PDA

View Full Version : Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)



Tom White
06-23-2008, 07:59 PM
Ric Beucher (or however you spell the moron's name) was just on ESPN radio and said the O'Neal to Toronto trade died on Sunday. He also said that JO had not worked out on his knee any.

With this guy's past, I guess we can assume that O'Neal will be in Toronto soon.

:laugh:

robocop's cousin
06-23-2008, 08:16 PM
hopefully we can get a crate of old Shawn Respert jersey's in return

Hicks
06-23-2008, 08:38 PM
Why would Mike Wells report it on Monday if it was dead Sunday?

grace
06-23-2008, 08:43 PM
Why would Mike Wells report it on Monday if it was dead Sunday?

Because one or both of them is woefully misinformed? :dunno:

Kegboy
06-23-2008, 08:52 PM
hopefully we can get a crate of old Shawn Respert jersey's in return

:happydanc
:yay2:

tadscout
06-23-2008, 08:54 PM
Why would Mike Wells report it on Monday if it was dead Sunday?

In the other thread it said it died this afternoon... so Bueucher has that wrong... plus he's totally off that JO hasn't been working out... I don't know why he even gets paid...

Bball
06-23-2008, 09:26 PM
plus he's totally off that JO hasn't been working out...

Is he?

-Bball

tadscout
06-23-2008, 09:37 PM
Is he?

-Bball


A number of NBA veterans including Jermaine O'Neal, Mike Miller and Al Harrington have been joining a plethora of prospects including Joe Alexander (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=19096), Marreese Speights (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=19161), Richard Hendrix (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=18890), Malik Hairston (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=18842) and international mystery men Nathan Jawai (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=19225) and Giorgi Shermadini (http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/draft/tracker/player?draftyear=2008&playerId=19284).

Link (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftWatch-080520&univLogin02=stateChanged&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftWatch-080520%26univLogin02%3dstateChanged)

Plus today on WIBC Chad Ford even said teams have been sending 'spies' to Las Vegas to see him work out...

LG33
06-23-2008, 09:39 PM
Tomorrow's headline: Mike Miller on his way to Indiana.

Shade
06-23-2008, 09:46 PM
Tomorrow's headline: It's Miller Time again in Indy.

Fixed.

grace
06-23-2008, 11:19 PM
Tomorrow's headline: Mike Miller on his way to Indiana.


:suicide4:

Bball
06-24-2008, 12:45 AM
Link (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftWatch-080520&univLogin02=stateChanged&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftWatch-080520%26univLogin02%3dstateChanged)

Plus today on WIBC Chad Ford even said teams have been sending 'spies' to Las Vegas to see him work out...


Maybe the spies didn't see the level of rehab and working out that they expected?

-Bball

Major Cold
06-24-2008, 01:01 AM
Ric B. is a schmuck. Every time I see him I want to give him a noogey.

Anthem
06-24-2008, 01:01 AM
Maybe the spies didn't see the level of rehab and working out that they expected?
:laugh: Ah, Bball, you're a trip.

Say what you want about the guy, but he does work out in the summer. That's not his problem.

Bball
06-24-2008, 01:24 AM
:laugh: Ah, Bball, you're a trip.

Say what you want about the guy, but he does work out in the summer. That's not his problem.

I don't doubt he works out in the summer... doing what he wants to do and when he wants to do it.

I think when JO is gone we're going to learn alot about his work ethic, demands, etc... and it isn't going to be nearly as close to the ideal that we would hope or have been led to believe.

-Bball

Hicks
06-24-2008, 01:26 AM
The shark has been jumped.

Arcadian
06-24-2008, 01:30 AM
I don't doubt he works out in the summer... doing what he wants to do and when he wants to do it.

I think when JO is gone we're going to learn alot about his work ethic, demands, etc... and it isn't going to be nearly as close to the ideal that we would hope or have been led to believe.

-Bball

I bet he kills puppies over the summer.

Bball
06-24-2008, 01:37 AM
I bet he kills puppies over the summer.

...And kittens too!!!

-Bball

NPH
06-24-2008, 02:00 AM
Jermaine is completely healthy, and works out 5 days a week diligently. His knee is fine.

