PDA

View Full Version : A thought I haven't seen yet.......



Taterhead
06-28-2008, 02:10 AM
If the Pacers didn't like Bayless in the first place, why not use his talent more to our advantage?

In other words why not use him to try and get rid of Murphy or Tinsley? Or package him with Dunleavy for an elite big man?

Doesn't it seem that we could have used him more effectively in a trade?

jjbjjbjjb
06-28-2008, 02:13 AM
Doesn't Miami need a PG? Maybe we could have gotten Marion...

Taterhead
06-28-2008, 02:23 AM
Doesn't Miami need a PG? Maybe we could have gotten Marion...

Exactly my point. He certainly would have been a very attractive piece for them. Or maybe even the Clippers for Elton Brand?

Hicks
06-28-2008, 02:32 AM
Placing a combo guard next to Wade is a bad idea.

Pig Nash
06-28-2008, 02:36 AM
Hey guys, if we repeat it enough, it'll happen!

Peck
06-28-2008, 03:24 AM
Well here is a thought.

I know this is not going to set well with any of you but here goes.

The Indiana Pacers are not looking to get rid of Troy Murphy.

You will really want to not read this next part.

Troy Murphy will play a very prominant role on the team next year and will be your starting power forward.

There, I said it.

Taterhead
06-28-2008, 03:26 AM
Well here is a thought.

I know this is not going to set well with any of you but here goes.

The Indiana Pacers are not looking to get rid of Troy Murphy.

You will really want to not read this next part.

Troy Murphy will play a very prominant role on the team next year and will be your starting power forward.

There, I said it.

LOL! Prominant role in what? That's hilarious!

Trader Joe
06-28-2008, 03:29 AM
LOL! Prominant role in what? That's hilarious!

You make a compelling point...

Peck
06-28-2008, 03:38 AM
LOL! Prominant role in what? That's hilarious!

Well if your asking...

Scoring, passing and rebounding.

He will not play a prominant role in shot blocking or man to man defense, however he will be heavily involved in the team concept defense.

Laugh all you want, I'm not saying I prefer him, I'm just telling you how it is.

Anthem
06-28-2008, 07:55 AM
Nope, you're absolutely right, Peck.

The fact that we'll have to move three superior players to make sure he gets PT doesn't excite me, but even I, hardened skeptic, will say that he was playing the best (offensive) ball of his life after the ASB last year.

If he keeps that up he won't be bad.

Alabama-Redneck
06-28-2008, 08:30 AM
Well if your asking...

Scoring, passing and rebounding.

He will not play a prominant role in shot blocking or man to man defense, however he will be heavily involved in the team concept defense.

Laugh all you want, I'm not saying I prefer him, I'm just telling you how it is.

Peck,

You and I have been around here long enough to realize this is not the place or group to talk about reality or actuality. Shame on you. You should know better, :o :D

:cool:

D-BONE
06-28-2008, 08:54 AM
Well here is a thought.

I know this is not going to set well with any of you but here goes.

The Indiana Pacers are not looking to get rid of Troy Murphy.

You will really want to not read this next part.

Troy Murphy will play a very prominant role on the team next year and will be your starting power forward.

There, I said it.

No question about this. He'll still have all the defensive liabilities he did at C but he's more cut our for PF anyway IMO. However, I don't think in any semiobjective analysis you cannot conclude that the second half of last year he was our third best offensive option.

Big who shoots the three-good for JOB's offense. Used the threat of his range to open up a shot fake, quick drive to the rim move to his repetoire. Serviceable rebounder. Those are the strengths. Doesn't justify his contract, but I'd be surprised if we could move it and, barring some other big man acqusition, he's the leading guy to step into at the starter at 4 with Williams and Foster candidates to get some minutes there behind him I would think.

count55
06-28-2008, 09:05 AM
Nope, you're absolutely right, Peck.

