View Full Version : Interesting Article...

07-28-2004, 10:27 AM
It's old but it has a trade scenerio at the bottom.


The Pacer Report
By Marc F. Roberts
Jul 17, 2004, 17:00

Harrington Traded

As was reported last week on the Pacer Report, 26 year-old shooting guard Stephen Jackson officially became a Pacer on Thursday via sign-and-trade. Jackson signed a six year contract with the Hawks and then was traded (unfortunately without Jason Terry) to Indiana for Pacerís 6th man Al Harrington.

At first glance this trade will make most Pacer fans scratch their heads. It isnít so much that the trade is uneven, but the bothersome part here is that it seems the Pacers could have signed Jackson to a nearly identical contract with their mid-level exception and kept Harrington. However, if you look at the transaction a little closer, you will see that Walsh and Bird do indeed have a plan, and I for one am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Here are a few reasons why Bird and Walsh made this trade:

A sign-and-trade allowed the Pacers to offer Jackson the largest amount of money. Because they made a sign-and-trade they were able to sign Jackson for a slightly larger contract than they would have been able to offer with their MLE (mid-level exception). While this may seem a little selfish on Jacksonís part, you can be sure that the Pacers werenít the only team offering Jackson the MLE, and the larger contract certainly would have been more appealing to Jackson, who has never been paid over $1.1 million dollars in a season.

The Pacers wanted to be able to keep their mid-level exception. If you look at all of the angles of this trade then you will see it basically boils down to the Pacers trading Harrington for Jackson and another MLE. That is why the value of this trade will probably be decided after the off-season is over. If the Pacers are able to add a piece or two who are more valuable to the team than Harrington, or they are able to use their extra cap space to add another player via trade (remember the Pacers are on a tight budget) then this trade will be a success.

Donít get me wrong this trade will make Atlanta fans very happy. It isnít every day you can get a young promising forward for a player you were planning on losing anyway, but if the Pacers play their cards right this trade will be a success for both teams.

Dampier to Indy, still a possibility?

If you listen to the newspapers it seems that the answer would be no. Still whenever Dampierís name is brought up, so are the Pacerís. They are one of six or seven teams reported to still be in the running for the center, and one of only three that could offer Dampier their entire MLE (the Knicks and Wizards are the others). Dampier says he would like to return to Indiana, and the Pacers could defiantly use him. However, it is unlikely the will be able to get the big man to agree to take their MLE, meaning they will probably have to work out another sign-and-trade to get him.

One interesting scenario that continues to pop-up is a trade that would send Ron Artest and Scot Pollard to the Warriors for a re-signed Dampier and Mike Dunleavy. While giving up Artest would be very hard for the Pacers, it does make a lot of sense for the both teams.

The Warriors would be able to team Artest with Mickael Pietrus, newly signed Derek Fisher and Adonal Foyle to give them a defensive team that would rival the Pistons.

The trade would also give the Pacers one of the most versatile line-ups in the league. If the Pacers could continue to refine Dunleavyís skills at point guard (he played considerable time their last year, and played very well), they would be able to put a line-up of Dunleavy, Jackson, Bender, OíNeal, and Dampier on the floor, all of whom are 6í9Ē or taller. Talk about match-up problems. Add to that players like Reggie Miller (who will likely start over Jackson next season), Jamal Tinsley, Freddie Jones, Austin Croshere, David Harrison, Jeff Foster, and Anthony Johnson and the Pacers would have one of the most talented and well-balanced line-ups in the league. They would also lose Pollardís large contract, which would be a huge bonus.

Marc F. Roberts, who covers the Pacers, is a regular contributor to hoopsworld.

07-28-2004, 10:41 AM

6 yrs Dampier = 50+ million
2 yrs Dunleavy = 8 mill

total 58 mill

4 yrs Ron = 27 mill
2 yrs Polly = 12 mill

totall 39 mill

so 2 years Damp = 19 mill diff, without re-signing Dunleavy.

And would Dunleavy start over Tins?

you want a backup PG that cost 4 mill a yr on avg?

Somehow economics 101 was lost to the writer.

besides that, there would have to be another player involved from the Pacers, unless Damp would start at 7 mill a year, something that is not very likely

Add to that the fact that I can not see that Damp would be a "better" contract then Polly @ 6 years and the chances are almost lost in infinity.

Ultimate Frisbee
07-28-2004, 10:50 AM
They do make a good point about the trade... It would help out both teams in the short term...

I don't like the trade overall though..

07-28-2004, 11:05 AM
As we all know, Donnie doesn't make moves for the short term...

But does Larry? :devil:

I hope not. :(