Mourning
06-24-2008, 06:21 AM
I don't doubt he works out in the summer... doing what he wants to do and when he wants to do it.

I think when JO is gone we're going to learn alot about his work ethic, demands, etc... and it isn't going to be nearly as close to the ideal that we would hope or have been led to believe.

-Bball

Mmm... I doubt that, Bball. One of the things about JO that I always liked was that he always got back the next season with something in his arsenal. Be it better defense, better passing, gain some extra weight or muscles (on request from management) or whatever. The dude works hard in the summer I have no doubt about him there at all.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

indygeezer
06-24-2008, 06:39 AM
Mmm... I doubt that, Bball. One of the things about JO that I always liked was that he always got back the next season with something in his arsenal. Be it better defense, better passing, gain some extra weight or muscles (on request from management) or whatever. The dude works hard in the summer I have no doubt about him there at all.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Agreed, I will not fault the guy for constantly trying to improve his game.

On the idea the deal is dead: I realize I receive the early edition of the IS but both the report of the trade and Kravitz' column are in the paper this AM. They had enough time to do it, so I'm thinking if the deal were truely dead they would have pulled the articles and put in the dead dog story....wouldn't they?

Mourning
06-24-2008, 06:52 AM
Well.. I still think it's positive we had this story pop up... the more we get of those about JO, generally, the better. Makes it clear that there's interest from more then one angle, so we probably won't be completely bend over.

count55
06-24-2008, 07:45 AM
Agreed, I will not fault the guy for constantly trying to improve his game.

On the idea the deal is dead: I realize I receive the early edition of the IS but both the report of the trade and Kravitz' column are in the paper this AM. They had enough time to do it, so I'm thinking if the deal were truely dead they would have pulled the articles and put in the dead dog story....wouldn't they?

Another note, the Toronto Star's Doug Smith (http://http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/447786) is still reporting the deal. He notes concerns over health and that there are other suitors for TJ Ford, but it seems that there's decent reason to believe that it may still be alive, but just on hold.

From Toronto's perspective, this has to be the biggest risk/biggest reward scenario. If JO is healthy, then he could help them make a big jump in the East. I don't think Diaw would be a huge difference maker for them, and I'm not sure who the other teams mentioned (Portland, Miami, Sacramento, Cleveland) would have that would offer as big of a potential bump (or bust) as JO. (Of course, that depends on what you think of today's Ron Artest.)

I also had heard some rumors that there have been conversations with Chicago, but I cannot find any documentation so take that with a grain of salt.

I'm hoping we're getting close to resolution on JO. I admit that I was one of the Odom and Bynum crowd last summer, and I'm feeling pretty burned by the 42-game JO, so I'm just ready to be done with it. It also helps that I like Ford and think he'll be a good starting point guard for years to come.

BobbyMac
06-24-2008, 09:57 AM
If this trade goes thru it will probably not be announced til after the draft so the teams can verify the players they wanted are available.

Tom White
06-24-2008, 10:19 AM
Agreed, I will not fault the guy for constantly trying to improve his game.

On the idea the deal is dead: I realize I receive the early edition of the IS but both the report of the trade and Kravitz' column are in the paper this AM. They had enough time to do it, so I'm thinking if the deal were truely dead they would have pulled the articles and put in the dead dog story....wouldn't they?

Could be, geezer. Down here in Brown County, the edition we get is so far behind that if a game ends after 8:00PM or so, they list it as "too late to report" the next morning.

Seriously.

Anthem
06-24-2008, 10:49 AM
Jermaine is completely healthy, and works out 5 days a week diligently. His knee is fine.
Welcome to the board, NPH!

Honest question... is this sarcasm or inside info?

carpediem024
06-24-2008, 10:57 AM
Bucher has always been wrong about everything...

MyFavMartin
06-24-2008, 11:02 AM
If this trade goes thru it will probably not be announced til after the draft so the teams can verify the players they wanted are available.

word.

MyFavMartin
06-24-2008, 11:03 AM
Jermaine is completely healthy, and works out 5 days a week diligently. His knee is fine.

And his 3PT shooting is dramatically improved...

Bball
06-24-2008, 11:16 AM
Welcome to the board, NPH!

