PDA

View Full Version : Who is next? O'Neal?



3rdStrike
01-17-2007, 05:09 PM
Someone is next. At least one more trade.

There has to be more to this trade because it leaves the Pacers with Tinsley and only Tinsley as a capable PG.

It also leaves the Pacers with no starting SG, unless you consider Dunleavy or Daniels to be starting material, and I don't.

Third, the Pacers got back two big men, Diagou and Murphy. They each play PF and C. Diagou is an intruiging prospect who should be ready for a big jump in minutes played.

So to summarize, the Pacers took on a ton of salary and are in dire need at SG and arguably PG. I would assume they are looking at young players for both positions.

I highly doubt Jermaine O'Neal will have an admirable reaction to hearing that his best buddy Harrington and the team's starting SG were dealt for two busts and an enigma, two of the three players capable of playing his position. And we all know O'Neal says he's walking if the Pacers don't take him deep into the playoffs this year.

So therefore it's likely in the best interest of the Pacers to start a bidding war for O'Neal and get as many draft picks and young players as possible, rather than risk (more like accept) losing O'Neal at the end of the year for nothing.

Trader Joe
01-17-2007, 05:11 PM
My guess is a group of players for an upgrade in the backcourt. (Kidd, Carter, Maggz...)

Unclebuck
01-17-2007, 05:25 PM
No, the Pacers basically doubled down on JO. He's not going anywhere - barring some "great offer" they can't refuse. They are trying to build the team around JO and this trade aids those efforts

SoupIsGood
01-17-2007, 05:29 PM
Someone is next. At least one more trade.

There has to be more to this trade because it leaves the Pacers with Tinsley and only Tinsley as a capable PG.

It also leaves the Pacers with no starting SG, unless you consider Dunleavy or Daniels to be starting material, and I don't.

Third, the Pacers got back two big men, Diagou and Murphy. They each play PF and C. Diagou is an intruiging prospect who should be ready for a big jump in minutes played.




How is that different than before? And - Why not? If Jax was starting material then Daniels is too.

I like this trade a lot. Also agree with UB. JO is going nowhere.

3rdStrike
01-17-2007, 05:52 PM
Sarunas could provide offense and pass as a PG. He was a good backup. I didn't like Jack but unless Daniels has been holding back I don't see him as even a good backup. I would love to be wrong, though. At the very least I expect him to have a better shot selection than Jack.

How does this aid their efforts to build around JO? Does anyone think JO wants the team to go through another building session especially when it involves scrap heap types?

How are they going to aid O'Neal when they can't sign free agents?

Or draft players?

And when they are overloaded with PF/C types yet have zero options at the 1 and 2?

Do you think he's gonna be satisfied when the team misses the playoffs this year? And has no draft pick to show for it?

There's something else coming. If it doesn't involve O'Neal then I don't know who else could bring anything of value, but the roster is definately very unbalanced right now.

Shade
01-17-2007, 05:56 PM
Trading Al means we're keeping JO.

Team Indy
01-17-2007, 06:12 PM
I think management has done a little hedging. No doubt the moves will allow JO to do his thing in the post, but having Diogu gives them the option of trading JO at the end of the season or whenever. Davis for a young JO all over again. The backcourt is still deficient in 3 point shooting, so this team is no a likely title contender, though I'm always hopeful. Maybe someone can devise an offense where the guards don't have to shoot jumpers.

maragin
01-17-2007, 07:00 PM
Wishlist:

First and foremost, a second trade.

Secondly, I'm fine with giving up anyone but JO, Granger, or Foster. Any deal that runs through my head involves Harrison.

Third, here are the guys I'm hoping we made this move to acquire (that seem available):

Andre Miller
Ben Gordon
Corey Maggette
Jason Kidd
Mike Miller

I'm sure there's a ton of good players I'm overlooking, but those are who I'm eyeing.

