PDA

View Full Version : One more reason to love Jeff foster



aceace
05-19-2009, 02:33 AM
ESPN.com
By: Marc Stein
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Chatter-090518


Foster, though, is the closest thing there is these days in Indy to a Mr. Pacer since Reggie Miller's retirement. Even two good assets could not convince the Pacers to part with Foster, who received a two-year contract extension worth $12.7 million that kicks in starting next season.
I'm pretty sure Foster would have been reluctant to relocate to the Rocky Mountains, judging by what he told us back in November: "I love this franchise too much and this organization too much to have wanted to leave. I want to see this thing get back to where it was when I got here. ... It's a great franchise and we will rise again. It's just a matter of how long it takes."

diamonddave00
05-19-2009, 02:57 AM
I'm sorry Kleiza and the Charlotte pick for Jeff Foster is a trade Larry Bird should have jumped all over. Having 2 lottery picks plus Kleiza would have been nice additions to next seasons roster.

The Pacers in my opinion errored in giving Foster the 2 year 12.7 mil extention . Sorry Jeff's best days are behind him , to have gotten a lottery pick to me seems too good to be true , but to some I'm sure Foster is far more valuable than he is too me.

Jose Slaughter
05-19-2009, 03:11 AM
Lets see, ya trade Foster & don't get back a 5.

Nesterovic leaves this summer.

That pretty much leaves Hibbert as your center... oh I forgot Murphy.

Great plan!

I would have liked the draft pick too but just how thin to you want those power positions?

The only reason Foster got the extra two years is because Bird knew Rasho was not coming back & that Hibbert isn't ready yet.

There's still two years to go on the three year plan. That just so happens to be how much longer Foster will be a Pacer.

Speed
05-19-2009, 05:28 AM
I like Kleiza and he fits Obies offense, plus a lotto pick, no brainer. Foster is a Pacer to me, but you can't be stupid about, imo. You could get a big body from the NBDL, this season wasn't what you were concerned with anyway. Anytime you can get that kinda of return for a back up PF on the downside, you do it. Only thing I can think of is if Kleiza has a bad contract then maybe you don't.

Draft another bigman, heck, draft two of them.

MillerTime
05-19-2009, 06:02 AM
Then again, I wouldnt trade Foster for a pick in this years draft. But it still is a trade worth looking at. I think we could have found another team willing to take Kleiza for a big man (to make up for Foster's absence), and we still could have been able to get the Bobcats pick. We could have moved Kleiza to Dallas for Bass and kept the pick form Bobcats

Overall, I'm sure Bird looked at all these options, hes not an idiot. But its important to keep in mind that this years draft is weak and the Bobcats pick isnt worth much

Major Cold
05-19-2009, 07:05 AM
I forgot to click on a link....is there one.

Hicks
05-19-2009, 08:12 AM
Need to see a link and an author or this will have to be removed. Thanks.

Justin Tyme
05-19-2009, 08:49 AM
Then again, I wouldnt trade Foster for a pick in this years draft. But it still is a trade worth looking at. I think we could have found another team willing to take Kleiza for a big man (to make up for Foster's absence), and we still could have been able to get the Bobcats pick. We could have moved Kleiza to Dallas for Bass and kept the pick form Bobcats

Overall, I'm sure Bird looked at all these options, hes not an idiot. But its important to keep in mind that this years draft is weak and the Bobcats pick isnt worth much



Have you ever taken a look at Kleiza physically? He's put together like a rock. He can play both forward spots.

If the Bobcats pick isn't worth much, that doesn't say much for the Pacers pick 1 spot behind Charlotte, now does it? So why are you and others so excited about the Pacers pick at #13, but "the Bobcats pick isn't worth much" at #12.

If this supposed trade is true, Bird made another poor decision. This is EXACTLY the type moves good GM's make, and don't pass up. A nice young player and a 1st for Foster is more than Foster is worth. Really, this trade makes no sense b/c their salaries don't even come close to matching, let alone getting a 1st too. Foster value isn't that great at this stage of his game, but if the offer was made Bird should have jumped all over it.

Jonathan
05-19-2009, 09:12 AM
Bird gave Foster an extension because he is a great mentor for Roy and sets a standard of professionalism to other young players on the roster that this organization has lacked in recent years.

duke dynamite
05-19-2009, 09:20 AM
I'm with Jose on this one. Jeff's tenure is something to be proud of, but losing him would make us very shallow on the big category.

Some of you guys need to realize that it isn't just a matter of us presenting an offer to Rasho. He doesn't want to be back...in the NBA. He wants to go home and finish his career.

Putnam
05-19-2009, 09:23 AM
Bird gave Foster an extension because he is a great mentor for Roy and sets a standard of professionalism to other young players on the roster that this organization has lacked in recent years.


Yep. It's gotta be this.

Speed's and Justion Tyme's argument is strong enough to be obvious, so if Bird didn't do it he must know better than we do what Foster's value as an elder stateman is.

BRushWithDeath
05-19-2009, 09:32 AM
There is no good reason, other than sentimentality, to say that keeping Jeff Foster over Linas Kleiza and another lottery pick is good for the Pacers. Simply none.

JB24
05-19-2009, 09:34 AM
The pick wasn't this season's pick, though it still would have been an attractive asset.


The Bobcats will keep the pick for next month's draft, since it was 2009-protected through No. 14, but Charlotte's protection drops to 1-through-12 in the 2010 draft, 1-through-10 in 2011, 1-through 8 in 2012, 1-through-3 in 2013 and is fully unprotected in 2014.

ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Chatter-090518)

It's worth noting that Kleiza is a free agent at the end of the season as well, so he could have been used for cap relief. I love Jeff as much as the next guy and can understand the reasons for keeping him, but this was a pretty good deal if it was indeed on the table.

ABADays
05-19-2009, 09:46 AM
I hate it when we get to the point of a player's career that his roster space has to be defended. We went through this with Reggie too and it got heated. The front office has shown me enough to believe if Foster was extended there is a damn good reason for it and I doubt sentimentality had anything to do with it.

Jonathan
05-19-2009, 09:57 AM
There is no good reason, other than sentimentality, to say that keeping Jeff Foster over Linas Kleiza and another lottery pick is good for the Pacers. Simply none.

Do you know for sure that was the offer?

Putnam
05-19-2009, 10:10 AM
I hate it when we get to the point of a player's career that his roster space has to be defended. We went through this with Reggie too and it got heated. The front office has shown me enough to believe if Foster was extended there is a damn good reason for it and I doubt sentimentality had anything to do with it.


Perhaps "sentimentality" is not quite the right word.

BrushwithDeath seems to view the NBA as a poker game, which can always be won by the player with the best hand (poker experts, please don't muddle my point with objections about bluffing). To the extent that talent always prevails, he's right. But to the extent that loyalty, professionalism, etc. contribute to winning, Brush misses something.

Foster is quoted in the OP saying he "loves the Pacers franchise and organization." What's that worth? Especially if the young guys get infected with the same love and devotion because of Foster's veteran presence?

I personally don't know the answer, but I think Larry Bird does.

Shade
05-19-2009, 10:20 AM
This thread title could very easily read "One more reason to hate Jeff Foster," depending on your view of the proposed trade. I, for one, would have taken that deal in a heartbeat. A lottery pick and expiring contract for a player on the down-slope of his career? No-brainer, IMO. I understand the need for an elder statesman, but Jeff won't be here forever, and we really overvalue his contributions.

BRushWithDeath
05-19-2009, 10:31 AM
Do you know for sure that was the offer?

No I do not. But that is what the article says.

BRushWithDeath
05-19-2009, 10:43 AM
Not pulling the trigger on this move was clearly shortsighted for the Pacers. Did having Jeff Foster over Linas Kleiza allow us to win a few more games after the deadline? I would vehemently argue no, but even if I thought he won us 10 games after the deadline the trigger should have been pulled. The Pacers should have been in a full on rebuilding youth movement last year. This trade would have been not just a step, but a hop, skip, and a jump in the right direction. Because it would have so obviously been good for the Pacers, I assume this deal was never actually offered.

As for comparing Reggie's roster spot to Jeff's... well there is no comparison.

Trader Joe
05-19-2009, 10:52 AM
Lets see, ya trade Foster & don't get back a 5.

Nesterovic leaves this summer.

That pretty much leaves Hibbert as your center... oh I forgot Murphy.

Great plan!

I would have liked the draft pick too but just how thin to you want those power positions?

The only reason Foster got the extra two years is because Bird knew Rasho was not coming back & that Hibbert isn't ready yet.

There's still two years to go on the three year plan. That just so happens to be how much longer Foster will be a Pacer.

That is of course assuming that Jeff has ever really been a true center to begin with.

I agree with the overall point, but I do think we overpaid slightly in that deal.

Bball
05-19-2009, 11:51 AM
Perhaps it was felt that rewarding Foster's professionalism and presence with job security and a nice payday was worth it for the signal it sent (and sends) to other Pacers (and potential Pacers).

Walsh clearly did these type of things, to a fault even, so maybe the idea of it goes further up the food chain to Simon?

Is the risk vs reward worth it? I guess that is the question to be answered. I do find it odd that the Colts can cut ties with Marvin Harrison (after the career he's had) for economic reasons (dollars vs production) but the Pacers feel Foster deserved a new contract even during a period where the team has needs on the court as well as off the court (in the form of salary relief) and this didn't (directly) address either.

-Bball

BillS
05-19-2009, 12:18 PM
I don't think comparing Harrison to Foster makes sense. For one, Harrison would be getting a lot more salary relative to the value than Foster, who is just above the MLE. For another, the locker room effect of one player in the NFL is diluted by the sheer number of players on a team. Third, I think the value of a glue guy is vastly underrated until the locker room needs one, which is when everyone starts screaming at TPTB about how bad it is no one in the locker room provides a solid veteran presence.

I don't think slightly above MLE $ is overrating Foster.

Justin Tyme
05-19-2009, 01:50 PM
Loyalty? It only goes so far, and 12 mil was too far. Let's see if Foster is worth that 12 mil over the next 2 years. 12 mil for a mentor for Hibbert? Please, you can get a big man coach and a mentor for Hibbert at a fraction of the cost. A big man coach is far more important to Hibbert's development than being mentored by Foster. Give Ewing a third of that to come develop/mentor Hibbert like he has Howard!

Again, I don't see this trade as ever being offered, and I have yet to see a LINK proving it was! Is there a link??

JB24
05-19-2009, 01:57 PM
LINK (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Chatter-090518)

ABADays
05-19-2009, 02:20 PM
Loyalty? It only goes so far, and 12 mil was too far. Let's see if Foster is worth that 12 mil over the next 2 years. 12 mil for a mentor for Hibbert? Please, you can get a big man coach and a mentor for Hibbert at a fraction of the cost. A big man coach is far more important to Hibbert's development than being mentored by Foster. Give Ewing a third of that to come develop/mentor Hibbert like he has Howard!

