PDA

View Full Version : Reggie Miller's Pacers Rumor



imawhat
06-19-2009, 02:01 AM
This may have been mentioned somewhere. If so, please merge.


Reggie was on a draft show tonight on NBATV and was asked about the Pacers pick.

The talk he's been hearing is that we're looking to trade either Ford or Jack in order to draft a "point guard for the future".

This goes back to articles from Bird/O'Brien after the season ended. There's been a lot of focus on us taking a big, but I think there's a legit chance we take a PG and either a) trade Ford for a big or b) sign and trade Jack for a big.

I also think it's intriguing we've worked out two PGs that have been projected in the top 8. It sounds like we expect one of them to drop or we are considering trading up. I suspect the former.

croz24
06-19-2009, 02:18 AM
This may have been mentioned somewhere. If so, please merge.


Reggie was on a draft show tonight on NBATV and was asked about the Pacers pick.

The talk he's been hearing is that we're looking to trade either Ford or Jack in order to draft a "point guard for the future".

This goes back to articles from Bird/O'Brien after the season ended. There's been a lot of focus on us taking a big, but I think there's a legit chance we take a PG and either a) trade Ford for a big or b) sign and trade Jack for a big.

I also think it's intriguing we've worked out two PGs that have been projected in the top 8. It sounds like we expect one of them to drop or we are considering trading up. I suspect the former.

well let's hope the pacers pull the trigger. did he go into any more detail than that?

Placebo
06-19-2009, 02:49 AM
http://www.nba.com/video/channels/draft/2009/06/18/nba_090618_mil_draft_preview.nba/index.html

If you scroll down and go to the 2nd page, Pacers/Reggie video is there.

pwee31
06-19-2009, 02:58 AM
Foster isn't a free agent!?!

How are these guys informed?

underwave
06-19-2009, 03:07 AM
what's going to happen to tinman?

vnzla81
06-19-2009, 06:41 AM
I really hope they do that, draft maybe best player maybe a pg , trade Ford and get a big.

DEEman
06-19-2009, 07:45 AM
I really hope they do that, draft maybe best player maybe a pg , trade Ford and get a big.
What kind of big you think we can get by trading Ford?

Hitman02
06-19-2009, 08:26 AM
As much as I like TJ, it would be a dream come true to have Jennings come off the bench behind Jack.

BKK
06-19-2009, 08:32 AM
I think we have more chances of getting a swingman ala Mike Miller for Ford which would not be bad at all considering:
1. he replaces Dunleavy in a similar role while we wait for Mike to return
2. he expires after next season and Minny is not really a serious candidate for the 2010 sweepstakes
3. Minny needs a true PG
4. there's no 4

this deal s been discussed before but i think it's the most realistic one. i don't see us getting a quality big for ford just beacause those don't grow on trees or because some of the interesting ones ala Haslem expire after next season and play for teams who want to position themselves for 2010 (plus Beasley needs to improve on defense to be reliable)

there are options to trade a guy like Ford (the most likely gone when u think about it with Foster) but it won't land us the needed athletic defensive big man...

ESutt7
06-19-2009, 08:44 AM
Uh...yeah, not impressed with NBATV's coverage in the least. The Reggie part was nice though. I think that's what we're going to do too, and I really think it's going to be Ty Lawson, unless one of the bigger PGs like Holiday falls to us. Even then I wouldn't be shocked to see us take Lawson.

I still think we could work a deal with Portland to get someone like Outlaw or Webster for TJ Ford.

DrFife
06-19-2009, 08:56 AM
I think we have more chances of getting a swingman ala Mike Miller for Ford which would not be bad at all considering:
1. he replaces Dunleavy in a similar role while we wait for Mike to return
2. he expires after next season and Minny is not really a serious candidate for the 2010 sweepstakes
3. Minny needs a true PG
4. there's no 4

this deal s been discussed before but i think it's the most realistic one. i don't see us getting a quality big for ford just beacause those don't grow on trees or because some of the interesting ones ala Haslem expire after next season and play for teams who want to position themselves for 2010 (plus Beasley needs to improve on defense to be reliable)

there are options to trade a guy like Ford (the most likely gone when u think about it with Foster) but it won't land us the needed athletic defensive big man...

This is one of my favorite ideas; I was pondering it again last night (although I still see #13 as "in between" what we need, as Seth and others have also reported). Miller's on the decline, so if Minnesota were to play along, we should be able to extract their #28, too. Probably not quite enough to nab Hansbrough, but perhaps 3-4 Brown, or certainly Pendergraph. If only there were a way to improve that to their #18 instead ... .

Will Galen
06-19-2009, 09:00 AM
Reggie was on a draft show tonight on NBATV and was asked about the Pacers pick.

The talk he's been hearing is that we're looking to trade either Ford or Jack in order to draft a "point guard for the future".



We can't trade Jack to draft a future point guard. Jack's a restricted free agent. And it's not a guarantee we will be able to resign Jack. So I call a 'foul' on that part of what Reggie said.

count55
06-19-2009, 09:14 AM
We can't trade Jack to draft a future point guard. Jack's a restricted free agent. And it's not a guarantee we will be able to resign Jack. So I call a 'foul' on that part of what Reggie said.