The fact that we'll have to move three superior players to make sure he gets PT doesn't excite me, but even I, hardened skeptic, will say that he was playing the best (offensive) ball of his life after the ASB last year.

If he keeps that up he won't be bad.

OK...I come up with JO, but who are the other two? Is Harrington on the list?

I don't think it's Diogu, because I thought we were more or less on the same page with him.

I'm not a fan of Murphy, but he could conceivably put up some decent numbers.

It's funny, I was looking at some old December 2005 (Artest Trade) threads on Realgm a few weeks ago, and I came across a four-page thread titled "Troy Murphy", and it just raved about him...he was a 17-9 guy at the time, and everybody pretty much thought it'd be great to get him for Artest, as long as we got Diogu or Biendrins. (Of course the GS fans flatly refused to give up Ike....). The thread's gone since rgm did their upgrade, but it's interesting to see how sometimes attitudes about players change so drastically.

Unclebuck
06-28-2008, 09:33 AM
Peck, I agree with you 100%. I don't really like Murph's game, but he played extremely well the last 25 of the season. He fits well into O'Brien's system. Sure he isn't a good defender, but he knows what to do in this defense.

Everyone right now is feaking out about the Pacers power forward postion - I don't thnk it is really that bad with Troy and Jeff


Some of you are way overvaluing Bayliss, he was the 11th pick in the draft.

count55
06-28-2008, 09:40 AM
Peck, I agree with you 100%. I don't really like Murph's game, but he played extremely well the last 25 of the season. He fits well into O'Brien's system. Sure he isn't a good defender, but he knows what to do in this defense.

Everyone right now is feaking out about the Pacers power forward postion - I don't thnk it is really that bad with Troy and Jeff

Yeah...that's like an '80's style PF combo. It's only in the last few years that the PF has taken over the scoring role that had been traditionally reserved for Centers. Guys like JO, Duncan, Garnett, Brand brought more athleticism to a spot that had traditionally been manned by enforcers, defenders, rebounders, and role players.

Foster fits the Iavaroni/Lucas role to a T. Murph's a little less traditional, but next to a big Center (which we have two, now) he could do OK. It's certainly not a long term solution, but it's not what I'd call a gaping hole.

Let's put it this way...I don't think it's as big of an issue as we've had at the point for the last two years.

rm1369
06-28-2008, 09:48 AM
Won't Murphy's weaknesses on D be even more exposed at the 4 and his offensive advatages be negated a little? His lack of foot speed will really show against the smaller more athletic 4s that are more prominent in the league. The thought of him trying to guard Rasheed, Bosh, KG, or Jamison scares the hell out of me. At least at the 5 the talent and skill level drops significantly. I agree it currently looks like he will have to play a more prominent role, but I'd much rather see Jeff start. IMO adding Hibbert will help Jeff tremendously because he is much more suited to playing against those athletic 4s instead of the bigger 5s.

idioteque
06-28-2008, 09:51 AM
Yes, Murphy isn't that great, but it's not like we're starting a 35 year old Oliver Miller at PF either. He's below average, but not by much. And he had some good games at the end of the season last year.

We are REBUILDING. It takes TIME. The answer at PF will probably not be found this offseason. It may not even be found the offseason after that.

D-BONE
06-28-2008, 10:00 AM
Won't Murphy's weaknesses on D be even more exposed at the 4 and his offensive advatages be negated a little? His lack of foot speed will really show against the smaller more athletic 4s that are more prominent in the league. The thought of him trying to guard Rasheed, Bosh, KG, or Jamison scares the hell out of me. At least at the 5 the talent and skill level drops significantly. I agree it currently looks like he will have to play a more prominent role, but I'd much rather see Jeff start. IMO adding Hibbert will help Jeff tremendously because he is much more suited to playing against those athletic 4s instead of the bigger 5s.

Well, you also have SW (assuming he's still on board) and Baston who can play their against smaller, more athletic types. How many guys can really shut down a KG or a DH? Jeff's probably our best option against them or a even Rasheed. It should be interesting to see what develops at this position for us.

