PDA

View Full Version : How high could we trade into the draft?



Shade
04-30-2008, 12:46 PM
When thinking about how to turn the Pacers back into a legit title contender, two main issues stand out to me:

- We need a superstar player.
- We need to part ways with either Danny or Dun.

Now, I think Granger is easily our most valuable asset, and between him and Dun, I think the vast majority of us would keep Danny (not to say that we don't like Dun, just that he's older, less athletic, and more likely to be near his ceiling than Danny). And though I'd be okay with keeping them both, the fact remains that both are natural SFs and we really can't afford to be throwing down $20+ mil/year on that one position (the easiest to fill, I might add) for the forseeable future.

So, if we consider that Danny is "our guy," we also have to realize that there are still many players in the league better than him. And though it's possible that he could exceed all of our expectations and bloom into a full-fledged superstar, odds are against it. So, we need to go get our "Pippen" his "Jordan." And considering the cap situation we're in, as well as the fact that Indiana is not a hotbed for quality NBA free agents, and that we don't have the pieces to trade for a legit superstar that isn't at the end of his career or habitually broken down, the only way to potentially secure such a player would be in the draft.

The way we're currently assembled, we'll probably never be good enough to not worry about getting a superstar, and not bad enough to get a high lottery pick. So, we'll need to trade up for as high a pick as possible. And we need to start NOW.

So, taking Danny off the table, what is the best combination you feel we could offer to a team in order to get as high a pick as possible? Could the #11 and Dun move us up significantly? How about young "P" (potential) players like Diogu, Williams, or even Daniels? Is there anyone acquirable in the draft worth taking that risk for?

Swingman
04-30-2008, 12:51 PM
After the first 2 or 3 picks, I'm not sure we'll be able to get a sure thing superstar player. I see us staying at #11 and picking the best available at a position of need.

d_c
04-30-2008, 12:59 PM
After the first 2 or 3 picks, I'm not sure we'll be able to get a sure thing superstar player. I see us staying at #11 and picking the best available at a position of need.

Right.

This is a 2-man draft up top. You can pretty much pencil in Beasley-Rose right there pretty much the same way you penciled in Oden-Durant. These 2 guys aren't as good as last year's top 2, but they're still clearly the top 2 talents. Those two guys won't be traded so they only way to get them is to win one of the top 2 picks.

After that it's a crapshoot as to who might be your future all-star. I really don't see anyone who's a surefire anyting. You just gotta hope there's an Amare/Dirk/Pierce that developed from the late lottery. Right now, there's nobody that even stands out as an Al Jefferson type.

The #11 and Dun to move up is difficult because of the salary situation. Another team would have to throw back a lot of salary the other way, and it's probably not going to be very attractive salary that you'd want on your payroll.

And trading a lot of assets to "move up" and get a guy like Brook Lopez hardly assures you of any superstar. I think the Pacers will just sit at #11 and take the best talent available that falls to their pick.

count55
04-30-2008, 01:06 PM
Other than Rose, there's nobody in this draft I'd be willing to trade either Dunleavy or Granger to move up and get.

Speed
04-30-2008, 01:09 PM
If I was at 3-8 or so, I'd look really hard at trying to move down to 11 and pick up another piece because you can probably get one of the guys you want at 11.

If you were one of those teams and say you could pick up Dun and the 11 and only have to move out of the 5 spot, I'd do it and draft who I wanted at 11.

I guess I'm saying that I'm not sold on Lopez, Mayo, or Bayless much more than Love, Westbrook, or Deandre Jordan.

I don't think you can get into the top 2, unless its a team that shouldn't be in those spots and they want Granger as a missing peice. And I value Granger over either of those picks or the players at those two picks to be honest because he's proven and is just starting his prime. However, picks get way over valued at draft time, cause teams judge players as if they are going to maximize their potential, not as some 20 year old kid that will take 4 years to be a real player.

Major Cold
04-30-2008, 01:15 PM
Would you say the same thing about last year, which was a two man draft?

Horford anybody?

Jonathan
04-30-2008, 01:18 PM
Is the draft really where you want to improve this team? I would rather trade the rights to our 11th pick and Jamaal Tinsley or Troy Murphy for a quality wing defender and a later first round pick. No team in the top three is going to trade their picks (AGREED). So if/when the Pacers land the 11th pick the only player we could trade to move up in the draft is Shawne Williams (lottery teams want cap space/ and youth) (Dunleavy does not fit the bill) The thing with this draft is you have several players ie Augustine, Arthur that could land anywhere from five to 11 or maybe even 20.
I am not a fan of moving up.

Speed
04-30-2008, 01:22 PM
Would you say the same thing about last year, which was a two man draft?

Horford anybody?

I liked Horford way more than Lopez. Mayo and Gordon are enigmas as far as size and skill set and I'm not sure about Bayless.

I would guess, and I really don't know, that Horford had a higher rating prospect-wise than this years group. I still see him as a nice player, and its too early to tell, but I think Oden and Durrant will be all stars and Horford won't.

Also, I agree with the above, I don't think Rose and Beasley are nearly as highly rated as Durrant and Oden.

QuickRelease
04-30-2008, 01:23 PM
Would you say the same thing about last year, which was a two man draft?

Horford anybody?

I think the point being made was that as far as a superstar player goes (which Horford is not as of now), last years draft really only had two players that you could say have surefire star potential. That's not to say the draft was only 2 deep for quality; just on 'out of the gate' starpower. This draft has alot of quality, but the guys you can probably bet on being stars would be Rose and Beasley.

MyFavMartin
04-30-2008, 01:30 PM
I think we need to revisit this topic after May 20, when the lottery order will have been set. It's hard to speculate where you can move up to right now. For example, Minny would be great trade partners if they land #3 and we could either go for Bayless or Foye. Similarly, if Memphis gets #1 or #2, they could take Rose and we could make a move for Conley.

Conley, their #28, and Cardinal for Daniels, Ike, and #11?

count55
04-30-2008, 01:31 PM
I think the point being made was that as far as a superstar player goes (which Horford is not as of now), last years draft really only had two players that you could say have surefire star potential. That's not to say the draft was only 2 deep for quality; just on 'out of the gate' starpower. This draft has alot of quality, but the guys you can probably bet on being stars would be Rose and Beasley.

I actually think this draft is pretty weak, including the top two. I like Rose a lot, but I have questions about Beasley. Everybody else in the top 10 to 15 have some serious warts on their game. I'm not saying that there won't be some good players, perhaps even stars, that come out of that group. However, this appears to be one of the hardest years to tell who's going to be a star and who's going to turn into a pumpkin.

Simply playing percentages, either Danny or Junior will be better players than several of the top 10 guys picked this year, and (IIRC) the OP is proposing throwing our #11 in, too...who could also turn out to be better (or as good) as the guy we end up moving up to get.

I just don't see it in this draft.

d_c
04-30-2008, 01:37 PM
I think we need to revisit this topic after May 20, when the lottery order will have been set. It's hard to speculate where you can move up to right now. For example, Minny would be great trade partners if they land #3 and we could either go for Bayless or Foye. Similarly, if Memphis gets #1 or #2, they could take Rose and we could make a move for Conley.

Conley, their #28, and Cardinal for Daniels, Ike, and #11?


I'm sure they'd be open to moving Conley if they got a shot at Rose, but there would be a long line for Conley.

For instance, Portland tried hard to get Conley last year. This year (in the event they got Rose) they could just offer up some combination of the #13, Outlaw, Webster and even throw in Rudy Fernandez if they had to. And if I'm Memphis, I'd probably lean towards that deal.

Anthem
04-30-2008, 01:40 PM
So, we need to go get our "Pippen" to his "Jordan."
What we need is a Jordan to his Pippen.

