PDA

View Full Version : Pick 3 pacers you wouldn't trade



speakout4
01-05-2009, 08:24 PM
Right now my three would be

Granger
Ford
Hibbert

MrSparko
01-05-2009, 08:25 PM
Assuming this excludes extremely lopsided trades...

Granger
Hibbert
Rush

Hicks
01-05-2009, 08:26 PM
I'm not sure that I have 3. Or really, even 2.

Only Granger falls under the "means more for the Pacers than anyone else" category right now. Maybe Dunleavy, but then he's the same position as Danny, so I can't really put him on the list for that reason.

Kemo
01-05-2009, 08:28 PM
Granger
Dunleavy
Hibbert

Lord Helmet
01-05-2009, 08:30 PM
Um, let's see:

Granger
Dunleavy
TJ

MillerTime
01-05-2009, 08:31 PM
Ford
Granger
Rush

Am I the only person the likes Rush...I see a future in him...to me, he still seems nervous when hes out there

count55
01-05-2009, 08:35 PM
I'd trade anybody for the right deal, but the three who would be last on my list to trade would be:

Granger
Hibbert
Rush

Spirit
01-05-2009, 08:36 PM
Granger
Dunleavy
Hibbert

MillerTime
01-05-2009, 08:41 PM
We should have done 5 instead of 3. Its more likely to protect 5 players, in situations like a disaster draft or a new team comes into the league.

In that case:
Granger
Hibbert
Rush
Ford
Dunleavy

speakout4
01-05-2009, 08:46 PM
We should have done 5 instead of 3. Its more likely to protect 5 players, in situations like a disaster draft or a new team comes into the league.

In that case:
Granger
Hibbert
Rush
Ford
Dunleavy
Three makes it a challenge.

MillerTime
01-05-2009, 08:49 PM
Three makes it a challenge.

ya thats true

Jose Slaughter
01-05-2009, 09:06 PM
Everytime I pick a favorite or do something like this the guy ends up in Milwaukee or Charlotte or something like that.

So, no .......... no way I'm naming even one guy.

Evan_The_Dude
01-05-2009, 09:15 PM
Granger - For obvious reasons

Rush - Good defender that can become an excellent defender. Can be aggressive offensively at times when it's most needed, and we need that. Size is a plus here too.

Jack - I'm sure I'll be the only one to name him. But we waited how long for a defensive point guard? Yes he makes mistakes, but he's also solid a lot of times too. If you have a championship squad, you have a guy like this on your team whether it's as a backup or a starter. He brings a toughness that you can't take for granted.

GO!!!!!
01-05-2009, 09:18 PM
Granger, Rush, Hibbert with Jack being a close forth

Reasons, NBA 2K9 Domination..

MillerTime
01-05-2009, 09:21 PM
:D
Everytime I pick a favorite or do something like this the guy ends up in Milwaukee or Charlotte or something like that.

So, no .......... no way I'm naming even one guy.

Name players you want trade instead then :D

Evan_The_Dude
01-05-2009, 09:25 PM
Granger, Rush, Hibbert with Jack being a close forth

Reasons, NBA 2K9 Domination..

werd

MyFavMartin
01-05-2009, 09:38 PM
Granger - For obvious reasons

Rush - Good defender that can become an excellent defender. Can be aggressive offensively at times when it's most needed, and we need that. Size is a plus here too.

Jack - I'm sure I'll be the only one to name him. But we waited how long for a defensive point guard? Yes he makes mistakes, but he's also solid a lot of times too. If you have a championship squad, you have a guy like this on your team whether it's as a backup or a starter. He brings a toughness that you can't take for granted.

I'd agree to those 3. (I'm a Jack fan too.)

I'd have Foster as 4th just because of his veteran grit and maximum effort, which can really rub off on the team, and I don't think anything coming back in a trade would make up for that loss.

jeffg-body
01-05-2009, 09:40 PM
Granger, Rush, Hibbert

joeyd
01-05-2009, 10:31 PM
I'd have Foster as 4th just because of his veteran grit and maximum effort, which can really rub off on the team, and I don't think anything coming back in a trade would make up for that loss.

