PDA

View Full Version : Bird's Next Move?



MillerTime
07-14-2008, 04:04 AM
Bird clearly said he likes the 'new team' but he is not done with his makeover, which make sense because our front court is very weak. Our back court is set for the next many years and like Bird said, they can get go know eachother (especially Ford, Jack, Hibbert, Rush and Granger).

Its no shock that our front court needs help; Rasho, Foster, Murphy, and rookie Hibbert arent going to get the job done. There was rumors that Landry could be a possible move for the Pacers but no ones really heard of anything after. I would love Landry as a part of the Pacers. He probably wouldnt start but would fill the void coming off the bench as an energy guy.

We spoke about Marion in another thread, but getting Marion would be tough. We probably dont have the right peiced for Marion. Heat said theyre looking for an "elite" PG for Marion. And considering the contract extention hes going to sign, Bird said that hes not looking for anymore long term contract. After this season, a lot of cap space will be freed up for us and we can his the free agency for a big time player.

We probably wont re-sign Rasho, Foster (because his age, but I will miss this guy; I wouldnt mind him as long we can sign him to a short contract), and Daniels....which would free up about $21 Million and put us under the cap.

Basically we could get a decent PF like Landry and a C like Noah for relatively cheap and wait till next summer for cap space to be free and sign a big named free agent.

Who will be a free agent next summer?

Mourning
07-14-2008, 05:20 AM
We allready have 16 players under contract, so we have to move atleast one first.

Assuming we deal Tinsley we go to 15, but we are going to atleast get one player back, but even if we get at 15 we still would need to let another player go to be able to sign someone new.

I'm going on a limb here and say McRoberts will be let go to from 16 to 15, but then what? I would prefer to trade Jamaal, but I think we are pretty much heading for a buy out.

Haggard
07-14-2008, 06:37 AM
I'm going on a limb here and say McRoberts will be let go to from 16 to 15, but then what? I would prefer to trade Jamaal, but I think we are pretty much heading for a buy out.

I think that McRoberts will be let go too.

I would also like to trade Tins but each day the likelihood of that happening seem less. I would like to think that there is a GM that thinks Tins can help their team.

MillerTime
07-14-2008, 06:59 AM
I think that McRoberts will be let go too.

I would also like to trade Tins but each day the likelihood of that happening seem less. I would like to think that there is a GM that thinks Tins can help their team.

McRoberts will be waved for sure, he wont make the roster then the season starts.

The only team I could think of that would take Tinsley is Miami. But im sure if Miami does that they're most likely going to want to send us Blount or Banks. Hopefully we could throw in Muphy + Daniels and a 1st rounder for Marion (but his contract is going to be huge this season)

DgR
07-14-2008, 07:32 AM
I have a question about Landry

What ceiling does he have?. because if the best we can get from him is a good, high energy, hustle role player then I'm not sure he's what we need. We already have a lot a role players. Almost every player on our team is a role player. I'd rather use the guys we have, save the money and try to sign a legit talent next summer. That way we'll also have a better pick in the next draft.

What kind of talent is Landry?

Mourning
07-14-2008, 07:43 AM
I have a question about Landry

What ceiling does he have?. because if the best we can get from him is a good, high energy, hustle role player then I'm not sure he's what we need. We already have a lot a role players. Almost every player on our team is a role player. I'd rather use the guys we have, save the money and try to sign a legit talent next summer. That way we'll also have a better pick in the next draft.

What kind of talent is Landry?

I share this opinion if not only to sign a FA next summer, but also have the possibility to send (a couple of our) expirings to some team near the trade deadline for a starplayer on a team that is dissappointing and wants salary relief.

Offcourse the player shouldn't be a problemcase, but you get what I mean. I think keeping our expirings atleast until the trade deadline gives us some more flexibility then just getting a (limited role) player now.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

MillerTime
07-14-2008, 08:12 AM
I share this opinion if not only to sign a FA next summer, but also have the possibility to send (a couple of our) expirings to some team near the trade deadline for a starplayer on a team that is dissappointing and wants salary relief.

