PDA

View Full Version : Pacers To Flip Dunleavy For Maggette?



pacers20
01-18-2007, 10:40 AM
According to three NBA executives, the Pacers (http://pacers.realgm.com/) are already in talks to move Mike Dunleavy (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/717/mike_dunleavy/) to the Los Angeles Clippers (http://clippers.realgm.com/) for swingman Corey Maggette (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/35/corey_maggette/).

Earlier reports have indicated a strong interest from head coach Mike Dunleavy (http://www.realgm.com/src_playerfile/717/mike_dunleavy/), Sr. in his son, but that other members of the Los Angeles front office had reservations





www.realgm.com (http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/www.realgm.com)

Pacers
01-18-2007, 10:45 AM
That would be amazing.

Naptown_Seth
01-18-2007, 10:47 AM
Now hearing Walsh's reaction to JMV yesterday suggested to me that he was still looking to do another deal. He got that nervous on-the-spot reaction for just a split second before covering up with "I wouldn't talk about anything else, we just did this trade, let's talk about that" angle.


Both sides have legit reasons to be interested and it certainly makes sense that the Pacers would rather have Magette than MDJr considering their roster makeup.


The big problem, even if this is something they both are talking about doing doesn't mean it will get done. It only takes one hang-up or concern to kill a deal.

indyman37
01-18-2007, 10:52 AM
If this did happen, I would have some major sympathy for Dunleavy. Getting traded twice in less than one month? He ain't even got here yet and they're talking about trade possiblities. His head must be spinning right about now.

Mourning
01-18-2007, 10:56 AM
I wouldn't mind DEPENDING on what else we would have to throw in to make the Clippers aggree to it. Guessing either Baston, Marshall or Harrison.

indyman37
01-18-2007, 10:58 AM
I would be fine with having to give up Harrison.

OakMoses
01-18-2007, 11:00 AM
Dunleavy and Harrison for Maggette is the best thing I've heard all day. Though after reading T-bird's thoughts, I wouldn't mind having him stick around for a while.

Frank Slade
01-18-2007, 11:01 AM
This is one of those deals that makes too much sense,. so it may not get done :(.

It would be nice but I won't hold my breath about it, if the Harrington deal has taught me anything.

Although maybe Harrington's Mom can now find that house for Maggette as originally planned ?

Quis
01-18-2007, 11:07 AM
The thing is, since Dunleavy was just dealt, he can only be traded by himself for 90 days. And by the time those 90 days are up, the trade deadline will have been long since passed. So it's either Dunleavy for Maggette straight up or no deal at all this year.

indyman37
01-18-2007, 11:08 AM
oh yeah...i forgot about that little rule. I guess we won't get rid of Harrison in this scenario.

diamonddave00
01-18-2007, 11:09 AM
Because Mike Dunleavy was just acquired any deal involving a player being included with him has be completed within in believe 24 hours . From that point on he can only be dealt one for one until this summer.

Of course it doesn't mean the Pacers could not do 2 seperate trades such as Jr for Maggette the Baston or Harrison for something else from the Clippers that works capwise.

Maggette as a scorer would seem a better fit here but he has been injury prone, but as we look at the current roster makeup does seem Maggette might be a better fit here than Dunleavy.

Los Angeles
01-18-2007, 11:11 AM
The thing is, since Dunleavy was just dealt, he can only be traded by himself for 90 days. And by the time those 90 days are up, the trade deadline will have been long since passed. So it's either Dunleavy for Maggette straight up or no deal at all this year.But a second player can be traded on the same day to the same team in a "separate" deal.

Like Harrison for a 2nd rounder or something along those lines.

JayRedd
01-18-2007, 11:12 AM
Makes sense.

