PDA

View Full Version : The aftermath of the draft makes dunleavy expendable



gknjr007
06-27-2008, 12:03 AM
Ive grown to love dunleavy, but after how we drafted rush, i see us using dunleavy and perhaps another player of ours to trade for a good power forward. Then i feel our core will be complet.

DisapointedPacerFan
06-27-2008, 12:19 AM
Bird has already gone to call Dunleavy and Granger 'untouchable' and 'too valuable to trade away'. So yea, we basically ****ed ourselves here.

Coop
06-27-2008, 12:24 AM
So what can a package of Dunleavy and Foster net us? A future pick + a young PF I hope.

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 12:24 AM
More than likely Shawne will be traded, and Granger and Dun and Rush will fill every single swingman minute.

Hopefully Rush is good enough to start right away and play like 20-25 mpg. Dun won't complain about being in the running for 6th man of the year.


So what can a package of Dunleavy and Foster net us? A future pick + a young PF I hope.

I'd rather be talking about trading Shawne and Foster together. One reliable vet and one "potential" player. Surely that'd intrigue some team, possibly get us a protected first.

duke dynamite
06-27-2008, 01:02 AM
I am not to sure about Rush starting off the bat. I do think that Mike will not mind coming off the bench. We do have a strong swingman combination now, and I would love to see it that way.

Maybe given a little flexibility and more opportunities to rest, Dun Dun may have more time to perfect his D and maybe become more consistent.

Hoop
06-27-2008, 01:08 AM
I agree with duke and SIG, Dun will be good as a 6th man. Or maybe Rush gets eased into the starting lineup, like Reggie was. Reggie played behind a pretty decent John Long till late in the season his rookie year.

BoomBaby31
06-27-2008, 01:23 AM
I hope we can keep Dun and still get a decent PF, we need a good 6th man and Rush or Dun should do that job well. Our future is bright, ready to start the bring back AL thread ? j/k j/k j/k!!!

Isaac
06-27-2008, 01:27 AM
I would like to keep Dun. We were one of the better scoring teams in the league last year, and Dunleavy was a big reason for that.

I don't see the season he had last year as his best year and a year we need to capitalize off of and move him, I think that was the real Dunleavy.

Brandon Rush is going to score and defend for us off the bench next year, he's a good player, but we have proven wings already.

We do need to get a new power forward though.

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 01:56 AM
With a guy as big as Hibbert at center, I am interested in playing shawne at the 4 spot. Could be an interesting experiment. It fits Obrien's plan of having 4 perimeter players surrounding a large post presence in the middle. Hibbert is actually a better fit in that scheme than JO.

As far as Dunleavy goes, it seems a bit premature. Rush is not exactly ready to come in and start right away. Potentially I could see keeping all three. Rush seems like a guy who will be a role player type starter, but a defensive improvement over Dunleavy. In this case, Dunleavy could play a great ginobli style 6th man role off the bench. I think that could work really well. I think Dunleavy is overall more talented than Rush, at least offensively.

Ford/Jack
Rush/Dunleavy
Granger/Dunleavy
Williams/Murphy
Hibbert/Foster

That is a 9 man rotation I would love to watch eventually.

Hoop
06-27-2008, 03:08 AM
With a guy as big as Hibbert at center, I am interested in playing shawne at the 4 spot. Could be an interesting experiment. It fits Obrien's plan of having 4 perimeter players surrounding a large post presence in the middle. Hibbert is actually a better fit in that scheme than JO.

As far as Dunleavy goes, it seems a bit premature. Rush is not exactly ready to come in and start right away. Potentially I could see keeping all three. Rush seems like a guy who will be a role player type starter, but a defensive improvement over Dunleavy. In this case, Dunleavy could play a great ginobli style 6th man role off the bench. I think that could work really well. I think Dunleavy is overall more talented than Rush, at least offensively.

Ford/Jack
Rush/Dunleavy
Granger/Dunleavy
Williams/Murphy
Hibbert/Foster

That is a 9 man rotation I would love to watch eventually.
I'd like to see Shawne at the 4 also. He just needs to be able to play the 4 defensively, his offense role can stay basically the same. If he's here or not depends on if TPTB think Shawne made a few mistakes or is he really a knuckle head. If he can't play the 4 I think he needs moved regardless.

beast23
06-27-2008, 03:09 AM
According to Bird's comments in Wednesday's Star:

"Bird said he has had '"enough" of forward Shawne Williams, and they will trade him if the can get something in return. Williams is on "very thin ice" if they can't find a taker for him, Bird said."

That pretty much seals it for me. Williams is not part of future plans and he is all but gone. Any depth chart that includes him would be inaccurate.

