View Full Version : Players you would get rid of/keep from the current roster

03-07-2009, 04:40 AM
This season has been tough... most of us are looking forward to next years team. I really do like this team and some of the guys here, they are likeable players and I really am glad we have a few on the team. I find myself puzzled alot of the time on how we can be so bad. I feel we have a better team than our record shows.

Some say we have more talent than our record. Others say we are about where we should be, and others say we are even worse. I am interested to see which players the folks here would like to see leave or stay.

The frustrating part of this for me is that a couple of the main players I feel we need to thrive next year have little to no shot of coming back.. Jack and Marquis. My opinions are based alot on salary along with value.

We need to move Dunleavy if at all possible but I thought we should have done that last offseason, too bad that didn't happen :( He is about as unmoveable as Tinsley. It is not just his lack of D and missing the whole season. He has a huge contract that hangs over the team like a cloud, and that cloud will screw us over by not letting us sign effective players that we need on this team (Marquis and Jack)

Murph just came off his best season ever. The best shooting big man in the game right now besides maybe Dirk, he probably has a better FG% than Dirk I dunno. I really do like him, but now is the time to trade him if we are ever going to.

What about Granger? How expendable is he? I love his game and attitude as long as he doesn't get the JO complex going about how this is HIS team etc.. ad naseum.. BUT he will get getting paid alot for alot of years. How expendable is he? I know this sounds awful to you guys but we have a suck *** team, there might be a possible deal out there that makes sense. Will Granger ever have higher value than he does now?

I think we really need to keep JJack and Marquis. JJack should be the future PG for the Pacers for the next 4 years. I agree with the Billups comparisons whole heartedly. He needs to grow a bit and not make the dumb TOs, but he really has that potential. Marquis is such a unique player, we need him on both sides of the court, just for the love of God, make his next contract have a clause that fines him for shooting a 3pt shot.

I think that will be the biggest question for management, how much is JJack and Marquis worth. Do we try to make a trade to be able to keep them both? We can of course pick up the option on Marquis, but it all comes down to the salary/taxcaps. The rest of the guys I really don't care about, Rasho is a bit of a relief for money, the rest of the team doesn't make enough for me to care about besides Jeff. He is a great player sometimes and sometimes he drives you crazy. I think he makes a bit too much money, and as much as I like him it might be better to explore some options.

Anyway thats just some thoughts on where we are at for next year. It feels like we are rebuilding but we we have a payroll of a team that is supposed to be competing... somethings gotta give. I just want the team competing sooner than later.

03-07-2009, 05:01 AM
Foster and Tinsley are two players I'd look to move.

Foster's defense is overrated. His hustle and professionalism doesn't stand out nearly so much on a team where we have that at pretty much every position now.

Also, Foster creates (IMHO) an issue where the coaches and management feel they should or must play him but they'd really rather have something different. But we just can't commit to that "something different" as long as we have the security blanket of Foster on the roster (I'm a poet and didn't even know it!).

I think last year there was some decent discussion about whether you keep Granger or you keep Dunleavy or do you keep both? I think Dun's injury has settled that debate. The problem is, it's likely also cooled the interest in Dunleavy at the same time forcing a different answer on the team then they would now choose. If you could move Dunleavy this summer somehow, I think you have to consider it. You have to consider that there is a gamble in keeping him due to the injury/healing concerns as well as the original gamble that he and Granger aren't a little too redundant at the wings anyway.

I don't know if there's anyone left from the argument that you trade Granger and keep Dun...

And Tinsley's hopefully sooner rather than later departure needs no explanation. I smell the potential for this to turn into a distraction next season if he loses his grievance and we keep up the status quo. I smell legal rumblings and a pr war... as well as even more noise from the "What if we just suited Tinsley up and gave him a chance?" crowd. No. Please no. Not to showcase him. Not to placate him. Not even to fill out the roster after a mass flu quarantine locks up most of the roster. No.
Tinsley- Never again.

