PDA

View Full Version : Ummm..DING!!!!!



QuickRelease
04-14-2008, 10:16 AM
Here's a potential way to grab an extra lottery pick. Portland basically gets Oden this year, plus Fernandez, so they're not starving for young talent. I wonder if there's anything we have that they'd be willing to deal. Here's the link:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ian_thomsen/04/11/weekly.countdown/index.html

Here's the key section to the above mentioned article:

Next year the Blazers will add Oden and their lottery pick. They also are expected to welcome Spanish guard Rudy Fernandez, the No. 24 pick in last year's draft who would be a top 10 pick this year, according to Pritchard. In 2009, they could have $26 million to $33 million in cap space; or this summer they could offer the pick and Raef Lafrentz's expiring contract if a rebuilding team is interested in making the kind of deal that sent Kevin Garnett to the Celtics or Pau Gasol to the Lakers. They have Roy, an All-Star this year, and LaMarcus Aldridge, who will be an All-Star soon. But their championship aspirations are built around the 20-year-old who has yet to play a minute.

That's a $12+ million expiring! What do you think? Good Idea/Bad Idea? (Believe me, I hate to say this, but) Maybe a Dunleavy/Foster pkg for Lafrentz/Jack/1st round pick. I don't know if this should be in the trade forum. I didn't start this to suggest a made up trade, so much as I wanted to see what everyone thought since acquiring extra picks has been echoed frequently.

Anthem
04-14-2008, 10:24 AM
I can't see them giving up that much cap space without bringing in a top-level proven NBA talent.

It's not like we have Garnett to trade.

Pacersfan46
04-14-2008, 10:36 AM
Maybe they'll take JO back! :)

-- Steve --

PacerGuy
04-14-2008, 11:00 AM
I think I read somewhere that w/ the draft picks & foreign players, & the returning players, they will have something like 22 players under contract for n/y. They need to make a move, & many agree w/ their youth, they could really use a vet. I personally think Dun would be a great fit, & he expires same time as Oden & Przyilla, so his contract doesn't hurt them. Plus they need a SF. I would rather trade Daniels & Dunleavy, as Foster would be more valuable to us then them, & Q's contract expires at the same time (& again, he can play some 3 for them).
If I move Foster to try & aquire a pick, I target PHX (ATL's pick/ #15).
Would love to know what NJ has/ will offer for JO beyond VC (#10?/ #22?/ both?)

Naptown_Seth
04-14-2008, 11:23 AM
Dun for Lafrentz contract-pick makes a ton of sense both directions. They have the solid core of youth. I could also see Foster interesting them.

Dun for that pick, great trade IMO.

owl
04-14-2008, 11:25 AM
My question for everyone is after seeing JO at the end of the season what SHOULD the
Pacers do for next year? Is JO enough to win a title with? To advance far in the playoffs?
Or do you trade for picks and expirings?

rexnom
04-14-2008, 11:51 AM
I can't see them giving up that much cap space without bringing in a top-level proven NBA talent.

It's not like we have Garnett to trade.
And it's not like they have a GREAT pick. We could take either their pick or Rudy Fernandez (preferably pick) for Foster and Dunleavy.

That would be a fantastic trade for the Pacers and a good one for the Blazers too, considering they have their core and now need solid, vet role players. McMillan would love both Mike and Jeff.

Tom White
04-14-2008, 12:27 PM
(Believe me, I hate to say this, but) Maybe a Dunleavy/Foster pkg for Lafrentz/Jack/1st round pick. I don't know if this should be in the trade forum. I didn't start this to suggest a made up trade, so much as I wanted to see what everyone thought since acquiring extra picks has been echoed frequently.

Believe me, I hated that you said that, too! :)

Seriously, I don't know why the Pacers would trade two of their harder working, play through injuries, heart of the team guys for a has-been + a run-of-the-mill point + an uncertainty in a draft pick.

I'm not trying to pick on you, but I don't understand breaking up that particular part of the team now that the team has started showing development and chemistry. I would rather add talent to what I view as the core (Dun, Murphy, Foster, Granger, Deiner) than break up that group.

maragin
04-14-2008, 01:16 PM
They'd coveted Granger some time ago, and I'm interested only because they have to find a deal. Yes, yes, I know Granger's great and all, but part of negotiating is knowing when you have the upper hand. Someone is going to get a really good deal out of Portland this year, and I'm interested in how much they'd be willing to bite.

