PDA

View Full Version : What are your ideal, yet realistic, offseason results for the Pacers?



Trader Joe
04-19-2008, 10:26 PM
Just curious what everyone is looking for from Bird this offseason. Not only who you would like to see us draft, but also what positions you would like to see him upgrade and how you would like to see them be upgraded.

I'm still undecided, but I know many of you probably have what you would like to see mapped out in your mind and I'm interested in hearing it.

Hicks
04-19-2008, 11:39 PM
In the draft, I want to take either the best PG or the best big man available, as long as it's not a reach at #11 to take that person.

Whichever one we do not draft, we should try to get the other through a trade if possible. Maybe there's an average PG or big we could pick up in FA to give us some modest help, too.

I'd like us to try to trade Mike for the best defensive wing we can get.

Kegboy
04-20-2008, 12:18 AM
Ideally, I'd like him to get rid of either JO or Tinsley. I seriously doubt he can do both, but at least one would be nice.

I'd like him to draft the best player available, regardless of position, as long as it's not Chase Buddinger.

Regardless of if we draft a PG, we still need to acquire a defensive-minded point, because anybody we get at #11 isn't going to be able to step in right away.

Ideally, we'd trade our pick for Kyle Lowry, or possibly throw in Shawne Williams to sweeten the deal and get a pick or two in the bargain.

Besides that, I don't care about positions. We need an overall talent upgrade. But a point who can play D is a must. Considering Jimmy is already saying that publicly, hopefully we'll get one.

Gamble1
04-20-2008, 01:45 AM
Lowry would be very nice and pick with Shawne is even better but I am in love with Robin. I could see us trading Shawne straight up for Lowry.

Moses
04-20-2008, 02:05 AM
Drafting BPA in June and then dealing Tinsley...If both of those are done, I will be happy. If we don't draft a PG, hopefully we can somehow get a guy via FA who can at least fill in for a while. Diener was great, but he's nothing more then a great backup at best.

clownskull
04-20-2008, 02:17 AM
well, as o'brien said, the only start worthy point in the draft is rose. so, i think we go big.
i would like to get thabeet if he's around. i love the idea of a useful 7'3 center who can defend the rim. his offense will take time but his D is already there. therefore, i think if we can get him in the drat, we are already doing pretty good.
the pg situation........ hell, i don't know but, i am hopeful that we can work something out if not this summer- then over the upcoming season.

CableKC
04-20-2008, 02:40 AM
I will comment on this later.....ideally, the offseason would involve moving Tinsley....but short of buying him out....I really don't see how that is going to happen.

CableKC
04-20-2008, 02:42 AM
well, as o'brien said, the only start worthy point in the draft is rose. so, i think we go big.
i would like to get thabeet if he's around. i love the idea of a useful 7'3 center who can defend the rim. his offense will take time but his D is already there. therefore, i think if we can get him in the drat, we are already doing pretty good.
the pg situation........ hell, i don't know but, i am hopeful that we can work something out if not this summer- then over the upcoming season.
With the 11th pick....I think that Thabeet is a bit too high to draft him.....but if we get a 2nd 1st round pick ( unfortunately, something I doubt )....then I wouldn't mind drafting him there ( assuming that we don't already draft a Big Man ).

Taterhead
04-20-2008, 02:52 AM
I think the Pacers need to look at this as a three year plan. We are pretty cap strapped for the next two years, then things clear up. So make moves to get young talent only and focus on 2010/2011, when we'll have a 30 million dollar payroll and almost all of it will be expriring contracts. 20 million in cap space and 30 million in expiring deals is a great situation, so we shouldn't screw it up, especially to make lateral moves out of desperation. I truly feel like 2010 is the year we would have the ability to make moves that will put us in championship contention instead of the lateral moves we have always made. After watching the Colts win the SB, I learned that you quickly forget the dark days when the sun is shining.

1. Don't aquire ANY contracts that run past 2009/2010.
2. Don't resign Granger to an extension, instead use him to move up in the draft or aquire extra draft picks. I know it's not popular, but I don't understand paying Granger 50+ million when we already have an equally talented SF due 40+ million.
3. Keep Jermaine O'Neal unless you can unload him to a team under the cap and only take back young guys with low salaries and draft picks.
4. I don't think there is anyway we can unload Jamal Tinsley, but even if we can, do not do it if the contract coming back is longer than his.
5. Pick a style and build to perfect it. I prefer great defense and rebounding.
6. Only aquire players that have good charcter and work ethic.

duke dynamite
04-20-2008, 03:09 AM
Anyone here knows what should happen.

I expect moves. I do not expect anyone in the starting rotation but Tinsley gone.

Neat little tidbit from Indystar.com, I mainly read into the FA part of it.