EDIT: In fact, it will be quite interesting to see how first and second units are defined and possibly change over time, rotations, etc.

rm1369
06-28-2008, 10:20 AM
EDIT: In fact, it will be quite interesting to see how first and second units are defined and possibly change over time, rotations, etc.

I agree.

Other than TJ, does any of the newcomers start? I like the potential look of a lineup of Jack / Rush / DG / Foster / Hibbert, but that doesn't seem like a Jim O'Brien team at all. Without any more trades I'd expect to see Ford / Dun / DG / Foster / Murphy start. That seems like and ideal O'brien lineup and one that I don't like at all.

Of course as much as Jeff is needed, I'd like to see them cash in his value if possible.

beast23
06-28-2008, 11:11 AM
I don't think there is any question at all regarding 4 of our starters.

Peck has stated the obvious with the personnel we now have.

Ford, Dunleavy, Granger and Murphy will start. It's merely a question of who is slotted in the starting lineup at center.

That gives you 4 guys who have either or both of the skills of shooting or penetration around the center.

In that case, if you want rebounding and more versatile defense, you probably go with Foster.

If you need rebounding and "stay at home" post defense, that's when you give Hibbert his minutes.

And, if you want a few more points from your center or you need better defense from your PF, that's when you eiher use Nesterovic or slide Murphy into the post.

Another solution against one of the better centers or PFs is to go with a more athletic frontcourt, possibly with Danny or Dun at PF, inserting BRush at SG and try to run the opposing frontcourt out of the game.

With this roster, there is a lot of versatility, even though we are still missing some better suited players in our frontcourt.

The obvious point previously made by others is that you go with what you have. See what you need and fill in either before the trade deadline with your expiring contacts or next summer through additional draft choices or trades.

A rebuilding process is not an overnight pursuit. It will require a mass switcing of talent (which we have seen), re-assessment, tinkering, additional re-assessment, more tinkering, etc.

The only thing we are probably all hoping right now is that it will not require additionl acquisitions in mass. That only means that were are even further away from a final product.

Hicks
06-28-2008, 11:17 AM
Hey guys, if we repeat it enough, it'll happen!

You can say that again!

Hicks
06-28-2008, 11:21 AM
Well here is a thought.

I know this is not going to set well with any of you but here goes.

The Indiana Pacers are not looking to get rid of Troy Murphy.

You will really want to not read this next part.

Troy Murphy will play a very prominant role on the team next year and will be your starting power forward.

There, I said it.

I think you're right, and I think we could do worse. It still stings defensively, but we already knew that.

Ford/Jack
Dunleavy/B.Rush
Granger/Williams
Murphy/Foster
Nesterovic/Hibbert

If that is what our top 10 looks like, I think we'll look a lot better than we did last year. That may not be saying much to a lot of you, but it does to me.

Wu-Gambino
06-28-2008, 11:22 AM
Peck, I agree with you 100%. I don't really like Murph's game, but he played extremely well the last 25 of the season. He fits well into O'Brien's system. Sure he isn't a good defender, but he knows what to do in this defense.

Agreed, it looks like towards the end of the year, he was back to playing the way he used to at GS putting up 15 and 10. If he can continue his production, he wouldn't be the best power forward, but he would be serviceable.

mildlysane
06-28-2008, 11:58 AM
All these ideas....Perhaps we tried all of them and this was the best outcome we could muster. You guys have been saying nobody wants Troy for a long time now. What makes you think an 11th pick will suddenly change everyone's mind about Troy? I will also repeat...Can Bayless guard Ford? How about our 2's, BRush or MDJ? WHY did 10 other GMs pass on Bayless if he is King BBall?

Pig Nash
06-28-2008, 12:46 PM
You can say that again!

Hey guys, if you repeat it enough, monkeys will fly out of my ***!

