PDA

View Full Version : Odd thoughts post the draft of 2008



Peck
06-27-2008, 01:48 AM
What a day this has been.

I'm just going to say it now, Bird is in charge and as of right now I like it.

This was one of the if not the most active draft days our team has ever had and I think in less than a 24 hour period Larry/David have managed to take our team from being a lower tier going nowhere franchise to being mediocre but at least with a direction.

Needless to say as you can imagine I am more than thrilled with the Raptors trade.

But before I get into breaking down the nights events for you I want to share some things.

I went to the fieldhouse tonight and let me tell you, there was a positive buzz in there. More than I have seen in years and I mean years.

When I was on the main concourse people of all types were talking about hte team and how excited they were for the new future. To me this didn't seem like people speaking out of the sides of their mouths, these people seemed genuinely happy for the first time in years about this team.

As the draft proceded you could feel the excitement level build and when Westbrook jumped all the way up to 4 there was almost a gasp that went across the fieldhouse.

There was some slight hope that Gordon was going to drop down to us but that was dashed quickly.

But as soon as our good friend Walsh picked Gallinari the section I was in once again began to light up. There was some serious hope of Lopez falling to us then when the Bucks picked Alexander and the Bobcats took Augustine we knew that one of two players we wanted would be there for us.

Of course there was also the real fear the Koufos would be called, but we were still hopefull.

Then Lopez went, a little sad but still that mean that Bayless was on the board.

Then came the announcement. Bayless name was called and our entire section erupted.

People were still talking and happy when out came Herb Simon and Jim O'Brien.

They got a very good round of applause btw. Herb spoke quietly and very breifly and turned over the mic to Jim.

While several people in our section were talking we heard Jim start talking about not thinking who is picked is who is picked. I immediatley said what the ****, is he talking about the 11 or is he talking about the 17? But we didn't know so everybody assumed that he meant the 17 or maybe he was even talking about something else. Nobody knew.

A few other picks go by, and by now we weren't paying as much attention to each pick and I was being lectured by kegboy about Bayless as I had no idea who he was or anything about him.

Then came Hibbert with the 17th pick. You would have thought we drafted the second coming with the reaction this got in the fieldhouse. I have no idea why but this was very popular. I think people were just thrilled because in one day we got rid of an albatross, replaced a useless point guard and now took a player to play center.

We were milling about in our section and everyone was universally happy. I mean even Kegboy was mildly impressed with the night so far.

Then it came.

It came like an F 5 Tornado striking a small town.

ESPN comes on and states that the Pacers have trade Bayless & etc., etc. to the Blazers.

The entire life was sucked out of our section. We had to have counciling sessions with Suaveness to keep him from jumping off of the balcony.

There were a lot of dejected and unhappy people at that moment.

However there were some of us, mostly me :), who were still riding high on the fact that we had traded away Jermaine O'Neal.

So the debate began. Kegboy and Seth presented their case that Rush was who we needed all along.

Then BillS actually spoke with Slick, who said that Rush is who he wanted all night long.

So we went from high to low to back to middle ground.

I was still on a high as you would have had to have told me that they traded Granger for Artest to get me to come down after having the O'Neal trade finalized.

But overall even the most ardent hater of the trade and the biggest lover of the trade had to admit one thing.

Donnie Walsh was no longer in charge of this team. These were large bold strokes, strokes made by people who were not content and people who were willing to make change for the sake of change.

Now the truth is this, I have no idea who is better Bayless or Rush.

But I do know this. Bird/Morraway took Bayless with the intention of leveraging him for other players they wanted.

Brilliant in my opinion. According to Slick and our ticket rep who was with us, Rush is who they wanted all along. So if that is the case they got who they wanted, got another point guard in the process and unloaded a player who had no use to the team.

Rush & Bayless as of right now are a wash, that won't be able to be told for a couple of years assuming that neither of them either blow up or bomb out.

However we traded the 12th and sometimes 13th player on our team for a player who will without a doubt be in the top 8 rotation and provide us depth at a position that we have soarly lacked in for awhile.

So again in one day we have obtained starting point guard, his backup or heck let them fight it out to see who wins and worst case scenario you have more trade tools for the future. We got even more under the cap as I believe that Jack is slightly less than Ike.

We got rid of two powerforwards, one of which was never going to work here (or probably there either as I don't see how he gets any min. behind the Blazers frontline) and one which was just dragging our entire team down in salary and unfullfilled promise.

We obtained two centers, one who might be able to start or he might be part of another package. The other is young and large and can replace Harrison right now on the roster.

We got a player we can cut as I believe he is not signed. We will probably invite him to camp and see where it goes but at least we have no long term commitment to him.

We have officially made Jamaal obsolete. He is not even needed here as a backup.

That to me is what I still find exciting, no not the fact of getting rid of Tins although that does make me happy. But the fact is this, we are not done.

We can't be, we now have to many players under contract and I think we are still going to make some moves. Probably not earth shattering moves, but you have to ask yourself. Where does Daniels fit into any of this? The answer is nowhere. Do we keep Foster or use him as part of another deal? Who knows. Doug kept trying to give him away all night long.

I made the statement at the fieldhouse and I will stand behind it now. I think the fieldhouse will be differant next year. It won't be filled, not even close.

But I do beleive with all of my heart that there will be more fans present and that it will not be the funeral parlor it has been for the past few years.

I think the common fans will start to notice that the same old characters aren't here. I think the new players and the new attitude and p.r. from the team will take hold.

Again, I'm not saying full house or even 3/4 full, but it won't be the 1/4 full we had last season.

Overall, this was a great day to be a Pacers fan.

I am thrilled beyond my wildest expectations.

Shade
06-27-2008, 01:52 AM
When Denari came out after the Bayless trade was announced, there were a good number of boos. It certainly deflated a lot of fans, myself included.

Whtwudusay
06-27-2008, 01:57 AM
Thanks for that post, Peck. It was insightful and enjoyable.

Since86
06-27-2008, 02:04 AM
Once again, Peck you summed up my thoughts way better than I ever could.

Out of all the *****ing and moaning in the other thread, I loved the move. #11 was too high for Rush, but being able to get more pieces out of Bayless was the right thing to do. Get him to a team that wants him, and fill multiple needs at the same time.

I think people are making too big of a deal about Jack not even being a starter in Portland. Steve Blake started over him. I know the reaction is, "Yes, he couldn't even start over Steve Blake," but every where he's been, he's been the starter. He's not some push over. Blake is a very fine PG. Not close to an all star caliber but he wins starting jobs every where he's been.

tadscout
06-27-2008, 02:09 AM
Thanks for that post, Peck. It was insightful and enjoyable.

:iagree:

Shade
06-27-2008, 02:09 AM
Rush & Bayless as of right now are a washWith all due respect, Peck, they are most certainly not a wash. Bayless is a much better player than Rush.

