PDA

View Full Version : Chad Ford gives Bird an A



Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 09:30 AM
<TABLE class="tablehead widetable" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=5 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ececec" vAlign=top><TD>
Indiana Pacers Grade: A

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>





Round 1: Brandon Rush (13), Roy Hibbert (17)

Round 2: None

Analysis: To evaluate the Pacers, you have to take a step back a day to see how everything unfolded. They traded the chronically injured Jermaine O'Neal and a second-round pick for T.J. Ford, Rasho Nesterovic, Maceo Baston and the No. 17 pick. That means they added a starting point guard coming off a career year, significant cap space in 2009 and a prospect.

Then Indiana swapped No. 11 and Ike Diogu for No. 13 and picked up a solid backup point guard, Jarrett Jack, and a local hero, Josh McRoberts.
So in the course of two days, the Pacers rebuilt their team in a way that improves it now and in the future. The Pacers should be much more exciting to watch with a Ford/Jack/Rush/Mike Dunleavy backcourt. The additions of Hibbert and Nesterovic give them some much-needed size. And with several major expiring contracts, including Nesterovic, Marquis Daniels and Jeff Foster, they'll have some significant trading chips at the trade deadline or real cap space in the summer of 2009.

Kudos to president Larry Bird and general manager David Morway for one of the most sophisticated rebuilding efforts I've seen.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftGrades-080627

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 09:35 AM
:)

count55
06-27-2008, 09:35 AM
I don't think this is horribly far off what I just posted...of course, I'm full of ****, so take it FWIW.

QuickRelease
06-27-2008, 09:36 AM
When you look at it the way Chad Ford puts it, it makes sense what happened. Taking the players out of the equation for a moment, the Pacers decided to swap picks with Portland, while unloading Diogu and bringing back Jarrett Jack and McRoberts. The fact that it translated into Jarred Bayless was secondary to the decision to swap positions. Portland just lucked out that Bayless was the player that dropped. So it sounds like we were picking for Portland all along before the deal was announced.

As far as draft coverage goes, I give ESPN an F. What happened to TNT?

blanket
06-27-2008, 09:36 AM
:nod:

Finally, some perspective

DGPR
06-27-2008, 09:36 AM
It's nice to know that we aren't hiding it anymore. The Pacers are finally starting from scratch and rebuilding. The future looks bright in Indiana if we can continue to make good investments like this. (Yes I do have a different feeling about the Brandon Rush trade than last night)

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 09:38 AM
When you look at it the way Chad Ford puts it, it makes sense what happened. Taking the players out of the equation for a moment, the Pacers decided to swap picks with Portland, while unloading Diogu and bringing back Jarrett Jack and McRoberts. The fact that it translated into Jarred Bayless was secondary to the decision to swap positions. Portland just lucked out that Bayless was the player that dropped. So it sounds like we were picking for Portland all along before the deal was announced.

As far as draft coverage goes, I give ESPN an F. What happened to TNT?

Thats been my point all along. Everyone was clamoring to make this deal when it was announced yesterday that the Blazers were shopping Jack+13. Well Bird did make the deal and Bayless just happened to drop to us.

And the hick from French Lick with one of the most sophisticated rebuilding efforts he's seen. Larry might actually be winning me over.

CompACE
06-27-2008, 09:44 AM
Everyone's getting over Bayless fairly quickly - Let's hope this trade pays off.

RamBo_Lamar
06-27-2008, 09:44 AM
Very nice! WTG TPTB!

:jump::jump::jump:

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 09:47 AM
A complement for the Pacers? Been a long time since we had positive words thrown our way!

317Kim
06-27-2008, 09:47 AM
Congratulations to our franchise and us Pacer fans :woot:

I don't remember the last time we were so active on Draft night!

Harddrive7
06-27-2008, 09:50 AM
Congratulations to our franchise and us Pacer fans :woot:

I don't remember the last time we were so active on Draft night!


Good point. It's been awhile hasn't it?

Hope you're doing well BTW.

Brian
06-27-2008, 09:52 AM
Just saw Chad on Mike & Mike,and Chad said that we did great in the draft,and he also said that Brandon Rush is the one of the most NBA team ready players in the draft.

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 09:56 AM
Just saw Chad on Mike & Mike,and Chad said that we did great in the draft,and he also said that Brandon Rush is the one of the most NBA team ready players in the draft.

Bird said he wanted players that can help right away. I think Ford, Jack, Hibbert and Rush all fit that description.

Brian
06-27-2008, 10:02 AM
Bird said he wanted players that can help right away. I think Ford, Jack, Hibbert and Rush all fit that description.

Your right..I mean dont get me wrong I dont like that we traded jerryd,but he seems like a real jerk.And I think alot of people had a knee jerk reaction to the trade.I always liked Jack.


And just a little side info,Im not going to go into much detail.But a very close friend of mine used to play basketball with Kareem and Brandon and he told me that Kareem always had a big head and that when he couldnt stay on a team was because of that very reason (which most of us already knew).But I guess what really brought Kareem back down to earth was that a coach over in europe told him "You can be a good player in the NBA,but if you dont change your attitude you are going to be the next Sprewell".


Now as for Brandon-My friend told me that Brandon is a really nice guy,not a trouble maker,doesnt smoke weed or anything.And works extremely hard.

ab2cmiller
06-27-2008, 10:03 AM
Miami Herald had the Pacers as one of three "Winners" in the draft. Here is the link and article is below http://www.miamiherald.com/594/story/585067.html

NBA Draft winners and losers

Posted on Fri, Jun. 27, 2008

By MICHAEL WALLACE
<script language="Javascript">; function PopupPic(sPicURLx, sHeight, sWidth) { var sPicURL = "/594/v-morephotos/story/585067.html"; y=Math.floor((screen.availHeight-sHeight)/2); x=Math.floor((screen.width-sWidth)/2); window.open(sPicURL,"slideshow","width="+sWidth+",height="+sHeight+",top="+y+",left="+x+",scrollbars=auto,resizable=yes").focus(); } </script>
Winners and losers from Thursday night's NBA Draft:

WINNERS
• Trail Blazers: A team that already was deep, young and talented only enhanced that crop by executing deals to land two projected lottery picks in Arizona guard Jerryd Bayless and Kansas forward Darrell Arthur.
• Pacers: After shipping Jermaine O'Neal to Toronto, the Pacers found his apparent replacement in Georgetown center Roy Hibbert. A draft-night trade with Portland also landed pick Brandon Rush, guard Jarrett Jack and forward Josh McRoberts.
• Clippers: The Clippers also picked up two projected lottery picks, grabbing Indiana guard Eric Gordon seventh overall. They then picked up Texas A&M center DeAndre Jordan, who dropped into the second round.
LOSERS
• SuperSonics: Grabbing UCLA guard Russell Westbrook seemed to be a reach with the fourth overall pick. The Sonics then followed later in the first round by drafting another obscure project in power forward Serbe Ibaka from the Congo.
• Kings: The Kings used the 12th overall pick on Rider forward Jason Thompson, a prospect who would have been available had they traded down in the draft. Anthony Randolph, Robin Lopez and Marreese Speights were still on the board.
• Rockets: With an aging roster and a need to add depth at center behind Yao Ming, the Rockets instead gambled on small forward Nicolas Batum of France, who will be hard-pressed to find time behind Shane Battier and Luis Scola.

idioteque
06-27-2008, 10:13 AM
I am still very upset about losing Bayless but not as upset as I was. Sure, Bayless may turn out to be a really good player in this league, MAYBE even a Gilbert Arenas, but how many titles has Gilbert won? In the end, I hope that Larry is just really looking ahead toward the next draft at some great talent that is coming out. In the end, you still have to build a TEAM and maybe Larry just didn't see Bayless as who he wanted as his feature player. Maybe Balyess is a really good player, but maybe, like some in Washington contend about Arenas, he doesn't really make his teammates much better.