We could potentially sign & trade Jack. It seems reasonable to me that we're shopping both, though probably Ford more than Jack.

Why would teams trade for Jack when they could sign him outright? It depends on his price. Most teams won't have more than the MLE, and while I expect Jack to be less than that, stranger things have happened. Also, teams may want to use the MLE on someone else, or teams may want to pick up Jack without adding salary (thus, the trade).

While Reg may not have the technicalities right, the spirit of what he's saying seems to be very reasonable and believable.

Anthem
06-19-2009, 09:18 AM
This is one of my favorite ideas; I was pondering it again last night (although I still see #13 as "in between" what we need, as Seth and others have also reported). Miller's on the decline, so if Minnesota were to play along, we should be able to extract their #28, too. Probably not quite enough to nab Hansbrough, but perhaps 3-4 Brown, or certainly Pendergraph. If only there were a way to improve that to their #18 instead ... .
Miller's ok, but doesn't do much with the "build for the future" thing.

I'd love Ford for Cardinal and the #18.

idioteque
06-19-2009, 09:20 AM
If we want a PG in this draft, I sure hope that means we are trading up to get one like Reggie mentioned rather than drafting one in our range.

As much as I try to warm up to Ty Lawson I really cannot. The guy's weakness is playing in a half court set, which is the key to winning in the NBA. The run n' gun may win you National Championships, but it is not going to win any NBA titles.

I'll predict Lawson's career as a Pacer right now: JOB's system makes him look better than he really is, after JOB leaves Larry hires a coach who demands we play a more controlled, half-court style of play, which exposes Lawson and he is traded for peanuts, beginning what becomes a relatively long journeyman career.

Lawson would be best served going to a team like the Spurs who play disciplined basketball, as that way he would be able to learn to play the half court style effectively while he is still pretty young. He might look hot under JOB for a couple years in Indiana, but that is not what is best for him career wise.

We have enough backup PG's right now on our roster. We need a starter. We need either Holliday or Jennings or to look elsewhere.

Will Galen
06-19-2009, 09:23 AM
We could potentially sign & trade Jack. It seems reasonable to me that we're shopping both, though probably Ford more than Jack.

Why would teams trade for Jack when they could sign him outright? It depends on his price. Most teams won't have more than the MLE, and while I expect Jack to be less than that, stranger things have happened. Also, teams may want to use the MLE on someone else, or teams may want to pick up Jack without adding salary (thus, the trade).

While Reg may not have the technicalities right, the spirit of what he's saying seems to be very reasonable and believable.

Reggie said that we're looking to trade either Ford or Jack in order to draft a "point guard for the future".

That means trading Jack this draft, not in the summer. That's what I called foul on.

DrFife
06-19-2009, 09:43 AM
Miller's ok, but doesn't do much with the "build for the future" thing.

I'd love Ford for Cardinal and the #18.

Yeah, I like that a lot, too. 'Course, I like Tinsley for Cardinal + #28 even better.

ESutt7
06-19-2009, 09:44 AM
Saying Lawson can't play in the half court is an assumption though. UNC didn't do it much, so people just assume that Lawson can't. It's an unfair knock because of the system he played in. But he is great at penetrating into the lane, and makes good decisions with the ball. There's no reason that he can't be a good P+R, half court PG.

We're all guessing more than anything with that. I believe that he could be very effective. Others believe he can only play run 'n gun, because that's all we've seen. What ultimately matters is whether the Pacers believe that he can play in the half court. If they don't, then I highly doubt they'd be interested in drafting a one trick pony. JMO, but we want guys that can both run and play smart half court basketball. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see. I think the Pacers will wind up getting a guy that they really wanted.

idioteque
06-19-2009, 10:39 AM
Saying Lawson can't play in the half court is an assumption though. UNC didn't do it much, so people just assume that Lawson can't. It's an unfair knock because of the system he played in. But he is great at penetrating into the lane, and makes good decisions with the ball. There's no reason that he can't be a good P+R, half court PG.

We're all guessing more than anything with that. I believe that he could be very effective. Others believe he can only play run 'n gun, because that's all we've seen. What ultimately matters is whether the Pacers believe that he can play in the half court. If they don't, then I highly doubt they'd be interested in drafting a one trick pony. JMO, but we want guys that can both run and play smart half court basketball. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see. I think the Pacers will wind up getting a guy that they really wanted.

I get what you're saying but let's not pretend that UNC never ran a half court set last season.

If you go back and watch the National Championship, you will see that UNC ran a lot of half court in the second half. Lawson's weaknesses in the half court were on full display and he settled for a lot of bad jumpers rather than finding open teammates. That is another thing that bothers me about Lawson: the lack of a midrange jumper. In a halfcourt set it is very important that a PG have a nice pull up and mid range to keep the defense honest when penetrating into the lane. Otherwise every defender will know that a pass is going to be made and it makes it more difficult for the PG to pass and makes turnovers much more likely.