03-07-2009, 05:15 AM
I'll do who I'd keep since it's much quicker.

Danny's a pimp. Jack is a decent 8th man. That's about it. Brandon's borderline playing for free for a few more years so he can stick around I suppose. Similar with Doc Hibbert. Foster would be fine to have if he could eventually get into the 7th/8th man role he should have been in like four years ago.

03-07-2009, 11:16 AM
I'd keep: Granger, Hibbert, Rush, Jack, Dunleavy (as future sixth man)

I'd move: Ford, Foster, Murphy

I don't care one way or the other *: McRoberts, Baston, Graham

FAs I wouldn't make any effort to resign: Rasho, Daniels

* = don't make a big impact on the court, don't make a big impact on the salary cap.

03-07-2009, 11:37 AM
i would keep everyone and having some minor changes.

i would love to see diener gaining some pounds. he lacks of strenght.. some pounds could boost his performance..

03-07-2009, 11:43 AM
I will only talk about who I would get rid of.

Murphy. I like Murphy. I like that he has finally come into his own this year. I would trade him while teams will even consider taking on his final two years. He is not our solution at PF. Yes there have been games he has absolutely carried us this year, but look at the Dunleavy thing. I was praying we traded Dunleavy last year. You have to sell high and we held on to him when we had a chance to get rid of him. Especially after drafting his replacement. I just didn't get that. There probably weren't a ton of teams willing to take him on, but I think it was necessary knowing the type of contract he has. Now that his trade value is low, we are forced to hold onto him and finish paying his contract. We might be able to trade him after next year assuming he makes a full recovery. I bet we could only really get Kenny Thomas' expiring contract and two second rounders for him at this point. We could get something more significant for Murphy right now and we should lock in that value by trading him. We need to address our front court this off-season anyway. I really like both guys as people, but they both are way overpaid, even when good.

We aren't going to be able to make a ton of moves, but I think we will see 4 or 5 new players for us next year.

03-07-2009, 11:52 AM
Oh, and to add to Miller4Ever. Our whole team needs to get stronger. Murphy could stand to add about ten pounds of muscle. Dunleavy, Deiner, Granger, Hibbert, Rush, and McRoberts all must belong to the Reggie Miller School of Power Lifting. I am not a big meat-head, but these guys need to add some more bulk this off-season. I think it will help the teams play. I understand JOB likes to out-run other teams and I agree to an extent, but the endurance training doesn't help us to not get pushed around in the post like rag dolls. I think that must be the next step for our team to take. You can increase the strength training a touch and still continue the endurance training.

03-07-2009, 12:22 PM

Granger - starting caliber SF. Face of the franchise

Hibbert - young and cheap. At least a backup caliber C, maybe eventual starter

Rush - young and cheap. At worst a defensive specialist, likely starter at SG

Diener - it's not that I wouldn't trade Travis, it's just that he is a rarity on the team IMO. He fits, accepts, and is appropriately compensated for his role. I believe he would be exposed as the primary backup, but as a third PG I don't see how you can ask for more. You know exactly what he will give you (better offensive movement), the fans like him, and he plays hard. It certainly isn't make or break for the team, but I see no reason to be unhappy with him.


Daniels - I like Marquis's game and believe his slashing and D are much needed on this team. I'm hopeful Rush can take over the D aspect, but it would be really nice to have two good defenders available on the perimeter. I realize the salary issues the Pacers face. That coupled with his injury history lead me to believe he can't stay long term. I'd love for the team to find a way to exercise their option as insurance for Duns health and Rush's development. Then trade him at the deadline if possible. Unfortunately to trade him you'd have to take back (most likely) longer salary obligations and the team can't afford it. That is the ultimate problem with Dun, Troy, TJ and Foster - they aren't quality starters (except maybe Dun) and they keep the team from using the few assets it does (or did) have - the expiring contracts.