Honest question... is this sarcasm or inside info?

Maybe NPH is just readying the normal mid-summer or preseason Pacer report for the Star ;)

...You know the one... Where everyone is healthy as they have been in years. Everyone has worked on their games diligently all summer long and are ready to take the next step. They've all found the perfect diet. Sometimes players even grow an inch or two.


-Bball

Anthem
06-24-2008, 12:02 PM
Maybe NPH is just readying the normal mid-summer or preseason Pacer report for the Star ;)

...You know the one... Where everyone is healthy as they have been in years. Everyone has worked on their games diligently all summer long and are ready to take the next step. They've all found the perfect diet. Sometimes players even grow an inch or two.

-Bball
That's totally unfair. The Star doesn't usually run those articles until LATE summer.

But it's his only basketball-related post, which makes me think he registered just to say that. So I'm thinking inside info.

Speed
06-24-2008, 12:09 PM
Jermaine is completely healthy, and works out 5 days a week diligently. His knee is fine.

JO? Morway? Joe Quatato, don't you need elbows to type?

grace
06-24-2008, 12:21 PM
Joe Quatato, don't you need elbows to type?

I thought about nominating that for Post of the Year, but in a year no one is going to remember who he is.

NPH
06-24-2008, 09:52 PM
And his 3PT shooting is dramatically improved...

Meh, take it for what it is. His shooting is really good right now from mid range, but I have no clue on his 3pt ability as of now or if it got any better, as he doesn't take those shots. The important thing is that his defensive side of things look really good right now.


Maybe NPH is just readying the normal mid-summer or preseason Pacer report for the Star ;)
-Bball

Never even heard of the Star.



But it's his only basketball-related post, which makes me think he registered just to say that.

Was looking for some info on the trade rumors, just felt that I should try and add a little to clear things up a bit.

TheSauceMaster
06-25-2008, 12:03 AM
Jermaine is completely healthy, and works out 5 days a week diligently. His knee is fine.

Is that you J.O. ?:laugh:

imawhat
06-25-2008, 02:22 AM
http://z.about.com/d/tvcomedies/1/0/L/0/-/-/barney.jpg


????

eldubious
06-25-2008, 02:31 PM
Bucher said that Cleveland, Toronto, NJ, and NY are all in play for JO. I think all are good trading partners except NY because they don't have extra picks. The most intriuging deal to me is NJ, they could put together a deal of Jefferson, M. Williams, 21st pick, and Van Horn for JO. That by far would be the best available deal for JO. Let's not forget the Nets are putting themselves in postion for LeBron, it makes a ton of sense with JO's expiring contract.

Tom White
06-25-2008, 02:34 PM
Bucher said that Cleveland, Toronto, NJ, and NY are all in play for JO. I think all are good trading partners except NY because they don't have extra picks. The most intriuging deal to me is NJ, they could put together a deal of Jefferson, M. Williams, 21st pick, and Van Horn for JO. That by far would be the best available deal for JO. Let's not forget the Nets are putting themselves in postion for LeBron, it makes a ton of sense with JO's expiring contract.

When did he say this?

Putnam
06-25-2008, 02:41 PM
Meh, take it for what it is. His shooting is really good right now from mid range, but I have no clue on his 3pt ability as of now or if it got any better, as he doesn't take those shots. The important thing is that his defensive side of things look really good right now.


What do you mean by "right now?" Do you mean at the end of last season? Or are you saying that you've watched him in Las Vegas or talked with someone who has?


This vvvv sounds as if you have better knowledge than the rest here have. Do you?


Was looking for some info on the trade rumors, just felt that I should try and add a little to clear things up a bit.


And as others have said, Welcome.


<!-- / message -->

grace
06-25-2008, 02:58 PM
When was the last time Ric was right about a trade? I'm just wondering because I'm still waiting for JO to get traded to the Lakers.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:07 PM
Bucher is reporting a trade between the pacers and Cavs
could happen.

I don't like this one at all - will be shocked if this even is seriously discussed

JO for Wally and Anderson Verajas & 19th pick

Bucher is on Eddie and Kravitz right now

JO is the most likely big name to be moved by Thursday night.