ABADays
06-28-2008, 01:18 PM
It's funny, I was looking at some old December 2005 (Artest Trade) threads on Realgm a few weeks ago, and I came across a four-page thread titled "Troy Murphy", and it just raved about him...he was a 17-9 guy at the time

Dang, that's only 3 + 1 away from franchise player money.

count55
06-28-2008, 01:37 PM
Dang, that's only 3 + 1 away from franchise player money.

Have you looked at his contract lately? :eek:
:p:)

count55
06-28-2008, 01:39 PM
Hey guys, if you repeat it enough, monkeys will fly out of my ***!

I find it odd, and somewhat disturbing, that you would seemingly encourage that.

JayRedd
06-28-2008, 01:48 PM
Yeah...that's like an '80's style PF combo. It's only in the last few years that the PF has taken over the scoring role that had been traditionally reserved for Centers. Guys like JO, Duncan, Garnett, Brand brought more athleticism to a spot that had traditionally been manned by enforcers, defenders, rebounders, and role players.

Indeed. And I welcome it. Maybe Oakley is available.


I don't think there is any question at all regarding 4 of our starters.

Peck has stated the obvious with the personnel we now have.

Ford, Dunleavy, Granger and Murphy will start. It's merely a question of who is slotted in the starting lineup at center.

beast meet Rasho...Rasho meet beast.

You guys are gonna love each other.

Pig Nash
06-28-2008, 01:50 PM
I find it odd, and somewhat disturbing, that you would seemingly encourage that.

This is the point I've been driven to!

JayRedd
06-28-2008, 01:57 PM
I still think you should have gone with: "Hey guys, if you repeat it enough, I will fly."

Pig Nash
06-28-2008, 02:01 PM
1ytCEuuW2_A

Taterhead
06-28-2008, 05:19 PM
Well if your asking...

Scoring, passing and rebounding.

He will not play a prominant role in shot blocking or man to man defense, however he will be heavily involved in the team concept defense.

Laugh all you want, I'm not saying I prefer him, I'm just telling you how it is.

I was looking for answers like "winning, exceeding expectations, making the playoffs, providing toughness down low"? He has over 30 million dollars coming to him, I repeat over 30 million dollars! "Heavily involved in the team concept defense", what is that Peck, making it as easy as possible to score in the paint?

I never knew there were so many Troy Murphy fans, LMAO.

count55
06-28-2008, 05:48 PM
I was looking for answers like "winning, exceeding expectations, making the playoffs, providing toughness down low"? He has over 30 million dollars coming to him, I repeat over 30 million dollars! "Heavily involved in the team concept defense", what is that Peck, making it as easy as possible to score in the paint?

I never knew there were so many Troy Murphy fans, LMAO.

Saying Murphy will play a prominent role does not necessarily make you a Troy Murphy fan. It just means you have a keen grasp of the obvious.

There's not a lot of reason to believe that Murphy won't get as many minutes as he can handle this year. I also don't particularly think it's unreasonable to expect the Post-All Star break performance of 15-8, thus giving him a prominent role in the team. This is a guy who has averaged a double-double three times in his career.

Does that make him worth is contract? No, not by a long shot. He maybe goes from obscenely overpaid to merely grossly overpaid, but we have what we have. Murphy (likely) won't ever play a prominent role on a very good team, but we don't have a very good team right now.

I believe what Peck was pointing out was that given the situation and the likely inability to get any takers for Murphy because of his contract, that the
Pacers were likely to seek to maximize his contribution rather than having a fire sale. None of us would choose this situation, but the more he produces, two things happen: his value goes up and his contract gets shorter.

In other words...I really would prefer not to have Troy Murphy, or at least the $30+mm Troy, but if we're stuck with him, we might as well get something out of him.

(As a side note: Murphleavy combined numbers, post All-Star break were 37.1 pts, 12.0 rebs on .489 FG shooting, including .461 from 3pt range. The team was 15-14.)