Agreed. Actually, I'd probably bump him up to 3rd on that basis alone.

cinotimz
01-05-2009, 10:53 PM
Considering we are in a rebuilding phase, contract situation and realizable potential probably are key ingredients here.

Danny is locked in to a reasonable long term contract for a player that seems to be at an allstar level right now and seems to have not reached his ceiling yet. He certainly appears to be our franchise type player and the player the team will be built around.

With Hibbert and Rush both being in the first year of their rooking contracts, both part of the rotation already, and both showing signs of tremendous potential, I would think they would be the other two you would be least likely to trade.

What you always dread in trades is trading away a player and then having him blossom into a much better player than what he was when he was with you. The only other player on the roster that probably isnt a known quantity for how good he might become is McRoberts. With all the other players on the roster you have to believe you have a pretty good feel for how good they are with us and how good they will be with anybody else. Therefore, it should be fairly easy to get equal value in return. If not, you dont do the deal.

duke dynamite
01-05-2009, 10:59 PM
Granger
Murphy
Dunleavy
Foster
Diener

I did FIVE OOOH TOP THAT!

Anthem
01-05-2009, 11:31 PM
I like all of our guys.

But I'd trade any of them in a heartbeat if I thought it would make the team better.

Cherokee
01-05-2009, 11:34 PM
Granger
Murphy
Dunleavy

aero
01-05-2009, 11:35 PM
Granger
Hibbert
Foster

Justin Tyme
01-05-2009, 11:39 PM
There isn't 3 players on the Pacers I won't trade.

Granger
Everyone else is tradeable including JO'B and Bird!

BlueNGold
01-06-2009, 12:00 AM
Danny is the only player I would not trade short of something unrealistic like Lebron.

Hibbert and Rush are two very good prospects, so I'd be careful dealing them. They both could turn out to be very good pro's.

Dece
01-06-2009, 01:22 AM
This team has 0 players I wouldn't trade. What are we, 10 games under .500 now? Bad teams don't have untouchable players, no one on our roster is the cornerstone of a franchise.

Quis
01-06-2009, 01:33 AM
There's no one I wouldn't trade for the right price, but if I had to keep three I'd go with Danny, Roy, and T.J. Ford.

MillerTime
01-06-2009, 03:51 AM
There's no one I wouldn't trade for the right price, but if I had to keep three I'd go with Danny, Roy, and T.J. Ford.

Exactly. Theres no one thats really untouchable. If we claim that Granger is untouchable and a trade comes by that makes our team better, we have to move him.

PaceBalls
01-06-2009, 04:29 AM
I'd keep the rookies since they are so cheap for a couple more years. Everyone else I can see trading, maybe not Danny, but his value is so high right now, there might be realistic offers to pursue

xtacy
01-06-2009, 06:32 AM
Granger
Rush
Hibbert

DGPR
01-06-2009, 09:41 AM
Jermaine O'neal
Ron Artest
Al Harrington

Bball
01-06-2009, 09:49 AM
We just gave up 135 points and we're losing games more often than there are cold days in winter. That doesn't bode well for me making anyone untradeable.

-Bball

Los Angeles
01-06-2009, 10:30 AM
No one is un-tradable. Especially when you don't have an established "face of the franchise" like Reggie. If trading your top three "un-tradable" guys gets you Shaq-in-his-prime, you do it.

Especially when your top three guys aren't even all that great. :sorry:

BillS
01-06-2009, 10:33 AM
Granger, definitely.

The rest are problematic.

If I'm trying to keep the team going right now, I'd put in

Quis (nagging injury aside, he seems to be the only one besides Danny even trying to play defense out there)
Jack (while TJ is down he's our only effective PG, though really only a bit above Diener)

If I'm looking at the future, it has to be

Rush
Hibbert

both of the are developing very well for their rookie years.

