PDA

View Full Version : I like what we did this draft...



Doug
06-27-2010, 02:55 PM
The past couple of years we have been basically going with "safe" picks. Rush, Hibbert,Tyler, even Price all solid, but not spectacular picks. Rotation players, or slightly better. But you generally know what you are going to get from them. None of them are likely to be all-NBA, but not are likely to be busts, either. And all seemingly with good attitudes and work ethic.


So, this year they went looking for 'home runs', particularly with the first two picks. Players that have a lot more variations in their possible outcomes. Players with some question marks, but a lot of "upside". But more risk, as well. They could become all-stars, or very good players at their positions. Or they could be disappointments.


I know a lot of you question whether or not TPTB have a plan (or are even competent), but this does seem like planned and logical step.


We have solid role players. We have young players who are still developing. We have a couple of draft picks with a lot of upside. And we have several big expiring contracts.

There are stills areas of need (PG, obviously)

While nothing is a sure thing, and I'm not sure I'm quite ready to get "excited" about future and start buying my NBA finals tickets, I do think the franchise is heading in the right direction.


Also, I would ask the Admins to ban anybody who mentions coaching in this thread. We've beaten that particular horse to death.

Bridge
06-27-2010, 03:03 PM
I would much rather us to be aggressive to improve, rather than just try to barely make the playoffs. I had no problem with them bringing in Bender. Not everyone pans out, but you have to make an effort. I don't know enough about the players we took in this draft to comment on them, but I like what I have seen so far. Hopefully we can really improve once we get out of this cap hell.

Psyren
06-27-2010, 03:20 PM
I agree. At some point you have to take a risk on players and try to get yourself away from the safe picks. Safe picks lead to mediocrity.

Mediocrity is exactly what we are. And it's boring to watch.

And if these players don't develop, what's the worst that happens? We don't make the playoffs, again? And if they do, we all smile and feel happy about the future.

Naptown_Seth
06-27-2010, 03:22 PM
Doug, I think my issue is that they've tried this several times recently and it keeps ending up bad.

Didn't they swing for the fences with Bender, Harrison, Saras, Williams and White? Even KRush was a poor man's gamble.

Harrison was a lower pick, but he fell because of attitude, something the team hoped to overcome. Saras was older, but the team sold us on his leadership impact and how it was worth outbidding several teams to get him. Bender cost you an all-star center. White cost you several 2nd round picks, ironically where they took Lance this year. Extra concern there because like White they were trying to buy farther up to get him.

Heck, even the Harrington process was a gamble that his friendship with JO and positive image with the fans would solve tons of problems. When the deal got ugly, like a pick and having to take back Edwards just for the rights to do what no other team could do (offer Harrington the amount of our TE space, higher than the MLE), the team gambled that it would be worth it. A few months later as Carlisle benched him to start the 2nd half because of his crappy attitude it was clear that this was another hard eight dream instead of a pass line bet.

Granger was a lucky break, but not a gamble. By the time he hit Indy he was into the "how many more dumb teams are going to pass on him" range. Hibbert and Rush are bland to fans, but they have proven to be functional players in a pretty disfunctional system.

The team is about to clear somewhere in the park of $30m....that's "homerun" money where you don't have to gamble on the talent, just the remaining longevity. You will be in the mix to trade that pending space for a known good star. With Danny already here you won't be thinking "I sure wish they had another HR guy", you'll be thinking "I sure wish they had a reliable starting role player to handle the dirty work".

The reason you suck it up and live the boring life now is that you are biding your time and working on the stuff you can best fix currently, and that stuff is your non-star players. Boring old Patterson, or a scoring specialist like Anderson for the bench (plus other pick, cash, whatever from trade-down) are certainly not the "final piece".

But the fact is that you didn't need the final piece yet. The team has about 4-5 missing pieces. If George is great even 2 months into the year, you still have PG, PF, defense, and split-time C issues that will keep them from winning. That's your best case scenario without other deals.


Bird just swung for the fences with no one on and his team down 5 in the 6th inning. Right about now we need baserunners. We've got Pujols set to bat in 4 batters, let's go for the HR then when it makes sense. If it wasn't clear, Pujols is the expiring contracts and 4 batters is about 6 months from now as the trade deadline looms.

