that works and makes sense for our team whether it means getting Iverson or someone else. But like I said before, in the off-season we became more athletic at every position except for point guard. Now is our chance to fix that.

actually from the sounds of it they would do anything to not take JO (or the JO/JAX trade mentioned above). they are looking for young players (not those two) draft picks (we're fresh out) and expiring contracts (given they're both locked up for big money till 2010... not happening).

aceace
12-10-2006, 02:46 PM
After thinking about it for the last hour there are many reasons why Philly won't trade with the pacers. As someone said they want young developing players, expiring contracts and/or draft picks. We have basically none of these. Philly would love to have a chance at Oden next year. Trading for Oneal at best would only give them the 4th or 5th pick unless they got lucky with the pingpong balls. With that said who's philly going to trade with. Dallas,Minn and a few others have already said its not going to happen. It would have to be someone that sees Iverson as a chance to win now and put them as one of the top 4-5 teams in the league. Dallas,Miami (when they get Shaq back) San Antonio, Detroit, Utah, Lakers (Kobe wouldn't allow that unless they started playing with 2 balls) Sacramento - no one -, Clippers ? who would they give up. Houston is playing great. Orlando too, Who's Philly going to trade with to make them happy?

Would Memphis gamble trading Eddie Jones expiring contract to win now? They're 5-15 and lottery bound. Memphis goes way under the cap next year about 10-12M. Golden State has B.Davis already.

Seed
12-10-2006, 03:19 PM
For me, AI is the most amazing and talented street-ball player I have ever seen. So talented, that he could carry his mediocre team to a near NBA championship. Really, he is a legend. But he just isn't playing the kind of ball I like to watch & cheer for. Matter of taste, I guess. I also think we will have to pay, and pay big to get him. At least something like Tins, DG, Foster and a 1st rounder or so.
So I say no.

JayRedd
12-10-2006, 03:33 PM
actually from the sounds of it they would do anything to not take JO (or the JO/JAX trade mentioned above). they are looking for young players (not those two) draft picks (we're fresh out) and expiring contracts (given they're both locked up for big money till 2010... not happening).

Thank you.

There is no reason to discuss Iverson in Blue and Gold. I wish there was, but aside from Granger and distant draft picks we have nothing they need or would want. Even Granger is redundant to them since they already have young, promisng SFs with UPside in both Igoudala and Carnery. And certainly, they don't need another injury-prone PF that makes $20 million per year.

Evan_The_Dude
12-10-2006, 03:50 PM
If you don't think TPTB have the ability to get Iverson in blue and gold, then you might need to review how creative they were in the offseason. Sure, it's not exactly paying off yet, but we're better off than we were last season by a long shot IMO.

#31
12-10-2006, 03:55 PM
28 freakin NOes? :suicide2:

Unclebuck
12-10-2006, 04:14 PM
I say no to Iverson, but not for the reasons Peck and others have suggested. In order for Iverson to be a success, you have to completely design the whole roster around Iverson. The only player on the current roster who I think could excel with Ivy is Granger.

Let's start with a guard who can play alongside Iverson.
You need a decent shooter, you need a guard who is big enough to guard shooting guards, and yet he needs to have some point guard capabilities, but at the same time he needs to be able to play off the ball. Tinsley - can't guard shooting guards and needs the ball, Saras can't guard anyone, Greene can't shoot well enough. DA can't guard shooting guards, Daniels can't shoot well enough.

So we need to acquire a guard to play alongside Iverson and to be clear that is the most important thing that needs to be done.

I doubt JO or Al could play well with Iverson. Iverson dominates the ball like no other player in the NBA.

So I think we could keep Baston, Foster, Granger and that is really it. And by the time we get the right team around Iverson he will be getting too old.

So I don't think Iverson is a player we need.

AesopRockOn
12-10-2006, 04:14 PM
Lol, no offense but some of you are completely basketball-retarded. If you'd do Jack, Tins, Harrison, and Daniels, that's what you would do. No GM is stupid enough to trade a superstar like AI for that pile of crap. Believe me, I would love to have someone who competed, not to mention is a perennial All Star; but we can't trade our unwanted crap for one of the best players in the league. It's just ridiculous how airbrained some of your trade scenarios are. It's not happening. There is no right deal for the Indiana Pacers.

Frank Slade
12-10-2006, 04:15 PM
Stephen A just now saying Billy King has recieved calls from 14-15 teams.
He has told them to make their best over , put their best foot forward.

He named Chicago, Dallas, Boston and Indiana among the teams you are going to hear starting this next week in regards to talks.

Stephen A saying AI could be dealt as early as this week.

avoidingtheclowns
12-10-2006, 04:25 PM
I say no to Iverson, but not for the reasons Peck and others have suggested. In order for Iverson to be a success, you have to completely design the whole roster around Iverson. The only player on the current roster who I think could excel with Ivy is Granger.