OakMoses
04-14-2008, 01:25 PM
I don't mind that trade. I'd really like it if we could do it without giving up Foster.

The Blazers are my second favorite team and Dunleavy is exactly what they need. He'd also be extremely popular there. His dad is still remembered very fondly in Portland and Mike played his high school ball in the Portland area. They'd be scary with a lineup of Roy, Dunleavy, Aldridge, and Oden. Even with Mike's defensive weaknesses, I think he'd be a significant upgrade over Outlaw, Webster, and Jones.

Jarrett Jack would be the best guard on our roster and an immediate starter at PG. He and Diener would make a nice contrast.

I don't think it works salary wise without Foster, but some version of the trade could be made. If we could pick up a young guard and a young big with the two picks, that could be quite exciting.

duke dynamite
04-14-2008, 01:36 PM
Raef LaFrentz has seen better days. I'd rather not package two of our hardest working players for that trade.

AesopRockOn
04-14-2008, 01:50 PM
I think that, in the grand scheme of things (and this is very grand we're talking), Jeff and definitely MIke are not in the picture. I love Feisty, mad iffy on DunDun, but other than giving up Danny everyone is fair game to attain young talent/picks and cap relief. I really like Jarrett Jack; the guy would start for us and, if he works on his shot consistency, can be a starter for a long time here. The concern would have to be giving up a ton of solid (Dun and Jeff) for some insubstantial. What pick are the Blazers getting? Are we trying for a Thabeet/Chalmers incoming Pacers rookie class? I don't know if that might pan out but you never know. At this point, I'd probably do anything to get this franchise turned around, though it does all start with the guys left over from November 19th. Plus, it's something to talk about over the offseason!

Kaufman
04-14-2008, 02:13 PM
Is Jarrett Jack not a lot like Travis Best? Not that I wouldn't kill to have ole' Trav at this time. Travis x 2 I suppose.

Maybe it is the Georgia Tech #3 Point guard thing that makes me relate the two of those guys...

Will Galen
04-14-2008, 02:14 PM
Dun for Lafrentz contract-pick makes a ton of sense both directions. They have the solid core of youth. I could also see Foster interesting them.

Dun for that pick, great trade IMO.

I thought that too, at first. Lafrentz has an expiring next year, whereas Dun has three more years, and we would be thinning out our small forward crop.

Then I looked at it closer and it didn't look so good. One, according to both Hoopshype, and StoryTellers, Lafrentz makes $12,722,500, and Dun makes $9,000,000. That's adding $3,722,500 to our cap. Plus it's worse, the 14th pick is what Portland has, and that pick according to http://www.nbpa.org/cba_exhibits/exhibitB.php makes, $1,424,400, so that's raising our cap $5,146,900.

Since we are right at the luxury tax line this year, and next years Pacers salary schedule is already higher than this years, we would be paying the dollar for dollar luxury tax on most if not all that money. So in essence that trade would cost us $10m next year that we would never make up..

Add in the fact that we are trading an 18 ppg scorer, who also makes the team run better when he is on the floor for Lafrentz, and a rookie who most likely will never be as good as Dun, and I don't see that as a good trade. I would want more of a sure thing for Dun.

I can see the argument that over the long hall the trade would save us money, basically Dun's last three years vs the rookie's three years, but that's not really true.

I've always thought that a spacious argument, because you spend the so called savings elsewhere. So doing such a deal really costs you $10m. The $10m you spent the first year.

EXAMPLE
08] Luxtax $68m......Pacers go over the tax and spend $78m
09] Luxtax $70m......Pacers spend $69.9m
10] Luxtax $72m......Pacers spend $71.9m
11] Luxtax $74m......Pacers spend $73.9m

So doing such a deal wouldn't save us money.

PacerGuy
04-14-2008, 02:30 PM
I thought that too, at first. Lafrentz has an expiring next year, whereas Dun has three more years, and we would be thinning out our small forward crop.

