PDA

View Full Version : Antoine Walker and O'B



RWB
06-04-2007, 09:58 AM
Under let's throw stuff at the wall to see if it sticks category. A discussion about unloading Walker to the Ps.


http://www.benmaller.com/

The Pacers do have several contracts as unpalatable as Antoine Walker's deal, which pays $8.5 million next season. The difference is Mike Dunleavy Jr. ($8.2 million next season) and Troy Murphy ($9.2 million next season) each have three additional seasons remaining. By contrast, after next season, Walker has only one additional guaranteed year on his Heat contract. And one thing the Heat has done especially well over the years is not chase bad money with even worse money. It is just one of the aspects that has separated the Heat from the Knicks. Still, when the Pacers get busy, keep in mind they will be working with a coach whose career flourished with Walker at his side.

Slick Pinkham
06-04-2007, 10:15 AM
Walker has almost nothing left. Another thread talks about Austin Croshere.

At this point in time,

Austin > Antoine

sad but true

Ragnar
06-04-2007, 10:16 AM
Wow I dont want Walker. The question is would I take walker to get rid of either Murphy or Dunleavy. Walker is every bit as worthless of a player as those two but he has a shorter contract.

I have no idea but at this point why trade one bucket of crap for another.

Trader Joe
06-04-2007, 10:18 AM
You know how some people say acquiring so and so would make me reconsider being a Pacer fan. Antoine Walker is the one player in the NBA capable of making me do that.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 10:27 AM
I hate Antoine Walker. I would totally take him in return for Murphy/Dunleavy, preferably Murphy (and especially if we trade JO and go young).

naptownmenace
06-04-2007, 10:39 AM
Dunleavy >>>> Walker

I hate how Dunleavy gets thrown in to these discussions. He's not a bad player he just has a bad contract. I thought his play at the end of the season was very good and he, Shawne, and Granger play very well when on the floor at the same time. :shrug:

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 11:04 AM
Dunleavy >>>> Walker

I hate how Dunleavy gets thrown in to these discussions. He's not a bad player he just has a bad contract. I thought his play at the end of the season was very good and he, Shawne, and Granger play very well when on the floor at the same time. :shrug:



Agreed. But Mike will never be an asset on an NBA team. He is solid, but he doesn't add anything in particular and can be replaced fairly easily. Therefore, I am in favor of doing whatever to clear his salary off the books.

8 million in cap room is more important to this team than a 28% 3-pt shooting SG.

RWB
06-04-2007, 11:06 AM
Dunleavy >>>> Walker

I hate how Dunleavy gets thrown in to these discussions. He's not a bad player he just has a bad contract.

According to Rakestraw last night on WTHR Dunleavy makes almost twice as much as Tinsley. Dunleavy get's thrown into discussions because the talking heads have to say or print something.

Slick Pinkham
06-04-2007, 11:11 AM
8 million in cap room is more important to this team than a 28% 3-pt shooting SG.


Trading Dunleavy for Walker would not save a single cent until 3 years from now and would add an absolutely horrible player who thinks he deserves lots of playing time into the mix.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 11:20 AM
Trading Dunleavy for Walker would not save a single cent until 3 years from now and would add an absolutely horrible player who thinks he deserves lots of playing time into the mix.


It would actually be two years (instead of four for Dunleavy).

So we would be cutting Dun's contract in half.

I still say it is a good move, especially if we can get Miami to throw in a warm body or some second rounders or something.

I will say that I would much prefer they take Murphy. He has four years left, also.

avoidingtheclowns
06-04-2007, 11:31 AM
I will say that I would much prefer they take Murphy. He has four years left, also.

thats the only scenario in which i would consider it but miami probably wouldn't. walker makes less per year than murphy and has two less years. not sure what miami gets out of it other than moving a malcontent.

i hate crybaby walker. always have, always will. but from a financial standpoint i would at least consider murphy for walker.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 11:38 AM
Another possibility is Tinsley for Williams. Jamaal has four years left and Jason has only one.

Maybe Jamaal and Troy for Williams and Walker? Then we would have three bad contract years instead of 8.