I'm going to post something that I never have before - Pacers probably could trade Foster if the Cavs deal took place.

Shade
06-25-2008, 03:12 PM
http://z.about.com/d/tvcomedies/1/0/L/0/-/-/barney.jpg


????

Exactly. How dare people question the mighty NPH?

Shade
06-25-2008, 03:13 PM
Bucher is reporting a trade between the pacers and Cavs
could happen.

I don't like this one at all - will be shocked if this even is seriously discussed

JO for Wally and Anderson Verajas & 19th pick

Bucher is on Eddie and Kravitz right now

JO is the most likely big name to be moved by Thursday night

That trade = huge suck

I may be extremely down on this franchise after Thursday night, with the way rumors are going.

Koufos or Hibbert/Foster
Varejao/Murphy/Diogu
Granger/WallyWorld
Dunleavy/Quis/Graham
Chalmers?/Diener

Meh.

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 03:15 PM
I really, really, really don't see the logic behind the Cleveland trade.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:18 PM
I really, really, really don't see the logic behind the Cleveland trade.

Varajas allows the Pacers to trade Foster, Wally has an expiring contract. At 11 the pacers are drafting a point guard anyways. At 19 they will take the best player still there.

That is the logic behind the trade - not that I agree with it, but there is a case that can be made. Reporter from Cleveland is on Eddie and Kravitz right now

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 03:24 PM
Who says the Pacers are definetely drafting a PG at 11?

count55
06-25-2008, 03:24 PM
Varajas allows the Pacers to trade Foster, Wally has an expiring contract. At 11 the pacers are drafting a point guard anyways. At 19 they will take the best player still there.

That is the logic behind the trade - not that I agree with it, but there is a case that can be made


I really, really, really don't see the logic behind the Cleveland trade.

The Cleveland deal is definitely a financially-motivated deal...$19mm reduction in contracts (prior to the #19, which would probably be 4yrs, $6mm, 1st two guaranteed).

I think the Varejao thing is valid, but more of a rationale than a reason, and it's possible they see some short-term utility in Wally, but...ugh.

If you're going to go whole-hog on the financial angle, then I'd insist Cleveland include Snow, and we include Tinsley. This would cut $34 million in future contract commitments off of our books.

I wouldn't particularly like that deal (I hate the current one proposed), but at least you could say you cleaned up all of the headaches and can start from scratch with some financial flexibility.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:25 PM
The guy from Cleveland says it might be too much for the Cavs to give up.

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 03:25 PM
Yep, the Cleveland deal makes infinitely more sense if we can clear Tinsley's contract off the books. Which I think the Cavs could actually get behind the idea.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:29 PM
Yep, the Cleveland deal makes infinitely more sense if we can clear Tinsley's contract off the books. Which I think the Cavs could actually get behind the idea.

Everyone needs to repeat after me. No team will ever take Tinsley - I'll bet anyone any amount of money that the only way to get rid of Tinsley is to buy him out.

D-BONE
06-25-2008, 03:30 PM
The guy from Cleveland says it might be too much for the Cavs to give up.

Guess that tells us what they view JO's worth at! When I hear the guys we'd get in exchange, I cringe.

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 03:31 PM
Everyone needs to repeat after me. No team will ever take Tinsley - I'll bet anyone any amount of money that the only way to get rid of Tinsley is to buy him out.

La, la, la, la I can't hear you.:-p;)

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:32 PM
La, la, la, la I can't hear you.:-p;)

I suppose we can all dream, have to keep hope alive

D-BONE
06-25-2008, 03:33 PM
Everyone needs to repeat after me. No team will ever take Tinsley - I'll bet anyone any amount of money that the only way to get rid of Tinsley is to buy him out.

Tinsley is radioactive!!

Trader Joe
06-25-2008, 03:34 PM
Tinsley played very well under Mike Brown, and under such a demanding leader like Lebron James, I could really see him turning his life around!

Arcadian
06-25-2008, 03:34 PM
Everyone needs to repeat after me. No team will ever take Tinsley - I'll bet anyone any amount of money that the only way to get rid of Tinsley is to buy him out.

Someone has fallen off the wagon.

