PDA

View Full Version : What's the best draft pick we could get for Foster?



Shade
06-09-2007, 03:09 PM
Outside of JO and Granger, Jeff is likely our most valuable trading piece. If we decide to hold onto JO, what do you think is the best draft pick we could hope to pick up if we dangle Foster out there? (Keep in mind that we would have to take back filler to make the salaries work).

Hicks
06-09-2007, 03:22 PM
I'd like to think somewhere between say, 14 and 20.

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 03:53 PM
Well, I'd like to think late-1st, but teams who trade those do so because they don't want more salary, and Jeff would cost more than a rookie.

Possibly SA at #28, but besides that, I don't see it happening, unless UB gets hired as somebody's GM before the 28th.

FlavaDave
06-09-2007, 03:56 PM
The problem is that Jeff is valuable to contenders, and contenders have low draft picks.

BlueNGold
06-09-2007, 03:58 PM
Foster would be more valuable in a trade. But, I would not trade him until we got a replacement for starting C....and Ike is not a C btw. Neither is Murphy.

If we got Bynum, I would be open to dealing Foster because Ike, Murphy, Baston, etc. could fill the PF slot.

ABADays
06-09-2007, 04:34 PM
I don't think Jeff would be nearly as valuable on the market - even a draft pick - than he is for us.

speakout4
06-09-2007, 05:00 PM
I don't think Jeff would be nearly as valuable on the market - even a draft pick - than he is for us.
For what he is paid and the hard dirty work he does, we would be nuts to trade him. I say he retires a Pacer.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 05:05 PM
I'd like to think somewhere between say, 14 and 20.

...in the second round, you mean?

Sollozzo
06-09-2007, 05:34 PM
There is no way Jeff Foster could land a first round draft pick.

Evan_The_Dude
06-09-2007, 05:42 PM
You don't trade Foster for a draft pick unless it's a person that can really help us now, and plays a role that means a lot more than that of Jeff's. If we're going to trade Jeff, I'd rather trade him for somebody that's already been in the league a year or two and has shown what he can do already. More than likely, if he is traded, he'd be the difference maker in the deal. But like FlavaDave said, teams most likely to want Jeff are contenders. I think anybody that's thinking that trading Jeff is a good idea should repeat that sentence a few times out loud.

Y2J
06-09-2007, 05:53 PM
Foster would get you somewhere in the lower 20's I'd imagine. A top-4 rebounder, good defender, great hustle, great teammate. Those types are in high demands, what with the NBA being filled with selfish team cancers like Sheed Wallace, Ron Artest, and Stephen Jackson.

Big Smooth
06-09-2007, 06:17 PM
I'd like to think somewhere between say, 14 and 20.

There is no way that Foster would have that kind of trade value. Maybe a late first round or second round pick.

Hicks
06-09-2007, 06:38 PM
...in the second round, you mean?

:rolleyes:

LG33
06-09-2007, 06:59 PM
New Jersey might want him, but #17 is a little too low for Foster. Considering we got Harrison at what, #29, I figure Jeff should be at least that good. I would say early second round, late first (25 up).

Unclebuck
06-09-2007, 07:09 PM
There is nothing that is more over-valued this time of year than draft picks.

Hicks
06-09-2007, 07:19 PM
There is nothing that is more over-valued this time of year than draft picks.

Agreed.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 08:23 PM
:rolleyes:

I was serious....

the only way Jeff Foster nets you a late lottery pick is if you deal him to the Indiana Fever.

ajbry
06-09-2007, 08:28 PM
I would guess the absolute highest pick would be 35th overall or something to that extent. A first-rounder is out of the question and I wouldn't even be surprised if teams weren't quick to pull the trigger on Foster even if the price was in the middle of the 2nd round.

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 08:29 PM
And what do you guys think a past-his-prime one-dimensional player is worth?