The only thing that would make this a win for us is if Bayless does indeed have attitude issues that surface. Because, in terms of talent, Bayless is the better player.

immortality
06-27-2008, 02:11 AM
If anything our backcourt look pretty good while our frontline blows

Isaac
06-27-2008, 02:13 AM
The fact of the matter is:

Ford/Jack is a very good PG rotation.

Rush will be an excellent player off the bench behind Dunleavy and Granger, making Williams and/or Daniels expendable.

Hibbert is going to be our starting center for a long time. He is better than people realize.

We still need a PF.

Tinsley is on his way out.

Overall this was a good day.

Robertmto
06-27-2008, 02:16 AM
It was nice seeing everybody there, glad none of us took the plunge off the balcony

croz24
06-27-2008, 02:17 AM
more "pieces" for bayless? who are the "pieces" of which you speak? a backup in jarrett jack? a piece of trash in mcroberts? c'mon, we got NOTHING in return for bayless.

nice post though peck.

imawhat
06-27-2008, 02:21 AM
more "pieces" for bayless? who are the "pieces" of which you speak? a backup in jarrett jack? a piece of trash on mcroberts? c'mon, we got NOTHING in return for bayless.

nice post though peck.

If I were Larry Bird, I would try to get Arthur out of this deal as well. I have a Rush mancrush, but losing Bayless is huge. In this case, we have a better looking trade.

imawhat
06-27-2008, 02:22 AM
Thanks for the Conseco recap. Wish I could've been there.

immortality
06-27-2008, 02:23 AM
yea darrel arthur would have been nice if could have got pick from blazers =)

Shade
06-27-2008, 02:23 AM
Envisioning Hibbert and Murphy on the floor at the same time makes me want to take a nap.

imawhat
06-27-2008, 02:25 AM
yea darrel arthur would have been nice if could have got pick from blazers =)

Actually, Blazers have sent Arthur to Houston Rockets (NO JOKE). *&^%

imawhat
06-27-2008, 02:26 AM
Actually, Blazers have sent Arthur to Houston Rockets (NO JOKE). *&^%

And then Houston sent Arthur to Memphis!

CableKC
06-27-2008, 02:29 AM
I think people are making too big of a deal about Jack not even being a starter in Portland. Steve Blake started over him. I know the reaction is, "Yes, he couldn't even start over Steve Blake," but every where he's been, he's been the starter. He's not some push over. Blake is a very fine PG. Not close to an all star caliber but he wins starting jobs every where he's been.
There is a reason why Blake started over Jack this season.

Blake was a guy picked by the current Blazer regime....I think Kevin Prichard....Jarrett Jack was picked by the previous GM....whoever that was.

I don't get the impression that Blake was better then Jack...or that Jack wasn't any good.....from what I read...Jack simply wasn't the guy that the Blazers wanted anymore. That's why he was shopped heavily to the Nets when Kidd was on the block.

imawhat
06-27-2008, 02:32 AM
I really like Jack. He's not flashy, but he's very solid, overall. He also hits big shots.

I'd take him over Blake in a split second.

Robertmto
06-27-2008, 02:34 AM
And then Houston sent Arthur to Memphis!

link?

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 02:35 AM
more "pieces" for bayless? who are the "pieces" of which you speak? a backup in jarrett jack? a piece of trash in mcroberts? c'mon, we got NOTHING in return for bayless.

nice post though peck.

Jarret Jack is the perfect backup for Ford, the two will compensate for one another's weaknesses perfectly.

Bayless, while very talented, is still not a true point gaurd. I like that we have a very strong PG rotation with two true PG's. I admit I was initially dissapointed with the Bayless trade, but after some reflection I can see its benifits.

It seems like talentwise Brandon Rush is very similar to his brother, however, he seems to have the intangibles his brother lacks. He is a champion. He is also a defensive updgrade over dunleavy. I really hope we keep Dunleavy and run him as manu style sixth man. That would be a very strong wing rotation IMO.

Our team is a lot better defensively.

CableKC
06-27-2008, 02:38 AM
link?
I don't have a link...but I heard the same thing on the radio...they swapped Arthur for Bantum.

burnzone
06-27-2008, 02:42 AM
link?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/news/story?id=3460866

Here's the link to ESPN's draft trades page.

Portland traded Arthur and Joey Dorsey to Houston for Nicolas Batum, and then Houston traded Arthur to Memphis for Donte Greene.

Robertmto
06-27-2008, 02:51 AM
Portland puttin in work still....

CableKC
06-27-2008, 03:09 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/news/story?id=3460866

Here's the link to ESPN's draft trades page.

Portland traded Arthur and Joey Dorsey to Houston for Nicolas Batum, and then Houston traded Arthur to Memphis for Donte Greene.
Geez....with the apparent lack of frontcourt depth that the Rockets have whenever Yao goes down with injury......which is as frequent as JONeal....you figured that they would have drafted a Center or a solid Big Man.

croz24
06-27-2008, 03:39 AM
let's see...

jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____

Shade
06-27-2008, 03:42 AM
let's see...

jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____

MVP?

croz24
06-27-2008, 04:29 AM
IF bayless was selected #4, as was projected up until last week (just a few days ago really), does anybody actually think seattle would have traded #4 for the #13, jack, and mcbaby?

it's funny because minny was even rumored to be drafting him for a while at #3.

bayless was a top 5 talent in the draft who fell due to nba gms relying too much on workouts to determine who they should draft, as opposed to actual game tape. did we even bring bayless in for a workout?

indygeezer
06-27-2008, 07:40 AM
I asked the gang last night and I'll ask again.

If 48 hrs ago someone would have told you that at the end of the day, the P's would have Rush, Hibbert, Ford, and Jack....would you have been happy or ****ed? My only question at this point is, Who is going to play PF, Foster? Otherwise it is a nice blend of rookies and young vets.

Jack is essential to having Ford on the team. He gives us a quality 1 in the event that Ford is injured for any length of time. Hibbert, I'm convinced, was the best big out there at the time and it was the 17th pick not the 1st or even the 7th.

rexnom
06-27-2008, 07:50 AM
Can we please at least be happy that we drafted Bayless, who had higher value than anybody else on the board? This team finally has a vision, something we've been wanting for a LOOOONG time and now that we have that, I'm gonna give it the benefit of the doubt. Bayless doesn't fit in that vision. Rush and Jack do.

Mourning
06-27-2008, 07:59 AM
Ok. I have slept over it and I did calm down. I DO like Rush, but for me to like this trade one or both of two things need to happen:

1. Rush better be a defensive ACE. I'm not talking a decent defender, I'm talking one of the best perimeter defenders in the league.

