PDA

View Full Version : Ok, time for my second go round about trades or lacktherof....



Peck
06-14-2004, 06:40 PM
Last week I gave you guys three options, of which trading Al seemed to be the most popular.

Let me take another swing at this with option # 4 & see if anybody would accept this.

It's simple really & once again does not require us to trade anybody. This one is just another matter of player adjustments, but would required a differant mind set where it came to Reggie.

Put Reggie on the bench, move Ron to shooting guard & start Al at the S.F. spot.

This allows Al to start which will make him happy. This will allow Ron to remain on the team which will make Uncle Buck happy. This allows the frontcourt to not be to small by benching Jeff Foster. This allows our defense to remain intact as Al & Ron can switch who guards who just as well if not better than Reggie & Ron did.

I know I know your all going to say that this does nothing to help with our outside shooting.

To a point I will concede that. However my theory is this, with Al all you are going to be able to get is a mid-level player who might develop into something. Flip Murray or somebody like him & everybody didn't like my Flip Murray idea anyway.

So I ask this, is the two guard we are getting going to be a better two guard than Ron Artest? My guess would be no. I know that people will say that Ron is really a better S.f. but I say that there is almost no differance between the sf & the sg spot on the floor & defensively Ron is going to take the better player anyway.

Reggie would still be there to come off of the bench for perimater offense as well as Bender, A.J. & Croshere.

This makes our starting lineup a better rebounding club & if Bender is even close to being ready to help he can take Al's offense with the second unit, not to mention Reggie.

I'm just not sure that we are going to get from Al what we need, or at the very least nothing that isn't any better that what we already have on our team.

Ok, tear it apart now.

MSA2CF
06-14-2004, 06:59 PM
Forgive me beforehand for bringing some Isiah logic into this thread. :prayer:

How bad does it matter that Ron is labeled as a SG, and strictly a SG? Ron can play the SF and the SG, Al can play the SF and the PF, JO can play the PF and the C, and Jeff can play the C and the PF. It's all interchangable, so the thing is, how important is it that we need a "SG"? As long as the guy fits the needs of the team, does it really matter what the position he plays is, as long as it's an exceptional outside shooter who can either create his own shot or spread the defenses?

Inquiring minds want to know. :)

edit: I wrote this before I read your post Peck. I think we were kind of thinking along the same lines regarding Ron Artest, and if we were, I agree with that. :)

bulletproof
06-14-2004, 07:02 PM
We need a player who strikes fear into the hearts of opponents with his perimeter shooting. We need someone who can consistently draw players out of the paint to open up the middle for Jermaine (and Ron). Would Ron accomplish that? I don't know. But I don't think so. Again, I submit game 4 and how Croshere's performance spread the floor as evidence.

By the way, I think we can do better than Flip Murray for Al and change.

MSA2CF
06-14-2004, 07:06 PM
By the way, I think we can do better than Flip Murray for Al and change.

I agree with that. Didn't he sort of cool off the second half of the season? He only scored 12.4 a game anyway; not much better than Reggie's 10.

edit: Besides, his 3P% is horrific. (29%)

Peck
06-14-2004, 07:16 PM
Oh, don't get me wrong guys. If I thought we could get that solid dead eye outside shooter for Al I would do it.

But, I think the kind of player you could get in return is really a crap shoot.

Artest would get you a sure thing & if things are going on behind the scenes (which I suspect they are) then that might happen. But for Al I'm not sure who you could get that would be that solid outside shooter that would be better than either Al or Ron.

bulletproof
06-14-2004, 07:19 PM
Let me ask you something, Peck?

Are you of the mindset that we should stand pat in the off-season? Or are you at least entertaining the thought?

I can understand this thinking to some degree. We're still a young team. I'd hate to lose either Al or Ron as well because you can see the potential there. Plus Freddie is showing signs of becoming a real contributor. It certainly begs the question: Do we risk the possibility of breaking this team up prematurely, before it's reached its full potential?

On the other hand...

MarionDeputy
06-14-2004, 07:26 PM
I like your idea, but only if we can't negotiate a trade to either give us a big, scoring, center, or an outside rifleman. If we don't though, I believe Reggie would be most effective coming off the bench.