I honestly believe you can trade anyone in the NBA. It may be that we are better off buying Tins out.

avoidingtheclowns
06-25-2008, 03:35 PM
When was the last time Ric was right about a trade? I'm just wondering because I'm still waiting for JO to get traded to the Lakers.

ummm when? try when you spent all last season watching kobe in a bulls uniform.


I'm going to post something that I never have before - Pacers probably could trade Foster if the Cavs deal took place.

wow, dude. you okay?


Yep, the Cleveland deal makes infinitely more sense if we can clear Tinsley's contract off the books. Which I think the Cavs could actually get behind the idea.

snow, varejao, wally, #19 for JO, tinsley? can't say i like it but it makes sense financially.

Vince Neil
06-25-2008, 03:36 PM
Bucher is reporting a trade between the pacers and Cavs
could happen.

I don't like this one at all - will be shocked if this even is seriously discussed

JO for Wally and Anderson Verajas & 19th pick

Bucher is on Eddie and Kravitz right now

JO is the most likely big name to be moved by Thursday night.


I'm going to post something that I never have before - Pacers probably could trade Foster if the Cavs deal took place.


I like the deal. It gets JO off the books quickly and I believe Wally's contract expires next year. IMHO, Pacer fans overvalue JO and we are not going to get solid value for him. This is not the year 2003.

We get younger and start anew. BTW, can we lump Tins in this some how?

Tom White
06-25-2008, 03:37 PM
Exactly. How dare people question the mighty NPH?

Yeah, you're right.

He is without doubt every bit as reliable as Ric Bucher.

(Yes, I AM being sarcastic.)

Tom White
06-25-2008, 03:39 PM
Bucher is reporting a trade between the pacers and Cavs
could happen.

I don't like this one at all - will be shocked if this even is seriously discussed

JO for Wally and Anderson Verajas & 19th pick

Bucher is on Eddie and Kravitz right now

JO is the most likely big name to be moved by Thursday night.


I'm going to post something that I never have before - Pacers probably could trade Foster if the Cavs deal took place.

Fisrt, thanks for the update UB.

I'm with you on this. I really don't like that trade.

Shade
06-25-2008, 03:39 PM
Someone has fallen off the wagon.

I honestly believe you can trade anyone in the NBA. It may be that we are better off buying Tins out.

How can you fall off the wagon if you were never on it?

UB = Dwyane Wade? :hmm:

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 03:40 PM
Someone has fallen off the wagon.

I honestly believe you can trade anyone in the NBA. It may be that we are better off buying Tins out.

Yes, I'm off the wagon. Now is everyone's chance. make your bets now - it's easy money

Sure, Tinsley is tradeable. If we include Granger we could trade JT for a horrible contract.

Shade
06-25-2008, 03:42 PM
I like the deal. It gets JO off the books quickly and I believe Wally's contract expires next year. IMHO, Pacer fans overvalue JO and we are not going to get solid value for him. This is not the year 2003.

We get younger and start anew. BTW, can we lump Tins in this some how?

In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.

rexnom
06-25-2008, 03:44 PM
In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.
How are we going to trade a 22 million contract without taking back a lot of Troy Murphy-quality players/contracts?!!!

Vince Neil
06-25-2008, 03:48 PM
In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.

Let's just keep the whole team intact from last year with addition of a couple of draft picks!!!!!:dance::dance:

We pray that JO stays healthy (3rd or 4th year in row we will do this) and Tin man as well. Yeah!

That is just stupid.

count55
06-25-2008, 03:48 PM
Yes, I'm off the wagon. Now is everyone's chance. make your bets now - it's easy money

Sure, Tinsley is tradeable. If we include Granger we could trade JT for a horrible contract.

No, we could trade Tinsley for an equally or slightly more horrible contract. While nobody has any respect for Tinsley anywhere, we get someone blinded by the towering hatred we have for him here.

Somewhere else, he's just a bad contract, not Droopy McTinsleberry...and if somebody has a bad contract on a par with Tinsley's with someone they're getting zilch out of, why not take a flyer on Tinsley? They have nothing to lose.

All that being said, I think it's highly likely that Cleveland would balk at the inclusion of the Tinsley/Snow swap, and I don't know that I'd blame them. I suggested it because I had so little regard for the Wally/Varejao/19 package that I had no problem risking it being torpedoed.