But there's no Jordan-level player in this draft. Best player for us is Rose, and he's not getting traded.

Kofi
04-30-2008, 01:51 PM
It's impossible to rate a draft within a year of it taking place, let alone before it even happens. It may not seem strong now, but that's more our own ignorance than a testament to the quality of the draft class. There are always sleepers that turn into major NBA players, and there's no reason to believe this year will be any different. d_c mentioned that there is no Al Jefferson in this years draft, yet he overlooks the fact that Jefferson himself wasn't drafted until 15th. Who's to say a Marresse Speights or a JaVale McGee couldn't be the next Al Jefferson, or better? Amare, Dirk, T-Mac, Pippen, Nash - I could go on and on - all with huge question marks coming out, none went higher than #9, all turned into superstars.

Just because we're ignorant of the players in this year's draft doesn't mean they necessarily suck. There will be All-Stars out of this draft class outside of Rose and underrated Beasley.

Once the measurements come out, I'll give my guaranteed list of studs and duds. Last year I nailed it with Thaddeus Young and Al Thornton (studs) and Corey Brewer (dud). It's really not that hard - just look at stats, size, athleticism, and age/experience. I've got it down to a science, literally.

QuickRelease
04-30-2008, 01:53 PM
I actually think this draft is pretty weak, including the top two. I like Rose a lot, but I have questions about Beasley. Everybody else in the top 10 to 15 have some serious warts on their game. I'm not saying that there won't be some good players, perhaps even stars, that come out of that group. However, this appears to be one of the hardest years to tell who's going to be a star and who's going to turn into a pumpkin.

Simply playing percentages, either Danny or Junior will be better players than several of the top 10 guys picked this year, and (IIRC) the OP is proposing throwing our #11 in, too...who could also turn out to be better (or as good) as the guy we end up moving up to get.

I just don't see it in this draft.

I agree, and would go a step further to say that half of who we consider to be stars in todays NBA possibly wouldn't be if the league were stronger. I would say that I think Brook Lopez beside Jermaine Oneal would improve us in a hurry.

Speed
04-30-2008, 01:57 PM
It's impossible to rate a draft within a year of it taking place, let alone before it even happens. It may not seem strong now, but that's more our own ignorance than a testament to the quality of the draft class. There are always sleepers that turn into major NBA players, and there's no reason to believe this year will be any different. d_c mentioned that there is no Al Jefferson in this years draft, yet he overlooks the fact that Jefferson himself wasn't drafted until 15th. Who's to say a Marresse Speights or a JaVale McGee couldn't be the next Al Jefferson, or better? Amare, Dirk, T-Mac, Pippen, Nash - I could go on and on - all with huge question marks coming out, none went higher than #9, all turned into superstars.

Just because we're ignorant of the players in this year's draft doesn't mean they necessarily suck. There will be All-Stars out of this draft class outside of Rose and underrated Beasley.

Right, no one knows the future, but it doesn't preclude us or anyone talking about it or even having an opinion on it. So I can say it sucks or I can say it's the best ever, makes me not right or wrong, but just having an opinion and discussing it.

When I say I really really think Love won't make it in the NBA. I, for one, am speculating and two openingly admit I don't know for sure because like you said, NO ONE KNOWS. I can still say it, though.

Or am I missing your point.

BTW, I waffle on Love more than any player I've seen in recent years.

Mmmmmm, Waffles.

Kofi
04-30-2008, 02:04 PM
Give me Jerryd Bayless over Conley any day of the week. If Dunleavy and #11 were enough to land Bayless, I'd take it without a seconds hesitation.

20/4/3 on great shooting percentages, as a college freshman in one of the nation's top conference? 6'3", 200 pounds? He's got superstar written all over him.

d_c
04-30-2008, 02:08 PM
It's impossible to rate a draft within a year of it taking place, let alone before it even happens. It may not seem strong now, but that's more our own ignorance than a testament to the quality of the draft class. There are always sleepers that turn into major NBA players, and there's no reason to believe this year will be any different. d_c mentioned that there is no Al Jefferson in this years draft, yet he overlooks the fact that Jefferson himself wasn't drafted until 15th. Who's to say a Marresse Speights or a JaVale McGee couldn't be the next Al Jefferson, or better? Amare, Dirk, T-Mac, Pippen, Nash - I could go on and on - all with huge question marks coming out, none went higher than #9, all turned into superstars.
.

I didn't say there's no Al Jefferson in the draft. I said nobody obviously stands out as Al Jefferson. If such a guy already stood out, he'd be pegged to go much higher than Jefferson himself went because now everyone is looking for the same thing that Danny Ainge found 4 years ago.

Having said all that, it probably makes more sense for the Pacers to just stay where they are and pick BAP because nobody right now knows who the Pierce/Dirk/Amare is in this draft (if there is one). Trading up to #6 or 7 (even if the other team is willing) might not be worth it.

SoupIsGood
04-30-2008, 02:37 PM
We're going to be bad for a long time if we keep trying to land a "superstar"--it's not an easy thing to do! There are other ways to become a contender. For now management should just worry about drafting well and being smarter with their money. We've got to build up the talent base and put ourself into a position to make some nice trades.

I'd rather that we try to find four other good starters to put around Danny. Honestly the model team should be the Pistons.

We've got the #11 pick this year. If we don't pick a bust, that player should be a good (probably not great) starter in this league. That's 2 out of five spots (assuming he's not a SF). (Personally I hope Gordon drops to us.)

Now let's say we trade Foster and Ike (or something) for pick later in this first round. If we get lucky, that's our third long-time starter. If not, then perhaps a valuable bench player (assuming we don't bust).

Is Marquis' contract an expiring next year? Maybe we turn that into something nifty. Jermaine's contract is going to a massive expiring contract in a few years--maybe we get lucky trade involving him. Maybe we hit on a young MLE-level player who blossoms.

Gradual improvement is not a bad thing. I really hope management doesn't go balls-out and give up a bunch of assets for the next Jon Bender. Just draft well with the picks we've got, make smart trades, and we'll be back soon. Let's just try to get five smart guys who can score and defend in our starting lineup.

croz24
04-30-2008, 02:53 PM
i'd trade danny straight up for bayless or mayo...wouldn't take much thought either...

count55
04-30-2008, 03:24 PM
i'd trade danny straight up for bayless or mayo...wouldn't take much thought either...

We are all shocked. Shocked! I tell you.

Anthem
04-30-2008, 03:30 PM
We are all shocked. Shocked! I tell you.
:laugh: Exactly.

Honestly, though, Bayless is probably the answer to Shade's question. If somebody ends up shooting up the board, Bayless could conceivably be there at 5. It would take some work, but we might be able to get there.

BobbyMac
04-30-2008, 03:46 PM
We tried to trade a good player for a high draft pick and got Bender....

jcouts
04-30-2008, 04:19 PM
the Pacers savior isn't in this draft unless they move up to #1

Trader Joe
04-30-2008, 04:22 PM
It's impossible to rate a draft within a year of it taking place, let alone before it even happens. It may not seem strong now, but that's more our own ignorance than a testament to the quality of the draft class. There are always sleepers that turn into major NBA players, and there's no reason to believe this year will be any different. d_c mentioned that there is no Al Jefferson in this years draft, yet he overlooks the fact that Jefferson himself wasn't drafted until 15th. Who's to say a Marresse Speights or a JaVale McGee couldn't be the next Al Jefferson, or better? Amare, Dirk, T-Mac, Pippen, Nash - I could go on and on - all with huge question marks coming out, none went higher than #9, all turned into superstars.

Just because we're ignorant of the players in this year's draft doesn't mean they necessarily suck. There will be All-Stars out of this draft class outside of Rose and underrated Beasley.