Jermaniac
06-04-2007, 11:41 AM
Fatoine is better then Murphy and Dunleavy. I would trade those 2 for any player in the NBA with a little bit of a better contract then them, any player. If a NBA player goes to jail and he has a better contract then Dunleavy I would trade Dunleavy for that player.

ajbry
06-04-2007, 11:44 AM
Hell no, I don't want any part of Fatoine and his declining ***. **** that.

At his peak he was never anything special and certainly nothing Pacers fans are looking for. Now he's rapidly declined and his statistics from last year don't even reflect how terrible he looks on the floor.

I don't want Murphy or Dunleavy and I'm already sick of them, but I don't want Fatoine under any circumstances.

Ragnar
06-04-2007, 11:46 AM
Fatoine is better then Murphy and Dunleavy. I would trade those 2 for any player in the NBA with a little bit of a better contract then them, any player. If a NBA player goes to jail and he has a better contract then Dunleavy I would trade Dunleavy for that player.

Clearly thats how Golden State felt. Of course we also gave them Al and Powell. And not to mention Jack at least has talent.

NapTonius Monk
06-04-2007, 01:31 PM
Agreed. But Mike will never be an asset on an NBA team. He is solid, but he doesn't add anything in particular and can be replaced fairly easily. Therefore, I am in favor of doing whatever to clear his salary off the books.

8 million in cap room is more important to this team than a 28% 3-pt shooting SG.

Are you talking bang for the buck, or just straight skill level? Dunleavy isn't a star, but to say that he can't benefit an NBA team is crazy. He's suffered from star expectation more than anything. Golden State took him sky high in the draft, and then dumped on him because he wasn't a star player. What was he supposed to do...tear up the contract because he wasn't worth it? If anything, dump on these gm's with itchy contract writing fingers. Don't blame Dunleavy for taking the money, nor for the Pacers bringing him in. He has a great all around skill set that we would greatly benefit from if used correctly. I'll bet he really blosoms under O'Brien.

RWB
06-04-2007, 01:51 PM
For as much as people harp on Dunleavy being so bad if you look at stats the swap of Al for Dunleavy is pretty close to being fair.

Al's salary 7,625,000

Dun's salary 7,438,016

Year Team FG% 3P% FT% Off Def Tot APG A/TO PPG
2006-07 .458 .458 .713 2.0 4.3 6.3 1.4 2.5 15.9

Year Team FG% 3P% FT% Off Def Tot APG A/TO PPG
2006-07 .454 .283 .792 1.0 4.7 5.7 2.6 1.4 14.0

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 02:15 PM
Are you talking bang for the buck, or just straight skill level? Dunleavy isn't a star, but to say that he can't benefit an NBA team is crazy. He's suffered from star expectation more than anything. Golden State took him sky high in the draft, and then dumped on him because he wasn't a star player. What was he supposed to do...tear up the contract because he wasn't worth it? If anything, dump on these gm's with itchy contract writing fingers. Don't blame Dunleavy for taking the money, nor for the Pacers bringing him in. He has a great all around skill set that we would greatly benefit from if used correctly. I'll bet he really blosoms under O'Brien.

I certainly hope he does, and I think there is a chance. But right now he could be replaced by any number of SGs in the game, and I'm not sure that just cutting his salary wouldn't be good.

Ever read moneyball? I think Mike can be functionally replaced by a second-year shooting guard that spent all four years in college. That would save us 6-7 million a year.

And let me clarify:

Can Mike be a part of a very good NBA team? Sure.

On that theoretical very good NBA team, could he be unoticeably replaced by just about any starting shooting guard in the league? Oh yeah.

There are only two things that make Mike distinctive: Above average rebounds for a shooting guard, and a very good ability to hit mid-range jumpers.

I will say that a smart coach could make Mike into a mini Rip Hamilton, since the only real thing Rip can do is hit mid-range jumpers, too. So there is hope.

But why is Mike any better than Charlie Bell? Or Luther Head? Or DeShaun Stevenson? Wouldn't you rather be paying that kind of player 1 million instead of 8 million?

NapTonius Monk
06-04-2007, 02:37 PM
But why is Mike any better than Charlie Bell? Or Luther Head? Or DeShaun Stevenson? Wouldn't you rather be paying that kind of player 1 million instead of 8 million?