JayRedd
06-28-2008, 06:18 PM
Every coach in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the player on their bench.

Zero GMs in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the contract on their salary cap.

There's a big difference. That's not to say that Troy is great, but he does several things fairly well and is one of the better outside shooting big men in the League.

I've criticized our financial policy a lot lately. But, just like with TJ Ford, the on-court stuff is not really affected much by the bookkeeping stuff.

count55
06-28-2008, 06:29 PM
Every coach in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the player on their bench.

Zero GMs in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the contract on their salary cap.

There's a big difference. That's not to say that Troy is great, but he does several things fairly well and is one of the better outside shooting big men in the League.

I've criticized our financial policy a lot lately. But, just like with TJ Ford, the on-court stuff is not really affected much by the bookkeeping stuff.


Well put...perfect number of "paragraphs".

beast23
06-28-2008, 08:31 PM
Indeed. And I welcome it. Maybe Oakley is available.



beast meet Rasho...Rasho meet beast.

You guys are gonna love each other.

I only got so much hair left.

Are you implying that I am about to lose it?

:rolleyes:

HOOPFANATIC
06-28-2008, 09:03 PM
I think you're right, and I think we could do worse. It still stings defensively, but we already knew that.

Ford/Jack
Dunleavy/B.Rush
Granger/Williams
Murphy/Foster
Nesterovic/Hibbert

If that is what our top 10 looks like, I think we'll look a lot better than we did last year. That may not be saying much to a lot of you, but it does to me.

I agree somewhat. I think this lineup may give us some stability on the offensive end, but without Jeff starting we won't be seeing many second chances. Also I'm not sure about Ford. I've seen him play a few times and see that he on the defensive end he suffers from little guy syndrome (hopefully Jack can solve that) also when I check his stats it looks like he may shoot a little too much. I don't know? I can see some improvement but I'm still holding out hope for more.

HOOPFANATIC
06-28-2008, 09:03 PM
I think you're right, and I think we could do worse. It still stings defensively, but we already knew that.

Ford/Jack
Dunleavy/B.Rush
Granger/Williams
Murphy/Foster
Nesterovic/Hibbert

If that is what our top 10 looks like, I think we'll look a lot better than we did last year. That may not be saying much to a lot of you, but it does to me.

I agree somewhat. I think this lineup may give us some stability on the offensive end, but without Jeff starting we won't be seeing many second chances. Also I'm not sure about Ford. I've seen him play a few times and see that he on the defensive end he suffers from little guy syndrome (hopefully Jack can solve that) also when I check his stats it looks like he may shoot a little too much. I don't know? I can see some improvement but I'm still holding out hope for more.

Kemo
06-28-2008, 09:49 PM
Every coach in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the player on their bench.

Zero GMs in this League would like to have Troy Murphy the contract on their salary cap.

There's a big difference. That's not to say that Troy is great, but he does several things fairly well and is one of the better outside shooting big men in the League.
.


AMEN


I dont understand the Murphy hate really...

I think , that although he is NO Chris Bosh , He knows his role, and from what I have seen.. plays it pretty well...
I would like to see Troy get better on his defense OF COURSE...
But everything else he does , I am not disappointed with really...
He is a hustler , has a fairly good 3 point stroke.. to open up the lanes... not to mention , at the end of this last season, he really impressed me when he started goin to the basket more...
I think if he works on his man to man defense , setting better screens/picks
and takes it to the hole more , that he can be a valuable role player at power forward position...
I think this summer he needs to work out alot with Foster, and let Foster's defensive mindest rub off on him a little...



The only players I want to see us get rid off really , would be Daniels and Tinsley .. .. Maybe try and get ourselves another (preferrably) Big Body at PF position by trading Williams and Rasho . or through free agency ..

No re-signing of Flip , nor Harrison...