UNDER CONTRACT
• Jamaal Tinsley: 3 years, $21.5 million.
• Jermaine O'Neal: 2 years, $44 million with an option this summer.
• Troy Murphy: 3 years, $33 million.
• Danny Granger: 1 year, $2.3 million.
• Mike Dunleavy: 3 years, $29.4 million.
• Marquis Daniels: 1 year, $6.9 million with $7.4 million team option for 2009-10.
• Jeff Foster: 1 year, $6.2 million.
• Ike Diogu: 1 year, $2.9 million.
• Travis Diener: 1 year, $1.6 million with a player option for 2009-10.
• Shawne Williams: 1 year, $1.6 million with a team option on 2009-10.
• Stephen Graham: The Pacers must decide by June 30 to pick up his team option or allow him to become a free agent.

FREE AGENTS
• David Harrison: Restricted free agent, meaning the Pacers can match any offer.
• Kareem Rush: Likely won't return after turning down a multiyear deal from the Pacers last summer and getting inconsistent playing time this season.
• Andre Owens: Likely won't return as the Pacers plan to go in a different direction at point guard.
• Flip Murray: Likely won't return after earning the starting point guard spot but often spending the fourth quarter on the bench.

-- Mike Wells

This thread is just beating around a dead horse.

Reckoner
04-20-2008, 03:37 AM
I think the Pacers need to look at this as a three year plan. We are pretty cap strapped for the next two years, then things clear up. So make moves to get young talent only and focus on 2010/2011, when we'll have a 30 million dollar payroll and almost all of it will be expriring contracts. 20 million in cap space and 30 million in expiring deals is a great situation, so we shouldn't screw it up, especially to make lateral moves out of desperation. I truly feel like 2010 is the year we would have the ability to make moves that will put us in championship contention instead of the lateral moves we have always made. After watching the Colts win the SB, I learned that you quickly forget the dark days when the sun is shining.

1. Don't aquire ANY contracts that run past 2009/2010.
2. Don't resign Granger to an extension, instead use him to move up in the draft or aquire extra draft picks. I know it's not popular, but I don't understand paying Granger 50+ million when we already have an equally talented SF due 40+ million.
3. Keep Jermaine O'Neal unless you can unload him to a team under the cap and only take back young guys with low salaries and draft picks.
4. I don't think there is anyway we can unload Jamal Tinsley, but even if we can, do not do it if the contract coming back is longer than his.
5. Pick a style and build to perfect it. I prefer great defense and rebounding.
6. Only aquire players that have good charcter and work ethic.

Superb post - except for the don't re-sign Granger bit.

BlueNGold
04-20-2008, 08:27 AM
1) Continue to keep JT off the floor (trade him or sit him).

2) Draft the best PF or PG available.

3) Trade Quis, Ike and Dunleavy for an upgrade at PF or PG (whichever position we do not draft for)....or to cut salary. Granger must be re-signed.

4) IF there is a way to move JO and package one of the three players in #3 to move up to the #3 or #4 position in the draft, consider doing it.

D-BONE
04-20-2008, 08:41 AM
I agree with sentiments of drafting best player on the board assuming we're at #11. I'm okay going big or point, of course, however not if we are obviously reaching based on talent remaining at that point.

Next thing I would like is to see some perimeter defense acquired somehow. Lowry, for example, while not probably a long-term star at PG, would be much better defensively than what we have. What about a guy like Quinton Ross? His name has been bandied about at times here. What does it take to get these guys? True, neither of those two examples are great offensive players, but we need some guys who can check up outside.

Acquiring another pick in this draft is also something to look into. In order to get some people, who do we give up? Well, IMO I'd gladly deal Tins, JO (I realize not easy on those two), Quis, Shawne, and possible MDJ (but only if the deal were really good).

Finally, in addition to Lowry, other solid upgrade but not star PGs I'd look at would be Jack and possibly Watson. They have experience running a team and have managed to avoid serious injury to this point. Of the three, I'd rank probably rank my interest as 1A Jack, 1B Lowry, 3 Watson. Jack's probably got the best offense but Lowry is young and provides the better D.

CableKC
04-20-2008, 01:06 PM
2. Don't resign Granger to an extension, instead use him to move up in the draft or aquire extra draft picks. I know it's not popular, but I don't understand paying Granger 50+ million when we already have an equally talented SF due 40+ million.
I don't even think that Dunleavy is an equally talented SF then Granger is. Granger has a higher ceiling then Dunleavy has....which apparently is 36 points.:laugh:

Los Angeles
04-20-2008, 01:28 PM
Housecleaning that MUST include Tinsley. Period.

Cobol Sam
04-20-2008, 01:42 PM
I think this off season is about improving the team and the business. It will be all too easy for fans to say "same old stuff" about the Pacers if Bird fails to move or otherwise cut ties with Jamaal Tinsley.

I think we continue to draft the best player available on the board when our turn comes up. To me it does not make a lot of sense (except in extremely unique circumstances) to draft an inferior player at one positions and leave a superior player on the board. It isn't like we are a rookie center or a rookie point guard away from winning the whole thing.

Other than that, fill holes where possible, be smart about moving or not moving Jermaine O'neal, and have the first player to get negative media after start of next year's ad campaign killed.