OakMoses
01-06-2009, 11:54 AM
Just to be different and controversial, here's a first blush look at the players in the order I would protect them if I had to choose one at a time. Contracts are taken into account.

Granger
Rush
Jack
Ford
Dunleavy
Foster
McRoberts
Hibbert
Daniels
Murphy
Diener
Rasho
Graham
Baston
Tinsley

Brad8888
01-06-2009, 04:37 PM
Well thought out.

In keeping with the original theme, without taking contracts into account:

Granger
Dunleavy
Rush

and Hibbert, Daniels, Jack, Ford, and McRoberts narowly missing the top three for various reasons mainly due to lower basketball IQ OR inexperience with little hope of the players being given a chance to develop with the current coaching regime.

jhondog28
01-06-2009, 05:21 PM
If I was a captain of a 3 on 3 bball team I would not want to lose...

Dunleavy
Foster
Granger

Hustle, Team Defense and Leadership

With my bench 3 of...

Diener
Ford
Hibbert

MiaDragon
01-06-2009, 05:30 PM
Ford
Granger
Rush

Am I the only person the likes Rush...I see a future in him...to me, he still seems nervous when hes out there

< Rush fan.

NashvilleKat
01-06-2009, 09:07 PM
Granger, Dunleavy, Rush, and Hibbert

YoSoyIndy
01-07-2009, 09:46 PM
Ford
Granger
Rush

Am I the only person the likes Rush...I see a future in him...to me, he still seems nervous when hes out there

I like Rush. Kid just needs to get a little more confidence. He's athletic, agressive and has a nice shot - he'll actually start hitting them once he gets over some jitters.

sloopjohnb
01-08-2009, 11:34 AM
In order of importance:

1. Granger
2. Rush
3. Hibbert

NapTonius Monk
01-08-2009, 12:13 PM
Granger
Dunleavy
Hibbert/Rush is a toss-up, leaning toward Hibbert

ChicagoJ
01-08-2009, 12:16 PM
Everytime I pick a favorite or do something like this the guy ends up in Milwaukee or Charlotte or something like that.

So, no .......... no way I'm naming even one guy.

Yeah, my list is Person, Flemming, and JO.

I'm still afraid to put that Reggie guy on my list...

NapTonius Monk
01-08-2009, 12:19 PM
I didn't want to start another thread, so I'll ask this question here. Has Graham shown you enough that you'd be willing to deal Marquis, and rely on Graham as the firepower off the bench?

count55
01-08-2009, 12:46 PM
I didn't want to start another thread, so I'll ask this question here. Has Graham shown you enough that you'd be willing to deal Marquis, and rely on Graham as the firepower off the bench?

Not without being comfortable with Dunleavy's recovery.

Graham has performed admirably, but, on the face of it, I would not feel comfortable with a Graham/Rush rotation @ the 2.

That being said, it would depend (as always) on what we got back for Quis. If the team can be made better overall, then I'd be OK with that risk.

OakMoses
01-08-2009, 12:51 PM
Not without being comfortable with Dunleavy's recovery.

Graham has performed admirably, but, on the face of it, I would not feel comfortable with a Graham/Rush rotation @ the 2.


If Dunleavy is back for good, then I really see no need for 'Quis, especially if O'Brien continues to use Jack as a 2 guard as much as he did last night.

Justin Tyme
01-08-2009, 01:37 PM
Graham has performed admirably, but, on the face of it, I would not feel comfortable with a Graham/Rush rotation @ the 2.

That being said, it would depend (as always) on what we got back for Quis. If the team can be made better overall, then I'd be OK with that risk.

Absolutely, I would. Graham at his price would work fine with the understanding he's possibly not the answer to the b/u SG, but for a year or so I'd give him a shot at B/U SG. If it doesn't work, he's trade fodder.

By all means do it if trading Daniels can get the POWER FORWARD the Pacers need, then Daniels is expendable.