Again, I don't see this trade as ever being offered, and I have yet to see a LINK proving it was! Is there a link??

Loyalty doesn't go far enough in my book these days.

And if Pacers history is any indiction they will never, never, never, never, never, never hire a big man coach.

:notamused:

Putnam
05-19-2009, 02:33 PM
Loyalty? It only goes so far, and 12 mil was too far. Let's see if Foster is worth that 12 mil over the next 2 years. 12 mil for a mentor for Hibbert?

Foster is more than a mentor. He is still a very good rebounder.

He finished the season 21st among all NBA players in rebounds per 48 minutes. that puts him between Shaq and Lamar Odom.

But I'll never disagree that any NBA player is paid too much, so I'm :buddies: with you there.

.

BRushWithDeath
05-19-2009, 02:36 PM
When you've only ever been good at one thing, being 21st at it isn't worth a lottery pick.

RWB
05-19-2009, 02:48 PM
I guess that is the question to be answered. I do find it odd that the Colts can cut ties with Marvin Harrison (after the career he's had) for economic reasons (dollars vs production) but the Pacers feel Foster deserved a new contract
-Bball

Of course number one is Harrison was due way, way, too much money for his services. But lets not fool ourselves into thinking Harrison even approached being a glue guy. Frankly the guy did not associate with any other players or serve as a role model to the young guys trying to move up. Not saying he should, but you look at someone like Jeff Saturday who does mentor the O-line not only in skills but how to act away from the field as well. I have to believe Foster probably does the same or attempt the same with the Pacers. IMHO as others have stated this importance can not be underestimated. !!!

CableKC
05-19-2009, 02:49 PM
The pick wasn't this season's pick, though it still would have been an attractive asset.

ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&page=Chatter-090518)

It's worth noting that Kleiza is a free agent at the end of the season as well, so he could have been used for cap relief. I love Jeff as much as the next guy and can understand the reasons for keeping him, but this was a pretty good deal if it was indeed on the table.
In a vacuum ( or in NBA2k9 FantasyLand where I can push the "reset" button ), I agree with JB24 and DD00 on this one.....CapRelief for the 2009 season ( something that we desperately need IF we intend to resign Jack along with giving us better 2009 FA options to help us be more competitive over the next 2 seasons ) and an additional Draft pick in the 2010 Draft for Foster would have been acceptable to me.

But given the situation at the trade deadline....where we all know that we were still trying our best to compete for the Playoffs with Rasho on his last legs, Hibbert barely able to stay on the court for 15-20 minutes without fouling out on a constistent basis and Murphy running on fumes playing 36+ minutes at Center for the rest of the season......I can understand why Bird chose not to trade Foster....we simply need him for Frontcourt depth in order to compete for this season. It could be argued that this would have forced JO'B to play more of Baston and/or ( preferably ) McRoberts and would have allowed us to have a small-medium lineup with Kleiza that was more athletic....but I'm guessing that TPTB decided to stick it out with the "tried and true" option of keeping Foster.

Keep in mind that this doesn't mean that I don't value what Foster brings and that he has earned his contract.....it just means that I recognize that there is an Financial/SalaryCap aspect to our current 2009 Offseason situation. I could understand IF we decided to take that trade....but also understand that TPTB desperately wanted to get back to the Playoffs and that they decided that we would have had a better chance to make a run with ( instead of without ) Foster.

Honestly, I can see Foster still being used as a possible trading asset before the 2009 draft to try to improve this team....but it's quite obvious that TPTB has shown to other GMs that Foster can be had.....but at a high price ( which IMHO ) is a good thing.

ChicagoJ
05-19-2009, 02:51 PM
And the winner is...


When you've only ever been good at one thing, being 21st at it isn't worth a lottery pick.

Kid Minneapolis
05-19-2009, 02:53 PM
Sure, he's not the best player in the world, but he's a known commodity, he's loyal, and he's a great influence on a team that is trying to improve a damaged reputation. You cannot undervalue that. He's a class act, a good smart representative, and respected across the league. I've said it before, and I'll say it again --- some people have fallen in love with stats and base their decisions solely off stats alone. That can lead you to some wrong decisions, believe it or not.

Foster is worth more to us than what we could get for him, is my guy feel anyway. Kinda like that 15 year old car with 250,000 miles, but still runs like a top and the $300 you'd get for it isn't worth what the car is worth to you, so you just keep it because you know that car treats you right and gets you where you need to go. (Please no jokes about the good little car missing a frustrating amount of layups, God love him).

The article posted by the OP quotes Foster saying exactly what you want someone on your team to say, that's a great attitude to have and will go a long way toward long-term growth and improvement.


I love this franchise too much and this organization too much to have wanted to leave. I want to see this thing get back to where it was when I got here. ... It's a great franchise and we will rise again. It's just a matter of how long it takes."

That's a beautiful thing to hear.

count55
05-19-2009, 02:56 PM
Some more details on the Charlotte pick:


Denver received the pick from Charlotte last June in exchange for the No. 20 overall selection used by the Bobcats to select Alexis Ajinca. The Bobcats will keep the pick for next month's draft, since it was 2009-protected through No. 14, but Charlotte's protection drops to 1-through-12 in the 2010 draft, 1-through-10 in 2011, 1-through 8 in 2012, 1-through-3 in 2013 and is fully unprotected in 2014.