Jack - The Jack re-signing is very dangerous issue for the Pacers. Unless JJ can improve his decision making and his D, then he is another player on the roster that is best suited for a backup role. Considering his recent offensive play, I could see a team bidding to much for his services. I know that there are few teams with room, but it only takes one. Making another long term commitment to a backup will just continue to hurt the teams flexibility. I don't think I could stomach more than a short term (3 years) below mid level type deal for Jack. I'm afraid he will get at least a mid level at 5 years. I'd have to pass.

McRoberts - I don't know that I see the same potential that many see, but he should come cheap and I certainly don't think we have seen enough of him to say what he will be. He's big, athletic, and hustles. Assuming he comes very cheaply, I would like to see him return to see what we have.


Dunleavy - besides the current injury issue, I could see being happy with Dun as the starting SF on a team but he's not better than DG. I believe our D and athleticism suffer too much with him as the starting SG. I would love to have him be the primary backup to DG and Rush, but his salary makes it difficult. The reality is that with the current injury he likely won't be able to be moved until his contract is expiring. At that point it is likely the teams best option will simply be to let him expire. If you can get a decent deal at any point you take it.

Murphy - It appears he's the new "flavor of the month" on the board. I don't dislike Troy Murphy. I do dislike Troy Murphy's game - at least for a starting PF. Like with Dun, I'd be fairly happy with him as a change of pace off the bench, but his salary doesn't match that role. I stated in another thread that short of getting an all-star center I can't imagine finding a player to pair with Murph that created the type of balanced frontcourt I'd like to see. I absolutely hate having both Murph and Dun in the starting lineup. It's been a recipe for disaster both in GS and in Indy. I could live with Dun starting more than Murph. I want him out of the starting lineup. If that makes me a hater ok. As I said, I don't hate him - just his game. Move him at the first decent opportunity, but at least get him out of the starting lineup.

Ford - I could live with TJ being the backup PG, but as with Dun and Murph his contract doesn't match that role. Where I believe Dun and Murph would accept the role without complaint, TJ has a history (Toronto) that makes me doubt that he would readily accept a permanent demotion.

Foster - I like Jeff and appreciate the hustle and professionalism he's brought to the team over the last few years. His game has been built on his hustle and his above average athleticism. His age and nagging injuries (primarily the back) really concern me. Unfortunately I believe we will start to see a drastic decline in his effectiveness. I definitely believe the extension was a mistake. I also believe that not cashing in Jeff’s value at the trade deadline was a big mistake. Even a mid first round pick in a bad draft would have been acceptable for me. It is very cheap way to possibly add an end of the rotation (or better) guy. I don't understand how those that preach you don't need to be in the lottery to find good players (and use DG as an obvious example) can so totally disregard such a pick. Worst case is they would have gotten out from under what will quickly become a bad extension.


Rasho - he'll likely end up with a contender as a decent backup C.

Graham - he's cheap enough that it doesn't really matter, but I'd prefer to use the last few roster spots on one dimensional, situational guys ( D stopper, sharp shooter) or developmental projects (McRoberts). Graham is neither.

Baston - see Graham

It is likely obvious that I feel the team only currently has one quality starter - DG. I think Rush and possibly Hibbert will eventually get there. Most teams don't have 5 quality starters, but they have more than one. The problem is compounded by the fact that TJ, Murph, and Dun all have the same primary weakness - defense. IMO the best thing the Pacers can do is replace the non-starter quality offensive minded players with non-starter quality defensive minded players. I'd like to see:

C - Hibbert
PF - athletic defensive minded player (foster as an absolute worst case)
SG - Ideally Rush, Daniels if Rush isn't ready (no JJ)
PG - better defensive PG. JJ would be acceptable for the right price and with more attention paid to defense. He has the ability.

That means TJ, Dun, and Murph are all coming off the bench. I don't think JOB would have that type of lineup, but IMO that would be more conducive to winning than what we've played this year.