Brandon Rush will never be an All-Star but he will be a glue player and a good defender, I'm hoping for a more aggressive, better shooting Derrick McKey. He seems much longer and more athletic than his brother, and at the 13th pick and giving up Bayless, he better be. Jarrett Jack is your consumate backup PG, he is a pretty good defender and will match up great against guys like Billups. McRoberts will probably be nothing, but hell, don't forget that this guy was, once upon a time, a projected lottery pick. And we got him basically as a throw in. Maybe he's grown up a little. If not, oh well, he was a throw in, but maybe he can be a valuable guy off the bench.

RWB
06-27-2008, 10:14 AM
Everyone's getting over Bayless fairly quickly - Let's hope this trade pays off.

Seems there were others who were not convinced Bayless would be the answer at point as well. This from the New York Daily News and Mitch Lawrence.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/2008/06/26/2008-06-26_danilo_gallinari_must_deliver_quickly_in.html?p age=1

"They're definitely looking for a point guard," said Minnesota-bound O.J. Mayo, one of a handful of guards who worked out for the Knicks. "Not a Steve Nash, but they want a point guard who can keep everyone involved and also knock down a jumper. They want a guy to run their up-tempo style."

They still don't have that guy. They saw their top choice, Russell Westbrook, go off the board at No.4. They passed on Eric Gordon, D.J. Augustin and Bayless. Only Augustin was considered a natural playmaker. The others would have fallen into the "manufactured" category, and it's never easy on this level trying to create a point guard.

purdue101
06-27-2008, 10:14 AM
I couldn't agree more with Ford.

I'll admit, like everyone else, I was a little steamed with trading Bayless.....but the dust has settled and I'm happy with the move. Bayless was the "sexy" pick and had all this hype b/c he was high in mock drafts....that's it.

Rush is a polished wing - I compare him to an Eddie Jones in his prime. He'll give you lock down D along with 15-18 pts a night. Good character guy too. Granger, Rush, and Dun is an awesome wing rotation - very well rounded. I love that we don't have rely on Granger to be our defensive specialist.

At PG I really like T.J. Ford. He's the fastest guy in the league and gets players involved, only 25 too. I expect 16 pts 8 assists per night, easy. I'm not too worried about the injury as it seemed like a freak incident. He's not the nagging injury type player that has haunted this team in the past. Jarrett Jack is the perfect backup for Ford as he compensates for Ford's defensive defeciences. Another good character guy.

Overall, we are absolutely set at the 1-3 positions for the next 6-7 years.

In regards to our cap space......we are in really really good shape. We have three big expirings in Quis, Rasho, and Foster. We can either keep them and use the money in 2009 FA, or use them to acquire a solid PF prospect and/or picks. What I love is that they are all in the 6-9 million dollar range, which gives us flexibility to combine them in different scenarios to make the numbers work. Next summer we can re-up Granger (9million per) and Jack (3-4 million per) and then go out and be a player in FA AND still use the MLE if need be.

Our front court is pretty thin right now, but I think we'll be ok. I love the Hibbert pick....he gives us some size and defense so we can play a "finesse" player at the four, such as Murph or Williams. If Williams can get himself together and learn the four, we have the makings of a very solid young core rotation.

Ford/Jack
Dun/Rush
Granger/Rush
Williams
Hibbert

I give Bird an A-, only b/c I think we could have gotten one of Portland's second rounders and gotten CDR, Chalmers, or Jordan.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 10:22 AM
I like pointing out McRoberts was once a projected lotto pick especially since everyone is calling him crap, but its about as relevant as pointing out that about three weeks ago Bayless was projected to go 4th overall.
The fact is he didn't and the other fact is that McRoberts didn't go lotto. So neither point is relevant IMO.
So yeah my point is McRoberts might be crap, but then Bayless is the 11th pick. At one point they were both projected to go much higher than they did, and that didn't happen.

Ownagedood
06-27-2008, 10:23 AM
Ya, im starting to feel a little better about the trade.. I guess it was just hard for me to see J.Bayless name come up on our selection and then see him go away for Rush (I like him, but not quite as good as Bayless) and Jack who I have never really liked.. But now that I think about it I don't even know why I don't like Jack, I guess because I thought he was sloppy when I watched him in college.. But when looking at the full picture, it does still seem like a very solid team for the future..

I also want to apologize for any psycho comments I made last night.. Lol, I was ripped apart by getting so excited over one player then seeing him be dealt away just like that.. I couldn't get over it, but now I see it may still be better for us that we did do that trade. Even if Bayless does turn into the great player I thought he would.

idioteque
06-27-2008, 10:26 AM
I also want to apologize for any psycho comments I made last night.

I'll second that. I was mad as hell, but really, at what? The draft hype gets to me every year.

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 10:36 AM
If Bayless turns out to be a Gilbert Arenas, I'm more than happy with the trade.

D-BONE
06-27-2008, 10:48 AM
I couldn't agree more with Ford.

I'll admit, like everyone else, I was a little steamed with trading Bayless.....but the dust has settled and I'm happy with the move. Bayless was the "sexy" pick and had all this hype b/c he was high in mock drafts....that's it.

Rush is a polished wing - I compare him to an Eddie Jones in his prime. He'll give you lock down D along with 15-18 pts a night. Good character guy too. Granger, Rush, and Dun is an awesome wing rotation - very well rounded. I love that we don't have rely on Granger to be our defensive specialist.

At PG I really like T.J. Ford. He's the fastest guy in the league and gets players involved, only 25 too. I expect 16 pts 8 assists per night, easy. I'm not too worried about the injury as it seemed like a freak incident. He's not the nagging injury type player that has haunted this team in the past. Jarrett Jack is the perfect backup for Ford as he compensates for Ford's defensive defeciences. Another good character guy.

Overall, we are absolutely set at the 1-3 positions for the next 6-7 years.