This is essentially how I see the deal:


~ Our problems/unfortunate contracts for GState's problems/unfortunate contracts.
(Jackson/Sarunas for Murphy/Dunleavy)

~ Our multi-skilled, proven young guy for their multi-skilled younger guy with a lot of upside.
(Al for Diogu)

~ Our throw-in for their throw-in
(Powell for Mcloed)

It would seem to me that taking on getting Diogu alone would not be enough for Bird/Wash (not to mention the Simons) to take on over $30 million extra in salary and also lose Harrington. So I would not be surprised to hear that they had this deal agreed to in principle prior to yesterday. I know Mags salary isn't much lower than Dunleavy, but it is at least two years shorter, with the large possibility that he opts out as soon as after next year.

And I, for one, would be all for the deal. Tinsley and, to a much lesser extent, Marquis are the only perimeter penetrators we have right now. It's tough to win without that given the new rules and whatnot, so we could really use a guy that can attack like Corey. And like Jack, he can be a pretty good defender if he puts the effort forth.

Unclebuck
01-18-2007, 11:15 AM
I've also read that Clippers regardless of what Mike Sr wants will not trade for Mike Jr.

Evan_The_Dude
01-18-2007, 11:16 AM
PM me when this is reported by an outlet other than RealGM...

CableKC
01-18-2007, 11:21 AM
I don't get it....if some Dunleavy for Maggette deal could happen...why didn't it happen when Dunleavy was with the Warriors?

Unclebuck
01-18-2007, 11:22 AM
I have real doubts about this report. It just doesn't seem right to me.

Rick said last night on his radio show that he has a call into Mike Sr. to speak with him about his son - why it didn't work in G. State - that type of thing. Mike and Rick are good friends. Maybe that is what the unnamed sources are confused about. Would Rick call Mike about his son if they were in heavy discussions about about trading him. I don't think so

My gut feeling: Jr. for Cory won't happen.

GetMoney
01-18-2007, 11:24 AM
too good to be true

Frank Slade
01-18-2007, 11:27 AM
PM me when this is reported by an outlet other than RealGM...

I hear you, although for what it's worth this was report was from the Akron Beacon Journal, then picked up by RealGM.

pacers20
01-18-2007, 11:28 AM
According to three NBA executives, the Pacers are now in talks to move Mike Dunleavy to the Los Angeles Clippers for dynamic swingman Corey Maggette. Indiana has been after Maggette since last season when they were looking to trade Ron Artest.

http://www.benmaller.com/nba_rumors_notes

pwee31
01-18-2007, 11:29 AM
PM me when this is reported by an outlet other than RealGM...

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/sports/basketball/nba/cleveland_cavaliers/16487512.htm

tadscout
01-18-2007, 11:32 AM
I've also read that Clippers regardless of what Mike Sr wants will not trade for Mike Jr.

BINGO!!! Think of the conflict of interest issues involved... and potential daddy favoritism/ chemistry issues with other players (along w/ the bad media if/ when that would happen)... In other words it would be a really stupid thing for the Clippers to do... <o:p></o:p>

Evan_The_Dude
01-18-2007, 11:35 AM
I don't get it....if some Dunleavy for Maggette deal could happen...why didn't it happen when Dunleavy was with the Warriors?

Because Al Harrington was their motivation to the trade, and the Clippers didn't have him.


EDIT: I stand corrected about the sources. The entire deal makes a lot more sense if this happens. But the one remaining question is why wasn't this a three-way deal to begin with?

rexnom
01-18-2007, 11:39 AM
I have real doubts about this report. It just doesn't seem right to me.

Rick said last night on his radio show that he has a call into Mike Sr. to speak with him about his son - why it didn't work in G. State - that type of thing. Mike and Rick are good friends. Maybe that is what the unnamed sources are confused about. Would Rick call Mike about his son if they were in heavy discussions about about trading him. I don't think so

My gut feeling: Jr. for Cory won't happen.
Completely agree with you here. Why would Rick say those things (and in that fashion) if Dunleavy wasn't going to stay?

Also, I think Frank is right in that this has "too much sense to happen" written all over it.

Shade
01-18-2007, 11:50 AM
They probably got this "rumor" from us.