MSA2CF
06-14-2004, 07:30 PM
I can understand this thinking to some degree. We're still a young team. I'd hate to lose either Al and Ron as well because you can see the long-term potential there and what each player means to the team. Plus Freddie is showing signs of becoming a real contributor. It certainly begs the question: Do we risk the possibility of breaking this team up prematurely, before it's reached its true potential?

I like the idea. If things aren't going right and/or Al is complaining, we could trade him by the deadline. Just see how things go I guess. Then again, I don't think Larry will go into the season without giving the fans some confidence that next season will turn out different.

TheSauceMaster
06-14-2004, 08:05 PM
I can't say I like it at all :shakehead: Standing pat is the worst thing we can do at this point .

Doug in CO
06-14-2004, 08:34 PM
I have to say that I agree with Peck - there is no way we get value for Al given his salary level and a draft pick is not attrative to me.

We could get a solid 2 with the mid level exemption - probably every bit as good as a flip murray or whatever we would get.

And trading Al for a Center - well that just rubs salt in the Brad Miller wound.

This is an attractive team for a free agent. If the Knicks can dream of Rasheed for the mid level exemption - tell me - why can't we get a 2 guard for the same. And while it did not work out - Gary Payton and Malone whored themselves out for a combined $6.4 million this year for a shot at a championship. Tell me we could not get a quality 2? I think we could do well in free agency. Does anyone have a list of available 2's?

Peck
06-14-2004, 08:49 PM
Let me ask you something, Peck?

Are you of the mindset that we should stand pat in the off-season? Or are you at least entertaining the thought?

I can understand this thinking to some degree. We're still a young team. I'd hate to lose either Al or Ron as well because you can see the potential there. Plus Freddie is showing signs of becoming a real contributor. It certainly begs the question: Do we risk the possibility of breaking this team up prematurely, before it's reached its full potential?

On the other hand...

No, not whatsoever. I am not of the mind to stand pat.

But I don't want to just give away Al for peanuts either.

Of course both you & I are aware that the trade may NOT be for Al.

I guess what I am trying to do is get people to thinking about not just getting rid of Al. BTW, I'm not Al's biggest fan either. It's just that I think that we have to wonder what we get in return.

Jason Richardson? He's a great scorer but not a great shooter. So in reality is he any better than Ron in the backcourt? I don't think so.

I just use him as an example.

I guess what I'm saying is I can see an argument for either side. In the past I've always been for a trade & I still wouldn't mind one this season either. But if nothing happens then I would much rather see this happen than to come back with the same old lineup next year.

Unclebuck
06-14-2004, 09:17 PM
Peck, I guess I like this idea better than making a bad trade involving Al.

Rick Carlisle played this lineup a few minutes every game, but only for a few minutes. Usually AL would come in for Reggie at the 6 minute mark of the 1st and 3rd quarters. But usually by the 4 minute mark Freddie and AJ were in.

So they played this lineup about 4 or 5 minutes per game.

My point is Rick did try it, but he never used it at crunch time. Rick's offense is based on floor spacing, that is his "big thing", and I just don't see him going to it very often for that reason.

Peck
06-14-2004, 09:22 PM
Floor spacing is important, especially at crunch time.

Remember I'm just talking about starting here, not who plays the most or when they play.

At crunch time I would suspect that Jeff or Al would be on the bench & either Fred, Reggie or maybe even Crosher or Bender might be in.

But do you at least see that this may solve Al's problem of wanting to start?

Doug in CO
06-14-2004, 09:36 PM
At the core of Peck's post - can we get equal value for Al.

All the rumors I have heard so far tell me no.

I would be happy to trade him - but not for someone who is no better than someone we could get for the mid level exemption.

Unclebuck
06-14-2004, 09:44 PM
But do you at least see that this may solve Al's problem of wanting to start?


Yes I can see that, but if AL is on the bench in the last 5 minutes of close games, he won't be satisfied about that either

bulletproof
06-14-2004, 09:49 PM
Well, as someone pointed out, there might be some merit to just standing pat, then make a move at the trade deadline (ala Sheed), if necessary. But given our glaring weakness at SG, that seems to be a conservative approach. Although I have to say, Peck, I think we can get more for Al than you do.