Let's start with a guard who can play alongside Iverson.
You need a decent shooter, you need a guard who is big enough to guard shooting guards, and yet he needs to have some point guard capabilities, but at the same time he needs to be able to play off the ball. Tinsley - can't guard shooting guards and needs the ball, Saras can't guard anyone, Greene can't shoot well enough. DA can't guard shooting guards, Daniels can't shoot well enough.

So we need to acquire a guard to play alongside Iverson and to be clear that is the most important thing that needs to be done.

I doubt JO or Al could play well with Iverson. Iverson dominates the ball like no other player in the NBA.

So I think we could keep Baston, Foster, Granger and that is really it. And by the time we get the right team around Iverson he will be getting too old.

So I don't think Iverson is a player we need.

i'm not saying that AI to the Pacers would be a good deal or work but i think saying that the only way for iverson to succeed is by building a team around him... when has he ever been put into a different situation. philly has tried for years to build teams around him and with some but not remarkable success. one thing that has never been tried is to put iverson into a decent situation that already existed. AI might be willing to do that if he has a couple of talented frontline players in JO, AL and DG... suggesting of course iverson were to come without those three being dealt.

what if we had a lineup of:

AI
SJAX
AL
JO
FOSTER

maybe everyone would be willing to put their egos on the table if they're winning.

like i said, im not advocating he come here, but i also think that to simply say you have to build a team around him might not be the only option out there.

Unclebuck
12-10-2006, 04:41 PM
what if we had a lineup of:

AI
SJAX
AL
JO
FOSTER

maybe everyone would be willing to put their egos on the table if they're winning.

like i said, im not advocating he come here, but i also think that to simply say you have to build a team around him might not be the only option out there.

The point is they won't be winning, and Al and JO will not be happy nor will Jackson. I think that lineup would be a disaster. AI isn't a point guard

avoidingtheclowns
12-10-2006, 05:00 PM
yeah i'm just saying that it could be possible for iverson to be put into a situation that works and not have a team built around him. that was just the pacers example.

i guess the point is that i think AI could be capable of taking somewhat of a backseat if the talent is there. i think everyone would agree that JO would probably be the most talented big man he will have played with and Al is more talented than most he's played with too. i think AI has a better chance of making personal adjustments if in the right situation. i don't see him as destructive as Artest or the like. he's someone that can be counted on to play. and the pacers need his toughness and his scoring. because AL and JO both have been fairly streaky this season.

it was more a devil's advocate thing i wasn't really suggesting that lineup was the answer to our problems. so im certainly not saying the pacers should do this, i just don't think its fair to write AI off as a team killer like Artest or say he's incapable of change because he has really been the only constant on the sixers and never had to adjust to another team. just was throwing that out there.

Shade
12-10-2006, 05:41 PM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.

Constantly failing to meet expectations will do that to a fanbase.

imawhat
12-10-2006, 10:14 PM
I'd still do this trade in a split second under the right conditions.


1. Our "chemistry" issue isn't going to get much worse. How could it get worse if we got rid of two cancers in exchange for one (if you truly think AI is one)?

2. We'd have a legitimate 1-2 punch, and I'd be thrilled if we could keep Granger, Al, Foster, etc. That's enough talent to make us a contender, which is something that we won't be this season barring a move.

3. This talk about individual play vs. team play is quite overhyped. Look at two of the past three title winners. Detroit got over the hump by picking up Rasheed Wallace and Miami won after picking up Jason Williams AND Antoine Walker. Of course both of those teams had more pieces than we have, but the point is that gaining a significant "individual" player doesn't necessarily make your team worse.

4. I think the impact of a fresh start for someone like Iverson is being overlooked. This is a guy that's been in a bad situation for years. I almost guarantee that he'll play great wherever he goes. That includes here, if it happens.

5. I think picking up Iverson would help our defense tremendously. When he came out of college he was considered to be one of the best defensive players available.

6. We know we'd be getting 100 percent every night. Say what you want about the guy, but it's hard to deny that he gives his all on the court. We need that energy and competitiveness right now.






I could go on, and there are some negatives to getting Iverson, but the positives seem a lot more valuable. And this is coming from someone who isn't an Iverson fan.

naptown
12-10-2006, 11:35 PM
Bring on AI!!! As long as Tins and Jackson are a part of the trade then bring it on!!!

Trader Joe
12-10-2006, 11:42 PM
Stephen A just now saying Billy King has recieved calls from 14-15 teams.
He has told them to make their best over , put their best foot forward.

He named Chicago, Dallas, Boston and Indiana among the teams you are going to hear starting this next week in regards to talks.

Stephen A saying AI could be dealt as early as this week.