So, there was not going to be an extra pick this year. Looking at the protection structure, there's a very sizable chance that either we don't see that pick until 2011 or 2012, or if we do, it's no longer a lottery pick, but one somewhere in the mid-teens.

So, now, the deal is for Kleiza (who impresses me not at all) and what will probably amount to a mid-first round pick at some unspecified point in the future. The further that pick drifts into the mid-teens, the less attractive this deal gets. If, as I suspect, Kleiza were not to be a long term asset, the Pacers would have traded away a productive player and good locker room presence for some vague, down-the-road return.

Realistically, it's probably about 50/50 that we get as much or more out of Foster over the next two years than we would get out of Kleiza and/or the pick over their careers with the Pacers.

If the deal were for the #12 pick this year, I probably would have taken it, but I would not have considered it a slam dunk. However, further inspection of the linked rumor shows a lot of small print.

[BTW...for those of you wondering how Denver can trade a $1.8mm/yr player (Kleiza) for a $5.5mm/yr player (Foster), the answer is: Trade Exceptions. Denver would use the exception (or part of the exception) received in the Marcus Camby trade, in effect trading the 1st round pick to Indy for Foster, slotting him into their Trade Exception. Meanwhile, the Pacers would use their exception from the JO deal, slotting Kleiza and sending back something to make the deal work.

This "something" could also have been a hang-up. If it was something meaningless, like the rights to Lorbek or Andrew Betts (if they still have them), then it's no biggie. However, it could also have been something the Pacers considered of some value, like a future protected 1st, or this year's second.

I have no problem with trading Foster, but I'd prefer to do it for something a lot less speculative.]

ABADays
05-19-2009, 03:23 PM
When you've only ever been good at one thing, being 21st at it isn't worth a lottery pick.

Damn - and to think Peyton Manning is only good at throwing passes.

BillS
05-19-2009, 03:29 PM
When you've only ever been good at one thing, being 21st at it isn't worth a lottery pick.


Damn - and to think Peyton Manning is only good at throwing passes.

Well, no, Peyton is also a valuable locker room presence and team leader ... *DOH*

BRushWithDeath
05-19-2009, 03:48 PM
Damn - and to think Peyton Manning is only good at throwing passes.

Worst. Comparison. Ever.

Trader Joe
05-19-2009, 04:22 PM
Damn - and to think Peyton Manning is only good at throwing passes.

I mean... really? You're better than that ABA.

Trophy
05-19-2009, 04:30 PM
He's our best offensive rebounder and a pretty good defender when he's at center. He's mostly the leader of the team as far as NBA experience and Pacer experience for that matter.

Trader Joe
05-19-2009, 04:35 PM
Does anyone really truly honesty believe that Jeff Foster is the leader of this basketball team?

Los Angeles
05-19-2009, 04:41 PM
Methinks that if we actually got Nazr for Jamaal, then the Pacers would have turned right around and sent Foster to the Nugz.

Trophy
05-19-2009, 04:42 PM
Does anyone really truly honesty believe that Jeff Foster is the leader of this basketball team?

I wouldn't say leader. Just the oldest and has the most knowledge of the team.

Trader Joe
05-19-2009, 04:45 PM
I wouldn't say leader. Just the oldest and has the most knowledge of the team.

Does that make him valuable at all? I like Jeff, but the guy isn't the leader of this team. I don't even think he would be in the top three in terms of leadership sway. He's just kind of there, and he gets some respect since he has always been a Pacer.

Trophy
05-19-2009, 04:49 PM
Does that make him valuable at all? I like Jeff, but the guy isn't the leader of this team. I don't even think he would be in the top three in terms of leadership sway. He's just kind of there, and he gets some respect since he has always been a Pacer.

No he's not the leader and one of the top few on our team to be a leader. He has some value in him. Not much though. I wouldn't be surprised if he were moved, not resigned in the future, or just retire.

Major Cold
05-19-2009, 05:08 PM
Some of you want to string up Larry Bird right now for not taking this trade?

I think count hit the nail on the head. We know what we are getting with Foster. We would not have LK after this season, most likely. The draft pick does not come to at least next year, unless the Bobcats underachieve. And if they continue to underachieve we might not see the draft pick for awhile (see Utah getting NYK's pick)

So you are willing to give up a player who exudes professionalism for a player who is rented and a pick that we might not see for a few years? And for those who say all he does is rebound...obviously when you watch a game you follow the ball and not Foster.

He produces off of the ball, which with the scorers that we have....we need.

This deal was not a no brainer.

JHcutt18
05-19-2009, 07:02 PM
Trading Foster for Kleiza and a pick would've almost guaranteed that we don't get any rebounds ever for the next few yrs...

Trophy
05-19-2009, 07:39 PM
Some of you want to string up Larry Bird right now for not taking this trade?

I think count hit the nail on the head. We know what we are getting with Foster. We would not have LK after this season, most likely. The draft pick does not come to at least next year, unless the Bobcats underachieve. And if they continue to underachieve we might not see the draft pick for awhile (see Utah getting NYK's pick)

So you are willing to give up a player who exudes professionalism for a player who is rented and a pick that we might not see for a few years? And for those who say all he does is rebound...obviously when you watch a game you follow the ball and not Foster.

He produces off of the ball, which with the scorers that we have....we need.

This deal was not a no brainer.

I just say keep him until he expires and we'll take it from there.