Let's put it this way. Would you trade Danny Granger for Jeff Foster? Would you trade Shawne Williams? Whether you believe this draft is that good or not, the perception is there, and not just among fans. Nobody is going to give up a potentially really good player for Jeff, unless they're a contender who wants to not only win now, but has a need for a defender/rebounder who won't score.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 08:37 PM
After the Spurs win the title, Foster's value will go up, especially out west. He gives Duncan more trouble than anyone else Ive ever seen. Duncan has said it himself.

Edit: Phoenix at 24 sounds perfect, I bet they would love to get someone to slow Duncan down. I wouldnt want to trade Foster for the 24th, but it sounds reasonable.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 08:41 PM
After the Spurs win the title, Foster's value will go up, especially out west. He gives Duncan more trouble than anyone else Ive ever seen. Duncan has said it himself.

...you mean now that Duncan is finally in the finals, after years of flying under the radar in the west...

indyman37
06-09-2007, 08:52 PM
After the Spurs win the title, Foster's value will go up, especially out west. He gives Duncan more trouble than anyone else Ive ever seen. Duncan has said it himself.

Edit: Phoenix at 24 sounds perfect, I bet they would love to get someone to slow Duncan down. I wouldnt want to trade Foster for the 24th, but it sounds reasonable.
I agree with both of your statements. If the Suns want to add a big man that can defend Tim Duncan, but still run in their offense (I'm pretty sure Foster can run), they should get Jeff.

Roferr
06-09-2007, 09:07 PM
The problem is that Jeff is valuable to contenders, and contenders have low draft picks.

There's always the fill-ins. Foster may be the only thing that a team not quite over the hump needs.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 09:10 PM
...you mean now that Duncan is finally in the finals, after years of flying under the radar in the west...After the Suns finally realize that their run and gun style alone wont win them a championship. Besides SA, who else is standing in their way of winning a title? Dallas?

Y2J
06-09-2007, 09:16 PM
Anyone who seriously doesn't think someone as useful as Jeff Foster could net a 1st rounder is either (A) Delusional, or (B) A Pistons homer still upset that his team got mauled by a mediocre Cavs team.

Amazing rebounder, amazing hustler, great attitude, very good defender, fairly efficient scorer. He wont get you a lottery pick, obviously, but he's well worth a pick in the 20's.

If I felt like it I could look up some past draft day trades and see what type of players fetch what number pick.

BobbyMac
06-09-2007, 09:17 PM
Late 1st round...25 or higher.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 09:21 PM
Anyone who seriously doesn't think someone as useful as Jeff Foster could net a 1st rounder is either (A) Delusional, or (B) A Pistons homer still upset that his team got mauled by a mediocre Cavs team.

Amazing rebounder, amazing hustler, great attitude, very good defender, fairly efficient scorer. He wont get you a lottery pick, obviously, but he's well worth a pick in the 20's.

If I felt like it I could look up some past draft day trades and see what type of players fetch what number pick.

Jeff Foster for hall of fame?

Tell you what, assuming they're both traded, we'll see who nets more value: Rasheed Wallace, or Jeff foster.

In the meantime, I realize you're trying to make a name for yourself by bringing me up in every single post you make, but give it a rest. I know I'm your idol, but this is taking it a tad too far.

maybe if donnie agreed to take an unwanted MLE-level contract in return, I could see Foster going for a pick 25 or lower. But that's with strings attached.

Jeff Foster is what you hope your 7th or 8th man will be when you finally get to an elite level. He's still in the rotation, just not part of the core. That kind of player you're hoping to draft at the later pick, probably 2nd round. While Foster already IS at the level you hope your project rookie will one day become, he also comes with a heftier price tag, wheras you can draft guys with similar potential at bargain-basement prices.

If there was a team that thought they were a Jeff Foster away from a title, a late 1st might be worth it.

Houston is likely the best bet, but I bet they're aiming to get a scoring guard with their pick. I also highly doubt Phoenix wants another big man that can't score.

Golden State is also a possibility, if the Pacers want to take on some more dead weight, maybe adonal foyle.

Y2J
06-09-2007, 09:41 PM
Jeff Foster for hall of fame?

Tell you what, assuming they're both traded, we'll see who nets more value: Rasheed Wallace, or Jeff foster.