MAKE IT SO DONNIE AND LARRY!

aceace
12-10-2006, 11:45 PM
I'd buy his jersey if he came here! Maybe... actually I would do a Iverson Dalembert for JO Jax. Iverson has one less year and Dalembert avg 8-8 on 26 minutes and blocks shots. Iverson commits turnovers but makes up for it in steals. I just think you gamble a little sometimes when you can and you know what you get with AI 30pts 7 assists.

Let me ask you guys and gals a question. Would you give up Granger + somene if they took Jackson also.

Jermaniac
12-10-2006, 11:56 PM
OMG I need this in my life. Please Larry and Donnie, Donnie you know King is your boy, talk him into it.

Pig Nash
12-11-2006, 01:10 AM
If we were to get AI, I would almost want to trade JO to the sixers. I think that King is a GM that thinks that winning now is more important then the future, evidenced by bringing in Webber. I think a JO/Granger for AI/Korver or Iguodala would be a good trade. Al can play off the ball. I think that Daniels is a really good fit with AI.

Tell me that this lineup doesn't intrigue everyone?
Foster
Baby Al
Korver(or Iguodala)
Daniels
AI

And with players like Tinsley, SJax, Baston, DA, Sarunas, off the bench, we'd be a damn good team. AI can dominate the ball in this scenario and it wouldn't matter. We'd be much better than the Sixers are now. My opinion however and I know most people don't want to give up Granger at all or JO at all but I'd think it'd take both of them to bring him here. And it would fix our need in the backcourt, without poking a gaping hole in the frontcourt.

ajbry
12-11-2006, 01:15 AM
If we were to get AI, I would almost want to trade JO to the sixers. I think that King is a GM that thinks that winning now is more important then the future, evidenced by bringing in Webber. I think a JO/Granger for AI/Korver or Iguodala would be a good trade. Al can play off the ball. I think that Daniels is a really good fit with AI.

Tell me that this lineup doesn't intrigue everyone?
Foster
Baby Al
Korver(or Iguodala)
Daniels
AI

And with players like Tinsley, SJax, Baston, DA, Sarunas, off the bench, we'd be a damn good team. AI can dominate the ball in this scenario and it wouldn't matter. We'd be much better than the Sixers are now. My opinion however and I know most people don't want to give up Granger at all or JO at all but I'd think it'd take both of them to bring him here. And it would fix our need in the backcourt, without poking a gaping hole in the frontcourt.

The day that Kyle Korver (Diet Peja) and Marquis Daniels are starting ahead of Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley is the day I stop caring about the NBA.

Pig Nash
12-11-2006, 03:20 AM
Do you always have to come out in favor of Stephen Jackson? I am trying to think of lineups that work. SJax and AI both need the ball in their hands to be effective. SJax would be the primary option off the bench. Tinsley is not a better player than AI and I'm starting AI in the backcourt so I need a bigger guy (to guard SGs) and a guy that can handle some backcourt responsibilities. Korver is starting because we need a shooter in the starting lineup. If you want Al to be the shooter, we need a banger, and that's what we'd be lacking if we traded JO and Danger away. Honestly it's not a cureall but this whole team needs some retooling if we don't want to be a perennial 500 team like we have been lately. (with the exception of Reggie's last two seasons)

GO!!!!!
12-11-2006, 03:36 AM
I think everyone is missing the point, for the last how many years this team has dissapointed the fans by not making it past the second round, if we can trade for Iverson and Start winning not only will we get more exposure and attention we get progress and favourable results

Iverson is 31, if we till 2010 commit to a team of Iverson, Harrington, Jackson and Foster or Iverson, Harrington, O'neal I'd be more then happy, AI has been to the finals with less talent, why can't he take the Pacers there again....

he can flat out score, he has a slight attitude problem but losing does that to everone not named Brand...

I'd take the gamble as the last two-four years we have been mediocre at best and as much as I respect and love the Pacers losing sucks...

if we win 50-60 Games and go to the East Finals 3 times before 2010 with Iverson I will consider that a sucess

he should make this team better and I WANT TO WIN ! !!!!!!!!

he more then likly will clash with Coach C, but if he could work under Brown I can see it happing

Iverson has heart and can flat out score and I don't see a Problem if he plays next to Jermaine and if Jermaine don't like it... Adios Amigo next year...

Winning makes problems dissapear...

Pig Nash
12-11-2006, 03:43 AM
I've been reading through the thread. It seems to me that a trade won't happen because we don't have the kind of young talent, expiring contracts and picks to give up. I was just offering one suggestion of a trade that would work well for both sides in the short term. No team in their right mind would take both SJax and Tins in a trade. And those are the only two recognizable names that we have to trade. Nobody wants Saras, Harrison, Powell, Marshall, or Baston. We do have Williams who is supposed to be pretty good, Harrington, Daniels, Granger, JO, and Foster. Those are the six tradeable assets we have. We can use the other as filler but to get AI, I think we'd have to give up at least two of those (if JO is included) and three if he's not included. Obviously Philly would want Williams and Granger since they're young talent. You could also probably make a case that Powell and Marshall are in play here.