Tinsley will be traded if we can find a sucker, or he will be bought out.

I am a huge BRush fan, but he's not going to be starting for the Pacers in the near term. With injuries, he will get a few starts this year. But follow his growth and look for additional roster movement next summer to open up additional time for him the following season.

The big question for the Pacers will be how quickly BRush and Hibbert can improve to compel the Pacers to increase their playing time.

Other than that, who will play PF? The primary bigs entering the season will still be Murphy and Foster, with additional contributions from Nesterovic and Baston.

Since Williams and Tinsley are out of favor, it would seem the Pacers are attempting to use them, along with possibly Harrison and Daniels to get a PF.

If Daniels is traded, I would think that would be the key to BRush getting additional playing time as a rookie.

PR07
06-27-2008, 03:10 AM
I don't think we can afford to lose Dunleavy without adding a proven scorer in the process. Granger can't be the only 18+ ppg scorer, and I'd rather ease Rush in as the 6th man for a season or so. What big guy can Dunleavy even get us? The market seems a little bare.

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 03:33 AM
I still think the tough talk toward shawne is more for PR purposes. Bird drafted shawne for his potential, and he showed flashes last year, I think it is too early to give up on him just yet.

I could be wrong I suppose, we will see. My guess is Shawne is still a pacer next year...

If he gets in any trouble again, he is surely done, however.

PR07
06-27-2008, 03:56 AM
Is Gerald Wallace available? Some sort of package with Dunleavy doesn't seem too far-fetched. Wallace would be an excellent 4 in an uptempo system.

QuickRelease
06-27-2008, 07:57 AM
Bird has already gone to call Dunleavy and Granger 'untouchable' and 'too valuable to trade away'. So yea, we basically ****ed ourselves here.

I disagree. After thinking the Bayless trade through, I have to say I was concerned about our defense with a backcourt of Bayless/Ford. This deal makes us a deeper team, plus it has a hometown flair with McRoberts coming back. Either Rush or Dunleavy can be excellent utility guys coming off the bench. This gives us great versatility with the 2nd unit. Plus we have a stronger defensive team with Rush, Jack, added to Foster and Williams (I hope we don't give him away for nothing). I do think O'Brien will need to demonstrate his flexibility as a coach, but this trade is starting to grow on me. I will say that I think Bayless has more star power, and he will be the better scorer. But Rush won't be a flush down the toilet selection. He's a strong player. I wonder if we'll re-sign Kareem for sentimental reasons. Wouldn't that have been funny, if we'd taken Joey Graham back from Toronto, while re-signing Kareem? We could have had the family reunion second unit.

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 08:34 AM
I agree that Dun might be the odd man out with Bird drafting Rush, but not necessarily this year. Rush, being a young player, would probably have no problem coming off the bench this year and maybe next. But if he starts to show promise, then Dun will be on the block.

Plax80
06-27-2008, 08:43 AM
Ive grown to love dunleavy, but after how we drafted rush, i see us using dunleavy and perhaps another player of ours to trade for a good power forward. Then i feel our core will be complet.


The core will be complete for a 22 win team.

Brandon Rush isn't as good as his brother right now so I don't see why its abig priority to have him start unless you are going to tank the season from day 1.

Williams should play the 4 which is about the only positive thing I have to say from the last 2 days of activity.

And I'm okay with trading Dun for picks and cap space although he is probably my favorite Pacer. Why win 28 games and pick 7th-10th next year.........win 16 and pick 1-4.

At least larry has a shot in the dark of picking someone good with our pick in that range.

QuickRelease
06-27-2008, 08:49 AM
I hope we can keep Dun and still get a decent PF, we need a good 6th man and Rush or Dun should do that job well. Our future is bright, ready to start the bring back AL thread ? j/k j/k j/k!!!


:plot:

QuickRelease
06-27-2008, 08:52 AM
Brandon Rush isn't as good as his brother right now

How do you figure that?

QuickRelease
06-27-2008, 09:00 AM
The core will be complete for a 22 win team.

Brandon Rush isn't as good as his brother right now so I don't see why its abig priority to have him start unless you are going to tank the season from day 1.

Williams should play the 4 which is about the only positive thing I have to say from the last 2 days of activity.

And I'm okay with trading Dun for picks and cap space although he is probably my favorite Pacer. Why win 28 games and pick 7th-10th next year.........win 16 and pick 1-4.

At least larry has a shot in the dark of picking someone good with our pick in that range.