Grant
06-14-2004, 10:05 PM
The other thing is that the lineups vary so much through the course of the game.

Anytime Foster goes out, the lineup essentially becomes PG, SG, Ron, Al, O'Neal.

Or if O'Neal goes out, it becomes, PG, SG, Ron, Al, C

Ron would not have to play a lot of SG, just 10 minutes a game. Fred could play a little PG. JB could play some more PF. The lineup is still unbalanced but it could still work.

The other thing is that Harrington already gets 30 minutes a game. I'm sure if he got to start and if he could get another 5 minutes from somewhere (read: Reggie) he would probably be fine with staying.

So I don't mind this option at all. LB/DW will try to trade and do something like this as a fallback

MSA2CF
06-14-2004, 10:06 PM
Not to be nitpicky, but could we keep calling Freddie Jones, "Freddie"? Everytime I see someone refer to "Fred," I think of Fred Hoiberg and I keep wondering how he got back on our team. :blush:

Bball
06-14-2004, 10:44 PM
I don't think we should be thinking of trading Al by himself. We need to think of a package. Although Pollard sucks, his size and the spin that he just didn't fit our 'system' could help him fit into a package with Al.

Bender did have some nice highlights and I am pretty sure his lowlights didn't get natl attention. A Bender and Al package might also work.

Did Cro move up anybody's list (I doubt it)?

I think Bender and Al makes the most likely package. I think we are stuck with Pollard.

-Bball

indygeezer
06-14-2004, 10:50 PM
I guess what I'm saying is I can see an argument for either side. In the past I've always been for a trade & I still wouldn't mind one this season either. But if nothing happens then I would much rather see this happen than to come back with the same old lineup next year.
=======

OK, now I'm with you. I have always been an AH fan...but no longer. I prefer he's gone. But...<insert above Peck comment here> AL needs a new home. We need more scoring and more muscle. It takes quality to get quality. Remember too...we have a trade exemption we can add to Al to get back a player with higher salary. But we have to do it quick or the exemption expires. (Although, DW likes to be the endpoint for those exemptions rather than a passer-on).

I guess what bothers me is I see Al and JO's game being too similar to work together for extended minutes.

TheSauceMaster
06-14-2004, 10:52 PM
I doubt if you'll see no moves and since it's already been said that the roster is unbalanced , I expect atleast 1 -2 trades.

indygeezer
06-14-2004, 11:04 PM
Yes but last year they said they wanted a creator/penetrator...when did we get that?

MSA2CF
06-14-2004, 11:07 PM
Yes but last year they said they wanted a creator/penetrator...when did we get that?

In the 2002 draft. :cool:

indygeezer
06-14-2004, 11:11 PM
Oh Please...no.

ChicagoJ
06-14-2004, 11:28 PM
Peck, I guess I like this idea better than making a bad trade involving Al.

Rick Carlisle played this lineup a few minutes every game, but only for a few minutes. Usually AL would come in for Reggie at the 6 minute mark of the 1st and 3rd quarters. But usually by the 4 minute mark Freddie and AJ were in.

So they played this lineup about 4 or 5 minutes per game.

My point is Rick did try it, but he never used it at crunch time. Rick's offense is based on floor spacing, that is his "big thing", and I just don't see him going to it very often for that reason.

Not to nitpick, but Al usually entered the game for Foster at the six-minute mark, not Reggie. I didn't see this particular lineup on the court very often, and not at all for the handful of games where I tracked five-man plus/minus.

Unclebuck
06-14-2004, 11:48 PM
Not to nitpick, but Al usually entered the game for Foster at the six-minute mark, not Reggie. I didn't see this particular lineup on the court very often, and not at all for the handful of games where I tracked five-man plus/minus.

Not tha games I watched :D . Unless Jeff or J.O were in foul trouble which it seemed like one or the other was maybe 30% of the time the first substitution was Al for Reggie.