I don't know that I would agree that Dunleavy is a 1 million dollar level player. Stevenson is athletic..nothing special. Luther Head is a good 3rd guard. Charlie Bell...about the same..nothing special. And while I don't think that Dunleavy is All-star level, I certainly wouldn't drop his value down around the level of the above mentioned players. He's worth much more. I think he struggled as a catch and shoot player somewhat..in Rick's offense. Certainly someone like a Brent Barry would have fit much better feeding off O'neal. But if we're moving O'neal and going to more of a motion offense..Dunleavy's passing ability and scoring ability fit much better.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 02:43 PM
I don't know that I would agree that Dunleavy is a 1 million dollar level player. Stevenson is athletic..nothing special. Luther Head is a good 3rd guard. Charlie Bell...about the same..nothing special. And while I don't think that Dunleavy is All-star level, I certainly wouldn't drop his value down around the level of the above mentioned players. He's worth much more. I think he struggled as a catch and shoot player somewhat..in Rick's offense. Certainly someone like a Brent Barry would have fit much better feeding off O'neal. But if we're moving O'neal and going to more of a motion offense..Dunleavy's passing ability and scoring ability fit much better.

I'm not necessarily saying that Dunleavy is worth a million. All I am saying is that I can find three players without much effort that are at least as good as Dunleavy that are making a million. Maybe your gut says Mike could become better, but there is no statistical evidence yet to back that up.

Again, I hope you are right, and like I said Mike has some potential to be a Rip Hamilton-esque player. But looking at what he has proven to be so far, I see no reason to keep Mike if we have a chance to get rid of him.


As a fan, I do hope you are proven correct.

ajbry
06-04-2007, 02:51 PM
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/getty/c5/fullj.getty-74187340jp109_draft_lottery_8_51_38_pm.jpg

Dunleavy, Sr: "So Larry, how did Mike work out for you this season?"
Bird: "I'm at the lottery, how the **** do you think it went?"


That being said, Dunleavy is an incredibly mediocre player and I'd agree with FlavaDave's comparisons. His massive contract is what garners the most criticism - if he wasn't paid so much, then his results wouldn't seem so lackluster.

Anthem
06-04-2007, 02:56 PM
I'd trade Trophy for Walker. In a heartbeat.

Young
06-04-2007, 03:17 PM
Wow, I am really suprised at how much people dislike Antoine Walker.

We would have Antoine for 2 years, 2 years assuming we wouldn't exercise a team opition for the 09-10 season and if that would be the case we would have him one more year after that.

We will see Murphy and Dunleavy 4 more years each. Do the math.

Murphy is defiantly not better than Antoine. Dunleavy and Antoine are about the same just different styles but Antoine's style and contract fits in better with this team. With OB as our coach a role player like Dunleavy won't do us that much good. Especially if we trade Jermaine for Lamar/Bynum we could really use Antoine because he can be a scorer for us.

Antoine hasn't filled up the stat sheet in Miami but what do you expect? He is playing with Dwyane Wade and Shaqiule O'Neal, two of the most ball dominate players in the NBA. Walker is player who needs the ball himself.

This team is looking like we are re building. You know that OB and Bird still want to make the playoffs though and Walker can help us do that.

IMO, Walker can help us more than Dunleavy or Murphy.

We still would have a problem with an overload of forwards but atleast we will only have that problem for 2 years instead of 4.

People just need to get over their dislike for Walker. You can't dislike him as much as I grew to dislike Artest. Walker isn't my favorite player by any means but given who our new coach is and knowing the style he wants to play (and the contract status) we defiantly should try and get Walker for Murphy or Dunleavy.

Let me go on record by saying I don't think it will ever happen unless it is Murphy, then MAYBE the Pacers would do it. But I don't think the Heat have any use for Murphy and I can't see Donnie or Larry trading Dunleavy after half a season unless OB really wants to.

Kegboy
06-04-2007, 03:27 PM
Walker shot 40% and 28% last season, Murphy shot 46% and 40%. Murphy also didn't get suspended for failing a physical.

No. Thank. You.

[edit] Also, as for the notion that he needs to ball to be effective, Shaq and Wade were hurt this year. He shot 44% and 36% the previous season when they were healthy. And I just looked at his FT%. 44% last year, 64% for his career.