However, I agree with the poster who said anyone could be traded.

Tinsley for Gazuric, for Jeffries, Tinsley and Daniels for Zack Randolph, I'm sure I could come up with more...it's all about how much pain you want to absorb coming back.

count55
06-25-2008, 03:52 PM
In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.

This is based on the assumptions that (a) he will be healthy and productive this year (which is a huge risk) and (b) that we'll be in position to take back the bloated contracts necessary to fill that $23 million.

There is absolutely no solid evidence, anywhere, that JO's value will peak next year.

Shade
06-25-2008, 04:02 PM
How are we going to trade a 22 million contract without taking back a lot of Troy Murphy-quality players/contracts?!!!

Not be stupid about it? :shrug:

There are a lot of players out there that make a lot but are more productive than Murphy or WallyWorld. We can also try to deal with a team under the cap.

Shade
06-25-2008, 04:04 PM
This is based on the assumptions that (a) he will be healthy and productive this year (which is a huge risk) and (b) that we'll be in position to take back the bloated contracts necessary to fill that $23 million.

There is absolutely no solid evidence, anywhere, that JO's value will peak next year.

Teams are offering us deals right now with the thought that "well, if JO is a bust, at least he'll be a huge expiring in a year."

Rajah Brown
06-25-2008, 04:06 PM
Seems to that we'll end up making a pretty similar deal a year from now
as the ones being kciked around now. A soon to exp contract, a young
talent, a mid-1st draft pick and filler. The only difference is that w/
only a year left on J.O.'s deal, we'd see a few other teams trying
to positin for the 2010 FA Lottery get involved. On the off chance
that J.O. plays alot and plays well this coming year, we might get
a bit better young talent and a bit better draft pick.

That's not far from a wash.

DGPR
06-25-2008, 04:12 PM
I like the Toronto trade 100 times better than the Cleveland trade.

mike_D
06-25-2008, 04:20 PM
I like the Toronto trade 100 times better than the Cleveland trade.


Me too. Like Unclebuck mentioned if this trade happens Foster is gone, probably for a future 1st round pick.

Unclebuck
06-25-2008, 04:21 PM
I have to agree with Shade on this issue. Sure discussing trades is fun and I think for many intangible reasons JO needs to be moved and the sooner the better.

But here is what I posted back in April





Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have posted these thoughts before, so I will keep it short and sweet. But after reading Kravitz column, I decided to start a thread on this topic.

Trading JO this off season would probably be the worst move the Pacers have ever made. Jo's trade value has never and will never be lower than this summer. He has two years left on his deal, so starting around the trade deadline (next February)his trade value increases slightly, and then next summer it increases by the day, and continues to increase each day during the following regular season. (and of course there is always the long shot that perhaps JO can stay a little healthier next season and that will also increase his trade value) The fact of the matter is that JO's trade value will never be any lower than it is right now.

So of course Kravitz wants the Pacers to trade JO now, and he'll be the first one to criticize the Pacers when a bad deal is made.

Sure, I think it would be best for the franchise if JO is playing somewhere else next season - but I truly believe in this situation, waiting to trade him in a year or two will help the Pacers franchise in the long run. In fact trading JO at the right time will likely be a more important decision than any draft pick the Pacers take over the next two years.

count55
06-25-2008, 04:33 PM
Trading JO this off season would probably be the worst move the Pacers have ever made. Jo's trade value has never and will never be lower than this summer. He has two years left on his deal, so starting around the trade deadline (next February)his trade value increases slightly, and then next summer it increases by the day, and continues to increase each day during the following regular season. (and of course there is always the long shot that perhaps JO can stay a little healthier next season and that will also increase his trade value) The fact of the matter is that JO's trade value will never be any lower than it is right now.


I believe this to be an assumption based on very little, if any, evidence. A very, very dangerous assumption, at that.


Teams are offering us deals right now with the thought that "well, if JO is a bust, at least he'll be a huge expiring in a year."

That may be at the back of their mind, but the reason there are offers are because teams are gambling on him being productive and (relatively) healthy.