Trader Joe
05-19-2009, 08:34 PM
For the record, I'm not complaining about not taking the trade or Jeff Foster the player. Merely speculating about what his value really is.

ABADays
05-19-2009, 08:49 PM
I mean... really? You're better than that ABA.

I was not trying to slam anyone. But if someone wants to point out singular attributes the statement is valid.

LoneGranger33
05-19-2009, 09:11 PM
Doesn't JOB use Foster as our primary playmaker? Isn't he the one with the ball (back to the basket) at the top of the key looking to hit cutters?

vnzla81
05-19-2009, 09:15 PM
Doesn't JOB use Foster as our primary playmaker? Isn't he the one with the ball (back to the basket) at the top of the key looking to hit cutters?

he also use him as a shooter in last second plays,,,,,,,,,:laugh::laugh:

Trophy
05-19-2009, 09:18 PM
he also use him as a shooter in last second plays,,,,,,,,,:laugh::laugh:

A perfect example is when he nailed that half court 1st quarter buzzer beating shot this past season against the Hawks I think.

I wish they had it on youtube.

speakout4
05-19-2009, 09:18 PM
Perhaps it was felt that rewarding Foster's professionalism and presence with job security and a nice payday was worth it for the signal it sent (and sends) to other Pacers (and potential Pacers).

Walsh clearly did these type of things, to a fault even, so maybe the idea of it goes further up the food chain to Simon?

Is the risk vs reward worth it? I guess that is the question to be answered. I do find it odd that the Colts can cut ties with Marvin Harrison (after the career he's had) for economic reasons (dollars vs production) but the Pacers feel Foster deserved a new contract even during a period where the team has needs on the court as well as off the court (in the form of salary relief) and this didn't (directly) address either.

-Bball
Marvin Harrison isn't half the team player that Foster is. Marvin sits on the bench and doesn't talk to other players and is belligerent to the press. He gets into scrapes that suggest he shot someone. I haven't seen other teams beating his door down so perhaps Foster just deserves a little more loyalty than Marvin.

idioteque
05-19-2009, 09:24 PM
Damn - and to think Peyton Manning is only good at throwing passes.

Do you really think he is 21st best at it, though?

count55
05-19-2009, 09:31 PM
Do you really think he is 21st best at it, though?

On a good day...:-p

(BTW...21st actually represents 89th percentile for rebounds per minute...He's actually 9th in Off Rebs per minute, or about 95th percentile.)

Trophy
05-19-2009, 09:35 PM
He was last year's MVP so I'm sure he's worthy of more.

ECKrueger
05-19-2009, 09:56 PM
:notamused:

Even if you say he's only worth about half the contract, I think this makes up for the other half :D

BRushWithDeath
05-20-2009, 10:54 AM
There is no chance that this trade ever was actually offered because it would so clearly be good for the Pacers, Bird would have to accept.

Anthem
05-20-2009, 12:48 PM
Methinks that if we actually got Nazr for Jamaal, then the Pacers would have turned right around and sent Foster to the Nugz.
Yep, agreed.

wintermute
05-20-2009, 01:21 PM
[BTW...for those of you wondering how Denver can trade a $1.8mm/yr player (Kleiza) for a $5.5mm/yr player (Foster), the answer is: Trade Exceptions. Denver would use the exception (or part of the exception) received in the Marcus Camby trade, in effect trading the 1st round pick to Indy for Foster, slotting him into their Trade Exception. Meanwhile, the Pacers would use their exception from the JO deal, slotting Kleiza and sending back something to make the deal work.

This "something" could also have been a hang-up. If it was something meaningless, like the rights to Lorbek or Andrew Betts (if they still have them), then it's no biggie. However, it could also have been something the Pacers considered of some value, like a future protected 1st, or this year's second.

I have no problem with trading Foster, but I'd prefer to do it for something a lot less speculative.]

count, i understand you're speculating on what the actual trade might have looked like, but if the above scenario were on the table, then it would have looked even better for the pacers :eek:

losing foster's contract would have allowed the pacers to use the mle, making a guy like brandon bass a possible free agency target. or if kleiza had worked out for us, presumably we'd use the money to re-sign him.

if foster is really such a coveted target, it makes me wonder why we haven't traded him yet. perhaps tptb really do value (overvalue?) his locker room presence.

Slick Pinkham
05-20-2009, 02:16 PM
Jeff is valuable to our team and to many others.

I think, for example, that if the Rockets had Jeff Foster backing up Yao all year, maybe his minutes would have been reduced enough to not get hurt yet again. Or even if he did, Jeff playing over the 6'6" Chuck Hayes might still have helped them beat LA.

He is a valuable asset but one I'd like to keep.

NuffSaid
05-20-2009, 04:09 PM
Have you ever taken a look at Kleiza physically? He's put together like a rock. He can play both forward spots.

If the Bobcats pick isn't worth much, that doesn't say much for the Pacers pick 1 spot behind Charlotte, now does it? So why are you and others so excited about the Pacers pick at #13, but "the Bobcats pick isn't worth much" at #12.

If this supposed trade is true, Bird made another poor decision. This is EXACTLY the type moves good GM's make, and don't pass up. A nice young player and a 1st for Foster is more than Foster is worth. Really, this trade makes no sense b/c their salaries don't even come close to matching, let alone getting a 1st too. Foster value isn't that great at this stage of his game, but if the offer was made Bird should have jumped all over it.
I understand your argument and it's a good one, but I think there's something to be said about a player who remains loyal to his team.