Offcourse the player shouldn't be a problemcase, but you get what I mean. I think keeping our expirings atleast until the trade deadline gives us some more flexibility then just getting a (limited role) player now.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

sending away our expirers next season would just limit us in signing a FA next summer. We probably want to keep some of those expirers so we can sign a big named FA next summer. Off the top of my head, I cant think of a post players thats a free agent next season

Doddage
07-14-2008, 08:39 AM
McRoberts will be waved for sure, he wont make the roster then the season starts.

The only team I could think of that would take Tinsley is Miami. But im sure if Miami does that they're most likely going to want to send us Blount or Banks. Hopefully we could throw in Muphy + Daniels and a 1st rounder for Marion (but his contract is going to be huge this season)
I think it's a long shot, at best, for us to get Marion without giving up Granger. Miami doesn't need Murphy or Daniels; they'd like Daniels' contract, but why would they trade a larger expiring and better asset in Marion for a smaller expiring (Daniels) and worse contract (Murphy)? They could probably use Tinsley, but the most they'd likely pay is either of who you said, Banks or Blount. But even then, Blount's contract expires a year earlier and Banks' contract is worth less, so I don't view Miami as a viable trade partner. But hey, if they want to give away Marion to us, I won't be stopping them... :D

On the other hand, a team that I could see using Tinsley's services is Denver. They'd probably want to unload one of their beast contracts like K-Mart or Nene (both of which fill positions of need), but I'm not exactly sold on such deal. Nene I'd consider because of his potential and skills, but he'd essentially be a lateral move if he continues to miss games. And that's simply something this franchise can't afford to deal with anymore.

Jonathan
07-14-2008, 10:06 AM
How does the developmental league work? Can we send a player down and have him not affect the roster? Can you send down a player with over two years NBA experience?

rexnom
07-14-2008, 10:09 AM
How does the developmental league work? Can we send a player down and have him not affect the roster? Can you send down a player with over two years NBA experience?
Good question. Could we send McRoberts or Calloway down there without cutting them? Or is that just for players on the inactive list?

count55
07-14-2008, 10:19 AM
The room we have under the cap next summer is illusory. If we don't sign anybody else this summer, we'll have between $42 & $43mm in contracts (assuming we don't sign either Danny or JJack to extensions), and the Salary Cap (assuming 5% growth), will be around $61mm. While on paper, it looks like $19mm of capspace, that's misleading because of capholds.

In order to keep our "Bird" Rights to our free agents, players whose contracts expire count against our available cap space until either they are signed by another team, or we renounce our rights to them. Also, there will be a cap hold for our 1st round draft pick next year.

In order to really have $19 mm in capspace next year (or close to it), we would have to renounce the rights to all of our free agents, including Danny Granger. While stranger things have happened...well, probably not...I don't see any scenario where we do this.

Even if we assume we renounce the rights to everyone but Danny, Danny's cap hold is almost $10mm, so, by the time you factor that in, plus the 1st rounder, we're at around $55mm in reserved cap, leaving us maybe $6mm under the cap to sign a free agent.

Assuming no significant trades that clear some of our bigger contracts and replace them with expirings, it seems most likely to me that we will have no free cap space next year to pursue free agents, and we really don't want it. (The reason I say we don't want it is that the only realistic way I see for us to have tons of cap space is if we lose Danny in Free Agency.) We will have the MLE, and room under the tax to use it, so therefore, I'd expect us to do so.

These are the moves I expect between now and next summer:

1. Move Tinsley - they will work the phones looking for any takers. Do not look for us to get healthier financially on this deal. If we could swap bad for bad (Jeffries/Gadzuric), we should probably feel somewhat grateful. Otherwise, we'll buy him out.
2. Extend Granger & Jack - 5/50-60 for Danny, 4/16 for Jack.
3. Trade Dunleavy & Expirings - As I noted above, I don't think we can get a big time player through free agency. However, I think we might be able to use Dunleavy and some of our expirings either late this summer or, more likely at the deadline to try and make a big jump. I think that if Dunleavy continues to perform at or near last year's levels, then he'll have some value. Rasho and Daniels are nice sized expirings, and Jeff's is slightly smaller, but he's has more value as a player. It's difficult to tell who might be "gettable", but one deal that might make sense to both teams could be Dunleavy/Foster for Kirilenko. Dunleavy would fit nicely into the 3 for Utah, while Foster has been a target of theirs. AK47 could move back to the 4, where I believe he's more comfortable, and add a defensive presence/shotblocker to the Pacers.
4. Use MLE next summer.