Los Angeles
04-20-2008, 01:46 PM
and have the first player to get negative media after start of next year's ad campaign killed.

:spitout:

:lol2:

pwee31
04-20-2008, 01:57 PM
Get rid of Tinsley, I don't care how.

Look slow and hard at your options for JO

Acquire another 1st round pick

Trade for a quality and proven PG, using expirings and maybe even a pick

Draft a young big man

Do NOT trade Granger or Dunleavy. They're 2 young wings coming into their own, even if you acquire a better wing who can defend, Dunleavy and Granger carried this team this year, and I will they will in the future

Be Patient, don't just jump the gun at deals. It's very unlikely we're going to become a chamipnship contender over night

Jose Slaughter
04-20-2008, 02:11 PM
Bird got a pretty solid read on some deals at the last trade deadline. Deals he said he would re-visit during the off season.

I believe one of those deals will involve O'Neal.

As for the draft, Bird will take the best player available. He took Williams feeling that in 3 years he would be a better talent than the much needed point guards that we passed over.

Overall, what I'm looking for Bird is drafting the best player available & making sure Tinsley never plays for us again. My guess is he will be bought out.

Since its been stated we will not go over the luxury tax he almost have to make a deal to cut salary.

d_c
04-20-2008, 02:23 PM
Overall, what I'm looking for Bird is drafting the best player available & making sure Tinsley never plays for us again. My guess is he will be bought out.



Tinsley won't be bought out. He has 3 years and about $22M left.

Let's say you buy him out for $18M. I don't see him taking less than that. That means he'll count against the cap for about $6M a year for 3 years and all the while you WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO TRADE HIS CONTRACT. So in the last year of his deal when he becomes an expiring contract, you can't trade him.

The Simons and Bird won't do that. Maybe they'll do that 2 years left on the deal but not 3 years.

Hicks
04-20-2008, 03:48 PM
An alternative to buying him out if you really don't want him on the team anymore, is to tell him to stay home. Don't come to our practices, don't come to our games. Like we did with Ron at the end. At least then you could trade the contract later.

mrknowname
04-20-2008, 04:42 PM
-trade tinsley (probably gonna have to package him with JO)

-try to trade one of the bad contracts (dunleavy/murphy) or both if possible

-hoping we can get anthony randolph and robin lopez in teh draft

tdubb03
04-20-2008, 05:20 PM
Trade Tinsley. Somehow someway. Miami for Marcus Banks and filler maybe.

Try and sign Steve Blake. He's not spectacular, but he's a good starter and would be perfect in Obie's system. And would be a nice holdover until any potential young PG we get is able to start.

Target Hasheem Thabeet in the draft. If not him, Russell Westbrook. Both may be (maybe even should be) gone by then though, if that's the case I'll take Augustin as my 3rd option.

Pray that Danny Granger keeps drinking milk and sign him to an extension before he really blows up next year. Maybe have a keep your nose clean clause in his deal.

Why are so many adamant about dumping contracts? I want to dump Tinsley because he's a PR nightmare and plays 20 games a year. What's the point in dumping cap space when we aren't going to end up using it? If a deal for Troy or JO comes up that's too good to be true, then you take it, but if not you let their value continue to rise as their contracts become shorter by the day.

Cobol Sam
04-20-2008, 05:22 PM
-trade tinsley (probably gonna have to package him with JO)

-try to trade one of the bad contracts (dunleavy/murphy) or both if possible

-hoping we can get anthony randolph and robin lopez in teh draft


You are still calling Dunleavy's contract a bad contract? :confused: Why?

NapTonius Monk
04-20-2008, 05:38 PM
I think the Pacers need to look at this as a three year plan. We are pretty cap strapped for the next two years, then things clear up. So make moves to get young talent only and focus on 2010/2011, when we'll have a 30 million dollar payroll and almost all of it will be expriring contracts. 20 million in cap space and 30 million in expiring deals is a great situation, so we shouldn't screw it up, especially to make lateral moves out of desperation. I truly feel like 2010 is the year we would have the ability to make moves that will put us in championship contention instead of the lateral moves we have always made. After watching the Colts win the SB, I learned that you quickly forget the dark days when the sun is shining.

1. Don't aquire ANY contracts that run past 2009/2010.
2. Don't resign Granger to an extension, instead use him to move up in the draft or aquire extra draft picks. I know it's not popular, but I don't understand paying Granger 50+ million when we already have an equally talented SF due 40+ million.
3. Keep Jermaine O'Neal unless you can unload him to a team under the cap and only take back young guys with low salaries and draft picks.
4. I don't think there is anyway we can unload Jamal Tinsley, but even if we can, do not do it if the contract coming back is longer than his.
5. Pick a style and build to perfect it. I prefer great defense and rebounding.
6. Only aquire players that have good charcter and work ethic.