Then I looked at it closer and it didn't look so good. One, according to both Hoopshype, and StoryTellers, Lafrentz makes $12,722,500, and Dun makes $9,000,000. That's adding $3,722,500 to our cap. Plus it's worse, the 14th pick is what Portland has, and that pick according to http://www.nbpa.org/cba_exhibits/exhibitB.php makes, $1,424,400, so that's raising our cap $5,146,900.

Since we are right at the luxury tax line this year, and next years Pacers salary schedule is already higher than this years, we would be paying the dollar for dollar luxury tax on most if not all that money. So in essence that trade would cost us $10m next year that we would never make up..

Add in the fact that we are trading an 18 ppg scorer, who also makes the team run better when he is on the floor for Lafrentz, and a rookie who most likely will never be as good as Dun, and I don't see that as a good trade. I would want more of a sure thing for Dun.

I can see the argument that over the long hall the trade would save us money, basically Dun's last three years vs the rookie's three years, but that's not really true.

I've always thought that a spacious argument, because you spend the so called savings elsewhere. So doing such a deal really costs you $10m. The $10m you spent the first year.

EXAMPLE
08] Luxtax $68m......Pacers go over the tax and spend $78m
09] Luxtax $70m......Pacers spend $69.9m
10] Luxtax $72m......Pacers spend $71.9m
11] Luxtax $74m......Pacers spend $73.9m

So doing such a deal wouldn't save us money.

That is why we add a 2nd player from IN!
M.Daniels fits that bill. I don't do the deal for Foster at all, but would for Daniels. We want/ need to move him (PR reason & fit). & Por still keeps an expiring deal they too can move atthe deadline. This also frees up $, as we ate on the < of the 125% rule.

Lafrentz/Jack/Pick for Dun/Daniels works.
(add Wedster for Ike in to make $'s closer, & they get a spot for Rudy F. & a PF)

idioteque
04-14-2008, 02:43 PM
Wait a minute, you want to trade a guy who is still pretty young and had the best season of his career this year for what will probably be the 13th pick of the draft? I think Dun is still able to improve his game at this point, but I am all about trading Foster, who will only become injured more and more in the next couple of years. His value will never be higher. NOW is the time to trade Foster for sure. I really wouldn't be surprised if he appeared in less than 60 games next year.

It really depends on if the Pacers see Dunleavy/Granger as redundant or if they see them as a possible good combination to have for the future.

I would only consider it if it is certain by having 13 and 11 that we can net both Westbrook and Augustin, that would be a nasty young backcourt.

I would not draft JaVale McGree with either pick, the guy looks rail thin and seems like Patrick O'Bryant in the making. DeAndre Jordan I would consider, his body seems much more NBA ready even though he needs to refine his inside game a whole lot before he can do anything in the league.

Will Galen
04-14-2008, 03:05 PM
I would only consider it if it is certain by having 13 and 11 that we can net both Westbrook and Augustin, that would be a nasty young backcourt.


Portland is pretty much locked into the 14th pick.

Sacramento could tie them by winning their two remaining game against the Spurs and Laker's, (Very unlikely) while Portand loses their final two against Memphis and Phoenix, but even then Portland would have a 50-50 change at the 14th spot, because the two teams would flip a coin.

Will Galen
04-14-2008, 03:09 PM
That is why we add a 2nd player from IN!
M.Daniels fits that bill. I don't do the deal for Foster at all, but would for Daniels. We want/ need to move him (PR reason & fit). & Por still keeps an expiring deal they too can move atthe deadline. This also frees up $, as we ate on the < of the 125% rule.

Lafrentz/Jack/Pick for Dun/Daniels works.
(add Wedster for Ike in to make $'s closer, & they get a spot for Rudy F. & a PF)

I looked at it, I just don't see that trade happening.

Mourning
04-14-2008, 03:26 PM
I'm not trying to pick on you, but I don't understand breaking up that particular part of the team now that the team has started showing development and chemistry. I would rather add talent to what I view as the core (Dun, Murphy, Foster, Granger, Deiner) than break up that group.

I think there is your problem. I don't think that core group is nearly talented enough and doesn't nearly have the room for growth to make us anything more then first round fodder. I just don't see it getting better and I don't think we are going to be adding that much talent substantial talent the coming years if we don't address some salary issues or get really lucky in the draft.