03-07-2009, 12:31 PM
I'd keep: Granger, Hibbert, Rush, McRoberts, Daniels, Foster, Ford and Jack (on the fence), Diener

I'd move: Murphy (never a better chance than now), Dun (impossible to do), Ford (see above)

I don't care one way or the other *: Baston, Graham, Jack (see above)

FAs I wouldn't make any effort to resign: Rasho

* = don't make a big impact on the court, don't make a big impact on the salary cap.

The thing with Jack is you might need bodies unless you have some 2 for 1 deals. He's fine, but after this year I don't really feel as bad having Diener as the #2 PG despite the defense. You do need a starter, but if you are dealing Troy, Ford and Dun I assume that's getting addressed.

PG - new/Ford, Diener
SG - Quis, Rush
SF - Granger, ?
PF - Foster, McRoberts
C - Hibbert, ?

You can maybe draft PF help in Blair, and maybe address PG in a trade or just ride it out. I don't know, this is going to be a much slower offseason it would seem, and not a very exciting draft.

Seems like regardless of what we want, not much can actually change other than losing Quis and Rasho for nothing. Hard times.

duke dynamite
03-07-2009, 12:42 PM
A lot of these posts give me the impression of blowing up the roster...again.

Jose Slaughter
03-07-2009, 12:47 PM
For one thing the Pacers are not going to take on longer contracts or even shorter contracts that bring back a short term pump in salary.

In short, like most every other NBA team, they are in cost cutting mode. When you factor in the 2010 free agent class & the cap coming down, moving Dunleavy or Murphy, in this economy just isn't going to happen.

Nesterovic will be gone. I doubt any NBA team will offer him anything close to what a Euro team will. It's my guess that Bird & Morway were aware of this, that's why Foster got his extra 2 years. Hibbert is good & getting better but he's got to have a backup & it would be better if that backup was a quailty veteren. Quality vet = Foster.

Daniels has almost always been a solid 7th man but in the current NBA 7.3 for what he brings to a team in transition is too much. My guess is, Daniels will not return.

Since Bird has stated that O'Brien will return I take that to mean that Jarret Jack will also. O'Brien has used Jack more than I thought he would & my guess is he will see a similar role next season.

Maceo Baston might hook up with another NBA team but he could look to go back overseas for his final big payday.

Stephen Graham will be happy just to be on a roster but I think he'll be looking at getting some playing time. It could be here but more than likely he'll sign somewhere else.

McRoberts has shown promise & even thou he doesn't seem to fit into O'Brien's system, Bird is aware that O'Brien is only the transition coach. McRoberts could be a good 3rd or 4th big in a few years. At the salary that he would want to stay here he would be worth keeping.

So the roster turnover continues.... Nesterovic, Daniels, Baston & Graham are out.

10 Vets return:

Hibbert, Foster, Murphy, McRoberts, Granger, Dunleavy, Jack, Rush, Ford & Diener

Give Tinsley (he never plays again) the 11th spot, add in a couple drafted players and an end of the bench role player and you've got your 2009-2010 Indiana Pacers.

03-07-2009, 12:48 PM
A lot of these posts give me the impression of blowing up the roster...again.

I wouldn't worry about that. The Pacers have too many overpaid players for that to really happen. While I'd like for TJ, Murph, Foster, and Dun to be moved, I'd be pleasantly surprised to see even one of them moved this offseason. After that we'd be probably better off just letting them expire.

03-07-2009, 02:47 PM
I think we could realistically see somebody get moved this off-season out of that group. Foster, Murphy, TJ and Dun. I could see one, but not more than that. Especially if we are still trying to figure out where to pawn Tinsley. Tinsley could be very movable right after our season is over, so a team has all summer to make sure he got back into basketball shape. I could see a playoff team that sees a definitive weakness at their PG spot making a play for him.