Once the measurements come out, I'll give my guaranteed list of studs and duds. Last year I nailed it with Thaddeus Young and Al Thornton (studs) and Corey Brewer (dud). It's really not that hard - just look at stats, size, athleticism, and age/experience. I've got it down to a science, literally.

Last year huh? Interesting since you weren't registered here until December 2007.

Naptown_Seth
04-30-2008, 04:28 PM
Other than Rose, there's nobody in this draft I'd be willing to trade either Dunleavy or Granger to move up and get.
I agree. I like kids in that area, but I also like the ones falling to 11. I don't think you massively improve your odds of the pick becoming great by moving up here.

Shade, the bottom line is this: it's just a long process and our "#1 guy" is going to have to come at some other time/way. This is probably tied to JO's deal because it's his money (and also a bit of Troy/Dun) that's holding up the #1 guy spot.

Say you clear him out as Danny has become a Marion type, a clear #2 all-star player but not the take-over star. Sure Danny is whatever, 28, idk, at the time but so what. Get the star then, young or old and let the 2 of them lead the Pacers to a run during Danny's prime of 28-32 as the #2 man.

That doesn't have to happen with this draft. The team is stuck. Get used to it and just keep swimming (per Nemo). Tough jobs like this are best if you don't look up to see how much more you have left to do. Just dig in and ride it out.

If smart people are in charge then they could get there by late 2009 or summer 2010 (post draft/FA). If you are willing to tank and ride out a few years of that crap as young guys figure it out then what's different about riding out this "slow" period?

It's all rebuilding in the end.

CableKC
04-30-2008, 04:30 PM
The reality is that there is no way that any team ahead of us in the draft ( likely a team that will need Salarycap/Financial flexiblility in the near future ) is going to take on Tinsley, Murphy or Dunleavy....or more specifically, trade down in the draft while taking on an additional $21 to $40 mil that any one of them are owed. Even if that did happen, we would be getting back a player with a worse contract then the ones we arleady have....which to me...isn't worth it.

At best, maybe we can trade down with the 11th pick while packaging them with Tinsley or MurphLeavy, but we would still get back a somewhat comprable and ( possibly ) slightly shorter Contract in return that may ( or may not ) fit our needs.

The only way that we can go up the draft ladder is to consider:

1 ) Moving Granger ( by himself ) for a higher draft pick ( as to how high, probably to a team that needs a Starting Quality SF....no idea what team though ).

2 ) Packaging the 11th pick with Shawne and/or Marquis to a team that has a 6 to 8 pick that is looking to shed salary beyond the 2008-2009 season. The problem is that we would be getting back a player with a long-term $5-8mil contract that we don't want.

In all liklihood, I'm thinking that Bird may try to move up in the Draft, but won't succeed and we will be stuck with the 11th pick.

Naptown_Seth
04-30-2008, 04:34 PM
I would trade Dun in order to get back into round 1 midway. The reason being is to shift talent from SF to PG/SG/C, go a bit younger in keeping with a "rebuild" and to perhaps ease Dun's deal off the books. While not bad, it's clearly a lot of money for redundancy at SF, especially with Danny's resign on it's way.

Kegboy
04-30-2008, 04:37 PM
Unless someone is stupid enough to give us a top-2 pick, this is a draft for trading down, not trading up.

Also, to everyone who belittled me hyping last year's draft by saying people say the draft is great every year, no, they don't.

CableKC
04-30-2008, 04:50 PM
I would trade Dun in order to get back into round 1 midway. The reason being is to shift talent from SF to PG/SG/C, go a bit younger in keeping with a "rebuild" and to perhaps ease Dun's deal off the books. While not bad, it's clearly a lot of money for redundancy at SF, especially with Danny's resign on it's way.
As Jay had mentioned before in another thread.....Dunleavy's trade value will be higher in the 2009 Offseason IF he does a repeat performance of his career 2007-2008 season ( hence it's wasn't a fluke year) and he is owed $20 mil instead of $29 mil.

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't try to shop Dunleavy for the very reasons you suggest or that he isn't a good player...but unless there is a team out there that is desperate to move up to the 11th spot ( which given the lack of depth in this year's draft ), needs to get a Serviceable scoring veteran SF, has a player that they are willing to send back to us that actually fills a position of need that doesn't have a horrible ( if not worse ) contract, I just don't see any team willing to take on Dunleavy's $29 mil / 3 year contract.

Unfortunately, I just don't see any of that happening in the 2008 offseason.....but I can see if maybe happening in the 2009 offseason.

CableKC
04-30-2008, 04:53 PM
Unless someone is stupid enough to give us a top-2 pick, this is a draft for trading down, not trading up.
Yeah...no kidding......teams that didn't make the lottery and stuck it out in the Playoffs are giong to get a lot of calls on Draft Day.

I would much rather draft in the Non-Lottery spots then draft in no-man's land at the 11th spot.

If Bird thinks that Augustin is the player that we should draft.....I wouldn't complain as much if we drafted him with the 15th pick instead of the 11th pick. Players like Brandon Rush, Spreights, Arthur or even Augustin aren't considered a reach at the 15th spot.

Kofi
04-30-2008, 04:54 PM
Last years draft has thus far been a bust.

If Bayless is there, I'd happily do J.O., #11 for Marbury, Lee, #5.

Kofi
04-30-2008, 05:05 PM
Yeah...no kidding......teams that didn't make the lottery and stuck it out in the Playoffs are giong to get a lot of calls on Draft Day.

I would much rather draft in the Non-Lottery spots then draft in no-man's land at the 11th spot.

If Bird thinks that Augustin is the player that we should draft.....I wouldn't complain as much if we drafted him with the 15th pick instead of the 11th pick. Players like Brandon Rush, Spreights, Arthur or even Augustin aren't considered a reach at the 15th spot.

The drafts are always like that this time of the year. By the time the pre-draft camps and measurements are done, things will begin to take on a more definitive shape.

From the current mocks, it's pretty obvious Marreese Speights is the way to go. He's nearly as productive as Love, but with a better body, athleticism, and upside, particularly on the defensive end. He's your stud big man sleeper in this year's draft, a la Amare in 2002, Jefferson in 2004, etc.

CableKC
04-30-2008, 05:51 PM
The drafts are always like that this time of the year. By the time the pre-draft camps and measurements are done, things will begin to take on a more definitive shape.

From the current mocks, it's pretty obvious Marreese Speights is the way to go. He's nearly as productive as Love, but with a better body, athleticism, and upside, particularly on the defensive end. He's your stud big man sleeper in this year's draft, a la Amare in 2002, Jefferson in 2004, etc.
If Love and Westbrook isn't available.....I would much rather gamble on Speights then gamble on Augustin. I'm not saying that he's a lock as a future All-Star or anything....I just think that there is a greater chance that a Big Man like Speights will pan out then Augustin.

Hicks
04-30-2008, 06:17 PM
I think trying to trade up for a reach pick (unless someone gives us the #1) is a mistake. Just make the best pick you can, or trade down and do so. Better to make moves like that and wait for lightening to strike at some point than to make gambles that will often flop.

owl
04-30-2008, 08:22 PM
Give me Jerryd Bayless over Conley any day of the week. If Dunleavy and #11 were enough to land Bayless, I'd take it without a seconds hesitation.

20/4/3 on great shooting percentages, as a college freshman in one of the nation's top conference? 6'3", 200 pounds? He's got superstar written all over him.

There is a good chance he will be a good player. Numbers and stats are great but the hard
part is evaluating what is in his heart and mind. In other words does he have the drive to
be great.

owl
04-30-2008, 08:26 PM
If Love and Westbrook isn't available.....I would much rather gamble on Speights then gamble on Augustin. I'm not saying that he's a lock as a future All-Star or anything....I just think that there is a greater chance that a Big Man like Speights will pan out then Augustin.