I think that it won't happen. If it did, it wouldn't surprise me if it was a package including Powell or Williams, Granger, Foster, and Harrington. Both of those work with the realgm trade checker but the only problem with that is that we have no frontcourt. It's JO and who else? JO/Baston/SJax/Daniels/AI seems awful pansy to me.

skyfire
12-11-2006, 03:45 AM
I'd still do this trade in a split second under the right conditions.


1. Our "chemistry" issue isn't going to get much worse. How could it get worse if we got rid of two cancers in exchange for one (if you truly think AI is one)?

2. We'd have a legitimate 1-2 punch, and I'd be thrilled if we could keep Granger, Al, Foster, etc. That's enough talent to make us a contender, which is something that we won't be this season barring a move.

3. This talk about individual play vs. team play is quite overhyped. Look at two of the past three title winners. Detroit got over the hump by picking up Rasheed Wallace and Miami won after picking up Jason Williams AND Antoine Walker. Of course both of those teams had more pieces than we have, but the point is that gaining a significant "individual" player doesn't necessarily make your team worse.

4. I think the impact of a fresh start for someone like Iverson is being overlooked. This is a guy that's been in a bad situation for years. I almost guarantee that he'll play great wherever he goes. That includes here, if it happens.

5. I think picking up Iverson would help our defense tremendously. When he came out of college he was considered to be one of the best defensive players available.

6. We know we'd be getting 100 percent every night. Say what you want about the guy, but it's hard to deny that he gives his all on the court. We need that energy and competitiveness right now.

I could go on, and there are some negatives to getting Iverson, but the positives seem a lot more valuable. And this is coming from someone who isn't an Iverson fan.

I used to be staunchly against getting AI, thinking him incapable of playing team ball. Yet, now I'd be willing to gain AI with his current contract if it came in a very budget trade, for Tins + Jax + filler or something thereabouts. However I think there is a very slender chance of this happening.

In all likelyhood, I think that Indy could be involved in trying to help facilitate a trade, most likely with Boston. I hope that LB and DW can bring us Delonte West in this deal.

31andonly
12-11-2006, 08:09 AM
I would do it as long as JO, Foster and either AL or DG stay!Maybe we could get rid of Jax, Tinsley (or Saras), Harrison and Draft Pick(s)? What do you think? Or am I dreaming?

Unclebuck
12-11-2006, 08:53 AM
Remember the Jim Gray - Allen Iverson thing from Friday night, well I think this settles it, Gray did talk with Iverson.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2006-12-10-hiestand_x.htm

DisplacedKnick
12-11-2006, 08:59 AM
I wasn't going to vote on this but then I decided that since I do care, why not offer my perspective?

As a non-native who isn't really a fan of any local team, one of my main concerns is how Indy is perceived around the country. Rightly or wrongly, one of the major aspects of perception relates to local sports teams. In the case of Indy, the Colts are a huge positive because of Manning and the Pacers are a huge negative, first because of Artest and now because of Jackson.

I'm tired of going home and having people ask me about the thugs on the Pacers. Deserved or not, Iverson has that reputation.

No thanks.

PacerMan
12-12-2006, 12:11 AM
Obviously the NBA has passed me by.

The forum is doing the same thing now as well I guess.

8 years ago if anybody would have even talked about bringing in a player like Iverson to our team they would have been crucified. No, not Iverson back then I'm talking about a player who would put up 30 shots in a game without even blinking an eye.

I'm not even going to try & talk about this because everybody has made up thier minds.

I think maybe I need to re-prioritize my life & see if I'm wrong here because I've never felt so disconnected with a Pacers board in my life.

Some how some way over the past 6 seasons we have gotten to the point where individual play has taken over what the team does. I just didn't keep up.

I think the only thing that's changed is you've got a bunch of young guys here that don't know any better. They've grown up with the selfish, ME FIRST attitude that AI is the POSTER CHILD FOR. And thus, they don't get how messed up that is. The problem isn't with you keeping up, it's with the messed up (and I DO mean *****ED up) attitudes in american society as a whole.
To me, just more and more evidence of the serious decline of western civilization. We are LIVING the "Fall of the American Empire".

PacerMan
12-12-2006, 12:15 AM
What a dream world this is.

Maybe 'dream world' as in stoned out of their minds.
Ron Artest was ONE SEASON ago! Wacko Jacko is NOW! Yet most here would take a flyer on Allen Iverson,

Unbelievable.

PacerMan
12-12-2006, 12:16 AM
I'm tired of going home and having people ask me about the thugs on the Pacers. Deserved or not, Iverson has that reputation.

No thanks.


The problem IS, it's very well deserved.