Who dis?

mrknowname
04-20-2008, 05:38 PM
You are still calling Dunleavy's contract a bad contract? :confused: Why?

because he's a liability on defense and he's putting up good numbers on a bad team.

if he was a servicable defender and putting up similar numbers on a team that was atleast .500 and in the playoffs then yeah he'd be worth his contract

Cobol Sam
04-20-2008, 05:59 PM
because he's a liability on defense and he's putting up good numbers on a bad team.

if he was a servicable defender and putting up similar numbers on a team that was atleast .500 and in the playoffs then yeah he'd be worth his contract

The guy is in the running for most improved player in the league. He fits well into the team's defense scheme, and was absolutely not being force fed offense this year. Your complaints of Dunleavy don't make sense to me.

idioteque
04-20-2008, 06:06 PM
1.) Trade Jeff Foster while his value is still relatively high. I believe that after this year he will start to become injury prone.

2.) Mike Dunleavy's value may never be higher. Attempt to trade him for Kirk Hinrich, add Shawne as a sweetener if necessary.

3.) Try to figure out if JaVale McGee or DeAndre Johnson have the ability to be a Bynum-type player in 3 years. If you become pretty sure that one of them can be, draft them at 11. Personally I have more faith in Johnson.

4.) Trade Tinsley for Eric Snow. Add Scuzzy Cotton Candy guy as sweetener if necessary.

5.) Look at your options for JO.

6.) Shop Quis. His expiring could be valuable.

Dece
04-20-2008, 07:14 PM
The guy is in the running for most improved player in the league. He fits well into the team's defense scheme, and was absolutely not being force fed offense this year. Your complaints of Dunleavy don't make sense to me.


He has 0 chance of winning most improved player, he isn't even the most improved on the Pacer squad.

"fits into the team's defense scheme" ???? what team did you watch? Our team defense was maybe the worst in the league, so yea, I mean, if sucking terribly is the team scheme, he fits great. Dunleavy had the best season of his career, yes, but the simple truth is he is an awful defender, and to quote what should be an NBA proverb "beware good stats on a bad team"

Gamble1
04-20-2008, 08:31 PM
Trade Tinsley. Somehow someway. Miami for Marcus Banks and filler maybe.

Try and sign Steve Blake. He's not spectacular, but he's a good starter and would be perfect in Obie's system. And would be a nice holdover until any potential young PG we get is able to start.

Target Hasheem Thabeet in the draft. If not him, Russell Westbrook. Both may be (maybe even should be) gone by then though, if that's the case I'll take Augustin as my 3rd option.

No way Thabeet is gone by the time our pick is their. He is totally not worth it too. I could stand to take Westbrook if we work out a deal for a big either in the draft or FA.

Gamble1
04-20-2008, 08:34 PM
1.) Trade Jeff Foster while his value is still relatively high. I believe that after this year he will start to become injury prone.

3.) Try to figure out if JaVale McGee or DeAndre Johnson have the ability to be a Bynum-type player in 3 years. If you become pretty sure that one of them can be, draft them at 11. Personally I have more faith in Johnson.

5.) Look at your options for JO.

6.) Shop Quis. His expiring could be valuable.

Offensively they could be but defensively no way in San Quintin do they measure up. Both have no desire to bang with the big boys.

Cobol Sam
04-20-2008, 09:02 PM
He has 0 chance of winning most improved player, he isn't even the most improved on the Pacer squad.

"fits into the team's defense scheme" ???? what team did you watch? Our team defense was maybe the worst in the league, so yea, I mean, if sucking terribly is the team scheme, he fits great. Dunleavy had the best season of his career, yes, but the simple truth is he is an awful defender, and to quote what should be an NBA proverb "beware good stats on a bad team"

The Pacers held opponents to 45% shooting this season as a team, with their best defender injured most of the season. Only 9 teams did better than that. That is team defense, and more impressive when you consider that the interior defense was lacking. Mike won't win MIP, but his name will be mentioned in conversations. He earned his contract this year plain and simple.

Edit: I see you are at Iowa State. I graduated from there a couple of times. Where in Iowa are you from?

Taterhead
04-20-2008, 09:07 PM
Who dis?

Mike Dunleavy of course. He is definately better in some aspects than Granger (ball handling, passing). I do agree Granger has higher potential, but not much.

Any of you that think Granger is going to be Scottie Pippen are kidding yourselves, IMO.

Dece
04-20-2008, 09:39 PM
The Pacers held opponents to 45% shooting this season as a team, with their best defender injured most of the season. Only 9 teams did better than that. That is team defense, and more impressive when you consider that the interior defense was lacking. Mike won't win MIP, but his name will be mentioned in conversations. He earned his contract this year plain and simple.

Edit: I see you are at Iowa State. I graduated from there a couple of times. Where in Iowa are you from?

About done with my economics degree here, from Davenport.

While we may have had a decent opp fg%, we gave up a ton of points each game, which ultimately is the more important thing here I think. The opposing team got to the free throw line a LOT pretty much every night, far more than us, and so their points per possession were relatively high. We also struggled to keep the opposition off the offensive glass, and I tend to consider defense not over until you have the ball back. In my assessment, we were absolutely terrible on defense, although - yes, we were missing our shot blocker.