OnlyPacersLeft
01-17-2007, 07:04 PM
bye bye JO...nice knowing ya...:(

Seed
01-17-2007, 07:08 PM
Question is what has the Pacers left to trade with.
JO won't get traded until Ike proves to be a decent replacement.
Granger won't be traded, being the core of this team's future.
New comers won't be traded for their contracts.
Shawne hasn't proved himself enough yet to be a trade asset.
Draft picks? no way.

We are pretty much left with Tinsley & Foster, plus Quis, Baston, DH as possible throw-ins.
Can we get a top-tier PG for that?

Evan_The_Dude
01-17-2007, 07:30 PM
LOL @ thinking we're going to trade J.O. We made this trade because we want to put pieces around J.O. that would compliment his game while making the team better. Instead of looking at what we got in return, look at what the strengths in each of their games brings to this team. Salary cap numbers aside, I can honestly say I haven't been this happy with our team since 2000.

Anthem
01-17-2007, 07:31 PM
Trading Al means we're keeping JO.
Agreed. And I'm happy with that.

Hoop
01-17-2007, 07:37 PM
JO is not leaving the Pacers anytime soon, except temporarily for the all star team. :cheers:

Brian
01-17-2007, 08:03 PM
This trade was made to see if JO will be a pacer next season or not...And if there are anymore trades for the pacers this season it will be to try to get working parts around JO.

If this doesnt work you can count on JO being J-Over in Indiana.


But isnt it funny how last year the trade with golden state fell threw because we wanted Ike-luv and golden state didnt want to give him up,now we got ike-luv and no more artest/jackson...isnt that what everyone wanted?.

CableKC
01-17-2007, 09:58 PM
Wishlist:

First and foremost, a second trade.

Secondly, I'm fine with giving up anyone but JO, Granger, or Foster. Any deal that runs through my head involves Harrison.

Third, here are the guys I'm hoping we made this move to acquire (that seem available):

Andre Miller
Ben Gordon
Corey Maggette
Jason Kidd
Mike Miller

I'm sure there's a ton of good players I'm overlooking, but those are who I'm eyeing.

Ironically, we just traded Harrington...the only player on our roster outside of JONeal, Granger or Foster that could have possibly netted us one of the above players ( outside of Jason Kidd of course ).

Salarywise, the Pacers could have made direct "one for one" trade offers for Dre Miller, Maggette and Mike Miller. On top of that....if we were desperate enough....Harrington could have been offered to the Bulls for Ben Gordon and filler ( or incentives ).

JayRedd
01-17-2007, 10:52 PM
But isnt it funny how last year the trade with golden state fell threw because we wanted Ike-luv and golden state didnt want to give him up,now we got ike-luv and no more artest/jackson...isnt that what everyone wanted?.

I think the thing that changed was GState getting Nellie. I was immediately curious as to whether Diogu's back-to-basket and half-court game would work with Nellie ball. Clearly, Nellie saw much evidence that it wouldn't, and once they struck gold with Biedrins, it seemed inevitable that he was their guy for the future down low.

So essentially, they chose Nellie over Ike.

And for my money, they can have the 67-year-old coach who's never heard of defense. I'll take the 23-year-old former Pac-10 Player of the Year who shot 52.4% from the floor and 81% from the line in his rookie season while also averaging 18.8 points, 8.9 boards and 1.2 blocks per forty minutes.

Leisure Suit Larry
01-17-2007, 11:47 PM
I think we need to trade for every tall white guy in the league. One of them is bound to truly be the next Larry Bird.

Leisure Suit Larry
01-17-2007, 11:50 PM
Wishlist:

First and foremost, a second trade.

Secondly, I'm fine with giving up anyone but JO, Granger, or Foster. Any deal that runs through my head involves Harrison.

Third, here are the guys I'm hoping we made this move to acquire (that seem available):

Andre Miller
Ben Gordon
Corey Maggette
Jason Kidd
Mike Miller

I'm sure there's a ton of good players I'm overlooking, but those are who I'm eyeing.

What is with the love for Andre Miller here? He sucks. Tinsley is a lot better.

Young
01-17-2007, 11:59 PM
I can't see us trading Jermaine this season. However, keep in mind that Ike Diogu could make Jermaine more expandable down the road here.