In the meantime, I realize you're trying to make a name for yourself by bringing me up in every single post you make, but give it a rest. I know I'm your idol, but this is taking it a tad too far.

maybe if donnie agreed to take an unwanted MLE-level contract in return, I could see Foster going for a pick 25 or lower. But that's with strings attached.

Jeff Foster is what you hope your 7th or 8th man will be when you finally get to an elite level. He's still in the rotation, just not part of the core. That kind of player you're hoping to draft at the later pick, probably 2nd round. While Foster already IS at the level you hope your project rookie will one day become, he also comes with a heftier price tag, wheras you can draft guys with similar potential at bargain-basement prices.

If there was a team that thought they were a Jeff Foster away from a title, a late 1st might be worth it.

Houston is likely the best bet, but I bet they're aiming to get a scoring guard with their pick. I also highly doubt Phoenix wants another big man that can't score.

Golden State is also a possibility, if the Pacers want to take on some more dead weight, maybe adonal foyle.

Fact - Foster would've started on the Pistons, and, while you still would've lost the series, it wouldn't have been such an embarrassing loss as the team would've at least put up a fight on the boards and would've at least guarded the basket, something nobody on the Pistons did. Sheed & Webber = worst defensive front court in the league.

And for the record - Sheed has what we call negative value at this point in time. His negatives - age, declining production, horrible attitude, monster contract - outweigh the positives he brings to the table. The only way you're getting anything of real value for Sheed is if Dumars takes back a bad contract in return. Troy Murphy & the #19 we get from the Lakers for Sheed, Amir Johnson, and a future 1st is fair.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 09:42 PM
oh yeah, I forgot: sheed is a horrible defender, too.

so, there's no way Dumars gets any value for him, correct?

Y2J
06-09-2007, 09:53 PM
oh yeah, I forgot: sheed is a horrible defender, too.

so, there's no way Dumars gets any value for him, correct?

At his salary, no way. He's an MLE-caliber player (14/7, 43% shooting, average defense) making All-Star money. He'll be 33 when the season stars, and he annually leads the league in tech's. Call it a hunch, but I don't think teams are lining up to trade for him. If he goes, he's going for pennies on the dollar. An expiring contract and a mid 1st, tops.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 09:54 PM
ok.

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 09:59 PM
I think that's the first time I've ever seen anybody use Jeff Foster and "scorer" in the same post.

ajbry
06-09-2007, 10:02 PM
Fact - Foster would've started on the Pistons, and, while you still would've lost the series, it wouldn't have been such an embarrassing loss as the team would've at least put up a fight on the boards and would've at least guarded the basket, something nobody on the Pistons did. Sheed & Webber = worst defensive front court in the league.

And for the record - Sheed has what we call negative value at this point in time. His negatives - age, declining production, horrible attitude, monster contract - outweigh the positives he brings to the table. The only way you're getting anything of real value for Sheed is if Dumars takes back a bad contract in return. Troy Murphy & the #19 we get from the Lakers for Sheed, Amir Johnson, and a future 1st is fair.

Speaking of delusional...

I'd add more but I ain't looking to get suspended or anything.

DisplacedKnick
06-09-2007, 10:10 PM
You only get a first rd pick for Foster if you're taking on another team's dead weight - a bad salary or something.

Straight up I'd say you're looking at a pick starting around 40.

Well, unless it's Isiah - considering he gave up 2 expiring contracts AND a high 2nd rd pick for Mo Taylor (of course he didn't know where the 2nd would be at the time). But I'm talking about GM's with a brain.

BlueNGold
06-09-2007, 10:13 PM
I wish Y2J was right because I like Jeff Foster, but we all know the truth.

Sheed > Foster...and it's not close. The only thing Foster is better at is rebounding and drinking milk.

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 10:15 PM
You only get a first rd pick for Foster if you're taking on another team's dead weight - a bad salary or something.

Straight up I'd say you're looking at a pick starting around 40.