Rajah Brown
04-20-2008, 09:51 PM
Taterhead-

Granger is God according to a plurality of PD posters. Did you not
get the memo ?

Taterhead
04-20-2008, 09:57 PM
Taterhead-

Granger is God according to a plurality of PD posters. Did you not
get the memo ?

I noticed that. I like him too, but not to that degree. He is a very good young player, but any contender needs a GREAT player. And I don't think he'll ever be that. I think Granger is good enough to help us get that player though.

If we add a great player, I think Mike Dunleavy would play even better, and we wouldn't miss Granger at all. Not to mention Shawne Williams is due to have a good year next year if he can get minutes, and that would help ease the loss.

But I'm obviously in the minority.

Hicks
04-20-2008, 09:58 PM
Taterhead-

Granger is God according to a plurality of PD posters. Did you not
get the memo ?

I think this needs to stop before it really starts. No one thinks Danny Granger is God, but many think he could become a very good NBA player and this excites many of us because we need that right now. Discussions on Danny are going to go to hell if we start an extremist argument between people who are high on Danny and those who are not so high on Danny (is anyone actually down on Danny?).

owl
04-20-2008, 10:08 PM
1---Pick best defending bigman available. (Thabeet,Jordan,McGee, Arthur)

2---Second round pick Rodrigue Beaubois(or some other defender type guard)

3---Via trade obtain a defending guard

This will take time and rushing to make a move would be a mistake. JO will expire in 2 years
so at the very minimum you let his contract expire and drop 21 million a year.
Plan on a three year plan to become competetive again.

PD Junkie
04-20-2008, 10:23 PM
1. Trade Jo and Shawne for Carter and #10

2. Tinsley and Quis for Ollie and Draft picks.

Draft Jordan and and best available guard.

Not really a oppose to draft both jordan and Thabeet or McGee.

I feel that Jordan is a 4 and the other will be 5.

I just think that JO and Tinsley have to be gone

SoupIsGood
04-20-2008, 11:02 PM
Win the lottery and draft Derrick Rose.

or...

Make a solid draft pick. Shed some salary. Don't make any stupid trades. Actually trade JT during his "well, maybe he's turned it around" stretch of the season, for once.

We've got to be patient. Nothing dumb and drastic.

Cobol Sam
04-20-2008, 11:10 PM
About done with my economics degree here, from Davenport.

While we may have had a decent opp fg%, we gave up a ton of points each game, which ultimately is the more important thing here I think. The opposing team got to the free throw line a LOT pretty much every night, far more than us, and so their points per possession were relatively high. We also struggled to keep the opposition off the offensive glass, and I tend to consider defense not over until you have the ball back. In my assessment, we were absolutely terrible on defense, although - yes, we were missing our shot blocker.

No Kidding... I'm from Davenport too, living there now in fact. It is certainly a small world.

Gamble1
04-20-2008, 11:16 PM
1---Pick best defending bigman available. (Thabeet,Jordan,McGee, Arthur)

2---Second round pick Rodrigue Beaubois(or some other defender type guard)

3---Via trade obtain a defending guard

This will take time and rushing to make a move would be a mistake. JO will expire in 2 years
so at the very minimum you let his contract expire and drop 21 million a year.
Plan on a three year plan to become competetive again.

Thats a contradiction but I like the philosophy.

BKK
04-21-2008, 04:04 AM
1---Pick best defending bigman available. (Thabeet,Jordan,McGee, Arthur)

2---Second round pick Rodrigue Beaubois(or some other defender type guard)

3---Via trade obtain a defending guard

This will take time and rushing to make a move would be a mistake. JO will expire in 2 years
so at the very minimum you let his contract expire and drop 21 million a year.
Plan on a three year plan to become competetive again.

do we still have our 2nd rd pick? isn't that the Stanko pick?

Unclebuck
04-21-2008, 09:04 AM
All I ask is that Tinsley is not on the team next season.

That is it

Speed
04-21-2008, 09:15 AM
Looking Philadelphia yesterday, I really wish the Pacers could pick up 3 or 4 really talented young guys.

Or along those lines pull a Portland and gather some more draft picks in the late first round.

Basically, there has been late 1st rounders given away the last couple of drafts.

Otherwise, I'd say you'll see at least 5 new guys next year. A third of the team will change.

MyFavMartin
04-21-2008, 12:56 PM
Get tougher.

Address the PG situation. See about trading up if Memphis lands #3 to get Bayless... a combo of 2 of the 3 of #11 / Ike / Shawne for #3. Prefer to keep #11 and pickup a Speights/ McGee.

Get the BPAs in the draft at either PG or PF/C in the 1st. 2nd get the BPA period.

Get some more talent on this team and build for the future through trading some veterans for draft picks or young guys. Should find some buyers from Western Conference teams like Phoenix, Denver, Utah, for a player like Foster...

Either resign Rush or pickup a quality backup SG. Could Graham be this?