See, I don't understand this line of thinking. The core that was instrumental in getting 37 wins is still intact: Granger, Dun, Jeff. Add to that a better point guard (Ford), a better big man presence (Hibbert), better depth and play at the backup PG (Jack), better bench support (Rush, Baston, Daniels), we'll be better defensively, and you somehow parlay that into 15 less wins? What am I missing?

Mourning
06-27-2008, 09:09 AM
I think we need to think about the future salary stucture of this team first. We have Rasho and Marquis going into their last years, Jarret Jack aswell I understood and, offcourse, Danny.

I would like to know how much we would probably have left from those two expirings if we resign both Jack and Danny and then with our players yearly raises (except Dun Dun. IF memory serves me right his salary doesn't go up, but could be wrong here) how much we still have left.

It's important, because if it's nothing to a minimum then both Quis and Rasho are unlikely to be used in trades respectively this summer (Quis) or in february (Quis or Rasho) and they should be removed from any trade scenario.

It's clear to me the PF spot is not what I want it to be (to put it VERY mildly). What we have to offer realistically IF we want a quality or decent PF back are a combination of the following:

- Dun Dun (not very likely, especially if Shawne is traded aswell and Quis expires)

- Shawne. Starting to look very likely unless JOB and Bird want to give him a last chance by letting him atleast partially man the PF spot.

- Tinsley. Nuff said. Is not going to net us anything valuable unless maybe if he's part of a trade for a high salary player, but we would have to give up something really nice to make it worthwhile for the our trade partner).

- Next years firstrounder. NOT happy about even considering this, but it's a chip of importance anyway you look at it.

- A list of second and third stringers with not much value. Think Diener, etc. Not something to lose sleep over I would say.

One thing I will say though. Our backcourt got fixed REALLY quick and I do like that. Also getting back Baston is something I like and I think he fits in our system very well, not a superb player, but very usefull.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 09:41 AM
I'm sorry, but no one could watch Brandon Rush and Kareem Rush play basketball and come away thinking Kareem is the better player. Brandon is smarter, more athletic, a better defender, and a much better finisher at the rim. Kareem MIGHT be the better 3 pt. shooter. Maybe.

Mourning
06-27-2008, 10:08 AM
I'm sorry, but no one could watch Brandon Rush and Kareem Rush play basketball and come away thinking Kareem is the better player. Brandon is smarter, more athletic, a better defender, and a much better finisher at the rim. Kareem MIGHT be the better 3 pt. shooter. Maybe.

Aggreed.

DGPR
06-27-2008, 10:17 AM
I wonder what Christmas will be like at the Rush house this year if Kareem isn't re-signed by the Pacers?

Kareem: So Brandon how do you like my old job?

Brandon: I love it...

Kareem: I'm going to kill you.

owl
06-27-2008, 01:53 PM
See, I don't understand this line of thinking. The core that was instrumental in getting 37 wins is still intact: Granger, Dun, Jeff. Add to that a better point guard (Ford), a better big man presence (Hibbert), better depth and play at the backup PG (Jack), better bench support (Rush, Baston, Daniels), we'll be better defensively, and you somehow parlay that into 15 less wins? What am I missing?

You're not missing anything. You've got it right.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 02:31 PM
Dunleavy was expendable before the draft. A Dunleavy/Bayless backcourt would have been decent... I could have lived with it as our team of the future. But Dunleavy/Ford? We're going to get punished every trip down the floor. There's not a backcourt in the league that we're going to hold below their average.

So yeah, I'd not shed a tear if we moved Dunleavy, assuming we got something decent back in return.

andreialta
06-27-2008, 02:42 PM
the way mike played last year, i dont think a 6th man role is what they are thinking, I've read somewhere that JOB wants Mike and Danny to work on their conditioning more thn last year. MIke was able to play a lot of minutes earlier in the year and you can see him getting tired by the 4th quarter, same thing with Danny, i think the drafting of Rush is just to back up Mike or Danny off the bench. I don't think Mike will go off the bench soon.

jcouts
06-27-2008, 02:52 PM
Mike will still be the starter st SG. The big difference this year is that when Danny goes out of the game, instead of Pierce, Kobe or some other star suddenly scoring 15 points effortlessly in 3 minutes, they will face a much greater challenge against Rush's defense.

That is the biggest reason I like Rush as our selection instead of Bayless.

tadscout
06-27-2008, 02:55 PM
Mike will still be the starter st SG. The big difference this year is that when Danny goes out of the game, instead of Pierce, Kobe or some other star suddenly scoring 15 points effortlessly in 3 minutes, they will face a much greater challenge against Rush's defense.

That is the biggest reason I like Rush as our selection instead of Bayless.

That deserves a :dance::happydanc