2. Bayless better not become close to an all-star.

I find it remarkable that some people like to detract from Bayless as a arrogant and ego-centric player, while praising Portland for all of its moves the last few years. IF Portland has such a good view on things why would they trade their pick just two picks lower then ours AND a decent back up PG for a ego-centric and arrogant player?

Doesn't make sense to me and sounds like talking yourself into liking this trade. I still don't, but I can accept it. Like I said Rush better be a damn good perimeter defender and not just above average.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

indygeezer
06-27-2008, 08:16 AM
I just finished reading all of the threads and can only conclude that we just drafted some skinny kid out of UCLA instead of the local hero from IU.

I haven't heard this much teeth gnashing since way bck then, so this draft/trade is obviously the right thing to have done.

grace
06-27-2008, 08:20 AM
I have to give Larry credit. He has started down the long, long road of getting me to be a Pacers fan again. I've always like Jack and think he can do well for the Pacers.

Now before anyone thinks I've mellowed, I haven't. I still don't like Bird and don't see that changing no matter who he drafts or trades for.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 08:40 AM
I just finished reading all of the threads and can only conclude that we just drafted some skinny kid out of UCLA instead of the local hero from IU.

I haven't heard this much teeth gnashing since way bck then, so this draft/trade is obviously the right thing to have done.
:) Let's hope so.

RWB
06-27-2008, 08:44 AM
2. Bayless better not become close to an all-star.


Then you'll be very happy. Now that the storm has passed the pundits are now saying only the top two picks will reach status. Everyone else in this draft are/will be average.

Unclebuck
06-27-2008, 08:49 AM
Shade, I don't know how you can be so sure that Bayless is better than Rush. (maybe in college he was) But who knows about who will better in the NBA. The NBA is a different game so who really knows right now.

I went back and watched the draft from the 11th pick through the time the trade was announced and I really liked what I heard about Rush. He's a legitimate shooting guard size - 6'6", great three point shooter, excellent defender. That all sounds very good to me. And I really like Jack

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 08:58 AM
IF bayless was selected #4, as was projected up until last week (just a few days ago really), does anybody actually think seattle would have traded #4 for the #13, jack, and mcbaby?

it's funny because minny was even rumored to be drafting him for a while at #3.

bayless was a top 5 talent in the draft who fell due to nba gms relying too much on workouts to determine who they should draft, as opposed to actual game tape. did we even bring bayless in for a workout?

Bayless has been dropping pretty consistently for the past week which is what makes his scenario different from Granger's who saw some of his highest rankings a couple days before the draft.

Roaming Gnome
06-27-2008, 09:10 AM
more "pieces" for bayless? who are the "pieces" of which you speak? a backup in jarrett jack? a piece of trash in mcroberts? c'mon, we got NOTHING in return for bayless.

nice post though peck.


let's see...

jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____



Enough with the belly aching about the trade, already. I will not let this thead be hijacked into a bit*h fest! There are many other threads that are more suitable to the whining.

In this thread, It Stops Now!!!

Mourning
06-27-2008, 09:14 AM
Ok. Sunshiners this thread has been cleared for ya'll.

Speed
06-27-2008, 09:18 AM
Found this summary on Ike from a Portland site, um, I think it's Ike...


Ike Diogu 6’8” 255lb PF, 24 years old: Diogu is something of an underrated player as his stats have not been impressive in his first three years. He started out well in <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = ST1 /><ST1:PLACE u1:st="on">Golden <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-default/ /><ST1:PLACENAME u1:st=<st1:PlaceName w:st=" /><ST1:PLACETYPE u1:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">State</st1:PlaceType></ST1:PLACETYPE></ST1:p, shooting around 53%, scoring 7 points, and netting 3.5 rebounds in about 14 minutes per game. After he was traded to <ST1:STATE u1:st="on"><ST1:PLACE u1:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on"><ST1:pIndiana</ST1:p</st1:State></ST1:PLACE></ST1:STATE> his production slimmed somewhat and his minutes decreased. He was injured last year and only played in 30 games. Diogu’s offensive game is pretty much limited to post and effort points. He can shoot a little face-up jumper but he doesn’t take it much. He’s a great rebounder, especially on the offensive end. He’s a super-high energy guy, so much so that he has to be reined in on defense so he won’t commit constant fouls. One of the big knocks on him is that he doesn’t know how to use his body effectively on either end of the court. He often substitutes fury when a little calculated leverage is all that’s needed. He also has trouble prosecuting offensive opportunities. He’s not going to be a big-minute guy if he sticks with the Blazers but he gives the team a dimensions (craziness, energy, offensive rebounding) that they currently lack.</ST1:PLACE>
<ST1:PLACE u1:st="on">
Diogu is in his third year, and thus is due a qualifying offer or restricted free agency next season just as Jarrett Jack was. If we retain him through the summer of 2009 he will either cost $3.95 million for the qualifying offer, $8.7 million in a cap hold, or whatever we can renegotiate his contract for. This is actually slightly more than Jack would have cost.<O:p</O:p
</ST1:PLACE>

Jose Slaughter
06-27-2008, 10:29 AM
When I got home from the draft last night & logged in to see if there were any surprises during the last half of the 2nd round, then headed off to bed.

I must have gotten up sometime during the night & had a drink of kool-aide because I'm seeing things slightly different this morning.

As soon as Charlotte picked Augustine at 9 that left is either Lopez or Bayless. I was completely surprised at one of them would be on the board at 11. All reports I had seen had pointed to Jersey wanting to go big at 10, makes sence since they just brought in Devin Harris in the middle of last season to be their point guard of the future.

That left Bayless, another gift, falling into our laps at 11. The basketball gods were now looking down on us with pity instead of using us as their cosmic haggey sack.

Then came the trade annoucement.

Peck was right, the air was sucked out of the fieldhouse. Bird was on the road to redemption & then did this!

First of all I've made it clear that I thought Bird was gunning for Rush all along. Especially after the TJ Ford trade I thought Rush made the most sence.

Heres where the kool-aide must have kicked in.

If you had told me 24 hours ago that we would come out of this draft with Brandon Rush & Roy Hibbert & would have been very very happy.

I also looked at it this way too. We traded Ike Diogu, a player that was not in O'Brien's plans, for Jarrett Jack, a guy that should now be nick named Magic Man because he made an entire point guard disappear!

Peck once again was right.

In just under 48 hours we moved the unmoveable contract for a starting point guard, starting & backup centers and a little much needed depth at power forward.

Added a true shooting guard with range & depth at point. Making Tinsley & Harrison only very bad memeories.

Add in the cap savings & PR benefits & this did indeed turn out to be the fresh start we've been looking for for far too long.

idioteque
06-27-2008, 10:30 AM
let's see...

jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____

Third times the charm?