If it is true, however, I would happily send them Dunleavy and Harrison for Maggette. I need a Pacer on my fantasy team! ;)

odeez
01-18-2007, 11:53 AM
This move could certainly happen. I am glad to see that TPTB aren't sitting around. Let's get players to fit around JO and lets make a run at the title, the EAST is wide open.

avoidingtheclowns
01-18-2007, 11:54 AM
am i the only one who doesn't like maggatte? i never felt he'd be an improvement over jax. i'd love cuttino instead but i don't know how available he might be.

i also agree that if something were going to happen with dunleavey why it wouldn't have been a 3-way deal yesterday

Cubs231721
01-18-2007, 12:04 PM
I don't get it....if some Dunleavy for Maggette deal could happen...why didn't it happen when Dunleavy was with the Warriors?

I've read that Dunleavy for Magette straight up would not work when he was with the Warriors because he was a BYC status. That's also why the Pacers couldn't make this a straight 3 way deal. Now that the trade is completed, Dunleavy loses his BYC status which makes the salaries of Dunleavy and Magette come close enough to make a trade.

CableKC
01-18-2007, 12:14 PM
I've read that Dunleavy for Magette straight up would not work when he was with the Warriors because he was a BYC status. That's also why the Pacers couldn't make this a straight 3 way deal. Now that the trade is completed, Dunleavy loses his BYC status which makes the salaries of Dunleavy and Magette come close enough to make a trade.
Well.....I haven't checked it before....but a Maggette for DunDun works now on the Trade Checker.

I still think that there would be concerns from the Clipper's Management about the "father/son/player/coach" angle....enough concerns to hinder any liklihood of DunDun moving to Indy.

Outside of DunDun's contract and the liklihood that he will end up taking away minutes from Granger and Shawne ( all major concerns )....I have always thought that he's a decent "all-around offensive player that does a little bit of everything except play slightly below average Defense" If given the 6th man role where he plays 25+ minutes a game....I think that he may actually do fairly well. If he is able to find his role in Indy...he maybe a more consistent 3rd/4th scoring option then SJax was.

Frank Slade
01-18-2007, 12:24 PM
Dunleavy had hoped to trade for his son
By Jason Reid, Times Staff Writer
January 18, 2007


It seemed Golden State Warriors Coach Don Nelson was alluding to a potential trade with the Clippers when he recently said that forward Mike Dunleavy Jr. is "more of a blend player" who would function best in a supporting role.

That's how the Indiana Pacers apparently plan to use the fifth-year player, who was acquired Wednesday from the Warriors in an eight-player deal that also sent forwards Troy Murphy and Ike Diogu and guard Keith McLeod to Indiana.

The Warriors received forward Al Harrington, swingman Stephen Jackson, forward Josh Powell and guard Sarunas Jasikevicius in a trade that disappointed some Clippers officials.

Coach Mike Dunleavy had hoped to acquire his eldest son, team sources said, believing the former Duke All-American and third overall pick in the 2002 draft would have been a good fit because of his shooting range and high basketball IQ.

But it now appears that the Dunleavys won't be a father-son act with the Clippers any time soon.

Before the Clippers defeated the Warriors, 115-109, Wednesday at Staples Center, Dunleavy declined to comment on the team's efforts to acquire his son, for whom he had high praise.

"He's a really good team player," Dunleavy said. "He has won a championship at every level he's ever played at. He's played big in big games and does the things that many coaches want players to do.

"He was one of the top five guys in the league last year at taking charges. He passes the ball well … he's had big rebound nights. His percentages on shooting the ball are pretty good and he can play four positions."

Last summer, the Warriors and Clippers were involved in discussions about a potential three-team deal that would have brought Dunleavy, in the first year of a five-year, $45-million contract, to Los Angeles, sources said. Because of salary-cap rules, a Dunleavy-Cuttino Mobley trade would have worked best for the Clippers, but the Warriors apparently weren't interested in that proposal.

"He's not a superstar player," Dunleavy said of his son. "People look at him and say that's what they projected him to be. Maybe that was the wrong projection, but that's not his fault.