ChicagoJ
06-14-2004, 11:54 PM
Not to nitpick, but Al usually entered the game for Foster at the six-minute mark, not Reggie. I didn't see this particular lineup on the court very often, and not at all for the handful of games where I tracked five-man plus/minus.

Not tha games I watched :D . Unless Jeff or J.O were in foul trouble which it seemed like one or the other was maybe 30% of the time the first substitution was Al for Reggie.

Hey, you've got to get the John Candy avatar back online. It makes it easier for me to find your posts sometimes. ;)

For what its worth, if either of us really wanted to prove the exact %, it would be available in the game logs on pacers.com. I do agree that Al entered the game for Reggie more often later in the season than early in the season. :shrug:

bulletproof
06-15-2004, 12:32 AM
I doubt if you'll see no moves and since it's already been said that the roster is unbalanced , I expect at least 1 -2 trades.

Yep, at least one.

bulletproof
06-15-2004, 01:18 AM
I have no problem with trading either Al or Jon, but I would really like to keep one if we aren't getting a top 5-10 player in the league.

It's not up to you. And Al + Jon could net us someone quite nice indeed.

Will Galen
06-15-2004, 02:59 AM
Oh, don't get me wrong guys. If I thought we could get that solid dead eye outside shooter for Al I would do it.

But, I think the kind of player you could get in return is really a crap shoot.

That last statement gave me a thought.

Maybe that is why Bird is trying to move up to the #3 pick. He can't trade for the players he wants, so he figures he can get a really good guard in the draft. (moving up in the draft is no doubt just one of the options the Pacer's are looking at though)

The thing is if I was looking for a player for Al. I would look for a young emerging shooting guard. I wouldn't even be thinking about the (33 year old) Brent Barry's of the league.

You have to remember Walsh is Bird's mentor. When has Walsh made a trade that was only for the present day. He always looks to the future too.

So . . . I don't think the Pacer's will make a major move that doesn't help them as much in the future as it does in the present.

Will Galen
06-15-2004, 03:11 AM
Let me ask you something, Peck?

Are you of the mindset that we should stand pat in the off-season? Or are you at least entertaining the thought?

I can understand this thinking to some degree. We're still a young team. I'd hate to lose either Al or Ron as well because you can see the potential there. Plus Freddie is showing signs of becoming a real contributor. It certainly begs the question: Do we risk the possibility of breaking this team up prematurely, before it's reached its full potential?


According to Bird, yes.

Quotes,
"If we make a couple of moves, we have a legitimate chance to get out of the Eastern Conference. If we make the right moves, we can separate ourselves from everybody else."

"We're going to look to see what we can do," Bird said. " But if you can't get the value you think you can get for them, they're still going to be here. It has to be a deal that makes us happy."

Will Galen
06-15-2004, 03:31 AM
One thing that has bothered me in all the trade talk is the constant talk of packaging Al and Bender.

That talk comes from guys on here so it means nothing. From comments the Pacer brass have made I don't think Bender is going anywhere. They are still high on him.

Here's what Carlise said about Bender.

Q. Will Bender become a more prominent fixture in the rotation next season?

A. Without question, this summer is a really important summer for him, that we spend the time with him to help develop his game to play effectively in our system. He made great strides this year in that vein. He had some stretches where his play was nothing less than breathtaking. But with the occasional injury sprinkled in, it made it hard for him to build a level of consistency. This summer is really key for him because heís a guy that can do things really no one else on our roster can do. At 7 feet tall he shoots threes, he can post up, he drives the ball, he can block shots. He and Jermaine (O'Neal) are really the two guys, from that size and ability standpoint, can do things very few guys on this planet can do. Itís important we get him ready to have a complete training camp next year and identify where heíll be playing. I think he needs to play two positions, probably small forward and a finesse, or shooting, power forward.

Peck
06-15-2004, 03:58 AM
One thing that has bothered me in all the trade talk is the constant talk of packaging Al and Bender.

That talk comes from guys on here so it means nothing. From comments the Pacer brass have made I don't think Bender is going anywhere. They are still high on him.

Here's what Carlise said about Bender.