Again. No. Thank. You.

Dr. Goldfoot
06-04-2007, 03:32 PM
Walker's a 3 time all-star, NBA Champion, 10th all time in 3 pointers made, his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years and he has 60 playoff games under belt. He has 2 more guaranteed years left on his contract and has a relationship with the coach. I see no downsides. I also don't see why the Heat would touch MDJ or Troy.

Kegboy
06-04-2007, 03:37 PM
his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years

40%, 28%, 44% vs. 45%, 37%, 78%.

Slick Pinkham
06-04-2007, 03:42 PM
his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years.

:crazy:

Show me years where Dunleavy or Murphy get 4 rebounds a game, shoot 39.7% from the field, 27.5% from 3, 43.8 % from the line. He used to be a good passer now he gets 1.7 assists per game.

He used to be a good player. Now he has NOTHING left. He would not even be worth the veteran's minimum.

Dr. Goldfoot
06-04-2007, 03:43 PM
I don't know where you're getting that 37%. He shot 35% for the Warriors and 28% for the Pacers last year. Look at what they've done over the last few seasons. Don't forget to look at Walker's playoff numbers, too.

Kegboy
06-04-2007, 03:45 PM
I don't know where you're getting that 37%. He shot 35% for the Warriors and 28% for the Pacers last year. Look at what they've done over the last few seasons. Don't forget to look at Walker's playoff numbers, too.

You said compare Walker's diminished stats to Dunleavy's best years, so I did. ;)

Since86
06-04-2007, 03:46 PM
You don't see any downsides? Have you watched the man play at all in the past 4 seasons?

During the '04-'05 playoffs he was a sole reason why IND won that series. Not only did he manage to get himself ejected during a tight game in the 4th qtr. he managed to miss lay-up after lay-up. His shooting made Jeff Foster seem like Reggie out there.

He's fat and out of shape. He's a horrible lockerroom guy, which is what the Ps are definately trying to stay away from. He can't shoot a lick while managing to think he's a scoring PG. He wouldn't make it out of FanJam intros before getting boo'd.

Dr. Goldfoot
06-04-2007, 03:50 PM
Average players on good teams will always be better than average players on bad teams. Walker would step right into the rotation here. Dun and Murphy wouldn't in Miami. On top of that, he'd be off the books in two seasons while those guys will still be collecting all-star paychecks.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 03:52 PM
Oh, by the way:

My plan would include playing Walker about as much as the Suns played Jalen Rose.

All I want is the contract.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 03:53 PM
During the '04-'05 playoffs he was a sole reason why IND won that series.


My friends wore ironic Walker jerseys while we chanted "An-toine Wal-ker!" after every miss. You are very right.

Since86
06-04-2007, 04:04 PM
My friends wore ironic Walker jerseys while we chanted "An-toine Wal-ker!" after every miss. You are very right.

I got a good chuckle out of the debate with Kegboy and I think UB in the thread about Tins and if he was the reason IND won that series.

I thought then and still do think that he is the first and foremost reason. He was horrible that whole series, and to make it worse he shot the ball 15-20 times a game. I thought PP was going to kill him at times.

Shade
06-04-2007, 04:17 PM
I called this rumor a few days ago. :rolleyes:

As for Fatoine...let's just say that, as much as I disliked Jack, I'd rather have 15 Jacks than one single Fatoine Walker. I absolutely loathe the guy.

CableKC
06-04-2007, 04:32 PM
I called this rumor a few days ago. :rolleyes:

As for Fatoine...let's just say that, as much as I disliked Jack, I'd rather have 15 Jacks than one single Fatoine Walker. I absolutely loathe the guy.
Except for the 15 SJax for 1 Antoine Walker....that's just to scary to contemplate, I agree....NO to Antoine Walker!!!!!!

I don't like the contract that Dunleavy received....but I would live with Dunleavy's contract and Dunleavy "the player" over taking on Antoine Walker. I always thought of him as an "unofficial" Pacer that played for the other team. He would always do something stupid...or make some mistake that would give the Pacers a win in some way.

Its hard to compare stats...whether it is comparing a bad player on a bad team...or a bad player on a good team.....simply because both players played different minutes on their respective teams over the last 2 years.