Foster brings alot to the table. He's a great team player, great personality, is a person of good moral character and has a solid work ethic. He's one of the best rebounders to ever play the game and is a very under-rated post defender. The problem with this last part - "post defender" - is most people equate it to "shot blocker", but as any good Center will tell you post defense is more than blocking shots.

Defending from the Center position is moreso about altering shots or forcing penetrators to give the ball up instead of allowing them an easy play at the basket. It's also about keeping your opponent off the ball underneath the basket on both the defensive and offensive ends. Foster brings all of this to the hardwood. Foster brings mentorship to the locker room and practise gym and that's hard to come by. And considering that the Pacers lacked experienced big men, not to mention the roster was filled with young players, the team needed Jeff Foster's experience. I, for one, was glad that he wasn't traded. Moreover, I'm glad he wants to be here and help bring this team back to elite status. This kind of loyalty doesn't come around everyday, folks. I hope Jeff Foster remains a Pacer and retires as such.

Justin Tyme
05-20-2009, 05:17 PM
I understand your argument and it's a good one, but I think there's something to be said about a player who remains loyal to his team.

Foster brings alot to the table. He's a great team player, great personality, is a person of good moral character and has a solid work ethic. He's one of the best rebounders to ever play the game and is a very under-rated post defender. The problem with this last part - "post defender" - is most people equate it to "shot blocker", but as any good Center will tell you post defense is more than blocking shots.

Defending from the Center position is moreso about altering shots or forcing penetrators to give the ball up instead of allowing them an easy play at the basket. It's also about keeping your opponent off the ball underneath the basket on both the defensive and offensive ends. Foster brings all of this to the hardwood. Foster brings mentorship to the locker room and practise gym and that's hard to come by. And considering that the Pacers lacked experienced big men, not to mention the roster was filled with young players, the team needed Jeff Foster's experience. I, for one, was glad that he wasn't traded. Moreover, I'm glad he wants to be here and help bring this team back to elite status. This kind of loyalty doesn't come around everyday, folks. I hope Jeff Foster remains a Pacer and retires as such.


You have some valid comments, BUT it wasn't necessary for Bird to give Foster an extension until the season ended. Foster still would have been one of the bigs here this past season. They weren't going to be short a big or lose his play if an extension hadn't been given to him. The Pacers weren't obligated to give him a 12 mil 2 year extension. Bird should have been prudent, taken his time, and let the season play out b4 jumping to give Foster 12 mil. By giving Foster that 12 mil, Bird has shot himself in the foot by not having enough money for FA. What if that 6 mil per year could have been applied in getting Milsap? Milsap can rebound AND score. Like I said "loyalty only goes so far", and if it handcuffs the team to get better then it's not worth it. Every player knows it's a business, and they were paid quite well for their services.

What other team is going to pay Foster 6 mil for his services. Just remember that is above the MLE which means only 8 teams have the money to do it. Again, who is going to pay 6 mil for a one trick pony that can't score, poor FT shooter, and a mediocre defender? The oblivous answer is Larry Bird.

I truly believe Bird could have saved the Pacers some salary by letting Foster become a FA. Foster would have taken less to stay with the Pacers. He said in a Star interview last year, I wish I had the link, he wasn't going anywhere unless it was by the Pacers. That's waving a red flag to TPTB to not have to give Foster 12 mil. It's like Okur saying he wants to stay with the Jazz and is willing to take 3-4 mil per year less to do so. Duh, you think Miller is going to pay Okur those extra mils out of loyalty? Don't think so!

Those extra mils Bird could have saved could go along ways helping the Pacers sign a better FA than what they will end up getting, could have been used to buy a 1st in this draft, kept the money in the Simons' pockets, etc. Sorry, Bird dropped the ball on this one big time, and it's going to cost and hurt the Pacers. JMOAA

Young
05-20-2009, 05:54 PM
Trading Jeff Foster is something I would be torn on if I were Bird.

On one hand he has value. He is likely going to be on the downside of his career soon. If you can get a solid player like Linza and a draft pick it's hard to pass that up.

On the other hand in this particular deal the Pacers probably didn't want to wait until 2014 to get something for Jeff. Sure they could get the pick before that but don''t be suprised if the Bobcats are still bad.

In general why trade Jeff? He is a model citizen and a great teammate. He loves this city and franchise and he wants to be here. His value and worth is probably mostly of things we don't see. Things that go on in practice and in the locker room. When your franchise has gone through what the Pacers have had the thing you want to do is hold on to all of your Jeff Foster type players you can.

ChicagoPacer
05-20-2009, 06:37 PM
The reason for the lack of a trade should be obvious. It has less to do with intangibles such as leadership than it does team need.

Troy Murphy had a career year rebounding. He boarded 32% of the our opponents' missed shots this year when he was on the court. That is an astounding number. It's a Dennis Rodmanesque kind of rate. Charles Barkley never did that in his career. Ben Wallace has done it once. Mutombo, Garnett, Mourning? Never. Unfortunately, Troy's rebounding had nothing to do with Murphy turning into some sort of machine and everything to do with how horrible our rebounding was this year. Someone has to get them. Take Foster of this team without adequate replacement down low and we would redefine futility in rebounding (defense and other things excluded).

It's been said here before, but leadership aside, given the chance to trade a mediocre player at our biggest need (interior defense and rebounding) to get a mediocre wing at a strength + a hypothetical mid-tier first rounder at some undertermined time in the next 4-5 years + a bit of salary savings, is there a clear cut option?