Too bad we won't bring him to the plate because we will have 3 strikeouts to go with the 1 solo HR, still down by 4.

Peck
06-27-2010, 03:32 PM
I agree. At some point you have to take a risk on players and try to get yourself away from the safe picks. Safe picks lead to mediocrity.

Mediocrity is exactly what we are. And it's boring to watch.

And if these players don't develop, what's the worst that happens? We don't make the playoffs, again? And if they do, we all smile and feel happy about the future.

We would have to improve to get to mediocre.

Ozwalt72
06-27-2010, 03:34 PM
Too bad we won't bring him to the plate because we will have 3 strikeouts to go with the 1 solo HR, still down by 4.

So basically, because of that one batter (our draft picks) you are saying that we will end up striking out on our trade chips near the deadline, as well as mess up our cap room.

That is simply a horrible analogy, and if you are trying to say that because of these draft picks we WILL be set back....you need to recheck your logic.

colts19
06-27-2010, 03:37 PM
Naptown seth, I always enjoy your post and respect your views. However this time I feel like this was the perfect time to go for the Home Run.

I think we have the base players that along with danny we have a chance to be a above 500 team. I am not sure about george, but am hoping he will develope into a good player. I wasn't to impressed with his college stats, but I remember seeing Mo Cheeks in college, and even though his stats were not that great, it was more a matter of being on a bad team with players that couldn't carry any of the load. So I can see where george may have been in the same type of situation as Mo.

I am also not to concerned about the point guard problem, we have all summer to do something, and if not then we have all of those contracts to make something happen with.

I think the young players will get better and if one of our draft picks comes up big, we could be a good team and maybe only a year or two away from being in the hunt for a top four playoff spot.

To me this was the perfect time to go for the Home Run.

xBulletproof
06-27-2010, 03:37 PM
If in your analogy the batters are the opportunity to acquire new players ... then who does Pujols represent? Future draft position? Expiring contracts?

If you think it's a bad pick, then it will allow for better draft position. His being here doesn't change anything with the contracts. So in the end Pujols still comes to the plate ... essentially.

That was a large disconnected mess of a post that had no logical point.

Hicks
06-27-2010, 03:45 PM
This draft was a crapshoot to me, so I'm cool wih them swinging for the fences this time. I think it was wise to draft how they did when they did the last two years, but it would probably be a mistake to keep it up year after year now that they've laid some foundation with safe character guys.

The bigger issue is what happens with these expiring contracts. I'm worried about it, but I have no choice but to wait and see.

IndyPacer
06-27-2010, 03:48 PM
I don't think any of our picks this year were as risky as Bender was, but I'll also say that I am not one of those who tries to say in hindsight that I knew all along what Bender was going to have such horrible chronic health problems. They rolled the dice, and I don't think that they were wrong to take a chance on him.

The guy I'm most worried about this year is Stephenson, but I think he's worth a risk at #40. But I do hope they gave him a psych evaluation, preferably one that included an assessment of personality (MMPI-2). But he probably has first round talent if they did their homework to make sure he's not a loon.

microwave_oven
06-27-2010, 03:50 PM
Doug, I think my issue is that they've tried this several times recently and it keeps ending up bad.

Didn't they swing for the fences with Bender, Harrison, Saras, Williams and White? Even KRush was a poor man's gamble.

Harrison was a lower pick, but he fell because of attitude, something the team hoped to overcome. Saras was older, but the team sold us on his leadership impact and how it was worth outbidding several teams to get him. Bender cost you an all-star center. White cost you several 2nd round picks, ironically where they took Lance this year. Extra concern there because like White they were trying to buy farther up to get him.

Heck, even the Harrington process was a gamble that his friendship with JO and positive image with the fans would solve tons of problems. When the deal got ugly, like a pick and having to take back Edwards just for the rights to do what no other team could do (offer Harrington the amount of our TE space, higher than the MLE), the team gambled that it would be worth it. A few months later as Carlisle benched him to start the 2nd half because of his crappy attitude it was clear that this was another hard eight dream instead of a pass line bet.