I can only add my opinion that Antoine Walker isn't the same player that he was when he was considered an All-Star. If the only reason is that Walker would be taken over Dunleavy is because of salary considerations....then I would rather keep Dunleavy. At least with a player like Dunleavy...under a defensive minded coach like JO'B and Harter....I can see some room for improvement..no matter how small that is, simply cuz he seems somewhat coachable.....but with Antoine Walker....I simply can't see it. The guy has been around the league to long to learn anything new.

SoupIsGood
06-04-2007, 04:34 PM
Trading Murphy for Walker would probably make sense. I wouldn't trade Dun for him.

Let's get AW and his 4-pointe.... I mean championship experience in here. :)

CableKC
06-04-2007, 04:38 PM
Trading Murphy for Walker would probably make sense. I wouldn't trade Dun for him.

Let's get AW and his 4-pointe.... I mean championship experience in here. :)
From a Pacers POV....yes...I would prefer a Murphy for Antoine Walker trade...but from the Heat POV...I have no idea why they would want any part of that deal.

SoupIsGood
06-04-2007, 04:40 PM
From a Pacers POV....yes...I would prefer a Murphy for Antoine Walker trade...but from the Heat POV...I have no idea why they would want any part of that deal.

Because of Murphy's fiendish good looks?

Anthem
06-04-2007, 05:56 PM
Oh, by the way:

My plan would include playing Walker about as much as the Suns played Jalen Rose.

All I want is the contract.
Zactly.

It's not like I want to see Murphy on the floor for us, either. I'd be thrilled with trading for Walker, even if we bought him out.

We wouldn't, though. Bird, Walsh, and Obie have all been high on Walker in the past.

NapTonius Monk
06-04-2007, 06:06 PM
I don't think Walker would help this team? He takes more bad shots than anyone I've ever seen. How much easier could it have gotten for him than to feed off of the post presence of Shaq? All he would do here is hinder the growth of younger players.

CableKC
06-04-2007, 06:29 PM
Because of Murphy's fiendish good looks?
Murphy and his continually broken nose has that "Owen Wilson" look to him that men like Riley cannot resist. :laugh:

CableKC
06-04-2007, 06:34 PM
Zactly.

It's not like I want to see Murphy on the floor for us, either. I'd be thrilled with trading for Walker, even if we bought him out.

We wouldn't, though. Bird, Walsh, and Obie have all been high on Walker in the past.
That settles it then......I have a bad feeling that Antoine is coming htere then.....we all know how Bird/DW is when it comes to players that they have been "high on" in the past. :rolleyes:

I have a question about his contract. When I look at his contract in HoopHype...it shows that he has a team option for 10 mil in the 2009-2010 season...and then shows that he is owed another 10 mil in the 2010-2011 season.

If the team that owns his contract in the 2009-2010 season doesn't pick up his team option in that year...does it mean that he comes off the books then?

or

Does it mean that he is still ( in some way ) owed his salary in the 2010-2011 season?

I'm lost on how these particular team/player options work.

Anthem
06-04-2007, 06:35 PM
If the team takes the team option, they stop paying him after that.

CableKC
06-04-2007, 06:37 PM
I don't think Walker would help this team? He takes more bad shots than anyone I've ever seen. How much easier could it have gotten for him than to feed off of the post presence of Shaq? All he would do here is hinder the growth of younger players.

Good point.....but given what we have read on Bird and JO'Bs vision of this team....developing players isn't a priority.

I would much rather keep Dunleavy and even Murphy IF it meant that TPTB are given little to no choice but to play the exisiting young players instead of moving in a player like Antoine Walker.

CableKC
06-04-2007, 06:43 PM
If the team takes the team option, they stop paying him after that.
Do you mean if they DON'T take the option....then they stop paying his contract?

or

Is it that if they take the team option....then they don't have to pay him after that year?

In Antoine's case....his team option is in 2009-2010....if the team that owns him doesn't pick up his option...then they don't pay him for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 season?

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 08:03 PM
Do you mean if they DON'T take the option....then they stop paying his contract?

or

Is it that if they take the team option....then they don't have to pay him after that year?

In Antoine's case....his team option is in 2009-2010....if the team that owns him doesn't pick up his option...then they don't pay him for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 season?