Doug in CO
06-27-2008, 10:42 AM
Update: in spite of my efforts, still no takers for Foster - I asked a few local rec teams at the Y... they say that they alreay have sideshow Bob come out once in a while... and Foster could not carry his jock... I disagreed and think that would be a wonderful career change for him.

ChicagoJ
06-27-2008, 11:57 AM
let's see...

jaron rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

kareem rush - highly touted college player turns out nba bust

brandon rush - highly touted college player turns out nba _____

Perhaps Brandon learned that the matador defense his big brothers played wasn't going to cut it.

Have you watched him play at both ends of the court? He's not the same player as his big brothers.

If you would have told me after the Final Four that he was the player the Pacers would get - I'd have been thrilled. I haven't had private workouts for these guys, and I don't get entralled with measurements like vertical jump and wingspan. This guy is a player.

He's got something else other than defense that we haven't seen from Jaron/ Kareem - he plays better in big games and big moments.

LoneGranger33
06-27-2008, 11:59 AM
THE NEW JERSEY NETS HAVE NINE (THAT'S 9) PLAYERS OVER 6'10"!

Suaveness
06-27-2008, 01:00 PM
I've had time to relax on this. I think I'm ok with it. I don't want to be hung over missed opportunities. I'm going to be excited for our team, and I'm really excited about our backcourt. If we can shore up the PF position, then I think we're in business.

Tom White
06-27-2008, 02:47 PM
I am happy with the aftermath of this week. I also think we have to remember that these moves are likely only 1A & 1B out of what will become about a 4 move summer. There is more to come, so don't put those depth charts in cement yet.

I have a feeling that some of our fellow PD members may not have watched all these new Pacers play very much, or are of the nature that if the Pacers didn't select their favorite guy, we are all doomed to hell.

I just want to see year-to-year improvement, on and off the court. Yes, we still need to add to the front court, but here is what I see so far.

Ford and Jack:

A more reliable, stable and defensively capable combo at the point than the team has had in a while.

Rasho:

A bit of a wild card in all of this, although I understand he can put it in the hoop I don't know about his D.

B. Rush:

We finally have an actual SG, instead of playing a SF out of position. I really like watching this guy play. I think he is going to grow on everyone. For crying out loud, he shot about 44% from 3pt. during his career at Kansas.

Hibbert:

How about if we look at him as a more stable and sane alterative to Harrison? If he can improve his footwork, I think we'll have something.

The Pacers also have a lot more salary flexibility to make other moves. When you are attempting to trade a $21M salary, there are only so many thing you can do. Now, with more players of lesser salary levels, many more doors are open to trading individual players, or packaging them.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:26 PM
If 48 hrs ago someone would have told you that at the end of the day, the P's would have Rush, Hibbert, Ford, and Jack....would you have been happy or ****ed?
Happy.

If I told you that you had a winning lottery ticket in a million-dollar lottery, and then when you went to get the prize you found out you got the $100 consolation prize, would you be happy or ****ed?

Or, more accurately:

If you got the million-dollar prize and traded it for the consolation prize, then came home and told your wife, would she be happy or ****ed?

Since86
06-27-2008, 03:31 PM
I kind of see where you're going, but no way is Bayless a million dollars and no way are the returning players as low as $100.

In term's of shoring up other problem areas, it's a lot closer than just evaluating the individual talent. Also, you're paying one hell of a high tax rate on the million while your "consolation prize" is tax free.

kester99
06-27-2008, 03:35 PM
Pacers get the highest marks, per Draft Express.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Win-Scores-2008-NBA-Draft-Recap-2953/

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:42 PM
I kind of see where you're going, but no way is Bayless a million dollars and no way are the returning players as low as $100.
Nope, I was exaggerating for the sake of the illustration.

Basically, the fact that we're better than we expected to be doesn't negate the fact that it was a stupid trade.

Since86
06-27-2008, 03:55 PM
We were better at ONE position in keeping Bayless.

Trading him for other pieces makes you better in multiple positions.

This isn't a zero-sum game. It's called a building block. The trade helped so much on the defensive side of the ball, it's not even funny. We had one of the worst defensive backcourts in the league prior to last night. That's not even close to being the case now.

If Rush lives up to his potential. This move sets up future moves. It makes Dunleavy expendable, like the other thread talks about which I haven't read yet BTW. You can move him, for other pieces, or just one piece in a quality PF if you package him with some other players.

You can give me the argument, what if he doesn't live up to it, and I can throw it right back at you regarding Bayless. Rush has a lot less risk, he's a tried and proven college talent.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:58 PM
We were better at ONE position in keeping Bayless.

Trading him for other pieces makes you better in multiple positions.
In the NBA, quality wins over quantity 6 days in a row and twice on Sundays.

If what you want is a building block, Bayless makes a better building block than Rush.

Unclebuck
06-27-2008, 04:01 PM
In the NBA, quality wins over quantity 6 days in a row and twice on Sundays.

If what you want is a building block, Bayless makes a better building block than Rush.

I agree with you and Shade in theory on the quality over quantity and I am always preaching "draft a future star". So if Bayliss is as good as you and Shade are saying then I'll agree with you that it was a bad trade. But no one knows, not even you and Shade just how good Bayliss is going to be. If other teams agreed with you and Shade he would have been taken before 11

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 04:01 PM
Also, for those saying Bayless is more of a sure thing than Rush, I'd have to disagree with you. Rush is one of the most NBA ready players in this draft. He has much less risk attached to him than Bayless.
Best Case for Rush: Caron Butler (JayRedd's comparion, but I like it)
Worst Case: James Posey

Best Case for Bayless: Monta Ellis (I'm not buying Arenas)
Worst Case: Dajuan Wagner

Anthem
06-27-2008, 04:15 PM
Worst Case: Dajuan Wagner
:D I'll just stand here and watch that meme get beaten down again.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 04:17 PM
I already posted my reasoning, and I'm not bashing Wagner for his medical condition.

Since86
06-27-2008, 04:19 PM
And again, I think Chris Lofton would have a bone to pick with you if you don't want to think serious illnesses affect shooting percentages.

When you're fighting off something as serious as what Dejaun went through, it's pretty understandable that you're basketball skills decline. I bet we can take you out healthy, get a good shooting percentage, then just give you the flu and it would drop like a rock.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 04:21 PM
I'm pretty sure Wagner didn't see the affects of his illness til his second year.
But yeah I'm the ******* pile on. I already said I didn't mean it the way people are taking it.

Since86
06-27-2008, 04:32 PM
No, not calling you an *******. I just think there's a lot better comparisons out there than Dajaun.

Bridge
06-27-2008, 05:06 PM
I always hesitate on sg's in a pg's body. The point position isn't something that can be learned. The lack of height at the 2 can also be a problem.