This is all just spitballing, but...eh, it's worth kicking around.

idioteque
07-14-2008, 10:25 AM
I'm not saying I think it's the right move to do because I'm more in favor of just leaving the front court how it is and making moves next year when more players will be available to help us out, but I think Larry will try to acquire Mark Blount from Miami. I don't know who we'll send them in return, but it just wouldn't surprise me since we seemingly need frontcourt help, Blount's value is pretty low, and he played his best years under Obie and knows the system.

count55
07-14-2008, 10:34 AM
How does the developmental league work? Can we send a player down and have him not affect the roster? Can you send down a player with over two years NBA experience?


Good question. Could we send McRoberts or Calloway down there without cutting them? Or is that just for players on the inactive list?

The answers to all of these (yes/no) questions is no. Any player we sent to the NBDL would have to be on our roster. Otherwise, they are a free agent. I'm pretty sure that 2 yrs is the limit for players who are on an NBA roster.

DgR
07-14-2008, 10:34 AM
Does Kirilenko play PF well enough? He seems much more like a 3 to me. we need a tough rebounding presence at the 4. I think AK will just be overwhelmed by the really big talented 4s (not that they're that common). I don't think he's the top player we go after.

NapTonius Monk
07-14-2008, 10:41 AM
I'm not saying I think it's the right move to do because I'm more in favor of just leaving the front court how it is and making moves next year when more players will be available to help us out, but I think Larry will try to acquire Mark Blount from Miami. I don't know who we'll send them in return, but it just wouldn't surprise me since we seemingly need frontcourt help, Blount's value is pretty low, and he played his best years under Obie and knows the system.

:thumbsdow

rexnom
07-14-2008, 10:43 AM
I would do Tinsley, McRoberts for Blount in a heartbeat.

NapTonius Monk
07-14-2008, 10:44 AM
Does Kirilenko play PF well enough? He seems much more like a 3 to me. we need a tough rebounding presence at the 4. I think AK will just be overwhelmed by the really big talented 4s (not that they're that common). I don't think he's the top player we go after.

Plus, I don't think we're looking to take on a contract of this magnitude. Utah isn't going to take our huge contracts back for a talent like Kirilenko.

count55
07-14-2008, 10:44 AM
Does Kirilenko play PF well enough? He seems much more like a 3 to me. we need a tough rebounding presence at the 4. I think AK will just be overwhelmed by the really big talented 4s (not that they're that common). I don't think he's the top player we go after.

Kirilenko is, IMO, much more effective as a smallish 4 than a biggish 3. He was much more productive prior to Carlos Boozer's emergence.

I don't necessarily think we need a big, physical rebounder as much as we need some sort of defensive presence inside. By that, I mean someone who can protect the rim. His shotblocking numbers did decline last year, and I'm not sure why, but this was a guy who could be dominant in that role in the same way JO was a his peak.

It's a risky move, but I'd probably do it.

idioteque
07-14-2008, 10:47 AM
Kirilenko is, IMO, much more effective as a smallish 4 than a biggish 3. He was much more productive prior to Carlos Boozer's emergence.

I don't necessarily think we need a big, physical rebounder as much as we need some sort of defensive presence inside. By that, I mean someone who can protect the rim. His shotblocking numbers did decline last year, and I'm not sure why, but this was a guy who could be dominant in that role in the same way JO was a his peak.

It's a risky move, but I'd probably do it.

AK is a good defender? I don't know his game at all but because he seems thin I always thought he probably got beat up pretty good in the low post.

NapTonius Monk
07-14-2008, 10:51 AM
Kirilenko is, IMO, much more effective as a smallish 4 than a biggish 3. He was much more productive prior to Carlos Boozer's emergence.