I would however like us to re-sign Kareem .. .. maybe to come in at sg or sf off the bench or in situational plays.. minutes determined by how well he plays ..


But I am not so sure , unless we make some more moves, cause we are going to be pretty stacked at PG / SG / SF positions , with most of our guys able to play 2 positions...

JayRedd
06-28-2008, 10:03 PM
Well put...perfect number of "paragraphs".

Nobody ever got that joke.


I only got so much hair left.

Are you implying that I am about to lose it?

:rolleyes:

I was actually being serious. Oak was the epitome of the hard hat PF that I love to see.

Anthem
06-28-2008, 10:27 PM
I think if he works on his man to man defense
He needs a LOT of work there.


The only players I want to see us get rid off really, would be Daniels and Tinsley
There's no urgent need to trade Daniels because he comes off the cap this year. I see him as our biggest trouble-finder, but he's worth holding onto for a Feb deal.

Taterhead
06-29-2008, 04:01 AM
Saying Murphy will play a prominent role does not necessarily make you a Troy Murphy fan. It just means you have a keen grasp of the obvious.

There's not a lot of reason to believe that Murphy won't get as many minutes as he can handle this year. I also don't particularly think it's unreasonable to expect the Post-All Star break performance of 15-8, thus giving him a prominent role in the team. This is a guy who has averaged a double-double three times in his career.

Does that make him worth is contract? No, not by a long shot. He maybe goes from obscenely overpaid to merely grossly overpaid, but we have what we have. Murphy (likely) won't ever play a prominent role on a very good team, but we don't have a very good team right now.

I believe what Peck was pointing out was that given the situation and the likely inability to get any takers for Murphy because of his contract, that the
Pacers were likely to seek to maximize his contribution rather than having a fire sale. None of us would choose this situation, but the more he produces, two things happen: his value goes up and his contract gets shorter.

In other words...I really would prefer not to have Troy Murphy, or at least the $30+mm Troy, but if we're stuck with him, we might as well get something out of him.

(As a side note: Murphleavy combined numbers, post All-Star break were 37.1 pts, 12.0 rebs on .489 FG shooting, including .461 from 3pt range. The team was 15-14.)

I like how you combine Dunleavy with Murphy to severly inflate his stats, but anyways.

The whole entire point of this post was to point out the obvious blunder by Bird to not atleast try and use Bayless to aid in moving Murphy and his atrocious deal or Jamal Tinsley. Either one of these moves would obvoiously help us dramatically in our rebuilding efforts.

Instead of responding to that people start talking about Troy Murphy playing a prominant role...............blah blah. My response is a prominant role in what? We are rebuilding, which means gaining a fresh start. Is Murphy a part of that?

Say what you want, but a player of Bayless abilities makes any trade package involving Tinsley or Murphy a great deal more attractive to anyone listening. The kid is 19 and has all star PG potential, even his critics don't deny that. Which was the whole point. We don't have anyone else on this roster we'd be willing to part with that is enticing enough to convince a team to take a descent but overpaid player like Murphy off our hands. But a 19 year old PG prospect with AS potential might be.

Shouldn't Bird have atleast explored other options? Maybe we didn't have to be stuck with Murphy and Tinsley, until now that is.

BTW, Murphy has been in the NBA a long time, he is what he is. He is not athletically capable of being a better defender. He will only get worse on defense with age as what little athleticism he has starts to dissapear.

duke dynamite
06-29-2008, 04:11 AM
Well here is a thought.

I know this is not going to set well with any of you but here goes.

The Indiana Pacers are not looking to get rid of Troy Murphy.

You will really want to not read this next part.

Troy Murphy will play a very prominant role on the team next year and will be your starting power forward.

There, I said it.
Troy Murphy isn't getting enough credit I think. I am estatic that someone finally had the guts to say this. He is a great fit for this spot, and if he has to, for center. Granted his contract isn't what he should be making, but Golden State had the money and felt like he deserved it in the beginning.

