PDA

View Full Version : Conrad Brunner answers, Should Pacers Pursue McGrady?



Will Galen
06-16-2004, 01:39 PM
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/question_040616.html

Should Pacers Pursue McGrady?

QUESTION
OF THE DAY
Conrad Brunner
Q. I understand the need to try to land a player like Tracy McGrady. But doing so at the expense of Indiana's best defensive player? I certainly can not understand why Donnie (Walsh) and Larry (Bird) would be willing to let go of such a gem as Ron (Artest). Not when there are so many other players they could lose and have little effect on the team. Indiana has joined Detroit as one of the best defensive teams in the NBA. Why are the powers-that-be willing to possibly destroy that to land a superstar offensive threat? (From Jack in Louisville, KY)

A. When a true superstar not only becomes available, but expresses an interest in your team, you have to explore the possibilities. McGrady is a truly great talent, one of the most gifted, complete players in the league. He has every skill set the Pacers need, chief among them the ability to create shots for himself and his teammates. The possibility of an inside-outside combination of Jermaine O’Neal and McGrady is too tempting to ignore. They’re not only premier players, but friends, which means there’d be no threat to team chemistry. But superstars can’t be acquired at your neighborhood dollar store. You have to pay full retail to acquire a player of that magnitude, and most franchises simply aren’t in position to do that. The Pacers are one of the few that could part with two (or possibly three) good players to acquire a player of McGrady’s caliber and still have a strong, complete roster.

This doesn’t mean the trade is going to happen. McGrady has yet to meet with Orlando owner Rich DeVos to declare his intentions, though it’s expected to happen this week. If Orlando can trade the No. 1 pick to acquire some veteran players that could contribute immediately, McGrady might decide to stay with the Magic. If not, and McGrady tells the Magic he’d prefer to be dealt, you can be sure a dozen or more teams will throw offers on the table. Anyone who acquires McGrady is going to need some kind of assurance that he’ll sign a long-term deal next summer, when he can opt out of his contract, otherwise the risk far outweighs the reward.

While some point to the Pistons and their NBA Finals conquest of the Lakers as an example of the value of team-building over superstar acquisition, Detroit also made a strong case for taking a big risk in order to obtain one key missing piece by acquiring Rasheed Wallace. The Pacers can go either way and remain a championship contender. But the front office is doing exactly what it asks of the players. Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird are leaving no stone unturned in trying to find a way to make the team better.

Unclebuck
06-16-2004, 02:32 PM
If I hear one more time that the Pistons took a big risk acquiring Sheed, I am going to puke.

There was no risk involved, none, zero, nada

Slick Pinkham
06-16-2004, 02:37 PM
I didn't know that Unclebuck was named Jack and was in Louisville.

;)

Slick Pinkham
06-16-2004, 02:41 PM
Chucky Atkins, Bob Sura, and Rebraca or whatever his name is.

How does one make trades like that, and what is the risk?

3 guys who may all be available for Charlotte to claim (possible exception being Sura).

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 03:22 PM
This sounds vaguely familiar. I wonder if DW wrote it for Conrad?.?

naptownmenace
06-16-2004, 03:39 PM
The Pacers brass sure are talking about this trade rumor a lot. Heck, Walsh is telling us that it could be done and Bruno is explaining why it's a good deal!

Very out of the ordinary for them. Something's going to happen this offseason... if not McGrady, another big name will be had. DW and the Pacers are spinning it before it's even been done.

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 03:47 PM
Or are they spinning the "dumping" of Artest????

Suaveness
06-16-2004, 03:47 PM
Or are they spinning the "dumping" of Artest????

Dear god i hope so.

Bball
06-16-2004, 04:19 PM
Or are they spinning the "dumping" of Artest????

Dear god i hope so.

I thought you wanted Artest to stay???

:confused:

-Bball

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 04:23 PM
That's what I thought too.

Suaveness
06-16-2004, 04:24 PM
Or are they spinning the "dumping" of Artest????

Dear god i hope so.

I thought you wanted Artest to stay???

:confused:

-Bball

I do...

Maybe I am misinterpreting geez's post....

I thought he said that maybe the Pacers were faking this entire artest thing and are looking at smoething else.

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 04:27 PM
No, I meant that in any trade scenario we have that exemption ($1.5 -4 million nobody knows for sure how much) that we can use to take back more salary than we send out. IF LB/DW want to that is. And since they are being sooo open about making a major trade, I have to assume they are willing to do that very thing.

Suaveness
06-16-2004, 04:28 PM
No, I meant that in any trade scenario we have that exemption ($1.5 -4 million nobody knows for sure how much) that we can use to take back more salary than we send out. IF LB/DW want to that is. And since they are being sooo open about making a major trade, I have to assume they are willing to do that very thing.

Ohhh ok

sixthman
06-16-2004, 04:29 PM
If I hear one more time that the Pistons took a big risk acquiring Sheed, I am going to puke.

There was no risk involved, none, zero, nada

Precisely.

diego
06-16-2004, 04:30 PM
No, I meant that in any trade scenario we have that exemption ($1.5 -4 million nobody knows for sure how much) that we can use to take back more salary than we send out. IF LB/DW want to that is. And since they are being sooo open about making a major trade, I have to assume they are willing to do that very thing.

i thought they lost the exemption because they didnt use it within a certain timeframe. maybe im wrong here....anyone know about this.

ChicagoJ
06-16-2004, 04:39 PM
No, I meant that in any trade scenario we have that exemption ($1.5 -4 million nobody knows for sure how much) that we can use to take back more salary than we send out. IF LB/DW want to that is. And since they are being sooo open about making a major trade, I have to assume they are willing to do that very thing.

i thought they lost the exemption because they didnt use it within a certain timeframe. maybe im wrong here....anyone know about this.

I beleive they've got a year from the Brad Miller trade to use it.

diego
06-16-2004, 05:04 PM
For some reason i thought last year we either had to use it or we lost it and hence just let it expire instead of adding anyone else. Maybe im wrong but i swore that is what happened.

ChicagoJ
06-16-2004, 05:07 PM
For some reason i thought last year we either had to use it or we lost it and hence just let it expire instead of adding anyone else. Maybe im wrong but i swore that is what happened.

If I recall correctly, they had a limited window in which they could have traded Danny Ferry's non-guaranteed contract again, and that expired.

We've had a variety of trade exceptions over the years (AD for Bender and an exception, DD for JO, Klien and and exception) but I don't think we've ever used one.

indygeezer
06-16-2004, 05:10 PM
IIRC we had a year from time of the trade...but I could be wrong I suppose....NAH..never. maybe.

Bball
06-16-2004, 05:29 PM
For some reason i thought last year we either had to use it or we lost it and hence just let it expire instead of adding anyone else. Maybe im wrong but i swore that is what happened.

You're probably thinking of another one.... We never use them :(

-BBall