Rajah Brown
04-21-2008, 01:07 PM
Mal-

Ok, I'll give it a rest. I'm not down on Granger. I just get tired of the
silliness when it comes to the exaltation of the kid before he's
done much of anything other than throw up some stats on a losing
team. I get that folks are starved for the next 'Mr. Pacer' (ala Reg)
with all the crap that's gone on in recent years. But clinging to one
kid who's a nice player with a shot at being very good (not great,
very good) at a position where those guys are numerous and calling
him 'untouchable' is over the top.

But as I said, that's the last I'll say on the matter. No more gratuitous
jabs from me.

naptownmenace
04-21-2008, 01:34 PM
This all depends on where the Pacers land in the draft, IMO. If they wind up with any pick 1-3 that changes the whole outlook on the team and direction they should go. If they wind up with they 11th pick I expect them to look into moving up in the draft.

Really until the draft passes, I don't have any thoughts or expectations on the team. It's too early to know what they should and reasonably can do until the draft arrives.

Speed
04-21-2008, 01:37 PM
This all depends on where the Pacers land in the draft, IMO. If they wind up with any pick 1-3 that changes the whole outlook on the team and direction they should go. If they wind up with they 11th pick I expect them to look into moving up in the draft.

Really until the draft passes, I don't have any thoughts or expectations on the team. It's too early to know what they should and reasonably can do until the draft arrives.

I think its if they get a top 2, then I've seen 3-8 all different on who people project. If the Pacers don't get top 2, I'm thinking its not going to be that helpful to move up, unless they really like one or two players.

Will Galen
04-22-2008, 07:17 PM
This all depends on where the Pacers land in the draft, IMO. If they wind up with any pick 1-3 that changes the whole outlook on the team and direction they should go. If they wind up with they 11th pick I expect them to look into moving up in the draft.

Really until the draft passes, I don't have any thoughts or expectations on the team. It's too early to know what they should and reasonably can do until the draft arrives.

I agree. There's no shot at realistic expectations until after the draft. In the draft the odds are great that we will pick where we are at now. (11)

I play the lottery on ESPN a lot just to experience what the likelihood is of us moving up or down is. My odds are 96% that we stay where we are. Then it seems theres an equal change of us moving up to third or back to twelveth.

Our best hope in the draft is that someone falls to us, ala Granger.

The one thing I think Bird was really looking at was trading JO to New Jersey for Carter and Hassell, but with Vince having surgery this summer I don't see that happening now.

Rajah Brown
04-22-2008, 07:50 PM
We'll have 8 balls in the hopper so it's a .8% shot. Pretty damn
slim odds. I wonder what the highest pre-Lottery, ranked team
under the current format that secured a spot in the top-3 ?

Will Galen
04-22-2008, 08:22 PM
We'll have 8 balls in the hopper so it's a .8% shot. Pretty damn
slim odds. I wonder what the highest pre-Lottery, ranked team
under the current format that secured a spot in the top-3 ?

It's .8% for the first pick, but 3.0% for one of the top three.

Shade
04-22-2008, 09:05 PM
1. Trade Jo and Shawne for Carter and #10

Trade our top 2 PFs for another SF? :confused:

Will Galen
04-22-2008, 09:20 PM
Trade our top 2 PFs for another SF? :confused:

Shawne is not better than Troy, and Vince plays shooting guard.

Speed
04-23-2008, 08:05 AM
I'll revisit what I want this offseason.

1.) Rajon Rondo type at the point, with the first pick

2.)Noah/Verajo/Foster/Reggie Evans/Carl Landry type in a really lucky second round pick.

Major Cold
04-23-2008, 09:16 AM
I have stayed out of this thread thinking that we would be too greedy of fans. Like the FO was last year with JO. But I see more realistic posts than usual. Are the times changing my friends.

1. Draft most promising big (that can crack the lineup this year) unless Westbrook is on the board.

2. Get a late 1st round pick. Trading Foster or Daniels to a team that needs to shed some salary by next year.

3. Look into moving JO but be patient. His value will increase even if his play does not.

4. Make sure Tins never suits up. Trade him, buy him out, or change to locks.

5. Identify Ike's role on this team. If there is none. Trade him away, sweetner for the mid-late 1st. Or a future protected 1st.

6.GRANGERS extension. What happens if he plays all of next season like he did late this season? Lock him up.

7. Find a veteran PG who can play some D.

8.Trade Dunleavy for a defensive minded wing who can hit the open jumper on the baseline. Childress is a RFA. Sign and trade. Maybe the Hawks would like an expiring around the time Horford is up for a contract. Or signing Shannon Brown and trading Mike for Kirk.

9.Do not match a DH offer.

10. Pick up Graham's option

11. Let Rush, Owens, and Flip walk

12. No slogan season for the fans. Let their conduct and play do the talking.

Sollozzo
04-23-2008, 09:24 AM
We'll have 8 balls in the hopper so it's a .8% shot. Pretty damn
slim odds. I wonder what the highest pre-Lottery, ranked team
under the current format that secured a spot in the top-3 ?

