PDA

View Full Version : Who thinks it's time to trade AL and RON??



Mourning
06-06-2004, 05:15 PM
Zeke might do a three team trade with Detroit if Pistons lose, where LBrown gets Al and Zeke gets Ron, and we get RIP??


Excuse me.... :unimpressed: you want to basically trade Ron AND Al for Richard Hamilton :confused: :wtf:










:banned:


I guess my answer would be ... HELL NO!!! ;)

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Mourning
06-06-2004, 05:23 PM
No problem ;). I personally still wouldnt do it, I like having either Ron or otherwise Al over here. Contracts are ok and running sometime, they are young, etc. One has to go, thats basically a given, but I rather keep atleast one, prefferably Ron.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Unclebuck
06-06-2004, 07:23 PM
Think about it.
Maybe it is time to ring the register on DWalsh's educated gambles?
Ron will NEVER be as valuable as this off-season given his offensive limitations and glowing league-wide respect as witnessed by his DOY award;


You don't know that. I fully expect Ron to only get better next season and the season after that. And his trade value will go up

Ant
06-06-2004, 07:41 PM
I dont see any reason for us to trade Artest. Watching so much of the Spurs, I've realized how important defense truly is. Its not like we really got blown out at all in the Detroit series, a good defense will almost always give you a chance to win if you can make some damn shots which was obviously our problem. But we shouldnt trade away the Defensive player of the year and the best perimeter defender in the entire league just to acquire that offensive player. I would like to think we could improve our offense without getting rid of the best defender. If we got rid of him that would be a huge blow to one of the leagues best defenses. Im sure if we traded him we would be getting a damn good offensive player but then we just opened up another hole. We might be scoring enough points but not making enough stops. Cant solve a problem by creating another one. Artest shouldnt be a go to guy offensively anyway, we need to bring someone in to take some pressure of him so he doesnt feel the need to try and score so often because hes obviously not someone who should be one of your top 2 scoring options.

Roaming Gnome
06-06-2004, 07:42 PM
One word...

NEVER!

TheSauceMaster
06-06-2004, 08:09 PM
You don't know that. I fully expect Ron to only get better next season and the season after that. And his trade value will go up

I expect the same will happen , infact I think Ron having a not so great series will drive him harder to improve this next year. The only way he would lose trade value is too revert to his destructive mode , like 2 years ago and then there will still be teams willing to take the chance.

Will Galen
06-06-2004, 08:10 PM
I've been thinking about Al and Artest to Orlando for T-mac and the #1. I think I've already voiced it on here. Maybe not, maybe that was on the Pacer's list.

Anyway that would give us a great shooting guard and our choice of big men in this years draft. That would mean Bender would be starting and we don't know if he can hack it.

Still I think that would be a good trade for us, but I would rather keep one of them.

I don't know . . . if we could make trade Al and Pollard to Golden State for Dampier, Cardinal and change. Then trade Artest and Croshere for TMac, I'd be all for it. Yeah, ha ha!


I'm glad it's Bird's decision!

ChicagoJ
06-06-2004, 10:20 PM
To answer the premise of this thread... not 'together' (i.e. the same package). If they're redundant for the Pacers, then they'd be redundant for the team trading for them as well. Therefore, you couldn't get as much for the two of them combined as you could get individually.

Two separate trades... I don't have a problem with any trade that makes the Pacers better. I don't have any untouchables, although JO is de-facto untouchable because the only player I'd rather have than JO is Duncan and, clearly, that ain't gonna happen.

beast23
06-07-2004, 12:45 AM
I think trading both Al and Ron this summer is a ridiculous idea.

All that will accomplish is to plug our holes at SG and possibly center and relocate the problem to SF.

To me, that's crazy. You have a team that has won a league best 61 games. You DON'T implode it!!!!! It needs tweaking, not the sacrificing of one position (SF) for another (SG).

You have an MVP candidate playing PF and the reigning DPOY who happens to also score 18 ppg at SF. You don't trade them. Instead, you ought to be thankful you're lucky enough to have such talent on your team.

If your thought is that either of Bender or James Jones is ready for the big time and that one or the other can plug the hole such a trade would leave at SF, think again.

It would be great to have a player like T-Mac, for example. I think we could all agree that he could plug our problems at SG. But if we had to trade away Ron and Al to do it, we would all be *****ing like hell next season that we have to do something about SF.

Leave JO, Ron and Tinsley alone. Perhaps get another PG as 3rd-string backup. Use Al and others, even Bender, to bring back either another center that can share time with Jeff or to get a very decent SG.

If our trade is for a center, then fill our need with the best available SG we can get with the $5.1M MLE. That would mean that we might have to accept the fact that we could only improve the center position this season and that we were only able to acquire stop-gap help for the SG position, hoping that Freddie continues to develop his offensive game.

sweabs
06-07-2004, 12:51 AM
The thing is...if Larry & Donnie decide to go after one of these superstar SG's like a T-Mac, then I think it would work best without Ron.

But, if they get a guy who can shoot the ball, and create (doesn't have to be a superstar and take 25 shots/game) then I think that will work well with our existing framework of JO and Ron.

Unclebuck
06-07-2004, 12:59 AM
You don't trade the second and third best player on your that just won 61 games and got to game #6 of the ECF.

This is not a fantasy league

Unclebuck
06-07-2004, 12:59 AM
You don't trade the second and third best player on your that just won 61 games and got to game #6 of the ECF.

This is not a fantasy league

beast23
06-07-2004, 01:01 AM
I would probably agree with that. This past season, JO averaged 18 shots per game, Artest 15, Al 12 and Reggie 7.

If Al were traded, right away that's about 12 shots a game that a new player could get.

And, if Reggie retires AND Al is traded, then that is 19 shots a game that could be redistributed between JO, Ron and the new SG.

I don't think it's a problem. If our 3 best scorers are all starters, then we would want them to get 15-17 shots a game anyway.

TheSauceMaster
06-07-2004, 01:08 AM
You don't trade the second and third best player on your that just won 61 games and got to game #6 of the ECF.

This is not a fantasy league

Exactly and you would be ripping the heart out of the offense that got you 61 wins , you would be taking you 2nd and 3rd best scores outta the mix .

In terms of Offense ppg avg
1.JO
2 Ron
3 Al
4 Reggie

Roy Munson
06-07-2004, 01:14 AM
This is not a fantasy league

It is to some people, like Mark Cuban.

If the deal was right, of course they should trade both. I'm not saying that they should unload them or dump them in a desparation move, but if someone wanted to give up a whole lot for Artest, why not do it. Artest has many negatives to go along with his many postives.

If you really really really liked your car, and you proclaimed "I'll never sell this car", then some idiot came up to you and said, I'll give you a million dollars for that car, of course you'd sell it.

Anthem
06-07-2004, 02:03 AM
You don't trade the second and third best player on your that just won 61 games and got to game #6 of the ECF.

This is not a fantasy league

You can say that again! :laugh:

Anthem
06-07-2004, 02:03 AM
This is not a fantasy league

It is to some people, like Mark Cuban.

Yeah, his team did well this year.

TheSauceMaster
06-07-2004, 02:13 AM
When Mark Cuban spends his money on a Defensive team and Realizes Defense wins and not let's see if we can outscore the other team , he will always have losing teams.