"Everywhere he's been, he's been good, and he has been dominant on certain levels. In the NBA, I've always said you'll find out how good of a player he is when he plays on a really good team.

"He makes other guys better by making the right plays

LA TIMES (http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/clippers/la-sp-cliprep18jan18,1,732747.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-nba-clippe&ctrack=1&cset=true)

diamonddave00
01-18-2007, 12:48 PM
The trade to the Pacer effectively removed Dunleavy's BYC status. But a second point was the Clippers had no desire to send Maggette to a team in the west they prefer to send him east.

Not saying it happend but I'd not be suprised at all to see Dunleavy moved before Feb. deadline , and Maggette is a player both Bird and Walsh like.

ChicagoJ
01-18-2007, 12:51 PM
"People look at him and say that's what they projected him to be. Maybe that was the wrong projection, but that's not his fault.

Sums it up pretty well. He's still a good NBA player, just drafted way too high.

Young
01-18-2007, 01:18 PM
This wouldn't be a bad deal for the Pacers at all.

We need guard help right now. More than that, we need another scorer. Maggette could help us out with both of those. We still will suck at shooting though.

One thing is that I am very intrigued by Mike Dunkleavy. He has unique skills. Great size, smarts, fundamentals. We could really use his passing skills. However he is owed a lot of money, so if we can move him for Maggette you gotta do it I guess.

Harddrive7
01-18-2007, 01:23 PM
We didn't know anything about this latest trade yesterday morning. NOT EVEN THE MEDIA. Do you honestly think that someone is now all the sudden going to leak info about a new trade?

The media is probably pissed so now they're going to try to put all sorts of things out there to try to catch up. Kudo's to the orginization for keeping a tight wrap on it.

CableKC
01-18-2007, 01:40 PM
One thing is that I am very intrigued by Mike Dunkleavy. He has unique skills. Great size, smarts, fundamentals. We could really use his passing skills. However he is owed a lot of money, so if we can move him for Maggette you gotta do it I guess.
I agree here. Salarywise.......unless DWs masterplan all along was to ultimately move DunDun or Murphy to another team before the Trade deadline or during the offseason.....if TPTB aren't as concerned about the impact that both of their salaries have on the cap....then I guess I shouldn't be.

The one thing that I have always known about DunDun ever since he has played with the Ws ( outside of somewhat poor defensive skills and that he hasn't really lived up to being a #3 pick ) is that he is some decent "all-around" offensive skills. I really want to see what DunDun can do and whether Carlisle can "coach/coax" anything out of him before passing him onto the next team for Maggette.

Major Cold
01-18-2007, 01:43 PM
I know some of you doubt this because it might have been a 3 team deal, but Dunleavy was a byc player and the salaries might not have matched up. With this recent trade the BYC status drops and the Cory for MDJ is good to go. Does that mean it will happen? Who knows

PacerFan31
01-18-2007, 02:23 PM
I think this would work.

Corey wants out of LA and Mike Sr. wants Jr. in LA. Somehow it just makes to much sense, which probably means it won't happen.

PacerMan
01-18-2007, 03:32 PM
I don't know Maggette's game much. Isn't he another Marquis Daniels type? Good drive, no outside shot?

We need an outside shooter. Even moreso with Al and Saras gone!

Mourning
01-18-2007, 04:48 PM
Well... IF Magette comes in or Dunleavy stays here, while Quis will stay here too can almost mean only one thing and that's that Tinsley won't be here for much longer.

IF we have both Magette and Quis we will REALLY need a good shooter from the PG spot and we all know Tins is pretty horrible in that department. We also know that Rick likes PG that can really shoot.

So, pairing Tinsley with one of them is not such a good idea IMO. That has got nothing to do with "live and die by the 3-point shot" and everything with atleast having a threat from downtown that opponents have to respect.

IF Dunleavy Jr. get's the starters job at SG we get a good ballhandler for the position, but a BAD perimeter defender and not such a great shooter. Well Tinsley's besides not beying a very good shooter also is pretty bad at defence, so who will pick up the opposing teams prime perimeter threat then? Don't talk to me about Oriene or McCleod because they won't be in the game for 30+ minutes.