Well, unless it's Isiah - considering he gave up 2 expiring contracts AND a high 2nd rd pick for Mo Taylor (of course he didn't know where the 2nd would be at the time). But I'm talking about GM's with a brain.

I was thinking Jeff for Lee and #23? Makes sense, why wait for Lee to gain all that experience when you can have the finished product (minus the offensive game and with a bad hip) right now!

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 10:20 PM
I wish Y2J was right because I like Jeff Foster, but we all know the truth.

Sheed > Foster...and it's not close. The only thing Foster is better at is rebounding and drinking milk.

Wait, was he saying Jeff would start over Sheed? I assumed he meant Webber (which I don't agree with either, but it makes more sense.)

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 10:36 PM
Ok Y2J is obviously delusional, but the rest of you are seriously underestimating the value of a player like Foster and overestimating the value of draft picks (which like UB said is common around this time of the year). Saying you couldnt get anything better than a 40 or so for Foster is insane. Most players picked that high are worthless and are out of the league in 1 or 2 seasons. Even mid-20s picks arent guaranteed to turn out to be as good as Foster. Danny Granger was a steal at 16, not the standard, think about that.

Kstat, you of all people should understand the value of a good rebounder. Im sure the Pistons were missing Ben Wallace's rebounding while the Cavs with Verajao (who plays very similar to Foster) were out-hustling them on the boards. Granted, Big Ben is a little over-rated but still. Oh and how many times did Foster out rebound both of the Wallaces combined? I seem to remember Foster having a couple of 15-20 rebound games against you guys.

BlueNGold
06-09-2007, 10:38 PM
Wait, was he saying Jeff would start over Sheed? I assumed he meant Webber (which I don't agree with either, but it makes more sense.)

Maybe I missed something, but I saw mostly slams on Sheed and praising of Foster. One small reference to Webber.

OK, maybe he is talking the C position. As for Webber v Jeff, it's debateable.

BlueNGold
06-09-2007, 10:43 PM
For the right team, Foster gets you a late first round pick. It would be surprising to me if he got you anything above #20 even though he is more valuable than the average #20 pick.

Don't confuse the perceived value of first round picks with the value of the underlying players. These GM's like to gamble and think they can pick a diamond in the rough.

Y2J
06-09-2007, 10:47 PM
I can't believe people still so massively overrate Rasheed Wallace. After his past 2 playoff collapses (both physically and mentally) I figured everyone finally realized what I've known all along - he's nothing more than a mentally weak glorified role player with a horrible attitude.

14 & 7 people....don't give me that crap about numbers not meaning anything......7 rebounds clearly shows the guys a huge liability on the glass....and guess what? Rebounding was probably the deciding factor in the ECF.

For the record, I meant Foster replacing Chris "Stick A Fork In Me" Webber at center.

Hicks
06-09-2007, 10:50 PM
the rest of you are seriously underestimating the value of a player like Foster and overestimating the value of draft picks (which like UB said is common around this time of the year). Saying you couldnt get anything better than a 40 or so for Foster is insane. Most players picked that high are worthless and are out of the league in 1 or 2 seasons. Even mid-20s picks arent guaranteed to turn out to be as good as Foster. Danny Granger was a steal at 16, not the standard, think about that.

This is where I'm coming from as well.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 10:53 PM
sheed blocked 4 fewer shots than the entire Cavs roster, and had more steals than any player not named LeBron....

but yeah, he sucked.

Anthem
06-09-2007, 10:59 PM
sheed . . . sucked.
Not true! The way he flipped out and cost the Pistons the game was my favorite play of the best playoffs in years!