Augustin would be a good pick later in the first but not at 11. I am with you on that. I
feel and I hate to repeat myself but I believe a bigman is the way to go in this draft.
Love, Arthur,Speights, McGee are the options at 11. I would love to see the Pacers pick up and additional first for a guy like Augustin.

Coop
04-30-2008, 09:04 PM
Bayless is my first choice outside of the unrealistic (Rose, Beasley). I feel like he is a combo of Wade and Arenas. Out of all the players in this draft, I feel like he has the highest ceiling.

AesopRockOn
04-30-2008, 09:41 PM
If Bayless is there, I'd happily do J.O., #11 for Marbury, Lee, #5.

Or if nobody's picked Mayo either. But I feel like OJ is the player the Knicks would love to have.

Anthem
04-30-2008, 09:55 PM
the Pacers savior isn't in this draft unless they move up to #1
Or #2. If Beasley goes first, then #2 would be exactly where I'd want to be.

docpaul
04-30-2008, 10:10 PM
the Pacers savior isn't in this draft unless they move up to #1

I'd betcha we don't do any moves up, and we select DJ Augustin... and he'll be another player we'll build our future around.

Anthem
04-30-2008, 10:32 PM
Unless someone is stupid enough to give us a top-2 pick, this is a draft for trading down, not trading up.
Depending on what we gave up, I'd be happy trading up for Bayless. Other than that, I'm with you.

I just don't want Augustin.

Major Cold
04-30-2008, 10:50 PM
I think that Bayless, Gordon, Mayo, or a big could end up having a better career than the top two. More so this year than last year. The gap is not as big as last year. It took all year to figure the rankings. Mayo was at the top of the list around the McDonalds game.

Oden was a projected first pick his junior year in HS.

Anthem
04-30-2008, 11:31 PM
I think that Bayless, Gordon, Mayo, or a big could end up having a better career than the top two.
Mayo and Gordon scare me, to be honest. I mean, if they're there at 11, then great. But I'm not sure I'd be comfortable trading up to #4 for them.

MyFavMartin
05-01-2008, 01:24 AM
I'm sure they'd be open to moving Conley if they got a shot at Rose, but there would be a long line for Conley.

For instance, Portland tried hard to get Conley last year. This year (in the event they got Rose) they could just offer up some combination of the #13, Outlaw, Webster and even throw in Rudy Fernandez if they had to. And if I'm Memphis, I'd probably lean towards that deal.

If I'm Memphis, I don't do anything to help Portland getting any better since they're in the same conference as me and will be my major competition long-term. (Plus, I'd be asking for Aldridge. I'm not sold on Outlaw, Webster or Rudy. If Speights is there at #13, I might consider it. May need Portland to take on Cardinal.)

But I would lean towards shipping Conley to the EC for some frontline help at PF or C.

d_c
05-01-2008, 02:51 AM
If I'm Memphis, I don't do anything to help Portland getting any better since they're in the same conference as me and will be my major competition long-term. (Plus, I'd be asking for Aldridge. I'm not sold on Outlaw, Webster or Rudy. If Speights is there at #13, I might consider it. May need Portland to take on Cardinal.)

But I would lean towards shipping Conley to the EC for some frontline help at PF or C.

Memphis didn't seem to worry about inter-conference competition too much when they gave Gasol to the Lakers.

And such a deal with the Blazers wouldn't be anywhere near as lopsided. Bottom line is if it's a deal that puts their team in a better situation, they'll do it. They'll worry about what that deal does for them first and what it does for someone else second, as was evidenced by the Gasol deal. They didn't care that it made the Lakers true contenders for quite some time (Gasol ain't exactly over the hill). All they cared was that they saved their franchise some money.

Yeah, I'd ask for Aldridge if I were the Grizz too. And of course I'd get turned down. But the Blazers refusing to give Aldridge doesn't change the fact that some combo of Outlaw, Webster, Fernandez and the #13 is a pretty strong offer. And if you're not sold on those guys, why should anyone be sold on Ike Diogu and Marquis Daniels?

naptown_baller
05-01-2008, 03:03 AM
First, I don't know how you can say this draft isn't deep!! What do you expect? this draft is oozing potential. The only draft in recent memory with star potential written all over the top picks was when LeBron, Melo, D Wade and Bosh all went top 5. But then you also had one of the biggest busts in draft history in Mlicic. This is one of the deepest drafts in recent memory. You could possibly land a star with the last pick in the first round (i.e. Bill Walker) Do you just expect someone to enter into the draft with no flaws?

Second, do you really think it is worth giving up Dunleavy or Granger for a CHANCE at the next superstar. I totally agree this team needs one but what will trading up get us? Brook Lopez, a player that is VERY slow and will have trouble keeping up with our new offense.

Finally, Why is everyone obsessed with Bayless? I am an Arizona fan so I love him, but I can also be unbiased and think for my NBA separately. Ok he averaged 20/4/4 in possibly the toughest conference in college basketball. He has the potential to be a stud point guard but he has not shown the ability to find the open man consistently. He sometimes takes on too much of a score first mentality. In my mind, he has Monta Ellis written all over.

Speed
05-01-2008, 07:38 AM
Mayo and Gordon scare me, to be honest. I mean, if they're there at 11, then great. But I'm not sure I'd be comfortable trading up to #4 for them.

Me either. I think you have to not fall in love with what a guy might be and sell the farm based on that (see Bender).

As for trading Granger, I wouldn't do it for the #1, its a step backwards. You trade Granger and then wait on a guy 4 years to maybe be as good as Granger is now? If there was a no doubt superstar then ya, but there doesn't seem to be in this draft.

As for trading down, maybe, depends what you get with it of course and how far down and if you think you can basically fill two needs by doing so. If you can trade down to 17 for example and still get Augustine, and he could drop due to his size, or if Love dropped for example and you pick up a Lowry or rotation big in the process then ya.

As for trading Dunleavy for a mid to late first rounder, two things you have to see if there is someone there you have targeted. Secondly, do you think Dunleavy is played his very best season last year and his value will only go down. Buy High, Sell low.

In summary, I agree I think they stay at 11 and get a player who could very likely be as good as someone taken at 6 or so. To me thats step one in this whole summer, it all depends on who you get there on where you go from there. Because even if you get your "point guard of the future" you still have alot of work to do.

Ballerzfan
05-01-2008, 08:21 AM
Finally, Why is everyone obsessed with Bayless? I am an Arizona fan so I love him, but I can also be unbiased and think for my NBA separately. Ok he averaged 20/4/4 in possibly the toughest conference in college basketball. He has the potential to be a stud point guard but he has not shown the ability to find the open man consistently. He sometimes takes on too much of a score first mentality. In my mind, he has Monta Ellis written all over.

Not to be argumentative as I also have some doubts about Bayless, but isn't Monta Ellis a definite improvement over our current roster??? Even with my doubts, I still rate Bayless as #3 over Mayo/Lopez or anyone else.

Naptown_Seth
05-01-2008, 08:46 AM
As Jay had mentioned before in another thread.....Dunleavy's trade value will be higher in the 2009 Offseason IF he does a repeat performance of his career 2007-2008 season ( hence it's wasn't a fluke year) and he is owed $20 mil instead of $29 mil.

I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't try to shop Dunleavy for the very reasons you suggest or that he isn't a good player...but unless there is a team out there that is desperate to move up to the 11th spot ( which given the lack of depth in this year's draft ), needs to get a Serviceable scoring veteran SF, has a player that they are willing to send back to us that actually fills a position of need that doesn't have a horrible ( if not worse ) contract, I just don't see any team willing to take on Dunleavy's $29 mil / 3 year contract.