In regards to our cap space......we are in really really good shape. We have three big expirings in Quis, Rasho, and Foster. We can either keep them and use the money in 2009 FA, or use them to acquire a solid PF prospect and/or picks. What I love is that they are all in the 6-9 million dollar range, which gives us flexibility to combine them in different scenarios to make the numbers work. Next summer we can re-up Granger (9million per) and Jack (3-4 million per) and then go out and be a player in FA AND still use the MLE if need be.

Our front court is pretty thin right now, but I think we'll be ok. I love the Hibbert pick....he gives us some size and defense so we can play a "finesse" player at the four, such as Murph or Williams. If Williams can get himself together and learn the four, we have the makings of a very solid young core rotation.

Ford/Jack
Dun/Rush
Granger/Rush
Williams
Hibbert

I give Bird an A-, only b/c I think we could have gotten one of Portland's second rounders and gotten CDR, Chalmers, or Jordan.

Ditto. I'm A-/B+, but more the A- b/c I do think overall the team is in a significantly better all around position taking into account all the recent moves.

Another pick as you mention bumps it to an A for me. The only other question mark for me is Hibbert. I don't think he'll be a failure, but if our system continues to be fast, will Hibbert have the endurance and agility to really fit?

SoupIsGood
06-27-2008, 10:48 AM
Rush is a polished wing - I compare him to an Eddie Jones in his prime.

This is what I was thinking. If Rush blossoms fully for us I think he'll be just a little worse than Eddie was at his best.

rousea24
06-27-2008, 10:51 AM
Also from Ford's "grades" column:

The Blazers had a prearranged deal with the Pacers to move up to No. 11 if D.J. Augustin or Bayless were on the board. After the draft, Pritchard told me they had Bayless ranked fourth on their board -- so that's great value at No. 11. As part of the trade, they also picked up Ike Diogu, an undervalued big man who's been injured a lot.

TheDon
06-27-2008, 11:27 AM
The Pacer people who do all the crazy little sound effects at the game need to add two new ones for the upcoming season. Everytime Brandon or Kareem(if we keep him) hit a three pointer they can play the clip from that intro to the old wrestling tag team the legion of doom "wwhhhhaaaatttt aaaaaaa rrrrrush". For Hibbert everytime he blocks a shot or slam dunks the ball in someones face use the Dr. Hibbert Laugh from the simpsons. I couldn't think of any entertaining quotes basketball related that Dr. Hibbert makes cause i'm not quite that big of a nerd. :D

Raskolnikov
06-27-2008, 11:34 AM
For Hibbert everytime he blocks a shot or slam dunks the ball in someones face use the Dr. Hibbert Laugh from the simpsons.
Haha good idea :)

DgR
06-27-2008, 12:17 PM
guys, since i live in israel i dont get to see much college basketball- i dont know the prospects too well- all I know is that the pacers lack talent and lack a go to guy- if Bayless was ours- wouldn't he be the biggest talent on the roster? isn't he a scorer who can create his own shot? I'm still generally very happy with the team's future but isn't B. Rush just a solid starter at best?
Why would we give a potential star for potential starter?

2minutes twowa
06-27-2008, 12:21 PM
The Pacer people who do all the crazy little sound effects at the game need to add two new ones for the upcoming season. Everytime Brandon or Kareem(if we keep him) hit a three pointer they can play the clip from that intro to the old wrestling tag team the legion of doom "wwhhhhaaaatttt aaaaaaa rrrrrush". For Hibbert everytime he blocks a shot or slam dunks the ball in someones face use the Dr. Hibbert Laugh from the simpsons. I couldn't think of any entertaining quotes basketball related that Dr. Hibbert makes cause i'm not quite that big of a nerd. :D

Fantastic!:D

rock747
06-27-2008, 12:52 PM
Draft Express says the Pacers won the Draft...


-The best Win Score draft goes to the Indiana Pacers for picking up solid players in Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert. Both are NBA-ready and excellent Win Score prospects. Along with their trades, the Pacers are primed to pass .500 this season and are a franchise on the upswing.




Regardless of who they actually drafted, the Indiana Pacers won the draft on Wednesday night. In dumping Jermaine O’Neal, the Pacers acquired the holy trinity of an expiring contract, future considerations, and the best talent in the deal. Expect to see the Pacers return to the playoffs given this excellent take.

On the flip side, the Raptors lost significant depth and are now a threat to miss the playoffs, despite the presence of solid talent in Chris Bosh, Jamario Moon, and Jose Calderon.


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

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 12:56 PM
The Pacer people who do all the crazy little sound effects at the game need to add two new ones for the upcoming season. Everytime Brandon or Kareem(if we keep him) hit a three pointer they can play the clip from that intro to the old wrestling tag team the legion of doom "wwhhhhaaaatttt aaaaaaa rrrrrush". For Hibbert everytime he blocks a shot or slam dunks the ball in someones face use the Dr. Hibbert Laugh from the simpsons. I couldn't think of any entertaining quotes basketball related that Dr. Hibbert makes cause i'm not quite that big of a nerd. :D

Completely sold on both accounts.

travmil
06-27-2008, 12:58 PM
guys, since i live in israel i dont get to see much college basketball- i dont know the prospects too well- all I know is that the pacers lack talent and lack a go to guy- if Bayless was ours- wouldn't he be the biggest talent on the roster? isn't he a scorer who can create his own shot? I'm still generally very happy with the team's future but isn't B. Rush just a solid starter at best?
Why would we give a potential star for potential starter?

Well if what Chad Ford says is true, and it more than likely is, the Pacers basically picked Bayless for Portland in a prearranged deal. Looking at it from that perspective, the Pacers never wanted Bayless anyway. That makes the whole thing a lot easier to swallow (TWSS) as far as I'm concerned.

Shade
06-27-2008, 01:02 PM
Well if what Chad Ford says is true, and it more than likely is, the Pacers basically picked Bayless for Portland in a prearranged deal. Looking at it from that perspective, the Pacers never wanted Bayless anyway. That makes the whole thing a lot easier to swallow (TWSS) as far as I'm concerned.

I've known that since the trade went down, but it doesn't make it any easier to swallow for me. There are certain guys that you just take and be happy if they fall to you, like Granger and Bayless.

Besides, there's a decent chance that Rush would have been there at #17, or that we could have made a deal to move up a couple spots and take Rush there.

Bayless/Rush/Diogu > Jack/Rush/Hibbert/McRoberts

count55
06-27-2008, 01:04 PM
You know, I largely agree with Ford's assessment, but, in the interest of full disclosure, he did say that he loved the James White deal (after initially hating it).

/imalittleblackraincloud

The Jumpshot Still Money
06-27-2008, 01:07 PM
LOL@local hero

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 01:21 PM
I've known that since the trade went down, but it doesn't make it any easier to swallow for me. There are certain guys that you just take and be happy if they fall to you, like Granger and Bayless.

Besides, there's a decent chance that Rush would have been there at #17, or that we could have made a deal to move up a couple spots and take Rush there.