Granger was a lucky break, but not a gamble. By the time he hit Indy he was into the "how many more dumb teams are going to pass on him" range. Hibbert and Rush are bland to fans, but they have proven to be functional players in a pretty disfunctional system.

The team is about to clear somewhere in the park of $30m....that's "homerun" money where you don't have to gamble on the talent, just the remaining longevity. You will be in the mix to trade that pending space for a known good star. With Danny already here you won't be thinking "I sure wish they had another HR guy", you'll be thinking "I sure wish they had a reliable starting role player to handle the dirty work".

The reason you suck it up and live the boring life now is that you are biding your time and working on the stuff you can best fix currently, and that stuff is your non-star players. Boring old Patterson, or a scoring specialist like Anderson for the bench (plus other pick, cash, whatever from trade-down) are certainly not the "final piece".

But the fact is that you didn't need the final piece yet. The team has about 4-5 missing pieces. If George is great even 2 months into the year, you still have PG, PF, defense, and split-time C issues that will keep them from winning. That's your best case scenario without other deals.


Bird just swung for the fences with no one on and his team down 5 in the 6th inning. Right about now we need baserunners. We've got Pujols set to bat in 4 batters, let's go for the HR then when it makes sense. If it wasn't clear, Pujols is the expiring contracts and 4 batters is about 6 months from now as the trade deadline looms.

Too bad we won't bring him to the plate because we will have 3 strikeouts to go with the 1 solo HR, still down by 4.

You may have already addressed it in another thread, but i'm just curious; What would you have done differently in this draft?

tadscout
06-27-2010, 03:54 PM
"He's got a lot of skill. He's the type of player that we're targeting now and it's just up to us to get the most out of him."

-Bird on George
LINK (http://www.indystar.com/article/20100626/SPORTS04/6260313/1088/SPORTS04/Pacers-George-has-long-faced-doubters)

KennerLeaguer
06-27-2010, 03:55 PM
I agree. At some point you have to take a risk on players and try to get yourself away from the safe picks. Safe picks lead to mediocrity.

Mediocrity is exactly what we are. And it's boring to watch.

And if these players don't develop, what's the worst that happens? We don't make the playoffs, again? And if they do, we all smile and feel happy about the future.

Was Hibbert a safe pick considering most experts had him going in the mid 20s?

tadscout
06-27-2010, 03:56 PM
You may have already addressed it in another thread, but i'm just curious; What would you have done differently in this draft?

Don't get him started again... :sadbanana
:laugh:

Doug
06-27-2010, 03:58 PM
Seth,

I don't feel that we've damaged our ability to still acquire that last missing piece. I certainly don't think that one of these draft picks is that last piece of a championship team.

I think we already have gotten those nice solid role players in the last couple of drafts, and we don't need any more of those. Yet another rotational player doesn't really get us any more than mediocre. And if we make the 'safe' picks where we were at, that's what we'd get. Another player that is at best, marginally better than the ones we already have.

And I would say that the Pacers have learned a bit from their previous gambles - based on the rumors we are hearing about private investigators and background checks, and etc. That doesn't eliminate the risks, but can help mitigate them a bit.

So, I think the risk/reward ratio on these picks was just about right given where we were at.

If one of them pans out, we either have filled another need or have another asset. If not, really, then I'm not sure we are any worse of than we were at, and I don't think we've set us back any.

joew8302
06-27-2010, 03:58 PM
Doug, I think my issue is that they've tried this several times recently and it keeps ending up bad.

Didn't they swing for the fences with Bender, Harrison, Saras, Williams and White? Even KRush was a poor man's gamble.

Harrison was a lower pick, but he fell because of attitude, something the team hoped to overcome. Saras was older, but the team sold us on his leadership impact and how it was worth outbidding several teams to get him. Bender cost you an all-star center. White cost you several 2nd round picks, ironically where they took Lance this year. Extra concern there because like White they were trying to buy farther up to get him.