I think the luckiest team ever is Orlando in 1993. They barely missed the playoffs (I think we beat them out actually), but somehow got the first pick. Not to mention, they had the first pick the year before that as well when they picked Shaq.

Unclebuck
04-23-2008, 09:27 AM
I think the luckiest team ever is Orlando in 1993. They barely missed the playoffs (I think we beat them out actually), but somehow got the first pick. Not to mention, they had the first pick the year before that as well when they picked Shaq.

Yes we ended in a tie with the magic that year and the tie-breaker that was used has since been changed - but I forget what the breaker was

Major Cold
04-23-2008, 09:47 AM
The lottery changed after that year as well. instead of each lottery pick being chosen by the ball of fate. only the first 3.

OakMoses
04-23-2008, 09:54 AM
I'll revisit what I want this offseason.

1.) Rajon Rondo type at the point, with the first pick

2.)Noah/Verajo/Foster/Reggie Evans/Carl Landry type in a really lucky second round pick.

1. There's not a Rondo-type PG in this draft.

2. As a Boiler fan, I feel the need to point out that Carl Landry is twice the offensive player that anyone else on the list is, but I wouldn't put him in the same energy/rebounding/defensive category. My hunch is that Landry is like a really smart version of Ike.

Speed
04-23-2008, 10:04 AM
1. There's not a Rondo-type PG in this draft.

2. As a Boiler fan, I feel the need to point out that Carl Landry is twice the offensive player that anyone else on the list is, but I wouldn't put him in the same energy/rebounding/defensive category. My hunch is that Landry is like a really smart version of Ike.


1.) I'd see Westbrook and Rose as that Rondo type and much more than that in Rose's case. Westbrook held Mayo to what 4 pts and 10 turnovers. Maybe not by himself, but he has the makings of a shut down point. I'd be for an existing player in this role as well. I know people mention Jarret Jack and Lowry as possibilities, I'm not sure I'm sold, though.

2.) I was hesitant to put Landry too for your reason, but because even though he's an energy/physical/rebounding/defensive type, he's not on the level of Verajo and Noah, yet, imo. And those two seem much bigger. I guess the point is with Landry is you can get a guy in the second round, if your smart or lucky or both.

Putnam
04-23-2008, 10:17 AM
This thread is interesting, and there are a lot of good ideas in it.

Practically, though, the decision tree still has too many branches. It isn't really possible to say what is "realistic" and what isn't. We have to wait until the playoffs and the draft seeding. Only after we know who is in the draft and which teams will pick in what order can the possibilities be whittled down to a small enough number to consider.

Until then, we should all dream big, I guess.

OakMoses
04-23-2008, 11:20 AM
1.) I'd see Westbrook and Rose as that Rondo type and much more than that in Rose's case. Westbrook held Mayo to what 4 pts and 10 turnovers. Maybe not by himself, but he has the makings of a shut down point. I'd be for an existing player in this role as well. I know people mention Jarret Jack and Lowry as possibilities, I'm not sure I'm sold, though.

2.) I was hesitant to put Landry too for your reason, but because even though he's an energy/physical/rebounding/defensive type, he's not on the level of Verajo and Noah, yet, imo. And those two seem much bigger. I guess the point is with Landry is you can get a guy in the second round, if your smart or lucky or both.

Westbrook could be the one exception. The main difference between he and Rondo is that Rondo actually played PG in college. Westbrook has big question marks as a PG because we've never seen him play the position. I like Westbrook a lot and will be very dissapointed if he's there at #11 and we don't take him. What I'd do if we got him would be to pretty much hand him all of Quis' minutes. All that being said, I think Westbrook probably has just as many PG skills right now as Flip Murray does.

Speed
04-23-2008, 01:02 PM
Westbrook could be the one exception. The main difference between he and Rondo is that Rondo actually played PG in college. Westbrook has big question marks as a PG because we've never seen him play the position. I like Westbrook a lot and will be very dissapointed if he's there at #11 and we don't take him. What I'd do if we got him would be to pretty much hand him all of Quis' minutes. All that being said, I think Westbrook probably has just as many PG skills right now as Flip Murray does.

Agreed, I'm really hoping for Westbrook now, but I'm thinking after he does some workouts he'll be gone pretty early. He'll jump through the roof and do some awesome windmill dunks and it'll be a done deal. I guess the guy is an amazing athelete and that'll translate in a workout, big time.

pacergod2
05-09-2008, 10:43 AM
What I would really like to see from this team is direction. What direction are we heading?

Do we go with the younger guys, allowing them to play more and see where the future is headed?

Do we stick with the vets that we have and attempt to be a legit playoff team in the East?


If we go with the youth movement, we need to trade some of our older guys for picks or young guys on other teams and make sure Ike, Williams, Harrison and Granger all see the floor together.

If we try to compete we need to trade for an All-Star caliber player and keep JO.

And I couldn't agree more with JOB's assessment of needing more toughness.