Bayless/Rush/Diogu > Jack/Rush/Hibbert/McRoberts

agree with you on this shade.... feel like Indy should have gotten a lot more from portland for bayless and on top of it we throw in diogu... couldn't we have gotten frye to address our pf needs and a 2nd rounder that would have become a CDR or Hendrix?

_________________________

nbadraft.net has indiana as a loser of this draft... http://www.nbadraft.net/node/1301

"Indiana Pacers- Traded Jermaine O’Neal to Toronto for TJ Ford and draft rights to Roy Hibbert (No. 17), traded Ike Diogu and draft rights of Jerryd Bayless (No. 12) to Portland for draft rights to Brandon Rush (No. 12) and Jarrett Jack.

It's unclear what exactly the Pacers are doing. They added a point guard in Ford, but traded away their franchise big man and replaced him with Hibbert, a skilled offensive player who is too slow and lethargic to excel at the NBA level. It was time to rebuild, but Indiana looks like it will be competing for a high lottery pick next season. Giving up Jerryd Bayless for Brandon Rush and change was completely asinine. "

________________

They mess up the draft pick numbers - Bayless was #11 and Rush was #13...

Should have gotten more for Bayless but Bird might prove us wrong with Rush and he did a good job of hiding his choice.

Wouldn't it have been better to not announce the Toronto/Indy trade so Portland doesn't realize that we already addressed our PG need?

RWB
06-27-2008, 01:35 PM
_________________________

nbadraft.net has indiana as a loser of this draft... http://www.nbadraft.net/node/1301

"Indiana Pacers- Traded Jermaine O’Neal to Toronto for TJ Ford and draft rights to Roy Hibbert (No. 17), traded Ike Diogu and draft rights of Jerryd Bayless (No. 12) to Portland for draft rights to Brandon Rush (No. 12) and Jarrett Jack.

It's unclear what exactly the Pacers are doing. They added a point guard in Ford, but traded away their franchise big man and replaced him with Hibbert, a skilled offensive player who is too slow and lethargic to excel at the NBA level. It was time to rebuild, but Indiana looks like it will be competing for a high lottery pick next season. Giving up Jerryd Bayless for Brandon Rush and change was completely asinine. "


And that's what happens when someone is not familiar with the situation. They seem to forget to mention the Jermaine O'Neal who was due $43 million dollars for 2 years. The Jermaine O'Neal who if not an anchor on the franchise sure was a big ole iceberg in the way.

indygeezer
06-27-2008, 01:36 PM
Should we feel bad for the people who won the customized Bayless jerseys..or envy them the collector items?

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 02:12 PM
And that's what happens when someone is not familiar with the situation. They seem to forget to mention the Jermaine O'Neal who was due $43 million dollars for 2 years. The Jermaine O'Neal who if not an anchor on the franchise sure was a big ole iceberg in the way.

They weren't panning the JO trade. They were grading the Pacers draft performance, which they didn't like Hibbert at #17, and didn't like the Bayless trade for Rush, hence the "Giving up Jerryd Bayless for Brandon Rush and change was completely asinine" comment.

idioteque
06-27-2008, 02:14 PM
It's absolutely hilarious that people are describing O'Neal as a "franchise" player, he isn't a franchise player in any way except his contract.

RWB
06-27-2008, 02:17 PM
They weren't panning the JO trade. They were grading the Pacers draft performance, which they didn't like Hibbert at #17, and didn't like the Bayless trade for Rush, hence the "Giving up Jerryd Bayless for Brandon Rush and change was completely asinine" comment.

It's unclear what exactly the Pacers are doing. They added a point guard in Ford, but traded away their franchise big man and replaced him with Hibbert,

Now why would I believe any site that still believes JO was a franchise big man?

I'm not trying to be a smart@ iPacer, But I think it's pretty clear what the Pacers were doing.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 02:17 PM
Hibbert at 17 is a pretty solid pick. I can't complain about that one at all.

RWB
06-27-2008, 02:18 PM
It's absolutely hilarious that people are describing O'Neal as a "franchise" player, he isn't a franchise player in any way except his contract.


Exactly, you beat me to it while I was responding. :buddies:

CableKC
06-27-2008, 02:24 PM
_________________________

nbadraft.net has indiana as a loser of this draft... http://www.nbadraft.net/node/1301

"Indiana Pacers- Traded Jermaine O’Neal to Toronto for TJ Ford and draft rights to Roy Hibbert (No. 17), traded Ike Diogu and draft rights of Jerryd Bayless (No. 12) to Portland for draft rights to Brandon Rush (No. 12) and Jarrett Jack.

It's unclear what exactly the Pacers are doing. They added a point guard in Ford, but traded away their franchise big man and replaced him with Hibbert, a skilled offensive player who is too slow and lethargic to excel at the NBA level. It was time to rebuild, but Indiana looks like it will be competing for a high lottery pick next season. Giving up Jerryd Bayless for Brandon Rush and change was completely asinine. "

________________
This is one of the things I don't like about Internet Blogs/Websites that have writers that doesn't truly follow a particular team and just writes about what they see on the surface. I'm a regular Pacer fan that constantly visits PD and RealGM that doesn't write about Basketball ( other then the many posts that I post here on PD ) and even I can clearly see what TPTB are doing.

TPTB want to put the team in the best position to rebuild ( getting a Draft pick and some additional SalaryCap and Financial Flexiblility by trading JONeal ) while trying to make a return to the Playoffs ( by drafting/acquiring the right type of players to fix the holes that they discovered last season without JONeal in the Offense/Defense ) and ( as a result ) hope that this will slowly get the fans to return to Conseco over the next 1-3 seasons.

As purdue101 posted...this isn't the sexy move that everyone wanted.....but it's a solid move that will help us now. I would much rather have TPTB try to hit a few singles and doubles to slowly advance the runners rather then try to swing for the fences and pray that we don't pop the ball up for an easy out. We've known this before the draft...we have a severe lack of talent and we can't afford to gamble....we needed players that can immediately provide an impact. Bird saw that those players were on the board that not only could likely help out now...but were players that filled positions of need...and he pulled the trigger.

I will admit that this is a gamble on the Pacers part.....JONeal can very well return healthy and return to form...and Bayless could become the next Gilbert Arenas.....but given the state of the Pacers now and how it appears that the future of the franchise with Fan support is hanging in the balence....we simply couldn't gamble anymore. I'll take the risk and hope that we made the right deal to help us out now while wishing JONeal good travels and hope that he can get healthy.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 02:27 PM
guys, since i live in israel i dont get to see much college basketball- i dont know the prospects too well- all I know is that the pacers lack talent and lack a go to guy- if Bayless was ours- wouldn't he be the biggest talent on the roster? isn't he a scorer who can create his own shot? I'm still generally very happy with the team's future but isn't B. Rush just a solid starter at best?
There's no answer for this. You're exactly right.

Isaac
06-27-2008, 02:30 PM
We are already better than we were last year, and now we only have one position that needs to be fixed.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 02:35 PM
It's unclear what exactly the Pacers are doing. They added a point guard in Ford, but traded away their franchise big man and replaced him with Hibbert,

Now why would I believe any site that still believes JO was a franchise big man?