I was like:

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/roflmfao.jpg

Alpolloloco
06-09-2007, 11:02 PM
I like to see if we could get Haywood from the Wizards for Foster. Maybe with some adjustments we could obtain their 2nd rnd pick, so what about:

Foster
Daniels
Greene

for

Haywood
Daniels
Hayes
#47 pick

Haywood has more offensive skills than Foster and is bigger force down low on the defensive end than Jeff while Jeff beats him in the rebounding category and hustling. Daniels gives us a good backup PG with above average defense while Hayes could be a nice shooter off the bench.

avoidingtheclowns
06-09-2007, 11:06 PM
After the Suns finally realize that their run and gun style alone wont win them a championship. Besides SA, who else is standing in their way of winning a title? Dallas?

except phoenix is looking to dump salary. if they trade marion, i could see them adding foster. i also think kstat is mostly right, although i think we could get a couple of firsts from the monarchs.

i don't see jeff alone getting a pick, but i could see houston in trading a couple of parts sending a pick our way, if they don't use it to get artest

Kegboy
06-09-2007, 11:06 PM
Y2J, after Sheed kicked our *** in '04 and '05, we learned our lesson about underestimating him.

Tom White
06-09-2007, 11:19 PM
There is nothing that is more over-valued this time of year than draft picks.

I don't know about that. It seems the Pacers under-value theirs. Remember, they gave up two frst round picks for Foster (First round pick Vonteego Cummings in the same draft, and a future first round pick.), and gave up this years first rounder for Harrington.

Nope. No over-valuing there.

Matter of fact, the more I think about a guy that can't make a lay-up (Foster) costing TWO first round picks, the sicker I get.

Kstat
06-09-2007, 11:19 PM
Kstat, you of all people should understand the value of a good rebounder. Im sure the Pistons were missing Ben Wallace's rebounding while the Cavs with Verajao (who plays very similar to Foster) were out-hustling them on the boards. Granted, Big Ben is a little over-rated but still. Oh and how many times did Foster out rebound both of the Wallaces combined? I seem to remember Foster having a couple of 15-20 rebound games against you guys.


I'm not underrating Foster. He is what he is: the first big off the bench on a typical contending team.

And yes, i know the typical late 1st doesn't always pan out. I'm also aware that guys like Tayshaun Prince routinely fall to that range. And most any GM worth his salt will believe in his talent evaluation skills to take that gamble.

and the reason we lost to the Cavs was LeBron James. Rebounding as a factor wasn't in the same zip code.

avoidingtheclowns
06-09-2007, 11:29 PM
I don't know about that. It seems the Pacers under-value theirs. Remember, they gave up two frst round picks for Foster (First round pick Vonteego Cummings in the same draft, and a future first round pick.), and gave up this years first rounder for Harrington.

Nope. No over-valuing there.

Matter of fact, the more I think about a guy that can't make a lay-up (Foster) costing TWO first round picks, the sicker I get.

not to mention we gave up vonteego. that guy puts jeff's game to shame.

also we traded a pick in 07 after the 06 draft, ub specifically said picks this time of year - meaning in the weeks before the current draft.

Mr.ThunderMakeR
06-09-2007, 11:31 PM
I'm not underrating Foster. He is what he is: the first big off the bench on a typical contending team.This I can agree with. But considering how few legitmate contenders there are right now and how slim the talent level is at the 5 position in the NBA today, Foster could be a starter on many teams (like he is here). This is why I think Foster could fetch us a pick in the 20's.

And for the record, I dont think the Pacers should trade Foster for a pick unless its an absolute steal, I'm talking 15 or lower.

Anthem
06-09-2007, 11:38 PM
Matter of fact, the more I think about a guy that can't make a lay-up (Foster) costing TWO first round picks, the sicker I get.
I'd much rather have Foster than Vonteego Cummings and Troy Murphy.

avoidingtheclowns
06-09-2007, 11:42 PM
I'd much rather have Foster than Vonteego Cummings and Troy Murphy.

then you my friend know nothing about basketball

Kstat
06-09-2007, 11:48 PM
I'd much rather have Foster than Vonteego Cummings and Troy Murphy.

of course, you could have hypothetically drafted Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker with those same picks...

Tom White
06-09-2007, 11:50 PM
I'd much rather have Foster than Vonteego Cummings and Troy Murphy.

Hey now, I'm not saying I would prefer Cummings. I'm not THAT crazy! The Pacers selected Cummings (for GS, if I remember right) as a part of the pre-agreed to deal.