Heck, even the Harrington process was a gamble that his friendship with JO and positive image with the fans would solve tons of problems. When the deal got ugly, like a pick and having to take back Edwards just for the rights to do what no other team could do (offer Harrington the amount of our TE space, higher than the MLE), the team gambled that it would be worth it. A few months later as Carlisle benched him to start the 2nd half because of his crappy attitude it was clear that this was another hard eight dream instead of a pass line bet.

Granger was a lucky break, but not a gamble. By the time he hit Indy he was into the "how many more dumb teams are going to pass on him" range. Hibbert and Rush are bland to fans, but they have proven to be functional players in a pretty disfunctional system.

The team is about to clear somewhere in the park of $30m....that's "homerun" money where you don't have to gamble on the talent, just the remaining longevity. You will be in the mix to trade that pending space for a known good star. With Danny already here you won't be thinking "I sure wish they had another HR guy", you'll be thinking "I sure wish they had a reliable starting role player to handle the dirty work".

The reason you suck it up and live the boring life now is that you are biding your time and working on the stuff you can best fix currently, and that stuff is your non-star players. Boring old Patterson, or a scoring specialist like Anderson for the bench (plus other pick, cash, whatever from trade-down) are certainly not the "final piece".

But the fact is that you didn't need the final piece yet. The team has about 4-5 missing pieces. If George is great even 2 months into the year, you still have PG, PF, defense, and split-time C issues that will keep them from winning. That's your best case scenario without other deals.


Bird just swung for the fences with no one on and his team down 5 in the 6th inning. Right about now we need baserunners. We've got Pujols set to bat in 4 batters, let's go for the HR then when it makes sense. If it wasn't clear, Pujols is the expiring contracts and 4 batters is about 6 months from now as the trade deadline looms.

Too bad we won't bring him to the plate because we will have 3 strikeouts to go with the 1 solo HR, still down by 4.

So what exactly do you want? You criticized the team last year for Hansbrough and being safe, now you are criticizing them for swinging for the fences. Well what exactly do you want?

tadscout
06-27-2010, 04:10 PM
So what exactly do you want? You criticized the team last year for Hansbrough and being safe, now you are criticizing them for swinging for the fences. Well what exactly do you want?

He wants them to let him in their war room so they'll pick the guys he's developed a mancrush on :-p

Bball
06-27-2010, 04:13 PM
Doug, I think my issue is that they've tried this several times recently and it keeps ending up bad.

Didn't they swing for the fences with Bender, Harrison, Saras, Williams and White? Even KRush was a poor man's gamble.



You might as well put JO on the list because when he got his max contract it was more based on the potential the team thought he had rather than what he was already doing. We're still trying to climb out of that salary hole. And what about overpaying Tinsley with a long term deal?

But IMHO this draft was pretty weak as far as depth so once we made the decision to try and win every game we possibly could right to the bitter end and stick with players whose time as Pacers was probably coming to an end sooner rather than later, you might as well take a risk or two in this draft.

Now, after some of the things we've learned about Stephenson I'm questioning the talk of the Pacers trying to move up to get him. That might've been crazy (depending on what we had to do to do that), but at where we got him it's not bothering me too much. I haven't heard a lot of talk about anyone better we could've gotten there. Not with any certainty.

Of course no matter who we have playing we still have :3deadhors :3deadhors :3deadhors :3deadhors

tadscout
06-27-2010, 04:18 PM
Also, I would ask the Admins to ban anybody who mentions coaching in this thread. We've beaten that particular horse to death.

Weeeee!!!
:3deadhors:2deadhors:deadhorse

pwee31
06-27-2010, 04:19 PM
I wouldn't call Harrison a swing for the fences pick, late first round, already a playoff team, you take a chance on a big guy.

Sarunas was highly touted, multiple teams were after him, including the Cavs, we won the free agent battle, and it didn't work out.

Bender, Williams and White b/c of the picks traded and the guaranteed money were really the downfall.

Bender was simply unfortunate, had potential, injuries just kept him from reaching them.

Shawne Williams I never understood. I didn't think much of him at Memphis, I felt we were already in the Tinsley needs to go state, and with Marcus Williams, Farmar, and Rondo on the board, I would have prefer a gamble in that direction. Bad mistake made, had to cut our losses, but hey if Magnum Rolle somehow turns out to be a solid player then Shawne would have came in handy after all.