I'm not trying to be a smart@ iPacer, But I think it's pretty clear what the Pacers were doing.

If JOB's system calls for athletic, fast players who can run, why do we get Hibbert?

Giving up Bayless we should have gotten more...

RWB
06-27-2008, 02:43 PM
If JOB's system calls for athletic, fast players who can run, why do we get Hibbert?

Giving up Bayless we should have gotten more...


1st and last because it's Bird's team not JOBs.

Bird doesn't want the Mike D.Antoni Suns. Bird wants his old Celtics. I believe the style of play will continue to evolve and will be built for the playoffs.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:09 PM
Giving up Bayless we should have gotten more...
Yup.

Does anybody think we wouldn't have gotten an A if we'd kept Bayless?

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 03:15 PM
I don't know where the theory giving up Bayless should have netted more comes from. TEN teams had already passed on him, and a bunch of teams after us aren't exactly pining for a PG/SG tweener.

None of these teams would have interest in Bayless...

14. Golden State (Ellis, Davis)
15. Phoenix (Nash, Barbosa, Bell)
17. Toronto (It was our pick)
18. Washington (Arenas, Nick Young)
20. Charlotte (Could have taken him at 9)
21. New Jersey (Devin Harris, Vince Carter)
23. Utah (Deron Williams)
24. Seattle (Could have taken him at 4.)
26. San Antonio (Tony Parker, Manu)
27. New Orleans (CP3)
28. Memphis (Could have taken him at 5.)
29. Detroit (Billups, Stuckey, Hamilton)
30. Boston (Rondo, Allen)

So of the 19 picks after us, you can make the argument that maybe 6 teams would have wanted him or been intrigued enough to make a deal.

So I think its safe to say, no we could not have gotten more for Jerryd Bayless.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 03:21 PM
Yup.

Does anybody think we wouldn't have gotten an A if we'd kept Bayless?

I'm not too concerned with our ESPN GPA.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 03:31 PM
I don't know where the theory giving up Bayless should have netted more comes from.


It's not a question of how much other teams wanted him. HOW BAD DOES PORTLAND WANT HIM?

Get more out of the Blazers or we take our player at #11 and allow Sacramento at #12 to pick Bayless.

It's not like getting one of the 2nds was going to hurt them. It would have just meant they would have to buy another one.

And they'll be hard pressed to find PT for Frye with Oden coming in and Aldridge starting at the 4.

rexnom
06-27-2008, 03:32 PM
I'm not too concerned with our ESPN GPA.
Obviously you don't wanna get into SI or CBS Sportsline. That's fine, but I'm not settling for Real GM or Hoopshype because you weren't concerned about our GPA.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 03:32 PM
It's not a question of how much other teams wanted him. HOW BAD DOES PORTLAND WANT HIM?

Get more out of the Blazers or we take our player at #11 and allow Sacramento at #12 to pick Bayless.

It's not like getting one of the 2nds was going to hurt them. It would have just meant they would have to buy another one.
Um what sense does that make? So instead we let Bayless slip by and take Rush with no Jack? That makes ZERO sense.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 03:36 PM
Um what sense does that make? So instead we let Bayless slip by and take Rush with no Jack? That makes ZERO sense.

Yes, but we gave up Diogu in addition to Bayless to get Jack and the #13 pick. Indy was in the driver seat and should have gotten more out of Portland.

If you were Portland, why would you care to give up your backup PF and a 2nd rounder for a premier starting PG?

rexnom
06-27-2008, 03:39 PM
I'm just...has Bayless even played a game? Can we give it a couple of years and then declare this a horrible failure? This rivals the outcry over the James White affair. Dear lord, we missed out on a second round pick. If we REALLY wanted someone in the second round, we could have gotten them.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 03:43 PM
Yes, but we gave up Diogu in addition to Bayless to get Jack and the #13 pick. Indy was in the driver seat and should have gotten more out of Portland.

If you were Portland, why would you care to give up your backup PF and a 2nd rounder for a premier starting PG?

For a premier starting PG? Is that even a serious comment? He's not even a PG yet, he will have to learn the position in the NBA.

Plus are we really crying over Diogu? Give me a break. He was never going to contribute here.

RWB
06-27-2008, 03:45 PM
For a premier starting PG? Is the even a serious comment? He's not even a PG yet, he will have to learn the position in the NBA.

Plus are we really crying over Diogu? Give me a break. He was never going to contribute here.

Quit using common sense, it makes people angry. :D

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:45 PM
I'm just...has Bayless even played a game? Can we give it a couple of years and then declare this a horrible failure?
I'll be happy to.


This rivals the outcry over the James White affair. Dear lord, we missed out on a second round pick.
Three second-round picks. And Bird said he'd have been happy taking the kid at #17.

Fills you with confidence, doesn't it?

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:46 PM
He's not even a PG yet
The Portland Trailblazers disagree with you.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 03:47 PM
The Portland Trailblazers disagree with you.

Why? I don't think he'll even be starting there on opening day. Dude's a shooting guard right now.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 03:55 PM
Why? I don't think he'll even be starting there on opening day. Dude's a shooting guard right now.
They wouldn't have traded for him if they thought he was a SG... they're supposedly very high on Rudy. He can't fail.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 03:58 PM
They also have the huge luxury of Brandon Roy. So Bayless doesn't need to be a pure PG for them since Roy can do it half the time anyway. We have no such luxury and need an actual, bonafide, according to Hoyle PG. As everyone that's ever discussed Bayless has said, he's not that right now.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 03:58 PM
Well I don't care if Pritch thinks he is a purple elephant, right now Bayless is more of a shooting guard than a point guard. He could grow and learn, but I just think some of the conclusions being jumped to about him are a little ridiculous.

Suaveness
06-27-2008, 04:00 PM
Boy oh boy some people need to drop this. I'm upset too, but who cares, it's done with. I'm going to be happy with who we've got.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 04:01 PM
Anybody who watched Bayless this past year can see that he's very good and has tremendous potential at the point. He has good size and a very good outside shot. He's been compared to a young Billups. This is what you capitalize on in a trade... the potential and how bad does Portland want him.


Next time no preconceived trades Larry. Make the team give up what they want in the 10 minutes or take your player and let their player fall to the next guy. Or take the BPA and trade him to someone else.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 04:02 PM
They also have the huge luxury of Brandon Roy. So Bayless doesn't need to be a pure PG for them since Roy can do it half the time anyway. We have no such luxury and need an actual, bonafide, according to Hoyle PG. As everyone that's ever discussed Bayless has said, he's not that right now.

He wouldn't have to be. You may have missed it, but the Pacers also traded for Ford. We'll almost certainly get at least half a season out of him before he breaks his back, which would give Bayless time to learn the position. Odds are good that Ford will still be an NBA player at this time next year, which means Bayless has plenty of time to fully make the transition.