Q. Will Bender become a more prominent fixture in the rotation next season?

A. Without question, this summer is a really important summer for him, that we spend the time with him to help develop his game to play effectively in our system. He made great strides this year in that vein. He had some stretches where his play was nothing less than breathtaking. But with the occasional injury sprinkled in, it made it hard for him to build a level of consistency. This summer is really key for him because heís a guy that can do things really no one else on our roster can do. At 7 feet tall he shoots threes, he can post up, he drives the ball, he can block shots. He and Jermaine (O'Neal) are really the two guys, from that size and ability standpoint, can do things very few guys on this planet can do. Itís important we get him ready to have a complete training camp next year and identify where heíll be playing. I think he needs to play two positions, probably small forward and a finesse, or shooting, power forward.


Will, Will, Will....

That was some creative use of the bold feature on here. Not that I disagree with you about Bender going anywhere but let me take a shot at the same Q & A.

Q. Will Bender become a more prominent fixture in the rotation next season?

A. Without question, this summer is a really important summer for him, that we spend the time with him to help develop his game to play effectively in our system. He made great strides this year in that vein. He had some stretches where his play was nothing less than breathtaking. But with the occasional injury sprinkled in, it made it hard for him to build a level of consistency. This summer is really key for him because heís a guy that can do things really no one else on our roster can do At 7 feet tall he shoots threes, he can post up, he drives the ball, he can block shots. He and Jermaine (O'Neal) are really the two guys, from that size and ability standpoint, can do things very few guys on this planet can do. Itís important we get him ready to have a complete training camp next year and identify where heíll be playing. I think he needs to play two positions, probably small forward and a finesse, or shooting, power forward.[/

wintermute
06-15-2004, 04:10 AM
:laugh:

it's almost like will and peck read the same article but understood completely different things :P

presumably the truth is somewhere in-between :flirt:

Will Galen
06-15-2004, 04:45 AM
:laugh:

it's almost like will and peck read the same article but understood completely different things :P

presumably the truth is somewhere in-between :flirt:

No, I agree with what Peck highlighted too. I think if Joh doesn't do it this year, (maybe by the trade deadline) he will be trade bait.

So until the trade deadline I feel my highlights are the way the Pacers feel.

debohstheman
06-15-2004, 08:53 AM
i agree...there is no way our roster is the same next year.....
at least one trade will happen.....
i also would rather it be for Al for a Center (maybe ED) and use the MLE for a SG ?

using ron as the starting SG and saying, well his outside shooting will improve, just demonstrates how unbalanced our roster is....ron of all people should be taking the ball low and inside....

the occasional 3 from him last year was perfect...keep people from giving him too much space...

but his strength lies in overpowering his defender inside....
dont change his game just to keep someone on the team....
find another player that better fills our holes.....

and, by the way..im more than happy with Jeff at Center.....
i'd trade Al and anyone else on the bench for a top flight SG

sweabs
06-15-2004, 10:03 AM
Hey, you've got to get the John Candy avatar back online. It makes it easier for me to find your posts sometimes. ;)

http://www.pacersdigest.com/unclebuck.gif

bulletproof
06-15-2004, 10:04 AM
Oh, don't get me wrong guys. If I thought we could get that solid dead eye outside shooter for Al I would do it.

But, I think the kind of player you could get in return is really a crap shoot.

That last statement gave me a thought.

Maybe that is why Bird is trying to move up to the #3 pick. He can't trade for the players he wants, so he figures he can get a really good guard in the draft. (moving up in the draft is no doubt just one of the options the Pacer's are looking at though)

The thing is if I was looking for a player for Al. I would look for a young emerging shooting guard. I wouldn't even be thinking about the (33 year old) Brent Barry's of the league.

You have to remember Walsh is Bird's mentor. When has Walsh made a trade that was only for the present day. He always looks to the future too.

So . . . I don't think the Pacer's will make a major move that doesn't help them as much in the future as it does in the present.

Walsh and Bird aren't doing anything right now, much less trying to move up to the #3 pick. Today is when the season starts for the front office. Today they all go back to work and start taking care of business. There's been talk of some possible moves, but that's all it is right now, talk.