James White, I didn't understand. Had crazy hops, and that was about it in my eyes. Must have liked his athleticism, but gave up too much for him, and never even made the roster

This year i liked what we did b/c even the safe picks weren't much to get excited about. Who else at #10 would you have wanted to take a chance on with that pick? Of course you could perhaps trade down, but if you didn't like the offers, you take a shot, and I like the shot Bird took with Paul George. I hear the Raptors were deeply upset George didn't make it to #13.

Lance Stephenson is a guy that could have went in the 1st round if the draft was strictly based off talent. His coach said he would likely have been a top ten pick if he had came back to school another year. They apparently did lots of research and even hired a private investigator to see who he hangs with, as well as his family. He's only 19 years old and has lots of potential as well.

With Rush being inconsistent you have 2 capable players of being the starting SG in the future.

Magnum Rolle looks like an upgrade over Solo at least, and could turn out to be more then that. A lot better then Ryan Reid, that's for sure.

I think if the Pacers can get a solid PG this summer they have a chance to be the up and coming team like the Bucks and Thunder were this year.

And I don't think the Pacers need a superstar PG, of course it would be nice, but as the Pacers have shown the last two 2nd half parts of the season, stability and a PG who simply runs the team can lead to a better Pacers teams. Jack and Watson both showed this once they got accustomed to the starting role.

Some of us are acting like certain PGs aren't good enough for this team, and it's quite silly actually. Of course you don't want to overpay for someone who's not worth it (like Ford for example). I'd be more then happy with a guy like Felton. He's not a superstar but he's a really solid option. He can defend, pass, score and run a team. That's a type of player we could use.

Of course we would like Collison. He's young and can apparently do it all when given the chance, but he also requires you take on a bad contract in his place. If something goes wrong or happens with Collison, we still have a contract to eat up most likely Might be worth the chance though.

There's been a nice list of PGs that should be available that some of you that dogged, but they would be solid additions to help our team win ball games. Mark Jackson was a really solid PG, b/c he could run the team and be a floor general, he didn't have to be an all-star or superstar. Even when Tinsley was at his best, he was good b/c his handle, court vision and being a floor general, and that's all the Pacers need to add this summer to have a roster that can start turning this thing around.

Point Guard I'd personally be fine with that are realistic:
Raymond Felton
Steve Blake
Kirk Hinrich
Jordan Farmar
Luke Ridnour
Andre Miller
Jarrett Jack
Jose Calderon
Eric Maynor
Mike Conley

Justin Tyme
06-27-2010, 05:45 PM
-Bird on George
LINK (http://www.indystar.com/article/20100626/SPORTS04/6260313/1088/SPORTS04/Pacers-George-has-long-faced-doubters)


Well, that clears up why FSU didn't have a better record. The way some here were trying to spin the reason it was Gerge's fault for being on a losing team for 2 years. Maybe some of those spin doctors will read this story and ease back on their comments. It's hard to have a winning team when you have no talent on the team after the school has been sanctioned. I'm sure no one in Indiana would know about a school's BB program being sanctioned and the team losing.

MyFavMartin
06-27-2010, 06:04 PM
After the interview that Bledsoe gave and looking at the other available PGs not named Wall, I figured the Pacers thought the risk of trading back with a team like OKC just wasn't worth it... Who knows if Bledsoe would still have been there at #18.... And I doubt George was a guy that OKC was interested in after the Pacers took him as they've got a good crop of SGs (Harden, Sefalosha) and they're looking for FC help.

So I figured the Pacers went after the BPA and figured we'll get some good pieces as potential trade bait and figure it out later.

oz_pacer
06-27-2010, 06:11 PM
Some of us are acting like certain PGs aren't good enough for this team, and it's quite silly actually. Of course you don't want to overpay for someone who's not worth it (like Ford for example). I'd be more then happy with a guy like Felton. He's not a superstar but he's a really solid option. He can defend, pass, score and run a team. That's a type of player we could use. I 100% agree with you people on here are talking like if we dont get chris paul or deron williams we are gonna suck someone like george hill, collison or raymond felton would be fine with me and really would improve the team without breaking up our young core of players

TheRifleman51
06-27-2010, 10:21 PM
I wouldn't call Harrison a swing for the fences pick, late first round, already a playoff team, you take a chance on a big guy.