Yeah, the team has the option to terminate the last two years of the contract.

carpediem024
06-04-2007, 08:04 PM
Antoine is garbage...

I'd rather have like Diop than Walker.

Unclebuck
06-04-2007, 08:06 PM
I just want to make a comment about Walker. I don't like his game, but I like him as a person. He's a good leader and a good teammate. He was the leader of the Celtics team that got to the ECF. I think the Pacers would trade Murphy for Walker without thinking twice. (Bird has always said he likes Walker)

Dunleavy is a totally different matter. Why so many of you don't like him is something I'll never, ever understand. (I think you could make a pretty strong case that he was our best player from the allstar break until the end of the season) JO was playing at about 50% during that time due to injuries. Sure his contract is a little too high - if he were making about 1 to 1.5 million less per season then he'd be a good player at a reasonable price.

CableKC
06-04-2007, 08:28 PM
I just want to make a comment about Walker. I don't like his game, but I like him as a person. He's a good leader and a good teammate. He was the leader of the Celtics team that got to the ECF. I think the Pacers would trade Murphy for Walker without thinking twice. (Bird has always said he likes Walker)
Okay..if we can exit out of Antoine Walker's contract after the 2008-2009 season...then I would have no problem with trading Murphy for him. But I still have no idea why the Heat would do that deal.


Dunleavy is a totally different matter. Why so many of you don't like him is something I'll never, ever understand. (I think you could make a pretty strong case that he was our best player from the allstar break until the end of the season) JO was playing at about 50% during that time due to injuries. Sure his contract is a little too high - if he were making about 1 to 1.5 million less per season then he'd be a good player at a reasonable price.
I'm with you.....I like what Dunleavy does on this team. He is overpaid....but he actually...IMHO...is a solid 6th man / reliable 3rd scoring option. We just need a solid 1st/2nd scoring option on the floor with him so that he isn't pressured to score the ball all the time.

Young
06-04-2007, 10:15 PM
Dunleavy is a totally different matter. Why so many of you don't like him is something I'll never, ever understand. (I think you could make a pretty strong case that he was our best player from the allstar break until the end of the season) JO was playing at about 50% during that time due to injuries. Sure his contract is a little too high - if he were making about 1 to 1.5 million less per season then he'd be a good player at a reasonable price.

I really like what Dunleavy can do.

Here is the problem.

He plays small forward. We have Danny Granger and Shawne Williams to play that spot.

Granted that Antoine Walker would just create a log jam at the 4 it would only be for two years instead of four.

FlavaDave
06-04-2007, 10:24 PM
(I think you could make a pretty strong case that he was our best player from the allstar break until the end of the season)


Our record after the all-star break: 6-23.

Not to pin it on Dun, but it is hardly impressive to be the best player on a team that isn't winning.

He shot 28% from 3-pt range and had an assist-to-turnover ratio of 1.5 (only .1 better than Jackson).

His defense speaks for itself.

What can Dunleavy do?


Is he terrible? I didn't say that. But he is in the bottom third of NBA shooting guards, and it makes no sense to waste all that money on a player we could easily replace in free agency or through the draft.

Hicks
06-04-2007, 10:25 PM
Our record after the all-star break: 6-23.

OK, but do you honestly believe that's his fault? At least in any way above and beyond the other players?

Anthem
06-04-2007, 11:00 PM
Antoine is garbage...

I'd rather have like Diop than Walker.
So would I.

And I'd rather have Walker than Murphy.

Unclebuck
06-04-2007, 11:06 PM
Our record after the all-star break: 6-23.

Not to pin it on Dun, but it is hardly impressive to be the best player on a team that isn't winning.

He shot 28% from 3-pt range and had an assist-to-turnover ratio of 1.5 (only .1 better than Jackson).

His defense speaks for itself.

What can Dunleavy do?


Is he terrible? I didn't say that. But he is in the bottom third of NBA shooting guards, and it makes no sense to waste all that money on a player we could easily replace in free agency or through the draft.



He isn't and never has been a good three point shooter. When did that become the benchmark to which all small forwards and shooting guards are judged. He's excellent however coming off screens and taking 18 ft jumpers.