I think we had a solid draft. I would have taken this outcome if it was given to me two days ago. We just happened to get a potential stud at our pick. We won't know which way is right for a few years.

I guess I'm just happy that we are actually making moves. I had fun last night being involved in trades. It has been a few years since I've had fun being a Pacer fan.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 05:24 PM
I just think there's a lot better comparisons out there than Dajaun.

Many.

How about Jay Williams or Bobby Hurley. Wait...those would be incredibly insensitive and completely unfair.

So, why not just use Calbert Cheaney, Dermarr Johnson or Trajan Langdon to illustrate the exact same point?

indygeezer
06-27-2008, 05:27 PM
Happy.

If I told you that you had a winning lottery ticket in a million-dollar lottery, and then when you went to get the prize you found out you got the $100 consolation prize, would you be happy or ****ed?

Or, more accurately:

If you got the million-dollar prize and traded it for the consolation prize, then came home and told your wife, would she be happy or ****ed?


That's NOT fair!! Play fair!

Bball
06-27-2008, 05:33 PM
If other teams agreed with you and Shade he would have been taken before 11

UB is a wise man!

-Bball

Pacemaker
06-27-2008, 06:21 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpfRL...eature=related
Hibbert looks pretty smart, mature and realiable in this interview with Utah. Some Utah fans even coveted him and thought he should have been a top 3 pick in last year's draft. Im glad we drafted him. He's ready.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 06:46 PM
Many.

How about Jay Williams or Bobby Hurley. Wait...those would be incredibly insensitive and completely unfair.

So, why not just use Calbert Cheaney, Dermarr Johnson or Trajan Langdon to illustrate the exact same point?

Cheaney was four inches taller than Bayless.

Johnson was six inches taller than Bayless.

Trajan Langdon works just fine. :)

BTW, and correct me if I'm wrong on this, but wasn't Wagner pretty healthy his first two years and then started getting sick his third year?
I have a very good friend with ulcerative colitis, so I'd just like to make it clear that I'd never discount the effect the disease can have on someone.

AesopRockOn
06-27-2008, 06:55 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpfRL...eature=related
Hibbert looks pretty smart, mature and realiable in this interview with Utah. Some Utah fans even coveted him and thought he should have been a top 3 pick in last year's draft. Im glad we drafted him. He's ready.

You're going to have to explain this logic. Having watched him play against Davidson, I can confidently assert that he's too slow for any team in this league, especially in an offense like our's is supposed to be. He'll be totally ineffective and spend most of the time in a suit. A terrible pick.

BlueNGold
06-27-2008, 07:24 PM
Hibbert will be a liability against most teams because he is not just slow. He is very, very slow and cannot get off the ground or move his feet. It will be absolutely brutal watching him get constantly beat on the Pick-n-Roll. Any centers who can shoot the midrange will fill it up on him.

The only place he will be helpful is as beef to keep a few of the larger centers off the rim...such as Shaq and Yao. Otherwise, don't expect him to amount to much. Keep in mind that with all that size, he didn't even come close to dominating in college...after several years.

rm1369
06-27-2008, 07:35 PM
I've went from being absolutley *$@!&* livid last night to slightly pissed and confused today.

I'm concerned that the primary goal is to get good PR with "good guys" and compete for the 7th or 8th playoff spot ASAP. If Bird targeted Rush and Hibbert only because they are the most mature and ready to contribute next year then his "vision" is horribly wrong and short sighted. You win in this league primarily based on the abilities of your best 2 or 3 players. I'm not sure Bayless will be that caliber of player, nor am I certain that Rush isn't. I'm just concerned that it wasn't even taken into consideration by the Pacers and that the decision was strictly based on putting butts in the seats next year.

I also question how TJ Ford and Jim O'brien's styles match that of Roy Hibbert and to a lesser degree Brandon Rush. IMO Hibbert, Rush, and Jack are better suited to a slower, more structured half court game. That doesn't seem to match Ford's strengths or O'brien's preferences. I realize you can't make everything match up perfectly in such a short time and that more trades may come. But I thought Bird had been pushing Carlisle for a more open, faster offensive style. His hiring of O'brien seems to support that. I'm not certain the roster he is putting together does.

ChicagoJ
06-27-2008, 07:57 PM
You guys sound like "ready to play in the NBA is a bad thing."

Tell you what, you can have a team of Bender, Darius Miles, Olowokandi, Fred Jones and I'll even give you Tony Parker.

There is very-high-risk/ somewhat-high-reward in drafting solely on potential.

I'll take Jack, Rush, Granger, Murphy and Hibbert over that any day. Maybe the ceiling is a bit lower, but the floor is also much, much higher.

(and who would have thought on paper that a lineup of Mark Jackson, Reggie, Mullin, DD, and Smits would have the athleticism to compete in the NBA in the 1990s?)

rm1369
06-27-2008, 08:19 PM
You guys sound like "ready to play in the NBA is a bad thing."

Tell you what, you can have a team of Bender, Darius Miles, Olowokandi, Fred Jones and I'll even give you Tony Parker.

There is very-high-risk/ somewhat-high-reward in drafting solely on potential.

I'll take Jack, Rush, Granger, Murphy and Hibbert over that any day. Maybe the ceiling is a bit lower, but the floor is also much, much higher.

(and who would have thought on paper that a lineup of Mark Jackson, Reggie, Mullin, DD, and Smits would have the athleticism to compete in the NBA in the 1990s?)

I started to cherry pick my own teams but decided it wasn't worth it. I'm not advocating drafting DeAndre Jordan, MaGee, or Ajinca. I actually like Rush and Jack. I just want to know my team is building to win a title and not scrambling to get to .500 to sell tickets. For me there is a big difference.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I don't dislike the results, the motivation concerns me.

mike_D
06-27-2008, 08:34 PM
Personally I would have kept Bayless. I think right now he would have been a perfect combo guard for us. He could have spelled T.J for 15 minutes a game, and could have spelled our two 10-15 minutes a game. That would have filled a need for. I think in the future he can be a pg in the Chauncey Billups type of mold. I also think he will be a star in this league.

I view Rush as a good player, I just don't think he will be a star. He has the athleticism, he's got great range on his jumper and he will defend however In college he didn't do a good job getting to the basket, he's not a good ballhandler the biggest thing to me he just wasn't aggressive almost to unselfish. This is just my view on him. I just hope Bird drafted this guy because he truly thinks he will be a better pro then Bayless not because Rush is more NBA ready right now.

Will Galen
06-28-2008, 06:55 AM
Happy.

If I told you that you had a winning lottery ticket in a million-dollar lottery, and then when you went to get the prize you found out you got the $100 consolation prize, would you be happy or ****ed?

Or, more accurately:

If you got the million-dollar prize and traded it for the consolation prize, then came home and told your wife, would she be happy or ****ed?