Now throw in the fact the Ps are still trying to win back fans so it might be important to the franchise to win an extra 4-5 games a year to show marginal progress...

Add that Hibbert has trouble not picking up fouls. Not to mention that even if he wasn't foul prone, we have no idea if his body is capable of withstanding the 30 minutes a night he'd need to play with no Foster...

Toss in that Foster is someone the casual fan still appreciates from the pre-brawl era...

Include the fact that Foster, while he might not be a "true leader" is at least more of a leader/respected than all but maybe a couple of players on the roster. This has some value. How much is open to debate...

It should be pretty obvious that the right choice was made, assuming there was no big man alternative out there.

ChicagoPacer
05-20-2009, 07:04 PM
You have some valid comments, BUT it wasn't necessary for Bird to give Foster an extension until the season ended. Foster still would have been one of the bigs here this past season. They weren't going to be short a big or lose his play if an extension hadn't been given to him. The Pacers weren't obligated to give him a 12 mil 2 year extension. Bird should have been prudent, taken his time, and let the season play out b4 jumping to give Foster 12 mil. By giving Foster that 12 mil, Bird has shot himself in the foot by not having enough money for FA. What if that 6 mil per year could have been applied in getting Milsap? Milsap can rebound AND score. Like I said "loyalty on goes so far", and if it handcuffs the team to get better then it's not worth it. Every player knows it's a business, and they were paid quite well for their services.

There is definitely something to the idea of waiting to see how things play out before spending. I also think the FA crop of guys who can rebound and score is awfully thin and you might be understating their availability/price in the market...even with Foster's $$$ available. Millsap is restricted and there is no way the Jazz are letting him go for anything we can afford within the cap. Boozer might free up, but we have no $$$ to offer him, and Lee will get his from NY.

Which means the only way out is through freeing up space via trade. There is nothing we can do about the lack of movable pieces for two years anyway w/ Dun, Murphy, and Tins.

If this is the case, there are only two possibilities: tank two seasons and build (not popular with the casual fan in a time the Pacers need as many casual fans as they can get). Sign what you can to keep things respectable and aim for Summer 2011.

LoneGranger33
05-20-2009, 09:02 PM
It's been said before, but not as bluntly: He wants to be here and he wants to win - that's why.

Justin Tyme
05-20-2009, 09:45 PM
He is a model citizen and a great teammate. He loves this city and franchise and he wants to be here. His value and worth is probably mostly of things we don't see. Things that go on in practice and in the locker room. When your franchise has gone through what the Pacers have had the thing you want to do is hold on to all of your Jeff Foster type players you can.


BUT why over pay to keep him, when he wants to stay in the 1st place? Why waste the millions when it can be used for other things? Why pay full retail when you can get it at a discount?

Bottom line is Bird dropped the ball!!

ABADays
05-20-2009, 10:31 PM
BUT why over pay to keep him, when he wants to stay in the 1st place? Why waste the millions when it can be used for other things? Why pay full retail when you can get it at a discount?

Bottom line is Bird dropped the ball!!

How do you get that he is overpaid for crying out loud?

ChicagoJ
05-20-2009, 10:37 PM
How do you get that he is overpaid for crying out loud?

Have you seen those numbers? For a guy that barely averaged 22 mpg when he WAS a starter.

Waaayyy too rich for his production as a 1-trick pony and leadership that should be coming from Granger, Rush, Hibbert, and Jack anyway.

vnzla81
05-20-2009, 10:59 PM
Have you seen those numbers? For a guy that barely averaged 22 mpg when he WAS a starter.

Waaayyy too rich for his production as a 1-trick pony and leadership that should be coming from Granger, Rush, Hibbert, and Jack anyway.

I agree, he will be making 6mil next year, just for a player that brings leadership to the team? with that money they could get players like Big baby, Bass, Gooden or even Millsap

Justin Tyme
05-21-2009, 06:03 AM
How do you get that he is overpaid for crying out loud?


You are kidding, right? You think Foster isn't with all that he DOESN'T do? 6 mil a year for a player who averaged 6.8 rebounds, 6.1 PPG, and shot 65.8% FT this past season!

flox
05-21-2009, 07:49 AM
On a good day...:-p

(BTW...21st actually represents 89th percentile for rebounds per minute...He's actually 9th in Off Rebs per minute, or about 95th percentile.)

What's his percentile for big men or from positions 3-5?

Country Boy
05-21-2009, 08:18 AM
The reason for the lack of a trade should be obvious. It has less to do with intangibles such as leadership than it does team need.

Troy Murphy had a career year rebounding. He boarded 32% of the our opponents' missed shots this year when he was on the court. That is an astounding number. It's a Dennis Rodmanesque kind of rate. Charles Barkley never did that in his career. Ben Wallace has done it once. Mutombo, Garnett, Mourning? Never. Unfortunately, Troy's rebounding had nothing to do with Murphy turning into some sort of machine and everything to do with how horrible our rebounding was this year. Someone has to get them. Take Foster of this team without adequate replacement down low and we would redefine futility in rebounding (defense and other things excluded).

It's been said here before, but leadership aside, given the chance to trade a mediocre player at our biggest need (interior defense and rebounding) to get a mediocre wing at a strength + a hypothetical mid-tier first rounder at some undertermined time in the next 4-5 years + a bit of salary savings, is there a clear cut option?

Now throw in the fact the Ps are still trying to win back fans so it might be important to the franchise to win an extra 4-5 games a year to show marginal progress...