This argument doesn't work at all for the Cleveland deal, where they'd be taking on about $15mm more in guaranteed contracts, including $14mm additional in 2009-2010.

The teams that are thinking expiring are NY and NJ, who are trying to foist Zach Randolph or Richard Jefferson on us. Those will get worse if JO spends another injury plagued year. It is very easy to see a point sometime in the next year where JO's maximum value to us comes in simply letting his contract expire and getting it off the books rather than taking back huge, onerous contracts that extend our misery.

If JO"s sole value becomes as an expiring contract, then the offers we get will make the current rumors look like spun gold.

PaceBalls
06-25-2008, 04:34 PM
I have to agree with Shade on this issue. Sure discussing trades is fun and I think for many intangible reasons JO needs to be moved and the sooner the better.

But here is what I posted back in April





Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have posted these thoughts before, so I will keep it short and sweet. But after reading Kravitz column, I decided to start a thread on this topic.

Trading JO this off season would probably be the worst move the Pacers have ever made. Jo's trade value has never and will never be lower than this summer. He has two years left on his deal, so starting around the trade deadline (next February)his trade value increases slightly, and then next summer it increases by the day, and continues to increase each day during the following regular season. (and of course there is always the long shot that perhaps JO can stay a little healthier next season and that will also increase his trade value) The fact of the matter is that JO's trade value will never be any lower than it is right now.

So of course Kravitz wants the Pacers to trade JO now, and he'll be the first one to criticize the Pacers when a bad deal is made.

Sure, I think it would be best for the franchise if JO is playing somewhere else next season - but I truly believe in this situation, waiting to trade him in a year or two will help the Pacers franchise in the long run. In fact trading JO at the right time will likely be a more important decision than any draft pick the Pacers take over the next two years.

Ok Mr. Buck,
I agree with your assessment of JO, basic business rules are "buy low sell high".
However, what are the other ramifications besides just having JO be at his lowest trade value ever. I think there are other things to factor in, which I don't really know all the ins and outs of, and could use some help from you guys with.

The main issue I see is one Danny Granger. Would JO's massive chunk of the Pacer's salary effect resigning him? I don't really think signing anyone else is a huge priority, but that also hinders being able to sign any free agent as well... Would it not be best to try to work out a deal where we can get back a big expiring deal, like Marbury to ensure we have enough cap room to resign Danny and get any nice looking free agents that might be worth pursuing.

Am I correct seeing JO and Danny's future deal possibly at odds?

Rajah Brown
06-25-2008, 04:36 PM
UB-

I remember that post and I laregly agree. I'm not sure it's quite that
critical that we wait. But your inference is correct. 12-18 months
from now, we could end up with several teams actually 'competing'
for his contract to gain the advantage in clearing space for the
Summer of 2010.

Wether LB has the patience to wait it out remains to be seen.

tadscout
06-25-2008, 04:38 PM
I like the Toronto trade 100 times better than the Cleveland trade.

The thing is it takes two to tango (or trade rather)... so what we don't know is if Toronto is still wanting to do the deal...

Peck
06-25-2008, 05:05 PM
In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.


There is this line of thinking and I am not going to disagree with it.

However, here is my fear.

Do you know why teams next season will want J.O.'s expiring contract? Yes that's right, so they can get out of the money.

Guess who else will be very tempted to do the same thing?

Why trade for an expiring contract when you have one yourself.

My fear is that if the team does not make a significant improvement in attendance this season that the Simons will be tempted to just keep the expiring contract and get out of the money.

Then J.O. just walks away and we get nothing in return. Yes the Simons save some $$ but this will not put us in any position to get free agents.

I would much rather trade J.O. for parts that we can use and still reduce salary than to have to set through another season of the "what if's" only to see him leave for nothing.

pacergod2
06-25-2008, 05:06 PM
I think we need to egt rid of dunleavy this offseason or by the deadline next year. I think he is in his prime, but I dont think the team is. He would be a perfect guy to send to a contender like phoenix or san antonio next year at the deadline and get rid of his last couple of years for an expiring and good young player from this years draft and a late first rounder.

I think that would be the best thing the pacers could do in 2008/2009.

Also Foster would be in that same boat.