I think your scenario's are a bit out of whack . . . no they are way out of whack because you are already assigning absurd comparison values to the players. Maybe Bayless will turn into another Wade, but then again Rush could turn into another Reggie. Likely not to either of my scenario's, but you never know. And that is the point! You don't know!

Mourning
06-28-2008, 07:25 AM
Also, for those saying Bayless is more of a sure thing than Rush, I'd have to disagree with you. Rush is one of the most NBA ready players in this draft. He has much less risk attached to him than Bayless.


Maybe that's because Rush is WAY older allready and much further to reaching his ceiling, while Bayless is much further away because he's way younger and thus has much more upside and even with that he still was a good college player.

indygeezer
06-28-2008, 07:43 AM
Can somebody in here tell me what tonight's winning lotto numbers will be, please? Thanks, I'll buy you a new car. :)





and even fill the gas tank.

Anthem
06-28-2008, 07:52 AM
You guys sound like "ready to play in the NBA is a bad thing."

Tell you what, you can have a team of Bender, Darius Miles, Olowokandi, Fred Jones and I'll even give you Tony Parker.

There is very-high-risk/ somewhat-high-reward in drafting solely on potential.

I'll take Jack, Rush, Granger, Murphy and Hibbert over that any day. Maybe the ceiling is a bit lower, but the floor is also much, much higher.
You don't think Bayless is ready to play in the NBA?


(and who would have thought on paper that a lineup of Mark Jackson, Reggie, Mullin, DD, and Smits would have the athleticism to lead the league in scoringin the NBA in the 1990s?)
Fixed

Anthem
06-28-2008, 08:13 AM
I just want to know my team is building to win a title and not scrambling to get to .500 to sell tickets. For me there is a big difference.
Yeah, that's the hypocrisy that bothers me. People say Donnie wanted attendence but Bird wants a championship, but this is a safe move if I ever saw one.

ChicagoJ
06-28-2008, 10:01 AM
Yes, its a safe move.

The criticism of Donnie was that he was too slow to even make a safe move.

The two-headed monster would've seen that Rush was on the board at #11, taken him, and not had the trade. Then convinced us that Rush was the player they wanted all along while everyone screamed that they passed on Bayless.

I'm no fan of Bird, but I liked the dysfunctional two-headed monster even less than I like Bird. So at least this is some sense of direction, which we haven't seen in five years or so.

They not only got the player they wanted, but improved their backcourt depth by unloading a guy that didn't figure in their plans.

I'll take "safe" right now over "directionless."

rm1369
06-28-2008, 10:11 AM
I'll take "safe" right now over "directionless."

You won't get an argument from me there. I've been critical of the teams management for awhile - especially since Bird joined and the "two-headed monster" was born. I'm just not dancing in the streets because we went from horibble to mediocre.

I understand this is going to be a process. And if I see something that says that the goal is a title then I'll be behind it. That just isn't the feeling I have right now.

Tom White
06-28-2008, 01:48 PM
I started to cherry pick my own teams but decided it wasn't worth it. I'm not advocating drafting DeAndre Jordan, MaGee, or Ajinca. I actually like Rush and Jack. I just want to know my team is building to win a title and not scrambling to get to .500 to sell tickets. For me there is a big difference.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that while I don't dislike the results, the motivation concerns me.

Well, this team has to get to .500 before it can even dream of being a title contender. When you say "building to win a title" you've got to remember that is an idea for much further down the road. These moves are simply first steps.

You have to crawl before you learn to walk, and walk before you learn to run.

I'll also add this as an opinion on the guys we got in the draft.

They can actually speak in complete and intelligible sentences. I couldn't believe how many of the kids sounded like they had a mouth full of mush, with a mind to match. I'm a believer that intelligence translates to the court.

PaceBalls
06-28-2008, 02:31 PM
Yes, its a safe move.

The criticism of Donnie was that he was too slow to even make a safe move.

The two-headed monster would've seen that Rush was on the board at #11, taken him, and not had the trade. Then convinced us that Rush was the player they wanted all along while everyone screamed that they passed on Bayless.

I'm no fan of Bird, but I liked the dysfunctional two-headed monster even less than I like Bird. So at least this is some sense of direction, which we haven't seen in five years or so.

They not only got the player they wanted, but improved their backcourt depth by unloading a guy that didn't figure in their plans.

I'll take "safe" right now over "directionless."

Well, seeing how there is talk that there was a deal already in place, my question is:

Would they have agreed to this trade before hand if Larry knew he would get Bayless? Or did he feel honor-bound by his word to go through with the deal without really wanting to after Bayless slipped to us?

I myself am pretty happy. Brandon Rush is a 6'7" SG who is ready to play. Jarret Jack is not some scrub either, this guy is a good ball player, who fits our need almost perfectly. In fact Bayless might end up being compareable to Jack as they are about the same size. It's not like being as good as JJ would be considered a bust either. I think alot of folks are under-evaluating what we got back in this deal and over-evaluating what Bayless brings. Time will tell...

Suaveness
06-28-2008, 03:17 PM
I don't consider this "safe". I consider it active, and the Pacers doing what they feel is best to improve their team. Rush may not be a safe pick, he may just fit into Jim's system better. Sure, there's more risk with someone like Bayless, but that doesn't make Rush a safe pick. Grabbing a bunch of mediocre players that don't make mistakes is safe. Rush I think has the chance to be better than mediocre.

JayRedd
06-28-2008, 03:34 PM
Well, seeing how there is talk that there was a deal already in place, my question is:

Would they have agreed to this trade before hand if Larry knew he would get Bayless? Or did he feel honor-bound by his word to go through with the deal without really wanting to after Bayless slipped to us?

My guess is yes.

Bayless falling to #11 was unexpected, but not completely unforseeable.

If Bird and Co. were really actually specifically interested in Bayless, they would have put that contingent into the trade. I can't believe Bayless fell to Larry and he was like "OH NO!!!! I really, really want this guy...but a deal's a deal. I just wish someone would have considered what we would do if the guy we really wanted fell to us at #11. Why didn't we think of that?!?!?"

It's much more logical to think Bird had no real desire to have Jerryd Bayless. Feel free to criticize him for this, but let's not act like he's a functional retard that never ran a scenario of what would happen if Bayless fell to them. Even if he is a functional retard, he has assistants who would have said "Do we take Bayless if he falls?"

Additionally, I bet that at some point, Larry talked about Bayless with Donnie, who actually worked him out. Bayless was likely one of the two or three most talked about prospects in Knick-land, and really it probably came down to either Bayless of Danillo. Bayless actually considers one the Knick assistant coaches "like an uncle" and also knows D'Antoni (who he actually had dinner with a few weeks ago...see link below), so Donnie had more info on this guy than pretty much any other GM in the NBA. As Larry is his protege, I'm sure they talked at length about prospects in the weeks leading up to the draft. Maybe Donnie mentioned somethings that Bird didn't like.