I am with those who believe that the Pacers may pick Lawson, but that is not because I think he is an excellent player. Whoever picks him is just going to get a really gimmicky backup at best.

Trophy
06-19-2009, 04:06 PM
Jack fits into our system so I'd figure we'd trade Ford and not him.

I like Jack at our PG over Ford.

Smoothdave1
06-19-2009, 05:31 PM
I think Ford to Minnesota makes a lot of sense for both teams. Minnesota needs a true point with experience and someone who can lead a team. They have Telfair and Bobby Brown right now. Although Telfair isn't bad, he's better suited coming off the bench and Brown is more of a 3rd stringer right now.

With that said, a deal like:

-- Ford to Minnesota for Miller straight up works
-- Ford for Craig Smith and Brian Cardinal also works

Would Minnesota be willing to do a deal like this? I think it's possible, especially since Kahn is now in charge and is looking to make a splash out of the gate. Ford has a player option the 2nd year, but that would also give Minnesota an expiring contract to work with too

I think the Pacers would probably like to trade Ford more so than Jack because:

-- Ford has a larger contract (2 years/17 million) right now
-- Pacers have Jack penciled in as their starter for the next few years
-- Jack will be cheaper to sign (4-5 million a year)
-- Pacers are going to draft a point (Lawson, Teague or Maynor)
-- Pacers could fill a need elsewhere or obtain cap relief by trading Ford

Minnesota will not take Tinsley unless we're either throwing in Rush, Roy or a 1st round pick and Bird will not do so. New T-Wolves GM David Kahn knows Jamaal too well and that doesn't fit with what Minnesota is looking to do.

Should we do a Miller for Ford straight up, we could have a lineup of say:

Jack, 1st rd pick, Diener or f/a signing, Tinsley
Rush, Miller, Dunleavy
Granger, Graham, fa
Troy, Josh, fa
Roy, Jeff, fa

That gives the Pacers a shooter coming off the bench and 6th man in Miller who would take over for Quis and give us some scoring until Dunleavy came back. Plus, he would be in the last year of his deal and could either be dealt at the trade deadline or the Pacers could let his salary come off the cap next summer.

pwee31
06-19-2009, 05:43 PM
I think the Pacers will get their PG at #13 and Ford or Jack will be move for an additional pick, or a solid veteran or two

I see could see Ford going to either Philly, Atlanta, Minny, or Dallas for a 1st round pick and vet or 2 to match salaries

MyFavMartin
06-19-2009, 07:40 PM
Very few teams will be taking on salary this summer so TJ Ford may be returning next season.

Trophy
06-19-2009, 07:43 PM
I think the Pacers will get their PG at #13 and Ford or Jack will be move for an additional pick, or a solid veteran or two

I see could see Ford going to either Philly, Atlanta, Minny, or Dallas for a 1st round pick and vet or 2 to match salaries

I agree, something kind of similar to last year's draft night deal.

PacerGuy
06-19-2009, 08:33 PM
-Most agree Ford the one the Pacers want to move 1st. His P/O for n/y, could be viewed as a + or a - depending on ones '10 plan. This will help deside what suitors are in play. As stated, J.Jack could also be moved in a S&T, something teams who may not have much $ to spend or don't want to add payroll but want JJ, but not sure what the Pacers can affordto take back. It would have to either fill a need for us w/ a player we like, or bring in picks IMO to be an option. "picks could be picks already made in this draft - like the R.Hibbert deal from l/y, if a deal were already in place.
-I don't see the Pacers including #13 w/ either Ford or Jack, unless they are in love w/ a player (Evans?) & have a team picking that high w/ interest in trading down & w/ Ford or Jack. This combonation is not likely. This leaves trading Ford or Jack by themselves, unless there is a need to combine other players or future picks. The Pacers cap situation t/y & n/y is very tight, so they will more then likely be looking for multible smaller contracts &/or 2nd rd picks. As we all know, the Pacers will not take back any contracts going past '11, unless its a young player or vet they really like & is low $. (In '11 T.Murphy, M.Dunleavy, J.Tinsley, T.Ford, J.Foster are all FA's).

Some deals that have been mentioned here & elsewhere:
-Ford for M.Miller
(Min gets a true PG & one for the draf pick to learn from & IN gets a replacement @ SG/SF while Dun recovers) or...
-Ford for B.Cardnial/ C.Smith/ 2nd (Min gets a starting PG & IN gets a young PF, expiring, & a desired pick) ** remove C.smith & 2nd for #28 &/or we add something for #18
-Ford to GS for Crawford
(GS rids themselves of Craw & get a true PG who will likely opt out at yr end, freeing up cap while IN gets bench depth (spot starter) while Dun recovers)

Not sure I love any of these, but I think they are more or less on track. I really think the Pacers would love to get a defensive (or young) PF in a deal here, or if they can't, find help to solidify our wing issue. My wish would to find a 3rd team for TJ & send their assets to N.O. for Chandler-type deal.

Anthem
06-20-2009, 01:18 AM
Yeah, I like that a lot, too. 'Course, I like Tinsley for Cardinal + #28 even better.
I think that goes without saying.