Murph is just now barely coming out of his shell. He has adapted to this new realm, and his full potential is about ready to be tapped.

In many situations, a player is as only good as their team. Murph and Dun Dun didn't have a solid team in GS. Same with last year. I feel with all this new talent coming in it will take a lot of the pressure off the current guys and make them a little more confident in their individual games as well as their work as a team.

Don't give up on Troy just yet.

That, and he has the one of the best left-handed jumpers I've seen in a long time. HOW DOES HE DO IT!?

duke dynamite
06-29-2008, 04:15 AM
And we are still waiting for Stanko.

Bball
06-29-2008, 04:19 AM
I like how you combine Dunleavy with Murphy to severly inflate his stats, but anyways.

The whole entire point of this post was to point out the obvious blunder by Bird to not atleast try and use Bayless to aid in moving Murphy and his atrocious deal or Jamal Tinsley. Either one of these moves would obvoiously help us dramatically in our rebuilding efforts.

Instead of responding to that people start talking about Troy Murphy playing a prominant role...............blah blah. My response is a prominant role in what? We are rebuilding, which means gaining a fresh start. Is Murphy a part of that?

Say what you want, but a player of Bayless abilities makes any trade package involving Tinsley or Murphy a great deal more attractive to anyone listening. The kid is 19 and has all star PG potential, even his critics don't deny that. Which was the whole point. We don't have anyone else on this roster we'd be willing to part with that is enticing enough to convince a team to take a descent but overpaid player like Murphy off our hands. But a 19 year old PG prospect with AS potential might be.

Shouldn't Bird have atleast explored other options? Maybe we didn't have to be stuck with Murphy and Tinsley, until now that is.

BTW, Murphy has been in the NBA a long time, he is what he is. He is not athletically capable of being a better defender. He will only get worse on defense with age as what little athleticism he has starts to dissapear.


What makes you think Bird didn't look into those options? I'm sure "what if" scenarios were played out and tossed around prior to the draft. And why would using Bayless to help move Tinsley or Murphy have been a better use of his value than the deal we ended up doing?

Also, as Peck said, don't be surprised if Murphy figures prominently in what we'll be doing this year.

count55
06-29-2008, 09:40 AM
I like how you combine Dunleavy with Murphy to severly inflate his stats, but anyways.

Well, to be accurate, I had started looking at Murphy's stats, something popped in my head, and I combined for another tangent that I was wondering about, then posted them as a single unit. I didn't want to post on that tangent, because it's a briar patch, but, to address your deflection: 14.8 pts, 7.7 rebs, .505 FG%, .422 3%.


The whole entire point of this post was to point out the obvious blunder by Bird to not atleast try and use Bayless to aid in moving Murphy and his atrocious deal or Jamal Tinsley. Either one of these moves would obvoiously help us dramatically in our rebuilding efforts.

Instead of responding to that people start talking about Troy Murphy playing a prominant role...............blah blah. My response is a prominant role in what? We are rebuilding, which means gaining a fresh start. Is Murphy a part of that?

Say what you want, but a player of Bayless abilities makes any trade package involving Tinsley or Murphy a great deal more attractive to anyone listening. The kid is 19 and has all star PG potential, even his critics don't deny that. Which was the whole point. We don't have anyone else on this roster we'd be willing to part with that is enticing enough to convince a team to take a descent but overpaid player like Murphy off our hands. But a 19 year old PG prospect with AS potential might be.

Shouldn't Bird have atleast explored other options? Maybe we didn't have to be stuck with Murphy and Tinsley, until now that is.


This, I believe, is the great myth. Time and again, people have said that we should've gotten more for Bayless. We didn't trade Bayless, we traded the 11th pick, and we got an equitable package for the 11th pick. And I'm curious, what deal do you envision the Pacers making that would force us to package Bayless along with either Tinsley or Murphy that wouldn't make people scream even bloodier murder than they are now?