I don't necessarily think we need a big, physical rebounder as much as we need some sort of defensive presence inside. By that, I mean someone who can protect the rim. His shotblocking numbers did decline last year, and I'm not sure why, but this was a guy who could be dominant in that role in the same way JO was a his peak.

It's a risky move, but I'd probably do it.

I echo the sentiment on the need for a defensive presence. I think Sean Williams from New Jersey would be a good, young talent to go after. I've heard that he had some character issues in college, so I'm not sure to what extent those have come into play since he's been in the league. I haven't heard anything negative about him in the pros. I think those things can be sometimes overblown. I understand we're more likely to lean more to the cautious side, but I think he'd do well here. I just wouldn't bring him here until Jamaal is gone.

Naptown_Seth
07-14-2008, 11:14 AM
Even if we assume we renounce the rights to everyone but Danny, Danny's cap hold is almost $10mm, so, by the time you factor that in, plus the 1st rounder, we're at around $55mm in reserved cap, leaving us maybe $6mm under the cap to sign a free agent.

And following Count's great explanation, the other cap holds you must renounce to get to this point are the EXCEPTIONS, including the MLE. So at some point you are better off just keeping your MLE than renouncing it for cap space anyway. As in 6m vs 5.8m or whatever the MLE falls at now.

The Pacers virtually are not going to move into the FA market soon. What they are doing is getting their finances in good enough shape to handle the Danny contract and still be able to adjust other parts. Dun might be fairly paid, though I think it's borderline given his defense, but Murph clearly is overpaid. Until you deal with those contracts your still limited.

Moving JO just gave the team some flexability, it didn't break the cap area wide open. The key to me remains the idea that smaller chunks are easier to move than big ones.

MillerTime
07-14-2008, 11:35 AM
AK is a good defender? I don't know his game at all but because he seems thin I always thought he probably got beat up pretty good in the low post.

AK was a good defender...probably one of the best at one point. He was one of the leaders in blocks and steals...the guy was like a cat. I dont know what happened to him, he totally fell off. I wouldnt want him or his contract as any part of the Pacers. If his contract wasnt so huge; hes making $15,106,000 next season and a bit more than that for 2 following seasons. After signing Granger to his extention, we're going to be in a bit of a hole this season, so we should pass off on AK

Naptown_Seth
07-14-2008, 11:39 AM
AK is a good defender? I don't know his game at all but because he seems thin I always thought he probably got beat up pretty good in the low post.
Err?

All defensive team 3 years straight (03-04 to 05-06, 2nd, 2nd, 1st). Career blocks per game of 2.4 (17th all time), career steals per game of 1.4.

What appears to have happened is that they put him at the 3 with Boozer and Okur coming in. Not all his stats changes were for the worse. His TO's dropped and his assists went up (per minute for both). He got/took less FGs per game, and therefore got less FTs per game. He stopped having to be a one man team it would seem.


Count is right, undersized 4 is where he belongs and if Hibbert worked out even moderately that might be a pretty good fit. I can see where Utah would have interest if they get Dun to come back as a more natural SF.

Cherokee
07-14-2008, 11:43 AM
Actually, the longer it goes the better for getting rid of Tinsley. As the point guard market dwindles, teams will be more willing to take a chance than they are now. As for getting rid of Dunleavy, I'd be shocked if it happens -- and Bird has repeatedly said it isn't likely to happen.

idioteque
07-14-2008, 11:43 AM
Err?

All defensive team 3 years straight (03-04 to 05-06, 2nd, 2nd, 1st). Career blocks per game of 2.4 (17th all time), career steals per game of 1.4.


Count is right, undersized 4 is where he belongs and if Hibbert worked out even moderately that might be a pretty good fit. I can see where Utah would have interest if they get Dun to come back as a more natural SF.


Good to know. I don't think I've watched a Jazz game when they were playing someone other than Indiana since the 1998 NBA Finals. And I don't really ever look at personal accolades teams either. I'm very provincial when it comes to the NBA.

Anthem
07-14-2008, 12:03 PM
Actually, the longer it goes the better for getting rid of Tinsley. As the point guard market dwindles, teams will be more willing to take a chance than they are now.
Agreed.