Unfortunately, I just don't see any of that happening in the 2008 offseason.....but I can see if maybe happening in the 2009 offseason.
I agree that IF he repeats this season his value goes up, plus his contract gets more tolerable. But if he doesn't repeat then everyone will say "shoulda...", just like they do with JO and Tins. I mean IF JO had been healthy as promised his value would be a lot higher this year.

Dun might have "clicked" or Dun might have just hit stride in this system or he just got hot. He has a history of both good and bad shooting, and right now I think the good shooting hides his defensive liabilities.

Finally, just how much greater will his value go with a repeat of this year? 40% from 3 as part of a 36 win team with poor defense? A few more people will believe that he can be trusted to hit the 3, but I bet a good chunk already see Dun as a guy who was hurt by the GS situation. And that "my situation will be fresh for them" view is one that many teams have. I think a good portion of the market for Dun has already opened up because of this.


Everyone thinks this is anti-Dun and it's not. It's just the reality of the rebuild. Does anyone truly target the goal being #1 star guy, Dun as #2 and then all new pieces? I think most people see it with Danny as that #2 that everything else is built around.


Regardless, it's clear that probably JO, Dun and Troy have to be moved in the next few seasons. There are valid reasons on all sides for the various timings on when those moves should happen. This is the main reason I worry about Bird in charge at this point. It's a serious make or break for him, but unfortunately that means he'll take the team up or down with him. I wish I could have confidence in him at this point, but if he deserves it he'll certainly show it in the next 2 years.

Naptown_Seth
05-01-2008, 08:54 AM
Last years draft has thus far been a bust.

If Bayless is there, I'd happily do J.O., #11 for Marbury, Lee, #5.
Interesting, but hard to say that Walsh would do that. Moves Marbury but gives up Bayless. He'd have to have a LOT of faith in JO/Tins to see them as more valuable to their rebuild plans than Lee/Bayless, which is exactly why we'd want to do this deal ourselves.



Back to Dun, to be clear I wasn't using him in a package with the Pacers pick. I meant Dun for a pick around 15-22 and salary match in order to take another shot at some of these guys with a wide slotting range. Okay, not everyone likes Arthur (Kofi) but to me the guy has offensive post game. This is about risk-reward and the reality that Dun isn't a long term SG solution, at least not in a practical sense. Go with guys I like (Rush, Arthur) or ones you like, I'm just trying to restructure the heirarchy of the team, shift some salary AND get a 2nd scratch off ticket in the draft "lottery" (not the pp balls, I mean the general crapshoot of the entire thing).


Kegboy - this draft has been better for guards than last year, and this draft looked stronger before a few guys passed on coming out, most notably Griffin. And the draft stock dropped when Rose tore up Augustin and Collison too.

Now this draft looks "normal" IMO.


MAYO - the reason he doesn't scare me is because he showed a strong desire to D up all year. Not only do you like that skill, but you also like the signal it sends about where his heart it at when it comes to basketball. I'm not saying this fixes his shooting and makes him a star, I'm just saying that I think the bust side on him is a lot lower than some guys that you wonder if this is just a paycheck for them (ahem, Beasley even).

Mayo's attitude and arrogance now remind me a lot more of Kobe than anything. NOT HIS GAME. Calm down freaks. Just the attitude, how you can see a guy with a bad attitude but in there is also a will to win that drives them, even if it comes off rough and snarky. Ben Gordan'ish with Kobe's will, you could do a lot worse.

naptown_baller
05-01-2008, 03:24 PM
Not to be argumentative as I also have some doubts about Bayless, but isn't Monta Ellis a definite improvement over our current roster??? Even with my doubts, I still rate Bayless as #3 over Mayo/Lopez or anyone else.

Monta Ellis is definitely an improvement over what we have, but it isn't one worth trading up to get. A player like Ellis isn't worth mortgaging our team on. I think the team should just stick with what they have at 11 or possibly trade down if you can get an expiring contract, some young talent (doubtful), or possibly two first round picks (even more doubtful). Besides that 11 is probably the best we can get without giving up too much.

Speed
05-01-2008, 03:38 PM
This is a bit random but still on topic. If I had the 5-8 pick, I'd offer it to Bird for this and his next years number 1 and I bet he'd do it in a second. Then I'd have a lottery pick next year too.

Bball
05-01-2008, 04:10 PM
We're going to be bad for a long time if we keep trying to land a "superstar"--it's not an easy thing to do! There are other ways to become a contender. For now management should just worry about drafting well and being smarter with their money. We've got to build up the talent base and put ourself into a position to make some nice trades.

I'd rather that we try to find four other good starters to put around Danny. Honestly the model team should be the Pistons.

We've got the #11 pick this year. If we don't pick a bust, that player should be a good (probably not great) starter in this league. That's 2 out of five spots (assuming he's not a SF). (Personally I hope Gordon drops to us.)

Now let's say we trade Foster and Ike (or something) for pick later in this first round. If we get lucky, that's our third long-time starter. If not, then perhaps a valuable bench player (assuming we don't bust).

Is Marquis' contract an expiring next year? Maybe we turn that into something nifty. Jermaine's contract is going to a massive expiring contract in a few years--maybe we get lucky trade involving him. Maybe we hit on a young MLE-level player who blossoms.

Gradual improvement is not a bad thing. I really hope management doesn't go balls-out and give up a bunch of assets for the next Jon Bender. Just draft well with the picks we've got, make smart trades, and we'll be back soon. Let's just try to get five smart guys who can score and defend in our starting lineup.

While I'm not sold on Gordon (I wish he hadn't suffered the broken wrist because I'm sure that didn't help this season be a showcase for his game), I certainly agree with your overall point and that is we shouldn't be looking for a superman but instead should be looking for a team.

A team is much stronger than any of its parts individually. You get an unselfish group of players with some heart and desire, a coach that knows how to make them the best players they can be, and management that can tweak without destroying their chemistry... then you create a synergy that will be tough to beat on its own right. The fans will sense what is happening and will return. That doesn't mean a player can't rise up to be the perfect leader capable of putting the team on his back... in fact it probably makes that scenario easier to happen than trying to pigeon-hole someone into that role and hoping they develop. You see what you can build from within.

The cream rises to the top...

-Bball

SoupIsGood
05-01-2008, 04:36 PM
This is a bit random but still on topic. If I had the 5-8 pick, I'd offer it to Bird for this and his next years number 1 and I bet he'd do it in a second. Then I'd have a lottery pick next year too.

One pick for two? Why are you sure he'd do it?

count55
05-01-2008, 04:55 PM
One pick for two? Why are you sure he'd do it?

I believe he was trying to intimate that Bird was stupid.

Kofi
05-01-2008, 04:56 PM
Monta Ellis is definitely an improvement over what we have, but it isn't one worth trading up to get. A player like Ellis isn't worth mortgaging our team on. I think the team should just stick with what they have at 11 or possibly trade down if you can get an expiring contract, some young talent (doubtful), or possibly two first round picks (even more doubtful). Besides that 11 is probably the best we can get without giving up too much.

If we could land Bayless without moving Granger, I think we'd have to do it. We need quality more than quantity right now. I have no problem with mortgaging our team considering our team is going nowhere in a hurry.

Kstat
05-01-2008, 05:01 PM
the Pacers could probably trade up as high as #3 if they really wanted to.

d_c
05-01-2008, 06:30 PM
the Pacers could probably trade up as high as #3 if they really wanted to.

"Really wanted to" = trading Granger to move up, which probably wouldn't be worth it. Not in this draft.

Kofi
05-01-2008, 06:35 PM
I could see the Clippers going for Dunleavy + #11 for Tim Thomas + #6, depending on if they keep his daddy around.

Kstat
05-01-2008, 06:37 PM
"Really wanted to" = trading Granger to move up, which probably wouldn't be worth it. Not in this draft.