EDIT: Heck, people are already talking about playing Jack at off-guard next to Ford. You don't think Bayless could have done that better?

EDIT 2: And I'm not conceding that he couldn't be a full-time PG right off the bat. I'm just saying it wouldn't matter.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 04:02 PM
Well I don't care if Pritch thinks he is a purple elephant, right now Bayless is more of a shooting guard than a point guard. He could grow and learn, but I just think some of the conclusions being jumped to about him are a little ridiculous.

He played point in the toughest conference of college last year for a team that has a history of producing very good PGs.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 04:03 PM
Anybody who watched Bayless this past year can see that he's very good and has tremendous potential at the point. He has good size and a very good outside shot. He's been compared to a young Billups. This is what you capitalize on in a trade... the potential and how bad does Portland want him.


Next time no preconceived trades Larry. Make the team give up what they want in the 10 minutes or take your player and let their player fall to the next guy. Or take the BPA and trade him to someone else.

The whole Bayless is a young Billups thing is silly. No one knew how good Billups would be. Young Billups kinda sucked to be honest.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 04:04 PM
He played point in the toughest conference of college last year for a team that has a history of producing very good PGs.

I'm pretty sure Bayless is the first Arizona guard taken in the first round since 1999. And he might be the first Arizona guard drafted at all since 2002.

count55
06-27-2008, 04:05 PM
They also have the huge luxury of Brandon Roy. So Bayless doesn't need to be a pure PG for them since Roy can do it half the time anyway. We have no such luxury and need an actual, bonafide, according to Hoyle PG. As everyone that's ever discussed Bayless has said, he's not that right now.

True, but he could've played combo guard with Ford. Bayless, as tbird noted, made a lot of sense.

I'm perfectly fine with the trade. I may have kept Bayless and taken my chances, but I can see the reasoning behind the moves made. While recent history would indicate that the Blazers may be favorites to come out ahead here, I don't think it's a huge stretch to see the Pacers being very happy with the results of this trade.

I'm relatively comfortable that both Rush and Jack will be good contributors. The inherent risk is that Bayless becomes a star in Portland. However, he could also be Randy Foye (not a bad thing, but...we'll find out.)

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 04:07 PM
The whole Bayless is a young Billups thing is silly.

Just FYI the Billups/Bayless comparison has been made by sports commentators and not by me. One, I think Tim Legler, made the comment during the USC/Arizona game, though it might have been a UCLA/Zona game.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 04:07 PM
He wouldn't have to be. You may have missed it, but the Pacers also traded for Ford. We'll almost certainly get at least half a season out of him before he breaks his back, which would give Bayless time to learn the position. Odds are good that Ford will still be an NBA player at this time next year, which means Bayless has plenty of time to fully make the transition.

EDIT 1: Heck, people are already talking about playing Jack at off-guard next to Ford. You don't think Bayless could have done that better?

EDIT 2: And I'm not conceding that he couldn't be a full-time PG right off the bat. I'm just saying it wouldn't matter.

Wasn't arguing either side.

Just stating some facts and some possibilities on what Larry's reasoning could have been.

I know nothing about Bayless.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2008, 04:09 PM
I'm pretty sure Bayless is the first Arizona guard taken in the first round since 1999. And he might be the first Arizona guard drafted at all since 2002.

Well I guess that means Bayless is not a PG.


???

avoidingtheclowns
06-27-2008, 05:34 PM
I don't know where the theory giving up Bayless should have netted more comes from.

Portland didn't want its second rounders. Why we didn't end up with one is a little silly to me. And, to harp on the James White trade, we gave up three 2nds for that - how was this not worth at least one? I think we were in a nice bargaining position and we blew it. Like I've said, I really like B.Rush and Jack so altogether I don't have a problem. But we included Ike and Bayless for Jack and B.Rush. Seems like an early 2nd wouldn't have been too much to ask for.

Gamble1
06-27-2008, 05:38 PM
Ford called Baston a project. I wonder if he will pan out at 40.

He probably doesn't even know his background at all.

maragin
06-27-2008, 06:27 PM
Ford called Baston a project. I wonder if he will pan out at 40.

He probably doesn't even know his background at all.

Ha.

I really enjoyed some of the games where Baston picked up defensive assignments against opposing centers. He also gives us a good trailer on fast breaks. I don't mind him being here again at all. (Assuming we have the spots for him)

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 07:32 PM
The idea that we could have gotten more for Bayless is flawed. Dude fell to 11, therefore he had the value of the 11th pick. If he was higher valued, he would have been picked sooner. I was totally shocked that Gordon was taken over him, but NBA GMs know what they are doing (to an extent), at least they know more than the people who make mock drafts on the internet.

People are only complaining because the guy was so hyped up in the mocks, when apparently GM's had a lot more questions about his ability to play PG than we all knew.

Reportedly, Bird had already figured we would be getting him, because he knew Augustin and Westbrook would not be there (this being what he told kravits). The deal was prearranged. The fact that a team like LA passed, who desperatly needs a PG, tells you something.

I bought into the Bayless hype as well, and I think he could be a very good player in Portland playing next to Roy, but I don't think he would have necesarily been the answer here. I am happy we got a good young complimentary player to backup Ford, and Brandon Rush may end up being a great fit. It is apparently who Bird wanted all along anyway.

On another note, I think it is lame to make fun of Ford's injury history as if he is Jammal Tinsley. The dude is risking paraylisis because he loves the game apparently. He had two relatively injury free seasons, gets laid out by Horford last season, comes back after 40 games, and plays great.

Acting like we can't depend on him to play a full season like its JO or Tinsley just does not tell the whole story.

Hicks
06-27-2008, 07:49 PM
The Pacer people who do all the crazy little sound effects at the game need to add two new ones for the upcoming season. Everytime Brandon or Kareem(if we keep him) hit a three pointer they can play the clip from that intro to the old wrestling tag team the legion of doom "wwhhhhaaaatttt aaaaaaa rrrrrush". For Hibbert everytime he blocks a shot or slam dunks the ball in someones face use the Dr. Hibbert Laugh from the simpsons. I couldn't think of any entertaining quotes basketball related that Dr. Hibbert makes cause i'm not quite that big of a nerd. :D


Haha good idea :)

This must happen. I'm not too kicked up about the Rush one (though I remember the Legion of Doom), but I love the Hibbert one.

BlueNGold
06-27-2008, 07:50 PM
I have seen many posters with the following view..."If he was higher valued, he would have been picked sooner." It might be time to bring up our new franchise player, Danny Granger, WHO ALSO FELL TO US!!!!!

I have to believe that this deal was consummated prior to the draft. If not, I suppose we simply don't want the BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER.

BTW, you don't compete in the playoffs and win championships with 12 mediocre players. You do it with 3 or 4 great ones and a supporting cast of 6 or 7. Unlike some of the potential picks and projects, Bayless had the goods. The fact he fell was a gift. One we rejected.