What didn't Bird like?

I have no idea. But it's rather possible that he simply had very little interest in bringing the kid to Indy.

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2008/6/10/549669/knicks-work-out-bayless-go

rm1369
06-28-2008, 04:20 PM
My guess is yes.

Bayless falling to #11 was unexpected, but not completely unforseeable.

If Bird and Co. were really actually specifically interested in Bayless, they would have put that contingent into the trade...

It's much more logical to think Bird had no real desire to have Jerryd Bayless.....

What didn't Bird like?

I have no idea. But it's rather possible that he simply had very little interest in bringing the kid to Indy.

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2008/6/10/549669/knicks-work-out-bayless-go

I agree. I don't think Bird was surprised and unprepared for him being there. Bird simply wanted Rush and got a little extra with him.

If Bird thinks Rush and Hibbert were the best players available - long term - then I have no problem with the moves and in fact like the decisiveness. I fear it was all about next year and I would consider that a huge mistake.

Plax80
06-28-2008, 06:31 PM
My guess is yes.

Bayless falling to #11 was unexpected, but not completely unforseeable.

If Bird and Co. were really actually specifically interested in Bayless, they would have put that contingent into the trade. I can't believe Bayless fell to Larry and he was like "OH NO!!!! I really, really want this guy...but a deal's a deal. I just wish someone would have considered what we would do if the guy we really wanted fell to us at #11. Why didn't we think of that?!?!?"

It's much more logical to think Bird had no real desire to have Jerryd Bayless. Feel free to criticize him for this, but let's not act like he's a functional retard that never ran a scenario of what would happen if Bayless fell to them. Even if he is a functional retard, he has assistants who would have said "Do we take Bayless if he falls?"

Additionally, I bet that at some point, Larry talked about Bayless with Donnie, who actually worked him out. Bayless was likely one of the two or three most talked about prospects in Knick-land, and really it probably came down to either Bayless of Danillo. Bayless actually considers one the Knick assistant coaches "like an uncle" and also knows D'Antoni (who he actually had dinner with a few weeks ago...see link below), so Donnie had more info on this guy than pretty much any other GM in the NBA. As Larry is his protege, I'm sure they talked at length about prospects in the weeks leading up to the draft. Maybe Donnie mentioned somethings that Bird didn't like.

What didn't Bird like?

I have no idea. But it's rather possible that he simply had very little interest in bringing the kid to Indy.

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2008/6/10/549669/knicks-work-out-bayless-go

Fair enough.

And maybe he's right and Brandon Rush becomes Eddie Jones and bayless is out of the league in four years.

But you still have to maximize the value of a player at the time you make a trade.

Put another way:

Lets say the Pacers had the #4 pick in this draft instead of #11.

Let's say they made no trades and drated bayless at 4 and Hibbert at 17.

Pacer fans would be going crazy with excitement that happy days were going to here again.

What would the reaction be if they took Brandon Rush at #4 ???

There would be bricks flying into Conseco Fieldhouse glass still today.

So does that mean the real key to the trade for everybody was getting Jarrett Jack for Ike Diogu ??

That doesn't seem real sensible.

Oh well.

I'm ready to let it go.............keep my $150 by not renewing the NBA Ticket and waiting in anticipation for next years lottery.

CableKC
06-28-2008, 06:47 PM
I agree. I don't think Bird was surprised and unprepared for him being there. Bird simply wanted Rush and got a little extra with him.

If Bird thinks Rush and Hibbert were the best players available - long term - then I have no problem with the moves and in fact like the decisiveness. I fear it was all about next year and I would consider that a huge mistake.
Although my first reaction was that Bird was probably stupid for doing this....I agree with Jay on this.

As most have said...after Rose and Beasley....and possibly Love and maybe Brook ( since both filled needs ).....there was a chance that everyone else afterwards would be a risk and may or may not pan out. Bird didn't want to gamble and wanted to go with the sure thing.

I just think that Bird had a plan and he stuck with it...even if Bayless fell to us. At worst.....the only thing I can think of is whether Bird actually decided to ask Pritchard for something extra ( 33 or 36 draft pick ) at the last second. But I'm guessing that KP probably said no.

But Bird did say before the draft that the 2 players that he wanted will likely be there at 11 and 17.....they were...so he pulled the trigger.

count55
06-28-2008, 07:11 PM
Fair enough.

And maybe he's right and Brandon Rush becomes Eddie Jones and bayless is out of the league in four years.

But you still have to maximize the value of a player at the time you make a trade.

Put another way:

Lets say the Pacers had the #4 pick in this draft instead of #11.

Let's say they made no trades and drated bayless at 4 and Hibbert at 17.

Pacer fans would be going crazy with excitement that happy days were going to here again.

What would the reaction be if they took Brandon Rush at #4 ???

There would be bricks flying into Conseco Fieldhouse glass still today.

So does that mean the real key to the trade for everybody was getting Jarrett Jack for Ike Diogu ??

That doesn't seem real sensible.

Oh well.

I'm ready to let it go.............keep my $150 by not renewing the NBA Ticket and waiting in anticipation for next years lottery.

This is just getting surreal.

Well, first, we didn't have the #4, we had the #11. We traded the #11 for the #13 & Jack. As JR said, TPTB almost certainly knew that Bayless could be there and, for whatever reason, didn't want him...or at least, didn't want him as much as they wanted Rush and Jack. (Diogu was salary filler, just like McRoberts. It's possible that Portland gets some value, but the odds lean heavily towards both Ike and Josh looking for jobs next summer.)

Second, if we had the #4, we probably take Westbrook and move on with life.

I understand, and even to some degree agree with the argument that we should've kept Bayless and taken a shot at him turning out to be a big time player. However, this idea of altering the basic facts of what happened the other night to enhance a position...ayayaya...:suicide4:

avoidingtheclowns
06-28-2008, 09:57 PM
This is just getting surreal.

Well, first, we didn't have the #4, we had the #11. We traded the #11 for the #13 & Jack. As JR said, TPTB almost certainly knew that Bayless could be there and, for whatever reason, didn't want him...or at least, didn't want him as much as they wanted Rush and Jack. (Diogu was salary filler, just like McRoberts. It's possible that Portland gets some value, but the odds lean heavily towards both Ike and Josh looking for jobs next summer.)

Second, if we had the #4, we probably take Westbrook and move on with life.

I understand, and even to some degree agree with the argument that we should've kept Bayless and taken a shot at him turning out to be a big time player. However, this idea of altering the basic facts of what happened the other night to enhance a position...ayayaya...:suicide4:


put it another way: what if we had the #2 pick and nell carter was our GM and we took bayless and traded him and jeff foster to minnesota for the secretary from ferris bueller's day off...