His team defense might be the best on the team - rarely if ever does he make a mistake in this department, he takes charges, he plays a team concept and IMo he will excel in the Harter - O'Brien defensive system because it is all about playing a read and react defensive system and that takes smarts and good instincts and Dun has abundant supplies of both.

I realize the issue of comparing Jax and Dunleavy's passing has come up several times since the trade and I think it is so obvious that Mike is just a more willing and better passer. But that doesn't mean he gets an assist - maybe he makes and is willing to make the pass that leads to the scoring pass.

ChicagoJ
06-04-2007, 11:41 PM
I really like what Dunleavy can do.

Here is the problem.

He plays small forward. We have Danny Granger and Shawne Williams to play that spot.

Granted that Antoine Walker would just create a log jam at the 4 it would only be for two years instead of four.

(Not picking on you, rommie)

I've seen nothing that suggests Williams is going to have the stamina and earn more minutes any time soon. He's intriguing, but that's about it. I wouldn't give up an already-NBA-caliber player (yes, he's slightly overpaid but not as much as everybody whines about it) on a hit-and-miss guy like him. I can't believe how much Shawne Williams get overrated around here.

FlavaDave
06-05-2007, 12:05 AM
He isn't and never has been a good three point shooter. When did that become the benchmark to which all small forwards and shooting guards are judged. He's excellent however coming off screens and taking 18 ft jumpers.

His team defense might be the best on the team - rarely if ever does he make a mistake in this department, he takes charges, he plays a team concept and IMo he will excel in the Harter - O'Brien defensive system because it is all about playing a read and react defensive system and that takes smarts and good instincts and Dun has abundant supplies of both.

I realize the issue of comparing Jax and Dunleavy's passing has come up several times since the trade and I think it is so obvious that Mike is just a more willing and better passer. But that doesn't mean he gets an assist - maybe he makes and is willing to make the pass that leads to the scoring pass.


I wouldn't judge Dun on his threes so much if he didn't take so damn many. He averages three attempts a game while shooting 28%.

Contrast that with Marquis. He sucks at threes, too. But he only takes half a three a game.

I don't care if you can hit from beyond the arc. Hamilton couldn't until this year. But for the love of god, if you can't hit them, STOP TAKING THEM.

___________________________

Anyway, my point is and always will be this:

Mike Dunleavy doesn't suck per se. I think he can contribute. The problem isn't that he can't pull his weight. The problem is that there is a pool of about 40 players currently in the NBA who could do Dun's job just as well as he can.

So why pay him so much? I am in favor of dumping him for an expiring contract and using the savings on a free agent, using the MLE. Someone like Charlie Bell or DeShaun Stevenson. Or use a draft pick on a Josh Childress. Or hell, start Marquis with Williams taking over in case of injury. Or trade for a Luther Head.

If there was no salary cap, then I would keep Dun. Why not? He is as good as any non-star SG. But that's the catch. He is only as good as any non-star SG.

So why burn so much cap space on him? Dump his salary and replace him with a cheaper part.

Read Moneyball. Seriously. I'm talking some Billy Beane Oakland-A's stuff here.

Again, one more time: It isn't Dunleavy. Is it the wide availability of replacements for Dunleavy.

ChicagoJ
06-05-2007, 12:21 AM
Three a game shooting 28% is better than SJax's five a game while shooting 32%.

Does Dunn take too many? Yes, but it was still a step in the right direction.

Young
06-05-2007, 12:53 AM
(Not picking on you, rommie)

I've seen nothing that suggests Williams is going to have the stamina and earn more minutes any time soon. He's intriguing, but that's about it. I wouldn't give up an already-NBA-caliber player (yes, he's slightly overpaid but not as much as everybody whines about it) on a hit-and-miss guy like him. I can't believe how much Shawne Williams get overrated around here.

Oh I know you aren't picking on me. No worries my friend.

But I guess I just want to see Shawne have a chance to get some minutes and see what he can do. I know that he isn't better than Dunleavy is right now, but with the direction the team seems to be going in I think that i'd rather see us get rid of Dunleavy. Get a better contract and give Shawne a chance to show us what he can do.