I would echo the sentiment of hating to move Dunleavy, but nobody in this team should really be untouchable. The two that come closest to that are Granger and Dunleavy, but for the right price I would still send them packing. I would seriously consider this proposal. Not sure I would do it, but it atleast has me doubting.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Speed
04-14-2008, 03:51 PM
I'll be disagreed with here, but Dunleavy just had his career number, move him now, if you are ever going to. I like Mike, but if you are going to trade him then this is your chance to get more than he's worth.

As far as a trade, Granger is really the only one I wouldn't trade unless it was for the number 1 pick in this draft and even then I'm not sure I would. The rest of the team is nice pieces, but mean nothing without the main talent to complete. I hate to say it but the Kravitz article had it right.

OakMoses
04-14-2008, 03:55 PM
As far as a trade, Granger is really the only one I wouldn't trade unless it was for the number 1 pick in this draft and even then I'm not sure I would. The rest of the team is nice pieces, but mean nothing without the main talent to complete. I hate to say it but the Kravitz article had it right.

I'd trade Granger for Derrick Rose 6 times before Sunday, and I'd throw in our 1st round pick as a sweetener.

I like Granger, but let's be realisitic here.

CableKC
04-14-2008, 04:12 PM
The only reason why I think that Portland and Indy could be good trading partners is because they have an abundance of guaranteed contracts that they need to get rid of and the Pacers ( in the upcoming offseason ) will be at the luxury tax limit with only 10 guaranteed contracts ( hence the need to get more players while staying under the Luxury Tax ). Both teams need to make some "2-for-1 / 3 for 2" type of deal to balence out their rosters.

Although some deal can be had where our Salary Cap won't be affected ( as in we would have 12 players...instead of 10....and still be at the Luxury Tax limit ), the only thing that I would want from a Pacers/Blazers deal is where we not only get back more players then we send out...but also take back less salary ( for this season ) that we send out. This way, we can get further under the Salary cap for the 2008-2009 season to fee up space to sign a $2-3 mil FA.

We have an abundance of SFs ( which they appear to need ) and they have an abundance of Guards ( most notably Jarrett Jack ) who they are trying to deal. The problem is that we just need to find a deal that works.

CableKC
04-14-2008, 04:27 PM
Dun for Lafrentz contract-pick makes a ton of sense both directions. They have the solid core of youth. I could also see Foster interesting them.

Dun for that pick, great trade IMO.


I'll be disagreed with here, but Dunleavy just had his career number, move him now, if you are ever going to. I like Mike, but if you are going to trade him then this is your chance to get more than he's worth.
Despite putting up career #s, I'm not sure the Blazers ( unless they fell in love with Dunleavy's game this season ) would take his guaranteed $28 mil contract without sending us back something that we don't want ( likely Darius Miles contract ).

On a RealGM Trade Checker / ESPN Trade Machine level, a "Dunleavy+filler for LaFrentz" deal works....but I just don't see that Dunleavy is worth the extra $16+ mil that the Blazers would have to pay in order to get him in the first place.

If a SF had to be involved in any trade....Shawne is the only one that I think that I would include. There isn't any trade that I think that the Pacers can make with the Blazers involving Granger that is not unfavorable for either teams involved and there isn't any trade that makes financial sense for the Blazers that involves Dunleavy.

The problem is that Shawne isn't at the level of development that the Blazers want in a SF. They already have SFs that are at the same level as Shawne is.

I wanted to get all of your thoughts on this

1 ) On HoopsHype, it shows that Harrison has a Qualifying Offer for $2 mil in the 2008-2009 season. I know that we didn't extend his contract in the last offseason. Does that mean that he will become a FA ( either Restricted or Unrestricted...I'm not sure ) in the 2008-2009 season and therefore not count towards our 2008-2009 Salarycap?

I'm not sure if he's considered part of the roster in the 2008-2009 season or not.

The main reason I ask is because Jarrett Jack and Channing Frye both have guaranteed contracts in the 2008-2009 season but have Qualifying Offers in the 2009-2010 season. Does this mean that if the Blazers do not choose to extend their contracts in the 2008-2009 offseason that they can become FA and ( techincally ) come off the books in the 2009-2010 season ( assuming that their Contracts are not extended in the first place )?

2 ) What are your thoughts on Jarrett Jack and Channing Frye?