Just ask yourself this - Is Jeff Foster worth TWO first round picks? Heck no.

Anthem
06-10-2007, 12:11 AM
Just ask yourself this - Is Jeff Foster worth TWO first round picks?
A 20th and 27th, if I remember correctly.

If my memory DOES turn out to be correct, then the answer would be yes. Foster was definitely worth the 20th and 27th pick.

diamonddave00
06-10-2007, 12:42 AM
I'd guess Foster would bring you a pick between 35-45 -don't see any team giving up a #1 plus they'd need a 5mil + salary slot.

Kegboy
06-10-2007, 10:41 AM
A 20th and 27th, if I remember correctly.

If my memory DOES turn out to be correct, then the answer would be yes. Foster was definitely worth the 20th and 27th pick.

Actually, a 14 and a 26.

Also, the pick we gave up for Tinsley was a 21 and turned into Boris Diaw.

And the pick we gave up for Tom Owens was a 2 and turned into Sam Bowie. So, of course, we didn't lose anything there. :rollout:

grace
06-10-2007, 11:16 AM
Ok Y2J is obviously delusional, but the rest of you are seriously underestimating the value of a player like Foster and overestimating the value of draft picks (which like UB said is common around this time of the year). Saying you couldnt get anything better than a 40 or so for Foster is insane. Most players picked that high are worthless and are out of the league in 1 or 2 seasons. Even mid-20s picks arent guaranteed to turn out to be as good as Foster. Danny Granger was a steal at 16, not the standard, think about that.

No way I'd trade a first round pick for someone with the injury history that Jeff has. As far as I'm concerned it's a miracle he played as much as he did last year.

Robertmto
06-10-2007, 02:06 PM
And the pick we gave up for Tom Owens was a 2 and turned into Sam Bowie. So, of course, we didn't lose anything there. :rollout:

Ps would have been smart enough to take Jordan tho right?

diamonddave00
06-10-2007, 04:49 PM
Okay I know Jeff Foster is a fan favorite but I'd see if the Spurs would like to acquire the home town boy. For pick #28 and Brent Barry.

If the Pacers are rebuilding it clears Foster's contract one year sooner as Barry has one year at 5.5 mil left on his contract. If Bynum is acquired from the Lakers clears more playing time for Bynum and Diogu.

No one will take Murphy's deal . If Kwame Brown is accepted by Walsh/Bird in the Laker deal his and Barry's deal clear over 14 mil off the cap in a year.

The Pacers with pick 28 and 19 from Lakers deal could add 2 more young rebuilding blocks. Just a thought many might think Foster is worth more -I'm not sure, but we know he is the type of player the Spurs like .

If we are rebuilding lets just get it started now, pieces like Bynum, Granger, Diogu , Williams , maybe Farmar and 2picks in this years draft could be a good start.

Shade
06-10-2007, 04:53 PM
Ps would have been smart enough to take Jordan tho right?

They weren't even smart enough to hold onto the pick that could have been Jordan.

IOW, I wouldn't bet anything significant on it. :-p

Anthem
06-10-2007, 11:21 PM
Okay I know Jeff Foster is a fan favorite but I'd see if the Spurs would like to acquire the home town boy. For pick #28 and Brent Barry.

If the Pacers are rebuilding it clears Foster's contract one year sooner as Barry has one year at 5.5 mil left on his contract. If Bynum is acquired from the Lakers clears more playing time for Bynum and Diogu.

No one will take Murphy's deal . If Kwame Brown is accepted by Walsh/Bird in the Laker deal his and Barry's deal clear over 14 mil off the cap in a year.

The Pacers with pick 28 and 19 from Lakers deal could add 2 more young rebuilding blocks. Just a thought many might think Foster is worth more -I'm not sure, but we know he is the type of player the Spurs like .

If we are rebuilding lets just get it started now, pieces like Bynum, Granger, Diogu , Williams , maybe Farmar and 2picks in this years draft could be a good start.
Actually? I'd be interested in that trade. It seems like San Antonio wins out there, so maybe they should include a little more in order to make it totally even. Maybe throw in that James White fellow?