If DunLeavy Jr. starts then I expect us to go after a defensive above average shooter and good defender or we REALLY will be in trouble. Good thing is that that player doesn't have to be a superb ball handler, just a decent one for the position as we have DunLeavy Jr. and Quis who can both help in that department.

I could be wrong, I don't know, but what am I missing then?

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Skaut_Ech
01-18-2007, 05:09 PM
Fisst of all, let me say that I do NOT want Maggette here.

Not only is the guy injury prone, but he's not too keen on playing defense. I also seem to remember rumors of him being more than a bit of a malcontent.

That being said, if the Pacers are serious about ridding us of our problem children (Jackson and Tinsley), the trade that would make the most sense and works fiscally is Maggette/Cassell for Tinsley/Dunleavy.

Sam has made no secret of the fact that he doesn't like to play off the bench. I would think he would welcome the opportunity to be "the man" here. Despite his age, he still can turn on the assists, or become a shooter, as the situation needs, even to three point range. He could be a nice, veretan presence at point, plus the guy is a bit of a leader, no?

Would he be a long term answer at PG? Uh..no. But if we were looking to take advantage of an opportunity, that makes a lot more sense to me than MD for Maggette straight up.

PacerMan
01-18-2007, 05:48 PM
Cassell = Yech

avoidingtheclowns
01-18-2007, 05:59 PM
well we know maggette is a problem child so trading one for another doesn't make sense. but cassell has had his problems in the past too, right? so trading 1 for 2 problem children?

Jermaniac
01-18-2007, 06:20 PM
Fisst of all, let me say that I do NOT want Maggette here.

Not only is the guy injury prone, but he's not too keen on playing defense. I also seem to remember rumors of him being more than a bit of a malcontent.

That being said, if the Pacers are serious about ridding us of our problem children (Jackson and Tinsley), the trade that would make the most sense and works fiscally is Maggette/Cassell for Tinsley/Dunleavy.

Sam has made no secret of the fact that he doesn't like to play off the bench. I would think he would welcome the opportunity to be "the man" here. Despite his age, he still can turn on the assists, or become a shooter, as the situation needs, even to three point range. He could be a nice, veretan presence at point, plus the guy is a bit of a leader, no?

Would he be a long term answer at PG? Uh..no. But if we were looking to take advantage of an opportunity, that makes a lot more sense to me than MD for Maggette straight up.Ohh but Dunleavy is keen on playing defense?

If we can do this trade I will be very happy with this whole thing.

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 07:37 PM
orien sighting! WOOOOOOO lets play the youngins!

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 07:39 PM
I kind of like all these young guys around are star JO...reminds me of the lakers with kobe.

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 07:42 PM
block by greene and baston with the dunk!!!!!! wooooo

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 07:51 PM
can we please get a score!? WTF

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 07:56 PM
OT. They showed shaq getting injured vs us so many times...did anyone see the last one? it was ron and he ran right under shaq with his foot an put it down. Like bruce bowen! he looked like he was trying to injure shaq?
typical ron :(

Hicks
01-18-2007, 08:04 PM
The game thread is over here:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=28403&page=3

OnlyPacersLeft
01-18-2007, 08:15 PM
lol whoooooooooopz! can you move these into the game thread? I clicked the wrong 1 and had 2 PD windows open..my bad

Young
01-18-2007, 10:07 PM
Donnie Walsh was the guest with Chad Ford on ESPN's Podcast today. He said that they are not going to pursue the deal of Dunleavy for Maggette and there is no truth to it.

Destined4Greatness
01-18-2007, 10:11 PM
OMG why do we KEEP reloading around O'neal. Build around Ike and Granger.

Cobol Sam
01-18-2007, 10:39 PM
OMG why do we KEEP reloading around O'neal. Build around Ike and Granger.