Add that Hibbert has trouble not picking up fouls. Not to mention that even if he wasn't foul prone, we have no idea if his body is capable of withstanding the 30 minutes a night he'd need to play with no Foster...

Toss in that Foster is someone the casual fan still appreciates from the pre-brawl era...

Include the fact that Foster, while he might not be a "true leader" is at least more of a leader/respected than all but maybe a couple of players on the roster. This has some value. How much is open to debate...

It should be pretty obvious that the right choice was made, assuming there was no big man alternative out there.

The same could be said about Granger's increased scoring, someone had to score.

ABADays
05-21-2009, 05:22 PM
You are kidding, right? You think Foster isn't with all that he DOESN'T do? 6 mil a year for a player who averaged 6.8 rebounds, 6.1 PPG, and shot 65.8% FT this past season!

If the average salary in the NBA is $5.2M, and doing the one thing this team needs, no I don't think he is overpaid.

This reminds me of all those who said JO deserved what he got. His pay was absurd.

Justin Tyme
05-21-2009, 08:15 PM
If the average salary in the NBA is $5.2M, and doing the one thing this team needs, no I don't think he is overpaid.

This reminds me of all those who said JO deserved what he got. His pay was absurd.


I hope you feel this way when age and injury(back) gets Foster, and the Pacers could use that 6 mil a year for another player who isn't a one trick pony.


It wasn't me that ever said JO was worth his salary, so we do agree on something.

Young
05-21-2009, 10:47 PM
I really don't think Jeff is overpaid. If he is it is not by much.

If you people don't think he is worth 6 million then how much is he worth?

Just take a look around the league and see guys like Diop, Narz, Gadzuric, Etan Thomas, Jason Collins, and the list can go on. These guys are making similar money to what Jeff is. Quit complaining. Be happy that this team has someone who wants to be here and has a passion for this team. I think Jeff can still produce for 2 more years. If not it's like he will hold this team back.

If this team wants to get back in the playoffs it needs more guys like Jeff. I believe in the draft and taking a chance there but from the deal showed on here the Pacers might not see that pick for a couple years. The Pacers need to get back in the playoffs soon. They made the right call.

Kid Minneapolis
05-21-2009, 11:04 PM
I really don't think Jeff is overpaid. If he is it is not by much.

If you people don't think he is worth 6 million then how much is he worth?

Just take a look around the league and see guys like Diop, Narz, Gadzuric, Etan Thomas, Jason Collins, and the list can go on. These guys are making similar money to what Jeff is. Quit complaining. Be happy that this team has someone who wants to be here and has a passion for this team. I think Jeff can still produce for 2 more years. If not it's like he will hold this team back.

Bingo.

Kid Minneapolis
05-21-2009, 11:05 PM
I hope you feel this way when age and injury(back) gets Foster, and the Pacers could use that 6 mil a year for another player who isn't a one trick pony.

So, like... are you hoping Foster does get injured now, just to prove your point? Lol...

PacersRule
05-21-2009, 11:17 PM
Ummm...stupid question...how did Foster end up here again?

LoneGranger33
05-22-2009, 12:56 AM
I believe all that information is available at his site: http://www.lifewithoutacentre.com/

Justin Tyme
05-22-2009, 05:24 AM
So, like... are you hoping Foster does get injured now, just to prove your point? Lol...



WOW! I understand this is a forum where posters are encouraged to express their views and opinions, but to insinuate that I hope Foster gets hurt to prove my point is asininely irresponsibly childish.

Kid Minneapolis
06-04-2009, 01:06 AM
WOW! I understand this is a forum where posters are encouraged to express their views and opinions, but to insinuate that I hope Foster gets hurt to prove my point is asininely irresponsibly childish.

Well, glad to hear you don't want Foster hurt, although I don't know if the "assininely irresponsibly childish" part was terribly necessary, lol... It was mostly a joke.

PR07
06-04-2009, 02:26 AM
This is a tough call, but I can understand why the front office stuck with Jeff. He's still a productive big man, and I think every team could use a Jeff Foster. As the longest tenured Pacer, he's always been a fan favorite. For an organization trying to connect again with the casual fans of Indy, trading Foster is only going to further alienate the casual fan base.

The young guys we bring in: Rush, Hibbert, etc. are going to need some veterans in the locker room. Otherwise, you end up with a culture (Atlanta early 2000's, LA Clippers since I can remember), where everyone is young, and no one really knows how to carry themselves in the NBA. Having a guy like Jeff Foster in the locker room is only going to help our young guys' development. No, I wouldn't say he's a vocal leader, but he's the type of guy that busts his butt in practice and in games, and plays the game the way it should be played: HARD. He's a nice piece in keeping a locker room professional.

JaimeKoeppe
06-04-2009, 02:58 AM
I say we keep him, if were drafting a big player he needs someone to be an influence on him.

kellogg
06-04-2009, 03:09 AM
I've gone back and forth on Foster. Unless someone (like a SA or another team just a piece or two away) makes you an offer on a young up-an-coming prospect or insists on Jeff to unload Tinsley, at this point he's more valuable as a locker room guy. I used to discount how valuable guys like this were but this team has had tremendous success since the 90s when guys like LaSalle, Big Smooth, Antonio, etc were here...guys who worked hard, were good examples to the young guys, good community folks, etc. Those intangibles are worth more at this stage...if another team was offering a 2nd round pick, then no way...in fact, in this draft, I'm not sure I'd trade Foster for any pick from #15 down.