Reading some comments by Blazers fans and Jack being a PG that was acquired under the previous Managment, he's the odd PG/Guard out with the likely addition of Rudy ( a player that the current Regime wants to give minutes to ). With Oden playing minutes in the upcoming season, Aldridge and Pryzbilla entrenched in the other Big Man rotation....I don't see the need for Frye. If the right players are involved....I think some deal can be had that involves Jarrett Jack and Frye. Jack maybe a decent answer as a PG to play next to or ahead of Diener....while Frye may be an acceptable 3rd/4th Big Man coming off the bench.

d_c
04-14-2008, 04:39 PM
Despite putting up career #s, I'm not sure the Blazers ( unless they fell in love with Dunleavy's game this season ) would take his guaranteed $28 mil contract without sending us back something that we don't want ( likely Darius Miles contract ).

On a RealGM Trade Checker / ESPN Trade Machine level, a "Dunleavy+filler for LaFrentz" deal works....but I just don't see that Dunleavy is worth the extra $16+ mil that the Blazers would have to pay in order to get him in the first place.

If a SF had to be involved in any trade....Shawne is the only one that I think that I would include. There isn't any trade that I think that the Pacers can make with the Blazers involving Granger that is not unfavorable for either teams involved and there isn't any trade that makes financial sense for the Blazers that involves Dunleavy.

The problem is that Shawne isn't at the level of development that the Blazers want in a SF. They already have SFs that are at the same level as Shawne is.


Correct.

I'm sure Nate McMillan would love to have Dunleavy but I'm not so sure Paul Allen would.

He has to pay that extra dough to Dunleavy, then there's the luxury tax. Paul Allen would be asking Kevin Pritchard and McMillian "Um, we've got Travis Outlaw at $3M a year. What's wrong with him?"

To add to that, they're not taking Shawne, as they themselves aren't taking back any players with offcourt issues. They've been through that and want to get past it.

QuickRelease
04-14-2008, 05:00 PM
Raef LaFrentz has seen better days. I'd rather not package two of our hardest working players for that trade.

Lafrentz is nothing but cap space. That's all. You get a good young PG and cap space, plus 2 lottery picks in a deep draft. You keep Granger, draft a 2 and a 5 and roll out!

QuickRelease
04-14-2008, 05:08 PM
Is Jarrett Jack not a lot like Travis Best? Not that I wouldn't kill to have ole' Trav at this time. Travis x 2 I suppose.

Maybe it is the Georgia Tech #3 Point guard thing that makes me relate the two of those guys...

I don't think he's like travis at all. He's bigger, a little stronger, a better point than Travvy was. Travis was sir-pound-alot. Jack moves the ball. Travis was more of a 2-guard in a 1-body.

Anthem
04-14-2008, 05:43 PM
I like J.Jack a lot. But I simply don't see how a trade with Portland works. They're not going to want Dunleavy at his current contract, what with the number of players they have who could get big contracts. And our two pieces of young trade bait (Ike and Shawne) are totally unappealing to Portland for the reasons mentioned. I suppose including Quis helps, just for his expiring contract.

If they'd do a Quis/Dun for Jack/#14/Raef/#53, then I'd do it in a heartbeat. It doesn't make us a better team in the short term, and it sucks because I've come to really like Dunleavy. But I simply don't see him as the long-term answer at the 2, and if it comes down to him or Danny I take Danny every time.

But it's all moot, because Larry's never going to trade Dunleavy. Not going to happen.

aceace
04-14-2008, 06:16 PM
I guess I'm all confused here....... I would not trade Dun at all unless I got a player like Aldridge. The guy just had a career year, shot the ball well all season and played smart. Granger and Foster I would keep. If the Portland guys are that good why are they not playing right now on a .500 team? I would seek to trade JO and Quis, let Harrison go and get the best PG or C I could in the draft even if I still got one in a trade. I would resign Flip. If you go to this website..

http://www.basketball-reference.com/

you will see that Dun made 7.4M and Murphy made 8.2M this year, much less than the hoopshype numbers.

We are close to the playoffs, albeit in a down year Eastern wise and for the most part without JO. We are 2 solid players from making a big jump. Easily attainable with a trade of JO / Williams.