Speed
07-14-2008, 12:13 PM
I disagree that they'll cut McRoberts unless he really is a tool and not willing to work. I think they'll buy out Tinsley first if McRoberts shows the heart to really be in the league.

McRoberts is naturally a good passer and will be a lights out shooter. I'm not saying he'll ever be a starter, but maybe Murphy-like with much better court vision. It's just hard to say, he's so young.

I'm not even necessarily high on him, but it would really suck to not give a chance because Tinsley is still here. What a nice parting gift by JT, thanks.

CableKC
07-14-2008, 12:20 PM
I'm not saying I think it's the right move to do because I'm more in favor of just leaving the front court how it is and making moves next year when more players will be available to help us out, but I think Larry will try to acquire Mark Blount from Miami. I don't know who we'll send them in return, but it just wouldn't surprise me since we seemingly need frontcourt help, Blount's value is pretty low, and he played his best years under Obie and knows the system.
I really don't think that the Heat are going to make a move for Tinsley.....adding Tinsley's 3 year contract ( that expires AFTER the 2010-2011 season ) is going to ruin any chance that the Heat will have at going after the 2010-2011 FA market.

Blount's contract expires before the summer of 2010-2011...if anything...they will trade Blount for a comprable contract.

That's what make moving Tinsley hard.......teams that are interested in getting into the 2010-2011 FA Market that has players like Lebron/Wade/Bosh aren't going to take on Tinsley.....unless it meant that they can swap out a player with a bigger contract then Tinsley's that expires AFTER the 2010-2011 season ( or beyond ).

The only way that we can move him is IF we move him for an equally ( or worse ) bad contract or use sweetner ( like Shawne ) is move him for a comprable contract.

Either way...there is no way that we can come out ahead in any Tinsley trade...we can only hope that we don't get a worse contract.

CableKC
07-14-2008, 12:27 PM
Actually, the longer it goes the better for getting rid of Tinsley. As the point guard market dwindles, teams will be more willing to take a chance than they are now. As for getting rid of Dunleavy, I'd be shocked if it happens -- and Bird has repeatedly said it isn't likely to happen.
I really don't see TPTB hold on to Tinsley that much longer......they will continually shop him and see what we can get...but I think that they will just bite the bullet sometime before the start of the season.

I really think that one of the main reasons why teams are not showing interest in Tinsley...despite the need to fill the PG position...most GMs will simply wait for the buyout and then get him cheap.....which is one of the reasons why I think that Marbury is still a Knick.

Everyone knows that Tinsley is not returning to the Pacers....it's just a matter of waiting the Pacers FO out for the buyout. Unless TPTB are lucky enough to swap out Tinsley for an equally bad contract ( Gadzuric or Jeffries )....which I would think Bird has already pursued.....the obvious question to any GM that would be interested in trying to acquire Tinsley is why they would be willing to pay $21 mil to get him instead of waiting it out and getting him for much cheaper?

Mourning
07-14-2008, 01:03 PM
I would do Tinsley, McRoberts for Blount in a heartbeat.

Same here...

cgg
07-14-2008, 02:05 PM
the obvious question to any GM that would be interested in trying to acquire Tinsley is why they would be willing to pay $21 mil to get him instead of waiting it out and getting him for much cheaper?

He would still have to decide to sign with that team... If he's going to be so cheap then there will have to be more than one team going after him. He might not be worth all that much in a trade because other teams know we hate him, but he would have value as a free agent. His issues are bigger for our team because of the history. We have to trade him because he (appears to) make our fan base buy less tickets. A new team won't have that history.

Anyway, my point is... Whether he has the most talent of the available PG's or he's most obtainable because they don't have to trade major pieces, if a team NEEDS a PG and they feel Tinsley is likely to help them, the only way to guarantee they get him is to trade. I'm not convinced that his value is low, just that our position to negotiate is weak.

It wasn't so long ago that he was impressing a lot of people. Last season he was playing good until he had whatever issues, but we don't really know what they are. Popular opinion is that its not really an injury, and the season before that he surprised us by playing 72 games. If it is a legitimate injury then he's had a lot of rehab time. They could be issues that are only major on the Pacers because of our situation. Not every team is recovering from events that makes every off court issue seem so much worse. Not every team is losing tons of money and fighting to get their fans to buy tickets again.