Because JO is a perennial All-star who averages basically 20 and 10 while leading the league in blocked shots. He also takes charges like a mad man and is a serious contender for DPOY and All Defensive team.

Destined4Greatness
01-18-2007, 10:41 PM
Because JO is a perennial All-star who averages basically 20 and 10 while leading the league in blocked shots. He also takes charges like a mad man and is a serious contender for DPOY and All Defensive team.

If he is so great why does the team play better without him. Stats are great, making your team better is whats important.

AesopRockOn
01-18-2007, 10:57 PM
As long as we get someone who can throw a decent pass without telegraphing it aka NOT what Tinsley has become.

Hicks
01-18-2007, 11:01 PM
If he is so great why does the team play better without him. Stats are great, making your team better is whats important.

1) We're not getting anything better than him.

2) He's pretty damned good himself.

3) If you can quantify what it is that a "superstar" does to "make his team better", do it.

Anthem
01-18-2007, 11:17 PM
3) If you can quantify what it is that a "superstar" does to "make his team better", do it.
Covering your teammates when their guy blows by them counts as making them better. When Jermaine's on the court and in the paint, he makes all of the perimeter defenders better, because they have to worry about getting blocked if they go into the lane.

Or did I disprove his poorly-conceived point?

lafayettepacer
01-18-2007, 11:22 PM
If you ask me this would be a good deal, but the Pacers would do alot better improving by getting a straight shooter at the 2 spot. Granger just put up 28 tonight, and I think Maggette and Granger would be in competition for the same minutes.

Hicks
01-18-2007, 11:31 PM
Covering your teammates when their guy blows by them counts as making them better. When Jermaine's on the court and in the paint, he makes all of the perimeter defenders better, because they have to worry about getting blocked if they go into the lane.

Or did I disprove his poorly-conceived point?

Ask him, I guess.

And what about the attention JO draws on offense? That doesn't make our other players better on that end by giving them more space and/or less attention?

Or did I just help you disprove his poorly-conceived point?

Shade
01-18-2007, 11:34 PM
If he is so great why does the team play better without him. Stats are great, making your team better is whats important.

They don't. They play well for a few games, until other teams adjust. If you'll notice, when JO is out for an extended period of time, the team is in a downward spiral by the time he returns.

Cobol Sam
01-18-2007, 11:35 PM
If he is so great why does the team play better without him. Stats are great, making your team better is whats important.

I am going to assume by "play better without him" you are referring to the records with and without JO that you have underneath all your posts.

I am a grad student doing statistical research for my assistantship, and what you display there is what we call a spurious relationship. In order for those numbers to mean anything at all, JO playing or not playing would have to be the only changing variable in those games. CLEARLY that is not the case, and I don't feel the need to list all the other hundreds of variables going on since 2004.

Saying this team is worse off with Jermaine Oneal playing makes it very hard to take you seriously. If you don't like the guy its one thing, but pretending he has no talent is a whole different story.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
01-18-2007, 11:46 PM
If he is so great why does the team play better without him. Stats are great, making your team better is whats important.
Im sorry but it's time someone called you out.

Do you ever make a single post that doesn't criticize JO? I agree that JO has been a disappointment as far as being our #1 guy the past couple seasons and I have also been critical of him in the past. But hes healthy now and he is obviously playing some of the best ball of his career right now and has improved in areas of his game that were weak in the past. You need to open your eyes and realize this.

Get over it already. I'd put you on ignore but it wouldn't do any good since somehow you still manage to elicit replies from the more insightful posters. You need to bring new material to the table, go read the thread about making the forum better. The funny thing is I liked you when you first started posting here and were going at it with Jermainiac all the time. Now its just old...

Shade
01-18-2007, 11:52 PM
The JO hate, the Peyton love... :chin:

I'm starting to think D4G is actually Bob Kravitz. :laugh:

Kstat
01-19-2007, 05:04 AM
Dunleavy has always been worthless. Maggette has recently become worthless.

Personally, I'd keep dunleavy. He's less likely to complain about not playing.