I think that the guy who is next to go would have to be Jeff. At least if you are talking about us making yet another move this season. I say Jeff because he is the most expandable and he has the most trade value. With the additions of Troy and Ike Jeff is much more expandable. We also have Maceo Baston. Jeff is the ideal roleplayer at the 4-5, atleast to me, but we still have to make moves to get better. I'm wondering if we make a strong run at swaping Jeff for either Morris Petterson or Corey Maggette. I would think that would be a reasonable swap.

I could also see us trying to deal Maceo Baston, David Harrison, and Keith McLeod. I could see us trying to get Travis Diener from Orlando or even Bonzi Wells from Houston. I know Wells isn't a high character guy but could the Pacers take the risk on him with his small salary?

CableKC
01-18-2007, 03:09 AM
If Foster is the odd-man out....I really hope that he could either be packaged with Tinsley for an upgrade at the PG spot ( which is doubtful given his contract )...or traded for another decent SG/SF that can hit the 3pt shot.

As you mentioned.....a MoPete for Foster trade works.

If the Grizzlies are willing to part with Mike Miller while improving on their interior rebounding ( since they are one of the worst Rebounding teams in the league ) and getting a slightly shorter contract in return...a Foster+filler for Mike Miller+filler works.

ChicagoPacer
01-18-2007, 04:55 AM
What is with the love for Andre Miller here? He sucks. Tinsley is a lot better.

Just curious: what do you think Tinsley does better?

He doesn't stay healthy better than Miller.
His 2ptFG% and FT% aren't better than Miller's.
He's not the scoring threat Miller is.
The last time Miller played in a more half-court offense in a true point role, he averaged nearly 11 assists a game. The last time Tinsley did that was his rookie year.
Miller rebounds better.
When you factor in minutes played, Miller turns the ball over less.
Tinsley isn't fit enough to play Miller's minutes.

If we offered Tinsley to the Sixers straight up for Miller (assuming the trade worked), they'd turn us down. If they came to us offering the trade, we'd take it in a second. I'm thinking that pretty much the entire world knows that Andre Miller is better than Tinsley.

Will Galen
01-18-2007, 07:26 AM
Someone is next. At least one more trade.

There has to be more to this trade because it leaves the Pacers with Tinsley and only Tinsley as a capable PG.

It also leaves the Pacers with no starting SG, unless you consider Dunleavy or Daniels to be starting material, and I don't.

Third, the Pacers got back two big men, Diagou and Murphy. They each play PF and C. Diagou is an intruiging prospect who should be ready for a big jump in minutes played.

So to summarize, the Pacers took on a ton of salary and are in dire need at SG and arguably PG. I would assume they are looking at young players for both positions.

I highly doubt Jermaine O'Neal will have an admirable reaction to hearing that his best buddy Harrington and the team's starting SG were dealt for two busts and an enigma, two of the three players capable of playing his position. And we all know O'Neal says he's walking if the Pacers don't take him deep into the playoffs this year.

So therefore it's likely in the best interest of the Pacers to start a bidding war for O'Neal and get as many draft picks and young players as possible, rather than risk (more like accept) losing O'Neal at the end of the year for nothing.


I think your premise for trading JO is built on faulty reasoning and bad information. The Pacers are building around JO, their not going to trade him, and he's doesn't have an option. So losing him for nothing would only happen in a career ending injury or accident.

I suppose JO could quit playing basketball but the only one I've known to do that in their prime is David Myers of the Bucks. I think there's little chance of that happening.

According to JO himself at the end of this season the Pacers are going to sit down with him and talk about his situation. So if they decided to trade him it would more than likely be at draft time.

Haggard
01-18-2007, 07:46 AM
I do expect at least 1 more trade and regrettably it will inlcude either Foster or Granger.
Which is a shame but when packaged with someone like Tinsley or Quis could net us with a good pg.

Harddrive7
01-18-2007, 10:02 AM
Trading Al means we're keeping JO.


It's funny when we were trying to get Al here we were saying "If we're getting Al then that means that JO is staying"