Robertmto
06-10-2007, 11:22 PM
They weren't even smart enough to hold onto the pick that could have been Jordan.

IOW, I wouldn't bet anything significant on it. :-p

Ehh so its obviouosly not a phase...

Kegboy
06-10-2007, 11:25 PM
Actually? I'd be interested in that trade. It seems like San Antonio wins out there, so maybe they should include a little more in order to make it totally even. Maybe throw in that James White fellow?

:laugh:

Hey, then maybe we could trade Ike for the #11 pick. :devil:

Anthem
06-10-2007, 11:45 PM
:laugh:

Hey, then maybe we could trade Ike for the #11 pick. :devil:
Oh, that's cold.

Seriously, what kind of evil mind thinks up that kind of thing?

Naptown_Seth
06-11-2007, 12:21 AM
A 20th and 27th, if I remember correctly.

If my memory DOES turn out to be correct, then the answer would be yes. Foster was definitely worth the 20th and 27th pick.
Of guys drafted between 80 and 2001 50% taken in the 2nd half of round one were OUT OF THE NBA in 5 years.

So yeah, considering Jeff is still playing and is extremely productive in at least one area of the sport I'd say he's equal to a TYPICAL 20th and 27th pick combo. One would be off the team and the other would have a 60% or more chance of being AT BEST what Foster is.

Manu and Parker are the extreme exceptions, not the rule. You've got about a 6% chance of pulling a star out of either of those picks, and getting 2 stars with those 2 picks? 0.4% chance roughly.

So there you are without Foster but counting on Malcom Mackey and Doug Edwards to save the day. Or Ed Gray and Keith Booth.

Kegboy
06-11-2007, 08:37 AM
Oh, that's cold.

Seriously, what kind of evil mind thinks up that kind of thing?

What? It'd be just like the Jax switcheroo, except this time we'd get Murphleavy for free!!!

:devil:

Evan_The_Dude
06-11-2007, 12:35 PM
Ok, I just have a dumb question. If the teams that would want this guy [Foster] are contending teams, then why are some of you so eager for us to trade him? Do you believe that he's one of the only players that are worth anything? I think there's a home for every player on this team on someone else's roster. Hell, I think there's players on this team that can get us a better pick than Foster can, not that I'm doubting Foster can get is a decent pick.

As most of you know, any team can become a contending team in the East. With that said, and the fact that contending teams need a Jeff Foster like player on their team, I'd rather be the one to keep Foster and try to be a contending team by moving the pieces that don't exactly fit the puzzle. As opposed to moving a piece that fits now for sure just because he can get us a draft pick that might or might not turn into a good player. There's other guys on this team that haven't found a role here, or may have fallen out of their role here that would make a little more sense to trade. But given the fact that we could be losing Baston (our other hustle big man), I wouldn't be so quick to pull the trigger and move Jeff.

Evan_The_Dude
06-11-2007, 07:29 PM
What... Was that too logical or something?

Hicks
06-11-2007, 07:47 PM
I don't want to trade Jeff either. He's not the damaged goods he's made out to be, nor is he anywhere NEAR the top of my list of players who should leave. In fact he's in the bottom-3.

Evan_The_Dude
06-11-2007, 09:08 PM
Agreed. We're in the business of trading to get better. Trading Foster just because he's a player somebody would want doesn't mean we trade him. We're trying to make ourselves better, not other teams better. If we have players that we want/need to get rid of, and another team has a want/need for that player, and they have someone we could use in return, then fine we have a deal. But trading players that aren't doing anything but helping the team just for the sake of doing so because he's tradable makes no sense to me.

ChicagoJ
06-12-2007, 04:32 PM
Okay I know Jeff Foster is a fan favorite but I'd see if the Spurs would like to acquire the home town boy. For pick #28 and Brent Barry.

Ohhhh... I'd do that.

But I'm not the best person to comment on this - I still wish the Pacers would've traded Artest for Brent Barry back in the 2003 preseason when that rumor was hot.