Hicks
06-27-2008, 07:54 PM
Boy oh boy some people need to drop this. I'm upset too, but who cares, it's done with. I'm going to be happy with who we've got.

Yep.

Shade
06-27-2008, 08:02 PM
The idea that we could have gotten more for Bayless is flawed. Dude fell to 11, therefore he had the value of the 11th pick. If he was higher valued, he would have been picked sooner. I was totally shocked that Gordon was taken over him, but NBA GMs know what they are doing (to an extent), at least they know more than the people who make mock drafts on the internet.

No, players slip in every draft because sometimes GMs reach for a player that they fear won't be there later (if they were unable to trade down), and most often players slip because teams draft based primarily on need.


People are only complaining because the guy was so hyped up in the mocks, when apparently GM's had a lot more questions about his ability to play PG than we all knew.I have seen both Bayless and Rush play. Bayless is better, and to be honest, it's not even really all that close. A team that desperately needs a talent infusion had one and opted instead to trade quality for quantity. That's how you stay a mediocre team.


Reportedly, Bird had already figured we would be getting him, because he knew Augustin and Westbrook would not be there (this being what he told kravits). The deal was prearranged. The fact that a team like LA passed, who desperatly needs a PG, tells you something.Bird was supposedly "surprised" that Bayless was still on the board. But any higher-up worth his salt will always have a contingency plan in place. From what's being reported, Bird painted himself into a corner, regardless of his thoughts on Bayless. Say what you will about Walsh, but he never would have made such a bone-headed blunder.


I bought into the Bayless hype as well, and I think he could be a very good player in Portland playing next to Roy, but I don't think he would have necesarily been the answer here. I am happy we got a good young complimentary player to backup Ford, and Brandon Rush may end up being a great fit. It is apparently who Bird wanted all along anyway.We got good players, but gave up a potentially great one in the process.


On another note, I think it is lame to make fun of Ford's injury history as if he is Jammal Tinsley. The dude is risking paraylisis because he loves the game apparently. He had two relatively injury free seasons, gets laid out by Horford last season, comes back after 40 games, and plays great.

Acting like we can't depend on him to play a full season like its JO or Tinsley just does not tell the whole story.Being concerned about his injury-prone past, ESPECIALLY after everything this franchise has gone through with injury-prone players, is not equatable to "mak[ing] fun of [his] injury history."

Shade
06-27-2008, 08:05 PM
Yep.

Trust me, I really want to drop this, but I just can't. We may have just made a blunder of franchise-altering proportions.

JayRedd
06-27-2008, 08:13 PM
We got good players, but gave up a potentially great one in the process.

Yup. That is exactly what happened. Gave up a potentially great for two expected goods.

And again, I'm not advocating anything because I'm really ambivalent about both sides...

But from Larry's standpoint, the package we got was low risk/low reward. The Bayless option is high risk/high reward.

Low risk/low reward certainly isn't going to take us straight to the top, but it should move us away from the past four years of misery.

High risk/high reward certainly could take us up towards the top, but it could also move us away to Las Vegas.

IMO, this wasn't about a title...It was about putting each and every resource they could muster into (hopefully) reversing the course of Battleship USS Despair that we've been sailing for almost a half a decade.

I'm not saying I'm okay with that. Not saying that at all.

But, it is what it is...And it is at least understandable rationale coming from a group of people running a $250 million organization.

Trader Joe
06-27-2008, 08:45 PM
Trust me, I really want to drop this, but I just can't. We may have just made a blunder of franchise-altering proportions.

:rolleyes:
C'mon, Shade the hype was great for Bayless, but he hasn't played a game yet. Its way too early to be THAT worried about this.

aero
06-27-2008, 08:52 PM
this isnt an april fools joke is it ? no wait...its june

travmil
06-27-2008, 08:54 PM
God just stop it this is getting ridiculous. I have an idea....why don't we wait until the games actually start and then gripe? Talking about giving up a potential franchise altering player is far beyond ridiculous when he hasn't even played a minute in the NBA. I have a story to relate for you. Several years ago Pike High here in Indy had an outstanding team. They won a state title and one of their players won Mr. Basketball. Of those players, one of them was a solid but not outstanding contributor. He had to practically beg his way onto the roster of a mid major team while his more highly regarded teammates were heavily recruited to Big Ten schools and made the Indiana All Star team. Who is it? Courtney Lee, and he's the only member of that Pike team that is ever going to sniff the NBA. My point? Nobody knows how any of these moves or these players will ever pan out so stop acting like the sky is falling.

Anthem
06-27-2008, 08:57 PM
I have an idea....why don't we wait until the games actually start and then *****?
Nope. Shade and I are getting it out now so we can root for Rush later.

DgR
06-27-2008, 09:36 PM
Is Bayless really a high risk pick?

Looks to me Bird's emphasis this draft was

1. NBA readiness- which I dont understand. I dont think we should have picked a long term project either- but at least not a guy with mediocre ceiling just because he's ready to contribute right now. doesn't sound very intelligent since we're nowhere near contention- why rush the rebuilding?

2. Good character- It seems to me Bird got so caught up in cleaning the franchise's image that the players potential becomes secondary. The player has to be a quire boy HOF to get picked by the Ps

this is disappointing because it doesn't seem like the right way to build a contender

Infinite MAN_force
06-27-2008, 09:47 PM
No, players slip in every draft because sometimes GMs reach for a player that they fear won't be there later (if they were unable to trade down), and most often players slip because teams draft based primarily on need.

I have seen both Bayless and Rush play. Bayless is better, and to be honest, it's not even really all that close. A team that desperately needs a talent infusion had one and opted instead to trade quality for quantity. That's how you stay a mediocre team.

Bird was supposedly "surprised" that Bayless was still on the board. But any higher-up worth his salt will always have a contingency plan in place. From what's being reported, Bird painted himself into a corner, regardless of his thoughts on Bayless. Say what you will about Walsh, but he never would have made such a bone-headed blunder.

We got good players, but gave up a potentially great one in the process.

Being concerned about his injury-prone past, ESPECIALLY after everything this franchise has gone through with injury-prone players, is not equatable to "mak[ing] fun of [his] injury history."

On the subject of Bayless's trade value, his value on draft day would not be any different than if it had been augustin at 11. Somehow I doubt there would be any controversy if it had been Augustin in this trade.

The trade was in place for the value of the 11th pick, which is set by the 10 teams drafting prior. Mock drafts don't mean sqaut to the GM of an actual NBA team. Besides, The deal was prearranged from what I understand, to be either Augustin or Bayless for Rush. So I don't think its a situation of Bird screwing up when he unexpectadly got Bayless. It was premeditated.

Bird must have known something, and apparently a few other GM's did also. Three teams prior to us with a need at point gaurd passed on Bayless... two for non pointgaurds, and one for a PG that we can all agree is less talented overall than Bayless... but Augustin is a pure PG.

and TJ Ford is much better than Augustin.

Bayless is a better talent than Rush, but there are other factors to consider.

If Bayless were 6-6 215 I would be right there with you.

If Kevin Love were 7 feet tall he probably would have gone #1 overall.

Size matters in the NBA.

Bayless is a tweener. As some have pointed out, his upside is probably something akin to Arenas, and I don't think Arenas is going to be the PG to lead your team to the promise land... unless he is surrounded with rediculous talent.

Realistically, your probably looking at something more like Randy Foye. Not bad at all, but not my point. Calling Bayless a potential franchise player is a joke. (not that you did, just saying...)

There is also something to be said for intangibles. A talented Arizona team exited the tourney pretty early... Kansas won it all. Obviously that can be totally meaningless when it comes to individual talents, but not always.

There have been plenty of players with more raw talent than a guy, like say, a Reggie Miller, who did not make an iota of the same impact. There is something to be said for being a winner and a hard worker. STOP. I am not saying Rush is Reggie, just illustrating a point.

My only real point here is that it is not so cut and dry. We may regret giving up Bayless, we may not. However, I like the results and I like the prospects of next year's team. Bayless may score a lot of points some day, he might be an all star, but I think we aquired some qaulity players that make more sense and fit into a longterm plan. I think calling it a huge blunder is a bit extreme.

BlueNGold
06-27-2008, 09:58 PM
I'm dropping this now, but one day of venting is hardly dragging this thing out.

I do think the team is better, so it's not all bad. It may lack talent Pacer fans have come to expect over the last 20 years, but it's still an overall improvement over last year...particularly at PG and perimeter D.

We have some size and strength finally in the middle. I think Rasho will actually help somewhat. I truly hope Hibbert is much better than I expect. Baston is a decent player. I hope McRoberts just stays home in Carmel.

I'm glad we don't have so much money wrapped up in a part-time player and it's likely we will have more continuity now.

The best thing of all? Jamaal Tinsley no longer holds this team hostage at PG. We don't need his services at all now, and probably never again. The Simons should just cut a check now....

Peck
06-27-2008, 10:31 PM
Trust me, I really want to drop this, but I just can't. We may have just made a blunder of franchise-altering proportions.

You've got to be kidding me?????

Bayless is actaully Michael Jordan and I didn't know it?

Let's review again shall we.

We traded a 12th man for a player who will easily be in the top 8 rotation and maybe even higher.

That in and of itself is a win and a win of huge proportions when you consider that the person playing Jacks position last year had either the name Owens, Diener or Daniels.

We picked up salary filler who can be cut with no long term money ramifications.

Oh yea in getting rid of the 12th man and picking up the top 8 rotation player you were able to drop about a million off of the salary cap, not that I care but so many of you do.

We then traded one unknown for another unknown. One is shooting guard and the other is a shooting guard in a point guards body.

However this was not done in a vaccum. We had already picked up a starting point guard, a center who may or may not start depending on JOB, a power forward to either fill out cap space or even be servicable and a project of a center in the draft.

I'm sorry, but how anyone can not call this a hell of a day is beyond me.

In one 48 hour period Bird transformed our entire team.

To be having the kind of epileptic fits some of you are having this Bayless had better come into the league and do nothing less than win the ROY and be considered for MVP.

Mourning
06-28-2008, 01:23 AM
We traded a 12th man for a player who will easily be in the top 8 rotation and maybe even higher.

That in and of itself is a win and a win of huge proportions when you consider that the person playing Jacks position last year had either the name Owens, Diener or Daniels.


The question to me is... WHY was Portland even willing to trade a clearly much better Jack for our 12th man and throw in McRoberts (sp?) aswell? You can talk me into a lot, but not that moving up two measly spots costs that much normally, especially not at the point where we picked.

So, apparantly Portland has a LOT more expectations of him. Borderline all-star btw would have been very, very cool to me. That's basically about where Danny is now.

I like Rush too (and I will support the dude), but given the choice of chosing between him and Bayless and the Trailblazers adding in Jack would make me as a GM think again... "why would they do that?", especially when the other GM offering it to you has basically run a perfect score sheet since he got his job about three years ago and his team is quickly on the rise.

Let's just say I have sort of laid it to rest now, but Rush better be this really, really good perimeter defender some people say he is.

avoidingtheclowns
06-28-2008, 01:52 AM
The question to me is... WHY was Portland even willing to trade a clearly much better Jack for our 12th man and throw in McRoberts (sp?) aswell? You can talk me into a lot, but not that moving up two measly spots costs that much normally, especially not at the point where we picked.

So, apparantly Portland has a LOT more expectations of him. Borderline all-star btw would have been very, very cool to me. That's basically about where Danny is now.

I like Rush too (and I will support the dude), but given the choice of chosing between him and Bayless and the Trailblazers adding in Jack would make me as a GM think again... "why would they do that?", especially when the other GM offering it to you has basically run a perfect score sheet since he got his job about three years ago and his team is quickly on the rise.

Let's just say I have sort of laid it to rest now, but Rush better be this really, really good perimeter defender some people say he is.

well they already have webster and outlaw in the 3 spot developing. ultimately i guess this means they don't expect much from sergio.

but another curious thing...

portland the last few years has been remarkably concerned with character following the jailblazer years. if bayless is such a malcontent, why is portland interested? blinded by talent or do they know something the rest of us don't? just a thought.

grace
06-28-2008, 02:56 PM
The question to me is... WHY was Portland even willing to trade a clearly much better Jack for our 12th man and throw in McRoberts (sp?) aswell?

I don't really know the answer except to say that even before the season was over the Portland TV announcers were saying that Jack would probably be the player the Blazers would be offering to trade.

As for why McRoberts is in the trade maybe Portland had to offer Jack to get anyone to take McRoberts. :dunno: ;)

Suaveness
06-28-2008, 03:08 PM
Trust me, I really want to drop this, but I just can't. We may have just made a blunder of franchise-altering proportions.

Seriously? You have no clue how the guy's going to play. And even if he does play well, who cares? He apparently doesn't fit our system, and it seems as though JOB, Bird, and Morway don't really mind so much that he's not here. From what I've seen, he doesn't play defense, and he shoots a ton. He's not even that much of a PG. Oh well, we lose some offense, I don't think offense was our problem.

Instead, we get a pretty good PG in Jack, who, while probably is not as good as Bayless, is a much better fit at the PG spot. We've gone from no good PGs to 2 starting quality ones in a matter of days. How freaking awesome is that? Not only that, he plays good defense as well. That makes me excited. And now we actually have a true SG as well in Rush. He plays good defense, and he's no pushover. He can shoot great and has a high bball IQ. As do all of our acquisitions.

I don't know, I'm just super excited with what we have. I think we're going to be a pretty darn good team next year. And definitely better defensively and more fun to watch.

colts19
06-28-2008, 04:17 PM
to those who are so upset about losing the future superstar, magic, jordon, nash, oscar and reggie all combined in one. Please take a breath, it will all be good. Bird to his credit has done what you all have been begging for the last 2 years and I am very happy.

tim