However if we did in fact swap Dunleavy for Walker than that takes away time from Ike Diogu and i'd like to see what he can do as well. So that same problem would just be at a different position. (however not as long)

One thing that bugs me that I saw last year is that Dunleavy is not a shooting guard. I don't know which one OB will decide to use their but my guess is that Dunleavy and Danny are going to be our 2-3 guys this year. I think that this team needs a natural two there at the 2, more of a shooter/scorer than Dunleavy. And I really don't want to see Dunleavy or Danny become a backup because both are much better than that.

My whole thing, more than Dunleavy's salary (although that plays a part in it) is that I think that we could use a natural two guard in here. And I don't want to see Dunleavy or Danny become a backup on this team. Ever.

But hey, like I said above, trading for Antoine would only give us that same problem at the 4 spot. It would just only last for 2 years.

If we do keep Dunleavy than hey I won't have a problem with it. He is a good player. Like I said in another thread I am very intrigued by what he can do under OB. And hey this team has very few players on the team who have been here more than 3 years (Jermaine, Tinsley, and Foster are the only ones I think) so maybe we should look to keep the new guys if we can. I really expect to keep em for this reason, the team needs stability.

ChicagoJ
06-05-2007, 12:57 AM
I don't disagree. But let's face it, we aren't trading Dunn for a starting 2-guard.

We could trade Danny for a starting 2-guard and let Dunn play SF. That isn't my preference, but its better than just about any other option the team will have.

My guess is that they won't want to give up Danny and we'll go into next season with Dunn as our staring SG. :puke:

Young
06-05-2007, 01:05 AM
I don't disagree. But let's face it, we aren't trading Dunn for a starting 2-guard.

We could trade Danny for a starting 2-guard and let Dunn play SF. That isn't my preference, but its better than just about any other option the team will have.

My guess is that they won't want to give up Danny and we'll go into next season with Dunn as our staring SG. :puke:

Yes I can't disagree here.

However I guess atleast our defense should be much better this year. Hopefully Dunleavy can play better offense at the two under OB than he did under Rick.

mike_D
06-05-2007, 01:09 AM
I wouldn't judge Dun on his threes so much if he didn't take so damn many. He averages three attempts a game while shooting 28%.

Contrast that with Marquis. He sucks at threes, too. But he only takes half a three a game.

I don't care if you can hit from beyond the arc. Hamilton couldn't until this year. But for the love of god, if you can't hit them, STOP TAKING THEM.

___________________________

Anyway, my point is and always will be this:

Mike Dunleavy doesn't suck per se. I think he can contribute. The problem isn't that he can't pull his weight. The problem is that there is a pool of about 40 players currently in the NBA who could do Dun's job just as well as he can.

So why pay him so much? I am in favor of dumping him for an expiring contract and using the savings on a free agent, using the MLE. Someone like Charlie Bell or DeShaun Stevenson. Or use a draft pick on a Josh Childress. Or hell, start Marquis with Williams taking over in case of injury. Or trade for a Luther Head.

If there was no salary cap, then I would keep Dun. Why not? He is as good as any non-star SG. But that's the catch. He is only as good as any non-star SG.

So why burn so much cap space on him? Dump his salary and replace him with a cheaper part.

Read Moneyball. Seriously. I'm talking some Billy Beane Oakland-A's stuff here.

Again, one more time: It isn't Dunleavy. Is it the wide availability of replacements for Dunleavy.

Are those guys you listed going to take us to the promise land? There in the same boat as Dunlevy is.Solid players and would be great fits on winning teams.None of those guys you mentioned are going to carry a team and ideally you wouldn't want them starting on your team if your looking to win a championship.

FlavaDave
06-05-2007, 08:21 AM
Are those guys you listed going to take us to the promise land? They're in the same boat as Dunlevy is. Solid players and would be great fits on winning teams. None of those guys you mentioned are going to carry a team and ideally you wouldn't want them starting on your team if your looking to win a championship.

Exactamundo!

http://re3.mm-a3.yimg.com/image/2652084732

The difference is that they make 3-7 million dollars less a year than Dunleavy.

Anthem
06-05-2007, 01:29 PM
I think Shawne's shown enough to get consistent PT... he's intriguing. I agree that he's not better than Dunleavy, but Dun hasn't shown much improvement in the past few years, while Shawne still has a lot of room for improvement (and you could see him improve over the course of the year).