And where did you get the idea that they can't trade for the players they want? Who are the players they want?

bulletproof
06-15-2004, 10:07 AM
:laugh:

it's almost like will and peck read the same article but understood completely different things :P

presumably the truth is somewhere in-between :flirt:

No, I agree with what Peck highlighted too. I think if Joh doesn't do it this year, (maybe by the trade deadline) he will be trade bait.

So until the trade deadline I feel my highlights are the way the Pacers feel.

If they can package Jon with another player and make a good trade, they (meaning Walsh and Bird) won't wait until the trade deadline.

indygeezer
06-15-2004, 10:09 AM
Why "today"? They been on vacation or sumpin??

(I know that today is the 1st day ED can opt out of his contract)

able
06-15-2004, 10:19 AM
Isn't today or somewhere this week the "state of the Pacers" speech time? It's been "habit" I believe to wait some time after our season finishes, but usually it's about the end of the 2nd early 3 week that Donnie has his Press Conference isn't it?

Also the Chicago camp is over now, time to go back to the office :D

bulletproof
06-15-2004, 10:52 AM
Why "today"? They been on vacation or sumpin??

Yep.

Bball
06-15-2004, 11:15 AM
:laugh:

it's almost like will and peck read the same article but understood completely different things :P

presumably the truth is somewhere in-between :flirt:

No, I agree with what Peck highlighted too. I think if Joh doesn't do it this year, (maybe by the trade deadline) he will be trade bait.

So until the trade deadline I feel my highlights are the way the Pacers feel.

Let me play Devil's advocate...

Let's say the Pacers want to trade Bender. They've decided that if the right deal comes along they would prefer to move on and let him go. How would Carlisle's comments be any different?

How I see it:
The comments wouldn't be any different. A: If we can't get a decent deal the team will not want him to know they've all but given up on him. B: They don't want to poison the market by saying that they are finished with him. He's a player that the only value he has is in his 'potential'. If the trade goes down based on his consistent game performance then we might get some pizza and coke for him.

Of course 5 years into his career I'm not sure how many people around the league thinks he has the 'potential' that some of the Pacer faithful put into him.

If someone is willing to bite on an Al and Bender package and give us something workable in return then I'd bet they go for it.

-Bball

Will Galen
06-15-2004, 12:55 PM
Oh, don't get me wrong guys. If I thought we could get that solid dead eye outside shooter for Al I would do it.

But, I think the kind of player you could get in return is really a crap shoot.

That last statement gave me a thought.

Maybe that is why Bird is trying to move up to the #3 pick. He can't trade for the players he wants, so he figures he can get a really good guard in the draft. (moving up in the draft is no doubt just one of the options the Pacer's are looking at though)

The thing is if I was looking for a player for Al. I would look for a young emerging shooting guard. I wouldn't even be thinking about the (33 year old) Brent Barry's of the league.

You have to remember Walsh is Bird's mentor. When has Walsh made a trade that was only for the present day. He always looks to the future too.

So . . . I don't think the Pacer's will make a major move that doesn't help them as much in the future as it does in the present.

Walsh and Bird aren't doing anything right now, much less trying to move up to the #3 pick. Today is when the season starts for the front office. Today they all go back to work and start taking care of business. There's been talk of some possible moves, but that's all it is right now, talk.

And where did you get the idea that they can't trade for the players they want? Who are the players they want?

You misunderstood my post.

Arcadian
06-15-2004, 01:19 PM
I agree that we should not make a bad trade. But I don't think the question is can we a more talented sg/sf combo than Ron and Al. It's can we get a player that fits better than Al.

I apologize to those whose eyes burn at reading this next point. Trading Detlef for Mckey we lost an All star calaber player but gained one who made the Pacers more complete. That is the kind of trade I believe will happen.

BillS
06-15-2004, 01:24 PM
I agree that we should not make a bad trade. But I don't think the question is can we a more talented sg/sf combo than Ron and Al. It's can we get a player that fits better than Al.

I apologize to those whose eyes burn at reading this next point. Trading Detlef for Mckey we lost an All star calaber player but gained one who made the Pacers more complete. That is the kind of trade I believe will happen.I think the difference is that this year we really need to swap a strong individual player at SF.PF for a strong individual player at SG. We aren't really looking for another roleplayer at SG, we're looking for someone who can share the #2 scoring option with Artest (or a more consistent Al).