He hasn't even been "for sale" for that long. Going into last season our coach was excited to work with him. We only had so long before the trade deadline, and we had no PG to replace him. We've only officially had that for what, a week? Now that we're set there we've got a lot more flexibility for what we can take in return.

Shaq seemed to be about the most untradable player in the league. If broken down Shaq can be traded for Shawn Marion then anything can happen.

CableKC
07-14-2008, 02:26 PM
Bird clearly said he likes the 'new team' but he is not done with his makeover, which make sense because our front court is very weak. Our back court is set for the next many years and like Bird said, they can get go know eachother (especially Ford, Jack, Hibbert, Rush and Granger).

Its no shock that our front court needs help; Rasho, Foster, Murphy, and rookie Hibbert arent going to get the job done.
Is our current ( and likely future ) Frontcourt good enough to win a Championship?

Definitely not.......but since we are not in a realistic position to truly win a Championship this season....unless there is a no-brainer trade that comes along that won't break up the existing core of players that we have while limiting our future Financial Flexiblility....then I'm not in a rush to make a significant move this season.

By adding Rasho ( a True Center that isn't on an emotional rollercoaster that definitely warrants about 20-22 minutes a game ) and Hibbert ( another True Center that should warrant enough minutes to be a rotational 9th-10th player off the bench ) to the lineup, this means that Murphy and Foster can play most of their minutes at the PF spot. Since I was never a fan of playing Murphy at the Center spot....this maybe a good thing. In addition....we have always said that Foster is a better "1st Big Man off the bench" then as our Starting Center, now we can see if this is true. IMHO....there are many variables this season that I think would give me pause to evaluate how well this Frontcourt lineup would do.

With the rash of moves that Bird has made....I really hope that he is a little bit patient when it comes to what other moves ( if any ) that we do this season. I really think that this season SHOULD be another continued "Shakedown" period ( which I think started in the 40 games we played last season without JONeal in the lineup ) to see how things truly works with our new pieces and the new direction that we are taking. Next offseason, when we have a clearer picture of our Financial situation and what moves we can make based off of that Financial Flexibility...then I would be more apt to decide how to proceed.

I agree with most of you.....I think that there is a need to EVENTUALLY improve the Frontcourt....but I don't think that we have to improve the Frontcourt this season...much less a need to make a huge move ( like get a Starting quality PF ) as opposed to one that will net us a Backup quality PF ( like getting Landry ). But given the situation that we are in now in the Post-JONeal era and that the dawn of the Granger era is just beginning.....if we can continue to build on what we had last season....then I will be okay with it. I'm in no rush to win a Championship now...I just want to be good enough to be competitive this season and eventually become a perennial 2nd ron Playoffs while building our team the right way to win in 2-3 years.


We probably wont re-sign Rasho, Foster (because his age, but I will miss this guy; I wouldnt mind him as long we can sign him to a short contract), and Daniels....which would free up about $21 Million and put us under the cap.
Regarding Foster, I guess that it depends on how much we can sign him for and how long. At his age ( he will be 32 years old at the end of the 2008-2009 season ), for Big Men that does what Foster does ( provide above average rebounding, energy off the bench and good Big Man defense in the paint while providing limited scoring ) at his age, do they tend to be more prone to injuries and digress in performance?

or

Can we ( hopefully ) expect to see Foster become more of a Dale/Antonio Davis type player ( specifically a vet Big Man that can still do what he does best....rebound/defend/dirty work....despite their age )?

Also...keep in mind...even if we sign him to a 4 year contract....Foster will be 35 years old by the end of the 2011-2012 season. Given what he does....I really think that he is worth resigning....even at a 4 year contract

Young
07-14-2008, 09:38 PM
I think the next move Bird makes is getting rid of Jamaal Tinsley. Most likely a buyout though but hey if a trade is out there i'm sure it will be made.

Other than that I don't see much happening to this team. We probably can't add much more to our frontcourt right now. Maybe at the trade deadline but to be honest I really think it is likely we have the same team to start the season as we have right now, just minus Jamaal.