Well, the question was asked...

For what it's worth, I agree with you.

Kofi
05-01-2008, 06:52 PM
I could see Miami doing J.O. and #11 for Blount, resigned Jason Williams or Ricky Davis (1 year), and #3.

AesopRockOn
05-01-2008, 07:20 PM
MAYO - the reason he doesn't scare me is because he showed a strong desire to D up all year. Not only do you like that skill, but you also like the signal it sends about where his heart it at when it comes to basketball. I'm not saying this fixes his shooting and makes him a star, I'm just saying that I think the bust side on him is a lot lower than some guys that you wonder if this is just a paycheck for them (ahem, Beasley even).

This is true. All of the attitude/teammate/selfishness issues that arose from reports before he came into the NCAA are pretty much void. For anyone who's watched USC this year understand that he's the most skilled player in the draft besides Beasley. Doesn't mean he'll be the second best player for his career obviously, but in terms of coming in and doing damage, OJ's got game. He did also show extreme poise, something that some other top picks *coughRose'sfreethrowthatcouldhavesealedthegamecou gh* did not exhibit throughout the course of the season. I'd love for the Pacers to get him but don't think there's a chance that so many other teams pass him up (i.e. trade him away) considering the workouts that he'll be giving.

I think we're just going to take what we can get at #11 myself. The Hick's probably not going to get to be able to sell anyone besides DG very well.

Speed
05-01-2008, 08:10 PM
One pick for two? Why are you sure he'd do it?

Clock is ticking and he would feel like he could get a "franchise" guy now, I think he'd be wrong and it would be a mistake.

naptown_baller
05-01-2008, 11:24 PM
Yes a team is better than the sum of its parts but we do need a star. If you haven't noticed, every team that has a chance to win the NBA championship has a future hall of famer or potential hall of famer on their roster except maybe Detroit and Utah. We need a star but it is too hard to predict who will be one. If there's a way to trade up without givin up, Granger, Dunleavy or Williams, then I would be fine with it. But that is not likely.

Kofi
05-02-2008, 12:05 AM
I'd give up #11 and next year's 1st for Bayless. Easily.

sig
05-02-2008, 12:33 AM
If the Pacer want to eat more salary, maybe the Knicks would include their #1 in a deal.

If the Knicks could get enough 2009 expiring contracts for Randolph, Crawford, and Jeffires, they could be huge players in the FA market starting in the summer of 2009. What FA's don't want to play for the Knicks? Would donnie rather have cap space in NY or high draft picks and young players. When is Lebron's contract up?

QuickRelease
05-02-2008, 07:54 AM
Last years draft has thus far been a bust.

If Bayless is there, I'd happily do J.O., #11 for Marbury, Lee, #5.

Hey Kofi, just curious as to why you don't like JaVale McGee and Darrell Arthur?

MyFavMartin
05-02-2008, 08:36 AM
This is true. All of the attitude/teammate/selfishness issues that arose from reports before he came into the NCAA are pretty much void. For anyone who's watched USC this year understand that he's the most skilled player in the draft besides Beasley. Doesn't mean he'll be the second best player for his career obviously, but in terms of coming in and doing damage, OJ's got game. He did also show extreme poise, something that some other top picks *coughRose'sfreethrowthatcouldhavesealedthegamecou gh* did not exhibit throughout the course of the season. I'd love for the Pacers to get him but don't think there's a chance that so many other teams pass him up (i.e. trade him away) considering the workouts that he'll be giving.

I think we're just going to take what we can get at #11 myself. The Hick's probably not going to get to be able to sell anyone besides DG very well.

OJ is good, but you can't say he's better than Rose just because Rose missed a FT. At least Rose was in the final game, which neither Beasley nor Mayo can say.

Rose is better than Mayo at a more important position.

If given the choice between Rose and Mayo for the Pacers, I would pick Rose every time.

rexnom
05-02-2008, 09:56 AM
OJ is good, but you can't say he's better than Rose just because Rose missed a FT. At least Rose was in the final game, which neither Beasley nor Mayo can say.

Rose is better than Mayo at a more important position.

If given the choice between Rose and Mayo for the Pacers, I would pick Rose every time.
I agree but if you switch Rose with Mayo, I still think Memphis does very well this year, maybe even reaches the final. You can't pin that on Mayo, even though he did handpick USC...

Major Cold
05-02-2008, 10:09 AM
We can't give up two consecutive years 1st. We could give this years and 2010.

count55
05-02-2008, 10:12 AM
We can't give up two consecutive years 1st. We could give this years and 2010.

We could give up both if we got a pick back. The rule says that you can't go consecutive years without a first rounder. Therefore, we could legally trade the #11 this year and our 1st rounder next year for another first rounder either this year or next.

Major Cold
05-02-2008, 10:16 AM
Duh your right. Forgot about getting one back.

count55
05-02-2008, 10:19 AM
Duh your right. Forgot about getting one back.

And I forgot that we'd traded last year's, so we'd technically have to get one this year...(though I can't for the life of me think why we'd trade this year and next year's pick to get a pick next year...I guess there'd have to be a player involved.)

Major Cold
05-02-2008, 10:40 AM
We can trade this years and not a pick back and be ok. Since next year we would have a pick. I thought?

count55
05-02-2008, 10:50 AM
We can trade this years and not a pick back and be ok. Since next year we would have a pick. I thought?

No. Since we didn't have a pick last year, we have to have one this year. We could (theoretically and conspiratorially) come to an agreement to make a deal involving our pick, take the guy the other team wanted, and trade him later this summer, (but I forget the waiting period), but, on the whole, we can't deal this year's pick for a player until well after the draft.

Hicks
05-02-2008, 10:52 AM
We can trade this years and not a pick back and be ok. Since next year we would have a pick. I thought?

No because we're coming off of a draft where we did not have a pick. If we trade this year's pick without getting another '08 back, that makes two years in a row.

MyFavMartin
05-02-2008, 11:01 AM
I agree but if you switch Rose with Mayo, I still think Memphis does very well this year, maybe even reaches the final. You can't pin that on Mayo, even though he did handpick USC...

Yeah, I could see Memphis doing well if Mayo replaced Rose, but PG is such an important position in basketball, it would depend on who was running the point for Memphis on how far they get... Mayo with CDR would seem redundant, though it would be interesting to see how many outside shots CDR would get and knock down with Mayo breaking down the defense and kicking out to him.

Mayo seems like a Brandon Roy/Joe Johnson type of SG, who likes to have the ball in his hands. His TOs are too high to run the point, but I do think he will be a very good SG and someone will be happy to have them on their team. Certain All Star.

That said, Rose is a spectacular PG with tremendous skills and would address a need a a very important position for the Pacers. Future Hall of Famer.

Everyone got their lottery ticket?

Should we send Danny to represent the Pacers at the lottery as Portland did with Roy?

MyFavMartin
05-02-2008, 11:13 AM
I'd give up #11 and next year's 1st for Bayless. Easily.

I would too if it was possible and you could guarantee that the Pacers would be in the playoffs next year (i.e., JO is healthy).

Bayless, Dun, Granger, JO, and Foster

With this I wouldn't mind seeing JO slide over to C and a trade done to bring in a physical PF (ala a young Dale Davis... Chris Wilcox, Udonis Haslem, Najera, Songaila, etc.)

However, I would like to know if Westbrook would be at #11, as I'd rather take Westbrook and keep next year's draft pick before doing this trade....

Hicks
05-02-2008, 11:40 AM
I kind of like the idea of sending Danny to the lotto show. It would trick me into believing we had a better chance of moving up.