Sarunas was highly touted, multiple teams were after him, including the Cavs, we won the free agent battle, and it didn't work out.

Bender, Williams and White b/c of the picks traded and the guaranteed money were really the downfall.

Bender was simply unfortunate, had potential, injuries just kept him from reaching them.

Shawne Williams I never understood. I didn't think much of him at Memphis, I felt we were already in the Tinsley needs to go state, and with Marcus Williams, Farmar, and Rondo on the board, I would have prefer a gamble in that direction. Bad mistake made, had to cut our losses, but hey if Magnum Rolle somehow turns out to be a solid player then Shawne would have came in handy after all.

James White, I didn't understand. Had crazy hops, and that was about it in my eyes. Must have liked his athleticism, but gave up too much for him, and never even made the roster

This year i liked what we did b/c even the safe picks weren't much to get excited about. Who else at #10 would you have wanted to take a chance on with that pick? Of course you could perhaps trade down, but if you didn't like the offers, you take a shot, and I like the shot Bird took with Paul George. I hear the Raptors were deeply upset George didn't make it to #13.

Lance Stephenson is a guy that could have went in the 1st round if the draft was strictly based off talent. His coach said he would likely have been a top ten pick if he had came back to school another year. They apparently did lots of research and even hired a private investigator to see who he hangs with, as well as his family. He's only 19 years old and has lots of potential as well.

With Rush being inconsistent you have 2 capable players of being the starting SG in the future.

Magnum Rolle looks like an upgrade over Solo at least, and could turn out to be more then that. A lot better then Ryan Reid, that's for sure.

I think if the Pacers can get a solid PG this summer they have a chance to be the up and coming team like the Bucks and Thunder were this year.

And I don't think the Pacers need a superstar PG, of course it would be nice, but as the Pacers have shown the last two 2nd half parts of the season, stability and a PG who simply runs the team can lead to a better Pacers teams. Jack and Watson both showed this once they got accustomed to the starting role.

Some of us are acting like certain PGs aren't good enough for this team, and it's quite silly actually. Of course you don't want to overpay for someone who's not worth it (like Ford for example). I'd be more then happy with a guy like Felton. He's not a superstar but he's a really solid option. He can defend, pass, score and run a team. That's a type of player we could use.

Of course we would like Collison. He's young and can apparently do it all when given the chance, but he also requires you take on a bad contract in his place. If something goes wrong or happens with Collison, we still have a contract to eat up most likely Might be worth the chance though.

There's been a nice list of PGs that should be available that some of you that dogged, but they would be solid additions to help our team win ball games. Mark Jackson was a really solid PG, b/c he could run the team and be a floor general, he didn't have to be an all-star or superstar. Even when Tinsley was at his best, he was good b/c his handle, court vision and being a floor general, and that's all the Pacers need to add this summer to have a roster that can start turning this thing around.

Point Guard I'd personally be fine with that are realistic:
Raymond Felton
Steve Blake
Kirk Hinrich
Jordan Farmar
Luke Ridnour
Andre Miller
Jarrett Jack
Jose Calderon
Eric Maynor
Mike Conley


I totally agree with your perception on the past draft do u think that Shaun Livingston could be added as one our realistic PG he's still young and had some pretty good game for the Wiz last year

pacers74
06-27-2010, 10:47 PM
I'm just glad we didn't draft Patterson. He might turn out to be good, but he is another undersized PF. Hopefully we already have that in Hansbrough.
What would we be saying if Utah would have passed on Hayward and we drafted him. Would that have been a safe pick? Yep.

tadscout
06-27-2010, 11:00 PM
What would we be saying if Utah would have passed on Heyward and we drafted him. Would that have been a safe pick? Yep.

From the Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/49824032-87/jazz-hayward-pick-connor.html.csp):

Many of the 3,500 fans who attended the Jazz’s draft party at EnergySolutions Arena lustily booed the choice, knowing that several post players — including Cole Aldrich of Kansas, Ed Davis of North Carolina, Paul George of Fresno State and Patrick Patterson of Kentucky — remained available when the Jazz picked, after the top seven selections went about as expected.