Murphy has relatively negative value because his contract. Tinsley is a sucking chest wound because of his contract, injuries, attitude, and off-court bull****. It's not an unreasonable projection to say that we would've gotten a lesser package than we actually got. In fact, I'm sure that Tinsley would completely negate Bayless' value, and we'd be lucky to get anything more than an expiring contract.

With your thread, there are now three scenarios on draft day:

1. Draft & Keep Bayless - Upside is that Bayless becomes a star playing combo guard and leads the Pacers back into contention...downside is that Bayless struggles to find a perfect role in the offense, as well as a perfect position for him to excel in the NBA.

2. Draft Bayless, trade him for Rush & Jack - Upside is that you get your (future) starting 2, adding quality depth at the point, and greatly enhance your perimeter defense. The real downside to this trade, the one that everyone's afraid of, is that Bayless becomes a stud for Portland.

3. Draft Bayless, use him for incentive to get someone to take Murphy or Tinsley. Upside is you clear Murphy or Tinsley's salaries & hopefully get something useful in return. Downside is that you end up with only financial relief and no benefit on the court, and no Bayless.

I, personally, would've taken the risk with #1, but I can live with #2. I find it hard to believe that anyone here, or anywhere would be happier with #3 than with either of the first two. There's a marked difference between rebuilding and just gutting. Decision #3 might leave us with plenty of money, but no players, no trading assets, and no history at all in attracting major free agents. It would probably leave us in Las Vegas.

Getting back to Murphy, what I believe people are saying is that, while he remains a financial albatross, he has been, and can be, in fact, a productive player. He has shown that he can contribute positively on the floor for this team. Given the choice between taking him for what he's worth vs. using him to dilute or impair the value of the #11 or Bayless, I'll keep him. That is where he has most value to the team and the rebuilding effort.

naptownmenace
06-29-2008, 10:02 AM
Well if your asking...

Scoring, passing and rebounding.

He will not play a prominant role in shot blocking or man to man defense, however he will be heavily involved in the team concept defense.

Laugh all you want, I'm not saying I prefer him, I'm just telling you how it is.

I don't think this should be viewed as a major revelation considering Troy played a prominant role on the team this past season.

He played pretty good from the All-Star break to the end of the season and had several double-doubles. I don't have a problem with Troy.


As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, who's to say the Pacers didn't offer Bayless to more teams? Maybe they did and weren't interested. Tinsley's practically untradeable unless we want to take back someone else's bad contract and underperforming player in return.

Taterhead
06-29-2008, 11:41 AM
I don't think this should be viewed as a major revelation considering Troy played a prominant role on the team this past season.

He played pretty good from the All-Star break to the end of the season and had several double-doubles. I don't have a problem with Troy.


As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, who's to say the Pacers didn't offer Bayless to more teams? Maybe they did and weren't interested. Tinsley's practically untradeable unless we want to take back someone else's bad contract and underperforming player in return.

Because we had him a total of 10 minutes tops?

Taterhead
06-29-2008, 11:57 AM
What makes you think Bird didn't look into those options? I'm sure "what if" scenarios were played out and tossed around prior to the draft. And why would using Bayless to help move Tinsley or Murphy have been a better use of his value than the deal we ended up doing?

Also, as Peck said, don't be surprised if Murphy figures prominently in what we'll be doing this year.

We had the guy 10 minutes, he couldn't have worked too many angles. When we cam into this offseason the majority of the people stated in thier top two things we needed to do, unload Tinsley #1, unload Murphy #2, and noone seemed optimistic as to either being possible.

The only reaon Murphy will figure into what we are doing this year is because of our severe lack of talent up front.

Bball
06-29-2008, 11:57 AM
Because we had him a total of 10 minutes tops?

But that ignores what I said about the possibility of the Pacers feeling out several "What if" scenarios leading up to the draft. I doubt it all fell on those 10 minutes.

-Bball