Kaufman
04-14-2008, 06:19 PM
http://www.grandstandsports.com/images/10781.jpg

Anthem
04-14-2008, 06:22 PM
We are close to the playoffs, albeit in a down year Eastern wise and for the most part without JO. We are 2 solid players from making a big jump. Easily attainable with a trade of JO / Williams.
JO's not tradable and Williams won't bring much. If we'd played him more, then maybe. But right now he's too big of a question mark.

Will Galen
04-14-2008, 06:26 PM
you will see that Dun made 7.4M and Murphy made 8.2M this year, much less than the hoopshype numbers.

The HoopsHype numbers agree with ESPN, and Story Teller's, sites so they are probably correct.

rexnom
04-14-2008, 07:12 PM
I think Portland is much less likely to do this deal than we are.

d_c
04-14-2008, 09:07 PM
I think Portland is much less likely to do this deal than we are.

Portland really doesn't need to do a heck of a lot of dealing with anyone. Their core is set. They just need a starting level PG (doesn't need to be great) and then get Oden healthy.

They'll try to trade their quanitity for someone else's quality. If nobody's willing to do that, then they probably don't make any moves at all.

No doubt their coaches and fans would love a guy like Dunleavy, but I'm sure the guy paying the salaries would probably view Mike as a luxury item.

D-BONE
04-14-2008, 09:23 PM
My question for everyone is after seeing JO at the end of the season what SHOULD the
Pacers do for next year? Is JO enough to win a title with? To advance far in the playoffs?
Or do you trade for picks and expirings?

Unless he can recoup some of his former athleticism, I don't see him as much more than a 20 mil or whatever bit player.

PacerGuy
04-14-2008, 11:48 PM
Portland really doesn't need to do a heck of a lot of dealing with anyone. Their core is set. They just need a starting level PG (doesn't need to be great) and then get Oden healthy.

They'll try to trade their quanitity for someone else's quality. If nobody's willing to do that, then they probably don't make any moves at all.

No doubt their coaches and fans would love a guy like Dunleavy, but I'm sure the guy paying the salaries would probably view Mike as a luxury item.

They have 22 contracts for n/y - they need to make some deels, maybe not w/ us, but they need to do some dealing.
They have needs at PG & SF, & a vet to lead their youth would be nice.

d_c
04-15-2008, 12:51 AM
They have 22 contracts for n/y - they need to make some deels, maybe not w/ us, but they need to do some dealing.
They have needs at PG & SF, & a vet to lead their youth would be nice.

Hoopshype has them with 13 guys under contract for next year. Then add a draft pick, so that's 14.

Rudy Fernandez has yet to sign, which he might. That would bring it to 15. Hoopshype has Blake as expiring. Goes to 16 if they re-sign him. Petteri Koponen doesn't have a contract and probably won't next year.

Guys like Von Wafer and Josh McRoberts probably won't be on the team next year. Their contracts are near minimum and expiring or have 1 year left and they'll simply be waived. They also have buyout deals with Steve Francis and Shawn Kemp, but they don't count as roster spots.

They'll probably make a move or 2 to free up a roster spot, but it won't be anything drastic. They'll try to make a quantity for quality deal. Their main core won't be affected.

CableKC
04-15-2008, 01:54 AM
^^ count 16.....the FO likes Blake. Also, I'm not sure if he is a FA or not...when I check the FA list on RealGM, it shows that he's a UFA in the summer of 2010.

Either way, I think that he will be the 16th Blazer. Apparently, they would prefer to keep Blake over Jarrett Jack.

pwee31
04-15-2008, 02:35 AM
If we trade Dunleavy, it better be b/c J'Ob is gone.

He's too good for this system, and the 14th pick in my opinion.

I would be exteremly angry if Dun or Granger were moved.

Those two and Diener as the backup PG I'm all for.

Anyone else, I could care less about.

Well I like Foster too, but he's aging

d_c
04-15-2008, 02:42 AM
If we trade Dunleavy, it better be b/c J'Ob is gone.

He's too good for this system, and the 14th pick in my opinion.

I would be exteremly angry if Dun or Granger were moved.


The chances of either being moved this summer are extremely low, for a variety of reasons.

Major Cold
04-15-2008, 08:32 AM
Ok I would understand using dun to get a higher draft pick in addition to what we have. but to get a pick lower than us?

So lets trade Dun for a player whom we think will be better.

NO ON THIS TRADE.