The reaction was so aggressive — some fans walked out before an interview with Hayward was broadcast on the video screen — that vice president of basketball operations Kevin O’Connor felt compelled to take the microphone to defend the choice.

“The only thing I hope is that in two years you’re not booing,” he said.

Coach Jerry Sloan said the boos comprised a “natural reaction” for fans who “aren’t familiar with what we’re trying to accomplish. We’re trying to get the best player, and sometimes that’s not who everybody wanted.”

vnzla81
06-27-2010, 11:06 PM
I don't think that Hayward was the best player available, at best he is going to be a 6th man and at 9th you expect more than that.

I still don't understand Utah, if they want a guy that is going to be the next Kyle Korver why not just resign the real one? they are a playoffs team why not take a young player who could possibly be a future star? :hmm:

pwee31
06-28-2010, 12:42 AM
I totally agree with your perception on the past draft do u think that Shaun Livingston could be added as one our realistic PG he's still young and had some pretty good game for the Wiz last year

I think Shaun Livingston is a guy that's very intriguing. He really had a horrible freak injury and it's simply remarkable that he's been able to make it back. With that being said, he's only 24 years old and will be 25 when the season starts. That's like a 1st/2nd year player that stayed 4 years of college. And judging by the end of the year with the Wizards he seems to be rounding back into form, while also gaining confidence in his knee/leg more and more.

I think Livingston would be a nice player to try and acquire as a backup for cheap. I don't think he's a player you gamble on to be the answer at PG, but I think as a backup he could be a really nice low risk high reward type of player.

He's really long at 6'7 and has a really nice shot selection for a PG. I'm not sure about his defense, but he distributes the ball well, and doesn't take 3's (which could hurt him under O'Brien), I know for the month of April with the Wiz he averaged 15 pts and 6 assists, including a 10 pt 7 assist 1 point victory over the Pacers to end the year. That stretch had to bode well for his confidence that he could still succeed in the NBA.

I think he would be a nice kid to gamble as a backup PG, I think him coming back from his injury says a lot about his hard work and determination. If we could get a solid veteran to bring in and start and have Livingston as a cheap backup and insurance for Price, I think it would be an excellent and inexpensive risk for the Pacers, and one worth taking.

beast23
06-28-2010, 01:22 AM
This draft was a crapshoot to me, so I'm cool wih them swinging for the fences this time. I think it was wise to draft how they did when they did the last two years, but it would probably be a mistake to keep it up year after year now that they've laid some foundation with safe character guys.

The bigger issue is what happens with these expiring contracts. I'm worried about it, but I have no choice but to wait and see.I think that your viewpoint is exactly where the TPTB and most of us on the forum stand.

This summer, the coming season and next summer are significantly impacted by the expiring contracts and what the Pacer management is able to do with them. I would personally probably go further and say that this period of time is "all about" the contracts and using them wisely.

Going for the home run this year, IMO, was not only acceptable, it was absolutely the wise thing to do.

We are definitely at the crossroads. With these expiring contracts, the Pacers are at a unique point in their history. We have never had opportunities for acquiring higher level players like we will have in the next 15 months.

If we want to be "back in the hunt", we must gain 3-4 upper shelf players from the pool of players we gain through our recent draft choices, the draft choices next year and the players that we will acquire using the expiring contracts.

If we don't, then I think we may as well resign ourselves to additonal mediocrity for another 3-4 years. If we totally bust with all of the opportunities we have, then I think things will get much, much worse than what we experienced this past season.

joew8302
06-28-2010, 01:27 AM
I don't think that Hayward was the best player available, at best he is going to be a 6th man and at 9th you expect more than that.

I still don't understand Utah, if they want a guy that is going to be the next Kyle Korver why not just resign the real one? they are a playoffs team why not take a young player who could possibly be a future star? :hmm:

Call me crazy, but I see Hayward more as an Adam Morrison pre leg injury than a Korver. Morrison was always a scorer, not a shooter. I think Hayward fits that bill much more.