LG33
06-25-2008, 05:07 PM
Varejao isn't Foster.

BillS
06-25-2008, 05:14 PM
I would much rather trade J.O. for parts that we can use and still reduce salary than to have to set through another season of the "what if's" only to see him leave for nothing.

But isn't the point of letting a contract expire so that you have those $ to spend on a big free agent? Assuming we can be far enough under the cap with other moves, wouldn't we essentially be getting that FA for JO?

Not that I agree with it, necessarily, but it isn't the "if we hold until JO expires we suck but someone else taking him and using him as an expiring contract is brilliant" hard line some might think.

count55
06-25-2008, 05:16 PM
I believe this to be an assumption based on very little, if any, evidence. A very, very dangerous assumption, at that.



That may be at the back of their mind, but the reason there are offers are because teams are gambling on him being productive and (relatively) healthy.

This argument doesn't work at all for the Cleveland deal, where they'd be taking on about $15mm more in guaranteed contracts, including $14mm additional in 2009-2010.

The teams that are thinking expiring are NY and NJ, who are trying to foist Zach Randolph or Richard Jefferson on us. Those will get worse if JO spends another injury plagued year. It is very easy to see a point sometime in the next year where JO's maximum value to us comes in simply letting his contract expire and getting it off the books rather than taking back huge, onerous contracts that extend our misery.

If JO"s sole value becomes as an expiring contract, then the offers we get will make the current rumors look like spun gold.

First, I want to apologize for this post...it was a little (perhaps more than a little) rude.

However, I believe that teams that are bidding on JO now are bidding primarily on the possibility that he can return to a reasonable degree of health and productivity, and help them make a leap. They're mitigating the risk with the fact that JO's contract expires in two years, but their primary interest in taking a shot at JO the player. (This would be especially true for Toronto and Cleveland.)

I believe that JO's value will peak later only if he plays a relatively productive and healthy 2008-2009 campaign. This would be trending towards 70+ games, 16-18pts, 8-10 board, 2+ blocks by the time the trade deadline comes around.

However, if he cannot be reliably healthy, or is plays, but is unproductive, then his value shrinks to simply that of an expiring contract. I believe the difference between that potential peak and the offers available this summer must be judged against the risk of a repeat of the 2007-2008 season and its accompanying decline in value.

I think the Toronto deal is acceptable under this measurement, but the Cleveland deal is borderline.

I cannot imagine why a large expiring contract on a player who has no value as a player would bring a more favorable package than a player who another team could see as risky, but a potential difference maker for their team, that also happens to have an contract that expires for the big FA summer of 2010.

All of this, as UB mentioned, ignores the potential intangible benefits that might come from just moving on from JO.

eldubious
06-25-2008, 05:38 PM
The teams that are thinking expiring are NY and NJ, who are trying to foist Zach Randolph or Richard Jefferson on us. Those will get worse if JO spends another injury plagued year. It is very easy to see a point sometime in the next year where JO's maximum value to us comes in simply letting his contract expire and getting it off the books rather than taking back huge, onerous contracts that extend our misery.

If JO"s sole value becomes as an expiring contract, then the offers we get will make the current rumors look like spun gold.

NJ makes alot of sense to me, they want to clear money for LeBron, so JO's expiring contract is gold to them. Also, they have the best package to offer. I believe the Pacers should get some value in return, rather than just expiring contracts and picks, which would be the only thing they'll get a year from now.

madison
06-25-2008, 05:43 PM
Are we looking at a JO trade value upside down? Seems to me his highest value to another team is his potential to contribute to their success next season. Their insurance policy is his expiring contract if it turns out he's truly injured.

Hicks
06-25-2008, 05:48 PM
But isn't the point of letting a contract expire so that you have those $ to spend on a big free agent? Assuming we can be far enough under the cap with other moves, wouldn't we essentially be getting that FA for JO?

Not that I agree with it, necessarily, but it isn't the "if we hold until JO expires we suck but someone else taking him and using him as an expiring contract is brilliant" hard line some might think.

Wouldn't work that way; JO leaving would just bring us in that "no man's land" range where we are either just a bit over the cap, or under it to where the money we have to throw at a free agent is LOWER than the M.L.E., which is a bad place to be.