Slick Pinkham
06-15-2004, 05:23 PM
I am not for standing pat, but...

IF we can't get a VERY GOOD 2-guard for Al and another bench player, the starting lineup I prefer is

Jermaine/Al/Jon/Ron/Jamaal

if Jon stays healthy. This is of course a big risk given Jonathan's inconsistency and inury-prone nature.

I like the combined skills of that lineup over

Jeff/Jermaine/Al/Ron/Jamaal (too perimeter-challenged)

or

Jermaine/Al/Ron/Freddie/Jamaal (too perimeter-challenged and too small). I wouldn't like the last lineup even with a FA starting at SG in place of Freddie (Brent Barry?)

beast23
06-15-2004, 09:59 PM
I'm with Bulletproof in that I think Al has an excellent trade value.

He's young, he scores and boards, and he is the 6th man on the team with the best record in the league.... meaning he probably could start of 75% or more of the teams in the league. And, I have faith in Donnie and Larry. There is absolutely no way that they let Al go without acquiring an excellent player in return.

That being said, I think that the absolutely worst thing the Pacers can do this summer is stand pat.

Peck, your idea is one that has been discussed significantly. But what it accomplishes is one thing and one thing only. Appeasing Al Harrington.

We had two weaknesses exposed in the ECS. First and foremost we had no one capable of consistently hitting a perimeter shot. Secondly, in most games of the ECS, we had no one the could adequately defend Rasheed and keep him off the boards.

I've said it before. We may have won the ECS had JO and Tinsley remained healthy. I think it is likely we would have won the series if we had someone hitting perimeter jump shots. And I feel very confident in saying that we would have won the series if we had someone hitting perimeter shots and someone better suited to guard Rasheed.

It can be argued that Al starting strengthens the starting lineup. But my response would be that it does absolutely nothing to strengthen the team.

In the event we stand pat, I'll go on record right now that we will NOT beat Detroit next season in the playoffs unless someone steps up and significantly improves as an outside shooter. And what if Miami suddenly gets an interior player or two?

I'd support keeping JO, Artest and Tinsley intact. Jeff is adequate, but certainly not great.

We have Artest and Jeff locked in for another 5 years. We have JO locked in for another 6. This summer, we can extend Tinsley, and I'll bet we'll extend him for another 4 years or so and have him locked in for another 6.

Al has two years and $13M left on his contract. Not exactly long term. And if he doesn't start next season, are we at more risk in possibly losing him after the following season? I think so.

We like to say that Ron can play both SG and SF. And we've said that Al can play PF and SF. IMO, Ron is a much better offensive SF than SG. And Al? Well he's a lot better PF than SF. And, since we're not going to budge JO from the lineup, so we propose playing two players out of their best and natural positions. Instead of leaving the one-player, and All-Star and DPOY, at his best and natural position and using the other player, Al, to acquire a natural SG that presumably would be a much the perimeter shooter that we so desperately need.

Standing pat just wouldn't be smart. And Al is the best and most logical player to be sacrificed. If we are lucky enough to package Pollard with him, then great. If it's going to take Bender, then so be it. But the trade MUST be made.

Bball
06-15-2004, 10:30 PM
I'll agree with pretty much all of Beast23's analysis and add this opinion: I think Al has leveled off and is showing us he isn't the player many thought he was (or would be), nor is he the player HE thinks he is.

His trade value will probably never be higher. He'll never embrace coming off the bench and -I'm starting to think that coming off the bench is what he'll be doing if he plays for a contending team. IOW, any team that has Al starting (and trying to be 'the man') will not be a contending team.

He's either a selfish player or a player with a low basketball IQ. Most likely IMHO, a little of both.

-Bball "Flamesuit is on"

Bball
06-16-2004, 01:36 AM
Wow, I thought I'd be roasted 5 minutes after I posted the above!

-Bball

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 06:52 AM
No flaming...everyone is in shock over DW's comments. All bets are off and evrybody is on the table (except JO).