Plax80
06-28-2008, 10:58 PM
My point was.........

Many fans' perceptions of a player are determined by where they are drafted.

Bayless would have been an acceptable pick as high as #4 for any team.......including ours.

If ANY GM drafted Rush at #4 they would have called for his head.

But because Bayless slipped to #11.......many of our fans are willing to "trust the evaluators" that Rush is the better player for our team.

But if the same scenario had happenned earlier in the draft......we would call it absolute lunacy.

In any event, we have 363 days before getting worked up over FO decisions all over again.
Whether the moves help and we win 38 games or they fail and we win 28 isn't very significant.

imawhat
06-29-2008, 12:55 AM
All 5 Kansas draftees were traded on draft night.

JayRedd
06-29-2008, 01:00 AM
put it another way: what if we had the #2 pick and nell carter was our GM and we took bayless and traded him and jeff foster to minnesota for the secretary from ferris bueller's day off...

Nell Carter died five years ago. And Edie McClurg is BYC so that wouldn't even work under the cap.

Jose Slaughter
06-29-2008, 04:39 AM
A couple other points I'd like to add.

Bird mentioned in his pre-draft press conference that he was looking for guys that could come in here & play right away.

I think Bird is done being a baby sitter while waiting on "kids" to develope. He can't afford to, this franchise can't afford to, this team can't afford to & this fan base really can't afford to.

Bayless was ranked higher on most draft boards based on little more than potential. The way I saw the draft, after Rose, Beasley, Mayo & Love there was a drop off to a group of about 8 to 10 players.

Bayless is 19 compared to Rush being 22. Bayless, from what I've gathered, is not considered a true NBA point guard. Rush is a classic NBA shooting guard.

It comes down to this, Bayless might be better in 2 or 3 years, or he might not. Rush fits into what Bird wants this team to be, fits into O'Brien's system & does it from day 1.

One other thing & I've mentioned this in some other threads the past couple days.

The players that Bird has aquired are not considered "tweeners". This might be a fluke, but I seriously doubt it.

Ford & Jack will be playing the point.

Rush will only be used as a 2 guard.

Nesterovic & Hibbert can't be anything other than true NBA centers.

Baston & McRoberts are both 4's in this league.

There was & is a plan layed out & its being followed, & its about time!

avoidingtheclowns
06-29-2008, 08:26 AM
Nell Carter died five years ago.

i guess that would explain why tinsley was never traded


And Edie McClurg is BYC so that wouldn't even work under the cap.

well f**k

how about sending that same package to the suns for linda lavin and the rights to flo's "kiss my grits" catch-phrase?

Raskolnikov
06-29-2008, 08:53 AM
If anything, the Bayless trade definitely shows Bird & co have a plan. Because keeping Bayless would've made everybody happy, him being the projected top 5 pick who fell to #11. It would've been the safe thing to do IMO.

That doesn't mean it can't turn out to be a bad move, but you can't blame Bird for not having an idea which direction this team should take. And I like this new direction.

Unclebuck
06-29-2008, 09:05 AM
Well, seeing how there is talk that there was a deal already in place, my question is:

Would they have agreed to this trade before hand if Larry knew he would get Bayless? Or did he feel honor-bound by his word to go through with the deal without really wanting to after Bayless slipped to us?

I myself am pretty happy. Brandon Rush is a 6'7" SG who is ready to play. Jarret Jack is not some scrub either, this guy is a good ball player, who fits our need almost perfectly. In fact Bayless might end up being compareable to Jack as they are about the same size. It's not like being as good as JJ would be considered a bust either. I think alot of folks are under-evaluating what we got back in this deal and over-evaluating what Bayless brings. Time will tell...

The latest info I saw was the deal was agreed to if either Augustin or Bayliss was there. if both were gone then Blazers don't do the deal

Unclebuck
06-29-2008, 09:11 AM
My point was.........

Many fans' perceptions of a player are determined by where they are drafted.

Bayless would have been an acceptable pick as high as #4 for any team.......including ours.

If ANY GM drafted Rush at #4 they would have called for his head.

But because Bayless slipped to #11.......many of our fans are willing to "trust the evaluators" that Rush is the better player for our team.

But if the same scenario had happenned earlier in the draft......we would call it absolute lunacy.

In any event, we have 363 days before getting worked up over FO decisions all over again.
Whether the moves help and we win 38 games or they fail and we win 28 isn't very significant.
'

I think a stronger argument can be made - just the opposite of your pont. Becaus the medi through mock drafts said that Bayliss was supposed to go 4-8, the fans eat that up, but then when the people whose job it is to make the picks, lets someone fall to 11, the fans think the media is right and those with NBA jobs are wrong. The bottom line everyone remembers when the NBA GMs screw up. But no one ever goes backj and see how many times the media draft experts screw up

rexnom
06-29-2008, 09:34 AM
'

I think a stronger argument can be made - just the opposite of your pont. Becaus the medi through mock drafts said that Bayliss was supposed to go 4-8, the fans eat that up, but then when the people whose job it is to make the picks, lets someone fall to 11, the fans think the media is right and those with NBA jobs are wrong. The bottom line everyone remembers when the NBA GMs screw up. But no one ever goes backj and see how many times the media draft experts screw up
It's just that people remember that GMs screwed up and didn't draft Danny but conveniently forget how Gerald Green was slated to go higher than Danny and dropped to 18. And what about Marcus Williams? He was supposed to go fifth to the Hawks in the draft after that.

Tom White
06-29-2008, 11:08 AM
I don't consider this "safe". I consider it active, and the Pacers doing what they feel is best to improve their team. Rush may not be a safe pick, he may just fit into Jim's system better. Sure, there's more risk with someone like Bayless, but that doesn't make Rush a safe pick. Grabbing a bunch of mediocre players that don't make mistakes is safe. Rush I think has the chance to be better than mediocre.

Oddly enough, the two words that keep coming to my mind are Safe and Aggressive. Those are two words you normally wouldn't use at the same time, but they both seem to fit this situation.

SycamoreKen
06-29-2008, 04:16 PM
After reading this thread, i get the impression the in the big picture and goal, a championship team, Bayless and Rush would both be complimentary pieces, not main cogs. Until we figure out how to get another superstar FHOF on the team, then the best we can hope to do is get the "pieces" to fit together the best as possible.

I have been gone for a week and will have to absorb this some more. I didn't even know about the O'Neil trade until I read yesterday's paper. The small town paper I read Friday didn't mention it. I will say i am excited about seeing what will happen next.

JayRedd
06-29-2008, 09:03 PM
the two words that keep coming to my mind are Safe and Aggressive. Those are two words you normally wouldn't use at the same time, but they both seem to fit this situation.

Shade's mom is the same way.