MyFavMartin
05-02-2008, 11:54 AM
Threw this out there:

http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/showthread.php?t=38915

I do think Denver could be a good spot for Tinsley. Another possibility would be to do a S&T for Najera though 5.7 mil seems too much for Eduardo. Don't think Denver wants him as they'd prefer his minutes go to Kleiza.

d_c
05-02-2008, 12:15 PM
No because we're coming off of a draft where we did not have a pick. If we trade this year's pick without getting another '08 back, that makes two years in a row.

That is irrelevant.

The only rule is that you can't have two consecutive future picks traded away before any of those drafts have occured.

The Pacers could have traded their 08' pick this year at the deadline if they wanted to. And they can trad it right before the draft if they want to too.

What they couldn't have done (for example) was some kind of trade (or trades) where they traded away both their 08' and 09' pick. That would be two consecutive FUTURE picks.

However, something you can do is trade away your 2008 pick. Then after the 2008 draft occurs, you can trade away your 2009 pick. That's because the 2008 draft will have already occurred and won't be considered a future pick. The trading away consecutive picks rule only applies to FUTURE picks and not picks that have already occured.

Major Cold
05-02-2008, 12:38 PM
I think a link is going to be needed and I get go searching now.

:link:

count55
05-02-2008, 01:19 PM
I think a link is going to be needed and I get go searching now.

:link:

He's right...this is from a Chad Ford story a few years ago. (http://http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&id=1993184)


Rule 5: Draft picks can't always be traded.
Teams are restricted from trading away future first-round draft picks in consecutive years.

That means teams that already have traded away a 2006 pick (like the Pistons) cannot trade their 2005 pick before the draft.

This may be the most paternalistic rule in the collective bargaining agreement. It's known as the "Ted Stepien Rule" and was created after Stepien, a former Cavs owner, made some pretty awful trades that cost the Cavs multiple future first-round picks in the early '80s.

With the way Isiah Thomas is going in New York, they might have to rename this the "Isiah Rule" in years to come.

In essence, the league is trying to stop teams from shooting themselves in the foot by trading away draft picks in consecutive years sight unseen.

Again, there are ways around it.

First, a team that traded away its 2004 first-round pick before the draft can trade away its 2005 first-round pick the minute the 2004 draft ends. That's a pretty gaping loophole the league likely will shut at some point in the future. The thinking is that once the draft is over, the 2004 pick is no longer a "future" pick. Unless the team already had agreed to trade away its 2006 pick, it's free to make the trade.

The other loophole is simply to wait until the draft is over to make the trade. Once a team drafts a player, it is free to trade his rights to any team it chooses.

d_c
05-02-2008, 01:26 PM
I think a link is going to be needed and I get go searching now.

:link:

Here's another source:

http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/history/nbadraft.htm



Note, however, that this rule only requires each team to have a first-round pick, not necessarily their pick. Some examples illustrating this rule follow. These examples assume that the 2005 NBA Draft has already taken place.

For the purposes of this discussion, let us assume that the San Antonio Spurs have no first-round pick in 2005, but have their first-round picks, and no others, in all future years. The Spurs may freely trade their 2006 first-round pick, since its 2005 pick is no longer a future pick. However, they cannot trade away their first-round picks for 2006 and 2007, or in any other consecutive years.
The Spurs make a trade after the 2005 draft, picking up another team's first-round pick for 2007. Now, the Spurs can trade their own 2006 and 2007 first-round picks, since they still have a 2007 first-round pick.

Major Cold
05-02-2008, 01:35 PM
Thank you gentlemen. My thoughts on the draft have not wavered then.

Anthem
05-02-2008, 01:44 PM
If given the choice between Rose and Mayo for the Pacers, I would pick Rose every time.
You're not likely to get that choice.

Taterhead
05-02-2008, 04:20 PM
the Pacers could probably trade up as high as #3 if they really wanted to.

I got a hypothetical for you guys. What if Shawn Marion opts out (almost a gurantee due to his age and the fact he is coming off a solid season), and instead of resigning him, Miami signs Gilbert Arenas. This makes sense for Maimi, Marion is 30 years old, Arenas is only 26 and fills a much more important position and can help take pressure off Wade down the stretch of games offensively.

Then lets say they are sitting there at 2 with Rose on the board, and we offer Granger, Foster, Daniels and #11 for Rose, Haslem and Blount? They save 15 million in 2009-2010 and add Granger to move down 9 spots. I personally don't think Brook Lopez has much more upside than the big guys that will be there at #11.

With Arenas, Wade and Granger Miami could contend in the east next year.

Anthem
05-02-2008, 07:54 PM
I got a hypothetical for you guys.
Doesn't work. The draft will be long gone before free agents can be pursued, let alone signed.

Besides, if I'm Miami, I'd rather have DWade/Rose than DWade/Zero

Also, I don't see Marion opting out.

Naptown_Seth
05-05-2008, 01:19 AM
If given the choice between Kobe and Paul Pierce, I will take Kobe every time. Man, that is fun.

;) :p


Anthem, you really don't think Marion opts? Man, I'm not sure on that. I think it's way more gray personally. He's a hard player to read. I mean he was unhappy in Phoenix with Nash at PG and Amare at PF. He was in a spot a ton of other SF/PFs would love to be in.

CableKC
05-05-2008, 12:11 PM
If given the choice between Kobe and Paul Pierce, I will take Kobe every time. Man, that is fun.

;) :p


Anthem, you really don't think Marion opts? Man, I'm not sure on that. I think it's way more gray personally. He's a hard player to read. I mean he was unhappy in Phoenix with Nash at PG and Amare at PF. He was in a spot a ton of other SF/PFs would love to be in.
Let's ask the obvious question, what team is willing to pay the money that he thinks he is owed? There are a few teams that are under the salary cap and the asking price for a S&T with the Heat and Riley will likely be costly for any team wanting him.

Anthem
05-05-2008, 12:18 PM
Anthem, you really don't think Marion opts? Man, I'm not sure on that. I think it's way more gray personally. He's a hard player to read. I mean he was unhappy in Phoenix with Nash at PG and Amare at PF. He was in a spot a ton of other SF/PFs would love to be in.
Where's he gonna go? Nobody's going to pay him close to what he makes now.

d_c
05-05-2008, 02:52 PM
Where's he gonna go? Nobody's going to pay him close to what he makes now.

He's only going to opt out if he and his agent get a new longterm deal setup AHEAD OF TIME. You workout an agreement in principal with someone, then opt out.

Nobody is going to just opt out of $17M and then just explore what's out there. That would be dumb.

Taterhead
05-06-2008, 12:18 AM
Where's he gonna go? Nobody's going to pay him close to what he makes now.

You don't think there will be demand for a player of that caliber? There will be tons of teams interested, IMO. The team I think would be most interested is Philadelphia. He could be a big addition to them and fits thier style of play perfectly. And that's not to mention that I doubt Miami has any interest in signing him to an extension. They will save thier money for Elton Brand or a younger swing player before commiting that kind of money in Marion. In fact, I would bet they are hoping he opts out, so they can be way under the cap.

And it's not a matter of him getting 17 million a year. But as of right now, he is only guranteed to make 17 million the rest of his career. If he opts out while healthy at 30 years of age he could land a 5-6 years deal worth 13-15 million per season at the least. If he gets hurt next year he could stand to lose over 50 million dollars in the total value of his next deal. His agent is paid on commision, and his agent knows he'll likely get more money this year than next.

Besides, who is going to give him a big deal next year? He won't risk it to bank on uncertainty, too much could happen. A bad year and teams could view him as "on the decline". A serious injury and he is a 31 year old swingman with health concerns.

Anthem
05-06-2008, 01:07 AM
And it's not a matter of him getting 17 million a year. But as of right now, he is only guranteed to make 17 million the rest of his career. If he opts out while healthy at 30 years of age he could land a 5-6 years deal worth 13-15 million per season at the least.
Dollars to donuts if he bets out this summer he ends up taking a deal under 12mil.