Young
05-09-2008, 11:42 PM
Agreed, I'm really hoping for Westbrook now, but I'm thinking after he does some workouts he'll be gone pretty early. He'll jump through the roof and do some awesome windmill dunks and it'll be a done deal. I guess the guy is an amazing athelete and that'll translate in a workout, big time.

I also am hoping for Westbrook.

The good thing is this is a very deep draft on guards that are clearly better prospects than him, IMO. You have Rose, Bayless, Gordon, and Mayo. I think what it will come down to is if teams want a big like say Kevin Love or Darrell Arthur or do they want to take a chance on Westbrook?

sig
05-10-2008, 01:50 AM
The Spurs are really lucky. They won the David Robinson lottery. Then the one year when they were totally ravaged by injuries and fell out of the playoffs in the Robinson era, they won the Tim duncan lotto. Of course they weren;'t on the short end of the ping pong balls.

I thought the Mavs were the team that was tied with Orlando for that ping pong ball that got Shaq.

MyFavMartin
05-10-2008, 08:59 PM
I think its if they get a top 2, then I've seen 3-8 all different on who people project. If the Pacers don't get top 2, I'm thinking its not going to be that helpful to move up, unless they really like one or two players.

I could see Chicago liking Westbrook and scaring the Pacers of not getting a PG in the lottery.

Plan B would be Speights for me.

Interesting that a lot of chatter at the last trade deadline was with NJ, who picks right a head of us. I'd love to see the Pacers get that pick, but I know it would require taking on Carter, which I would pass on. Can't think of a three way on where to send him too. Denver?

skyfire
05-11-2008, 07:50 AM
Hang onto JO unless you get a good offer, his value will only go up the closer his contract gets to finishing.

Extend Granger.

Deal Marquis, Foster or Ike packaged with Murphy or Tinsley to shed some salary.

Pick the best non-SF available at 11, move up if you can get a PG who could help us.

aceace
05-11-2008, 09:20 AM
All I ask is that Tinsley is not on the team next season.

That is itI agree, it's not necessary to trade JO. If we received a good player in return and maybe an expiring and pick I would do it. We have about 6 players we can depend on night in and night out. We need 8 minimum. It will be "another" interesting summer. I like where we sit going in. We have many ways to make this team better. I think its possible that JO may end up in Dallas. Not sure if Cuban wants 3 players making 20M a year.

pwee31
05-11-2008, 10:35 PM
We'll have 8 balls in the hopper so it's a .8% shot. Pretty damn
slim odds. I wonder what the highest pre-Lottery, ranked team
under the current format that secured a spot in the top-3 ?

If I'm not mistaken, there's not a certain number of team balls in the hopper anymore.

If I remember correctly there's numbered balls, and all teams receive a list of combinations. They dump in balls 1-14 I believe, and then they assign teams a number of combinations, and if your combo is selected out of the 4 balls drawn, you win the lottery

So every team will have combinations, with the worst teams getting the most combinations.

So the hopper could come out:
2-6-10-8
1-14-11-13
12-3-7-9

They do it a pick at a time, and if your team holds that combo you get the pick, and of course once your team gets a pick, your other combos are eliminated.

So it's actually a better chance for those teams with smaller odds, and it showed last year with Memphis, Boston, and the Bucks not getting a top 3 pick.


As for my expectations, I want a PG either in the draft or via trade. I don't care if it's Rose, Bayless, Westbrook, Augustin... they are all an upgrade to me.

If the Front Office likes a big better, then take a big, but you then have to make a move for a PG, and the best way to do that is for teams with multiple ones.

Toronto: Calderon, Ford
Seattle: Watson, Ridnour
Chicago: Hinrich, Duhon
Portland: Blake, Jack, Sergio
Memphis: Conley, Lowry, Crittendon

Either way it's nice to know that we'll have some options and will actually have a chance to make a 1st round selection no matter what. That's a bargaining chip itself.
Let's not forget that Ray Allen was obtained for the #5 pick and fillers and as was Jason Richardson for #9 last year
Not to mention players like Zach Randolph being taken on (granted it was Isiah)
And you also have late steals with teams like Portland trading in late to get Rudy Fernandez and Petteri Koponen (I wanted them both on the Pacers as well)

So who knows what may happen? I'm getting pumped just thinking about it

d_c
05-11-2008, 10:50 PM
And you also have late steals with teams like Portland trading in late to get Rudy Fernandez and Petteri Koponen (I wanted them both on the Pacers as well)


Portland didn't trade to get Phx's pick which got them Fernandez.

They gave Phx $3 million in cold hard cash.

pwee31
05-13-2008, 12:03 AM
Portland didn't trade to get Phx's pick which got them Fernandez.

They gave Phx $3 million in cold hard cash.

That's right! Oh well, either way..... they appear to be nice moves

MyFavMartin
06-10-2008, 11:44 AM
westbrook, speights, courtney lee, and george hill

westbrook at #11

trade for portland's #13 - Dunleavey and Daniels for #13, Frye, LaFrentz - draft speights

trade for houston's #25 - Foster and #41 for Bobby Jackson and #25 - draft lee

sign hill who goes undrafted.