Taterhead
05-06-2008, 02:59 AM
Dollars to donuts if he bets out this summer he ends up taking a deal under 12mil.

What does he get if he waits until next year? More? 6 years 60 million is still 60 million guaranteed.

rexnom
05-06-2008, 03:02 AM
What are Marion's extension options, if any?

Also what teams have cap room this year?

When does GS's J-Rich exception expire? Draft day? If so then that would suck for GS because Marion as a Dub just makes too much sense...

d_c
05-06-2008, 03:14 AM
WPacers Digest - Reply to Topic (http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=713595)hat are Marion's extension options, if any?

Also what teams have cap room this year?

Marion's extension options are either with the Heat or with somebody else in a sign and trade.

Teams like Charlotte and Philly have cap space, but only if they renounce the rights to guys like Okafor and Igoudala or can somehow sign those guys are bargain basement prices, both of which are unlikely.

The Wiz would have cap space only if they let Jamison walk and then Arenas opts out and they let him walk. If both those things don't happen, their cap space will be minimal.

Memphis will also have cap space, but it's unlikely they will have just given away Gasol so they could sign a 30 year old SF to a huge contract.

Sonics might also have some space, but it won't be for the type of money Marion is seeking and like Memphis, it's unlikely a rebuilding team would want someone of Marion's age.

In short, Marion doesn't have a lot of options. He's going to have to go through the Heat in a sign and trade if he wants the type of money he's looking for. If Marion can't work out a sign and trade beforehand, it's unlikely he's going to opt out of $17M.

d_c
05-06-2008, 03:18 AM
When does GS's J-Rich exception expire? Draft day? If so then that would suck for GS because Marion as a Dub just makes too much sense...

I think it expires a couple days after the draft (since draft day trades aren't official until a few days after the draft).

That really doesn't matter because it won't help Marion become a Warrior.

The Traded Player Exception (TPE) was for about $10M. It can't be combined with another player's salary in a trade for someone who's salary is bigger than the TPE. So you can't combine the $10M TPE with a guy like Al Harrington (just for example) to get take back Marion's $17M. That's against the rules.

rexnom
05-06-2008, 03:18 AM
Marion's extension options are either with the Heat or with somebody else in a sign and trade.

Teams like Charlotte and Philly have cap space, but only if they renounce the rights to guys like Okafor and Igoudala or can somehow sign those guys are bargain basement prices, both of which are unlikely.

The Wiz would have cap space only if they let Jamison walk and then Arenas opts out and they let him walk. If both those things don't happen, their cap space will be minimal.

Memphis will also have cap space, but it's unlikely they will have just given away Gasol so they could sign a 30 year old SF to a huge contract.

Sonics might also have some space, but it won't be for the type of money Marion is seeking and like Memphis, it's unlikely a rebuilding team would want someone of Marion's age.

In short, Marion doesn't have a lot of options. He's going to have to go through the Heat in a sign and trade if he wants the type of money he's looking for. If Marion can't work out a sign and trade beforehand, it's unlikely he's going to opt out of $17M.
Hmm...so I guess Marion and his agent have to be on the look out for teams that have huge expirings with picks/and or young players to offer Miami for their troubles.

rexnom
05-06-2008, 03:20 AM
I think it expires a couple days after the draft (since draft day trades aren't official until a few days after the draft).

That really doesn't matter because it won't help Marion become a Warrior.

The Traded Player Exception (TPE) was for about $10M. It can't be combined with another player's salary in a trade for someone who's salary is bigger than the TPE. So you can't combine the $10M TPE with a guy like Al Harrington (just for example) to get take back Marion's $17M. That's against the rules.
About 10 mil, but then there's some leeway with the plus/minus, right? If Marion can get something like 12 mil/year for five/six years, would he take the pay cut?

d_c
05-06-2008, 03:28 AM
About 10 mil, but then there's some leeway with the plus/minus, right? If Marion can get something like 12 mil/year for five/six years, would he take the pay cut?

Yes. The TPE will allow you to take back 125% of the TPE amount + 100K. In this case it's 1.25x $10M + $100K or about $12.6M.

So in theory, Marion could opt out and take a deal starting at $12M a year in some sign and trade with the Warriors.

But there are several more issues after that. That puts the Warriors well into luxury tax territory if they also want to re-sign Biedrins and Ellis. Unless the W's can coax the Heat into taking Al Harrington (unlikely), it's a luxury tax situation an our owner won't pay the tax (they claim otherwise but I'll believe it when I see it).

The other issue is that Miami is going to want some compensation. They'll probably ask for Brandan Wright, which the W's probably won't cave into.

Stranger things have happened, but I don't see Marion being on the Warriors next year.

MyFavMartin
05-06-2008, 03:28 AM
You're not likely to get that choice.


I don't either, but it was in response to rexnom.

MyFavMartin
05-06-2008, 03:30 AM
Dollars to donuts if he bets out this summer he ends up taking a deal under 12mil.

I have read that Marion won't be opting out due to the fact that very few teams will have the cap space to sign him and fewer will want to spend it, so I agree with your statement. I think Marion comes back for Miami next year, who will be better, and then hit FA next year.

I would also love to see Miami not be in the top 3 after tanking the season.

Naptown_Seth
05-06-2008, 11:15 AM
About 10 mil, but then there's some leeway with the plus/minus, right? If Marion can get something like 12 mil/year for five/six years, would he take the pay cut?
No, what d_c said is incorrect. The TPE brings with it a cost of the 125% factor. You EITHER get to finish the trade later OR deal for 125% more than you sent out, but not both.

So the TPE gets you $10m, period.


Now if Marion is sticking it out but a team like Philly sees him as a possible addition next year then dealing for Kidd's expiring becomes interesting, to tie in with what I said in the Carlisle-Mavs thread. And again, forget the Sixers and just think of all teams that might like Marion as the finishing piece on an up and coming youth movement. Heck, maybe Dallas would have interest themselves and Miami would certainly seem to have interest in getting something out of reducing costs beyond just letting Marion walk. Obviously Marion would be looking to extend and if Miami doesn't see interest in him in their puzzle you'd expect his agent to push to get out.

But maybe hitting for Beasley to go with Wade-Marion would change their outlook on what a rebuild is.

d_c
05-06-2008, 12:56 PM
No, what d_c said is incorrect. The TPE brings with it a cost of the 125% factor. You EITHER get to finish the trade later OR deal for 125% more than you sent out, but not both.

So the TPE gets you $10m, period.


You're right and I'm wrong. I was looking at rule 68 when I should have been looking at rule 69.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#69

Regardless, Marion isn't going to be on the Warriors next season. Marion is in somewhat of a tough spot because of his age and the fact that most teams that have cap space are rebuilding teams who aren't looking to shell out that kind of money for a 30 year old SF who is good but not great.

avoidingtheclowns
05-06-2008, 01:18 PM
You're right and I'm wrong.

don't ever, EVER, say that to seth. you only enable him...

Anthem
05-06-2008, 01:58 PM
I have read that Marion won't be opting out due to the fact that very few teams will have the cap space to sign him and fewer will want to spend it
Zactly.

Marion's not opting out.

QuickRelease
05-06-2008, 02:27 PM
Zactly.

Marion's not opting out.

Man, if they can land either Rose, or Beasley, they are going to be lethal. Especially if Marion comes back!

Anthem
05-06-2008, 06:22 PM
Man, if they can land either Rose, or Beasley, they are going to be lethal. Especially if Marion comes back!
Exactly. Say they get Beasley.... that puts Marion at the 3 and Wade at the 2. Brutal.

Then all they'll need is a point guard.... :signit:

:jamaaltinsley: