PDA

View Full Version : Let's buy 'em out



Anthem
07-07-2010, 11:58 PM
Here's what I think.

Unless we're able to pick up a superstar for spare parts, I don't think Bird is going to make any significant moves this summer. He wants the cap space provided by Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford/Tinsley's expiring contracts.

If we're not going to trade these guys, I'd rather we buy them out to clear up the roster space. I'd rather watch the kids play, even if it means fewer wins. Keep 'em until the All-Star Break, sure, but if we don't have deals on the table I'd rather let those guys sign with contenders.

If you buy out all of our expiring contracts, this would be our roster:

Hibbert - S.Jones
McRoberts - Rolle - Hansbrough
Granger - George
Rush - D.Jones
Price - Stephenson

Yeah, it's ugly at the 1 and 4. But wouldn't you rather watch this than watch Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford get irrelevant minutes that take away from developing the kids?

cdash
07-08-2010, 12:01 AM
Here's what I think.

Unless we're able to pick up a superstar for spare parts, I don't think Bird is going to make any significant moves this summer. He wants the cap space provided by Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford/Tinsley's expiring contracts.

If we're not going to trade these guys, I'd rather we buy them out to clear up the roster space. I'd rather watch the kids play, even if it means fewer wins. Keep 'em until the All-Star Break, sure, but if we don't have deals on the table I'd rather let those guys sign with contenders.

If you buy out all of our expiring contracts, this would be our roster:

Hibbert - S.Jones
McRoberts - Rolle - Hansbrough
Granger - George
Rush - D.Jones
Price - Stephenson

Yeah, it's ugly at the 1 and 4. But wouldn't you rather watch this than watch Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford get irrelevant minutes that take away from developing the kids?

Well, it would certainly alleviate the possibility of going on another late season winning streak.

I don't really see the point in buying them out. Just let them play out the contracts in that event. I think at least two or three of them will be dealt by then, making the point moot.

HC
07-08-2010, 12:02 AM
Bird seems too stubborn to make a move like this.

joew8302
07-08-2010, 12:05 AM
Here's what I think.

Unless we're able to pick up a superstar for spare parts, I don't think Bird is going to make any significant moves this summer. He wants the cap space provided by Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford/Tinsley's expiring contracts.

If we're not going to trade these guys, I'd rather we buy them out to clear up the roster space. I'd rather watch the kids play, even if it means fewer wins. Keep 'em until the All-Star Break, sure, but if we don't have deals on the table I'd rather let those guys sign with contenders.

If you buy out all of our expiring contracts, this would be our roster:

Hibbert - S.Jones
McRoberts - Rolle - Hansbrough
Granger - George
Rush - D.Jones
Price - Stephenson

Yeah, it's ugly at the 1 and 4. But wouldn't you rather watch this than watch Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford get irrelevant minutes that take away from developing the kids?

I like this thinking a lot. Most of all we will get a great draft pick like you said. Keeping guys like Murphy and Dunleavy we will just rack up meaningless wins and hold back the developments from the young guys.

pwee31
07-08-2010, 12:08 AM
I'm actually dumbfounded and still hoping to see the Mike Dunleavy from a couple years ago. I can't help it, I just enjoy what he brings to the table when healthy a little too much. I could care less about everyone else though.

I suspect Murphy has solid trade value already, and it's just Bird and O'Brien are blinded the stats and things he can contribute, and ignoring the things he struggles with. I truly believe the Pacers are overvaluing Troy Murphy, but that's just my opinion and unfortunately there's no fact to back that up.

I also think it will take Price more time then people think to recover. Knee surgeries always take awhile, even if it's just the player's confidence in the knee. Price may not return the player he was or we thought he could be (same could be true for Dunleavy unfortunately) and the Pacers may have to look elsewhere, though I think they'll stick behind AJ

Pacers2012
07-08-2010, 12:08 AM
Bad idea. murphy will be traded i am certain. if lebron signs with the cavs expect the cavs to want to add more pieces since they couldnt win this year. they wanted murphy before but we wanted to much now we just want to move him really. i think the cavs and possibly some other teams that dont get a free agent PF will look at murphy. Wolves are looking at Lee and so are the Nets so which ever one is left out in the cold might look at murphy too cause after lee there are no more 10 n 10 guys besides murphy

Speed
07-08-2010, 12:09 AM
I think TJ and Solo need gone, hook or crook. I think the franchise is just done with them, even though Bird mentioned TJ by name as a PG for the Pacers.

I think Troy and probably Jeff need sent away so that Obie can't give them minutes over younger players who ARE part of the future. It's meaningless to play those two coaches security blankets, in the larger scheme. Sorry about Jeff in this scenario, but it's probably whats best.

BornReady
07-08-2010, 12:10 AM
think TJ can play point for a team that needs a pg and has a lot of capspace? Both the Knicks and Miami need a pg, and there's only one Felton available in the FA :)

PacersPride
07-08-2010, 12:11 AM
Here's what I think.

Unless we're able to pick up a superstar for spare parts, I don't think Bird is going to make any significant moves this summer. He wants the cap space provided by Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford/Tinsley's expiring contracts.

If we're not going to trade these guys, I'd rather we buy them out to clear up the roster space. I'd rather watch the kids play, even if it means fewer wins. Keep 'em until the All-Star Break, sure, but if we don't have deals on the table I'd rather let those guys sign with contenders.

If you buy out all of our expiring contracts, this would be our roster:

Hibbert - S.Jones
McRoberts - Rolle - Hansbrough
Granger - George
Rush - D.Jones
Price - Stephenson

Yeah, it's ugly at the 1 and 4. But wouldn't you rather watch this than watch Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford get irrelevant minutes that take away from developing the kids?

we might want to see the kind of year this guys have first. if Dun comes back strong his value will increase, same with foster. i dont see murphy really improving any, ford as well.

i think theres the possibility Dun get resigned, much less expensive and shorter deal.. 5 mill 3 years or something like that. i would also like to see foster resigned if he has anything left at all.. 2 mill 2-3 years. but if both these guys walk i wont be too heartbroken.. well a lil with Foster, been of fave of mine for a long time and he has been with this franchise back when they were elite.

one more point to make, the potential i guess is always there for a S&T although highly unlikely.

with that said.. i completely see where your headed with this line of thinking.

im kinda hoping Dun and Foster have good seasons, esp Dunleavy, he could be a really good 6th man, and depending on Rush's development, or whether we trade him, Dunleavy might be worth keeping at a reasonable price.

Peck
07-08-2010, 12:11 AM
Here's what I think.

Unless we're able to pick up a superstar for spare parts, I don't think Bird is going to make any significant moves this summer. He wants the cap space provided by Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford/Tinsley's expiring contracts.

If we're not going to trade these guys, I'd rather we buy them out to clear up the roster space. I'd rather watch the kids play, even if it means fewer wins. Keep 'em until the All-Star Break, sure, but if we don't have deals on the table I'd rather let those guys sign with contenders.

If you buy out all of our expiring contracts, this would be our roster:

Hibbert - S.Jones
McRoberts - Rolle - Hansbrough
Granger - George
Rush - D.Jones
Price - Stephenson

Yeah, it's ugly at the 1 and 4. But wouldn't you rather watch this than watch Murphy/Foster/Dunleavy/Ford get irrelevant minutes that take away from developing the kids?

I don't see it as ugly at the 4 spot at all. In fact I think that would be a dramatic improvement at the 4.

If Hans is 3/4 healed then he is already 2/3 better than Murphy is. McRoberts right now is already better than Murphy.

Rolle, I don't know about him yet but I'm willing to bet he can't be any worse of a defender.

As to the 1? I don't see it being any differant than it would be with Ford - Sephenson.

So I am agreeing with you by way of disagreeing with you.;)

cdash
07-08-2010, 12:17 AM
I don't see it as ugly at the 4 spot at all. In fact I think that would be a dramatic improvement at the 4.

If Hans is 3/4 healed then he is already 2/3 better than Murphy is. McRoberts right now is already better than Murphy.

Rolle, I don't know about him yet but I'm willing to bet he can't be any worse of a defender.

As to the 1? I don't see it being any differant than it would be with Ford - Sephenson.

So I am agreeing with you by way of disagreeing with you.;)

I don't mean to be a dick...but really? Murphy isn't worth the money he makes, and he is an awful defender, but McRoberts hasn't done anything but show flashes in limited minutes.

This isn't addressed to you Peck, just kind of a statement in general, but it's amazing how much people negatively value Murphy for his bad defense and don't give Rush glowing reviews for his good defense.

Pacers2012
07-08-2010, 12:19 AM
This is the roster i'd like to see after this season

FA pg or s&t, stephenson/price
Rush, Dunleavy, Jones
Granger, Paul
Mcbob,Hansbourgh,Rolle
Hibbert, Solo or a small time FA

Next year all we really need are some solid backups and possibly one big FA if there are any then wait till the team develops into what i think it can be

I dont think mcbob is a starter so thats a tough decision if we get a pf in FA. im not big on mcbob at all

ThA HoyA
07-08-2010, 12:28 AM
This is the roster i'd like to see after this season

FA pg or s&t, stephenson/price
Rush, Dunleavy, Jones
Granger, Paul
Mcbob,Hansbourgh,Rolle
Hibbert, Solo or a small time FA

Next year all we really need are some solid backups and possibly one big FA if there are any then wait till the team develops into what i think it can be

I dont think mcbob is a starter so thats a tough decision if we get a pf in FA. im not big on mcbob at all

That lineup maybe gets them to the playoffs with the right coach but they really really need another top flight level player either at grangers level at either point guard preferably or PF

BornReady
07-08-2010, 12:31 AM
don't you guys feel like we could get some valuable assets for our expiring contracts? just a thought..

PacersPride
07-08-2010, 12:40 AM
don't you guys feel like we could get some valuable assets for our expiring contracts? just a thought..

seems like 1/3rd of the league at this point is considerably under the cap. i stated this in the DC/Okafor for expirings trade proposal where we take back additional salary for one year to land a pg. however, since were likely to be awful or at least lottery bound, im okay w/ seeing the pacers select a pg then, maybe move up if need be.

point is, with a limited number of stud free agents for the next two offseasons, and several teams under the cap, expirings value has decreased to some extent.

in addition, with the powerhouse teams now being established, seems like about 5-8 teams are head and shoulders above everyone else, we either land a STUD to go with Granger which is not likely, or were gonna have revise Birds 3 year plan to a 6 years. ie. buiding through the draft with hopefully a stud or two being acquired, and also attracting one STUD free agent.

its likely to be 2-3 more seasons before the pacers are relevant, the good news is, if Bird builds the team wisely, were likely to contend for a decade with all the young talent.

anyways, to answer your question, expirings are become overrated at this point in time IMHO.

* edit, maybe the hawks will realize they cannot resign hofford and a trade is made in advance in exchange for murphy, not sure what hoffords deal is currently so it might not work... with that said i would presume they would just let Hofford walk, because its still the same thing in the long run, cap space, hence the reason i think expirings are overrated. unless a team would actually value murph, dun, tj to want to resign them after the contracts expire.. i dont see any percieved value.

tadscout
07-08-2010, 12:54 AM
I'll be happy as long as Ford and Solo are gone... they drive me up the wall!

You do realize Solo is the smallest, easiest, and most likely to get bought out? Right?

PaceBalls
07-08-2010, 01:03 AM
I don't mean to be a dick...but really? Murphy isn't worth the money he makes, and he is an awful defender, but McRoberts hasn't done anything but show flashes in limited minutes.

This isn't addressed to you Peck, just kind of a statement in general, but it's amazing how much people negatively value Murphy for his bad defense and don't give Rush glowing reviews for his good defense.

I'm with Peck on this one. Murph is a negative on court no matter what his stats are on offense or however many easy rebounds he gets.

It isn't just his bad defense. He has horrible rebounding fundamentals as well. I have never seen the guy execute a proper box out on his man for a rebound... ever... in any game he has played in. Try to find one next year, it will never happen.

He is such an enigma in the NBA. Has there ever been a guy who averaged more rebounds who was such a **** poor rebounder? The guy can hit the three well and has a knack for that trailing, fast break 3pter that Jim just loves. That is it. That is his game. That is why Jim and Larry love him so much they claim he is the MVP of our team. :banghead:

The other big guys on the team.. especially McBob, who is much more talented in every facet of basketball than Troy, except for that fast break, top of the key, 3pt shot, are better options for our PF position.

Sookie
07-08-2010, 01:05 AM
I'm actually dumbfounded and still hoping to see the Mike Dunleavy from a couple years ago. I can't help it, I just enjoy what he brings to the table when healthy a little too much. I could care less about everyone else though.

I suspect Murphy has solid trade value already, and it's just Bird and O'Brien are blinded the stats and things he can contribute, and ignoring the things he struggles with. I truly believe the Pacers are overvaluing Troy Murphy, but that's just my opinion and unfortunately there's no fact to back that up.

I also think it will take Price more time then people think to recover. Knee surgeries always take awhile, even if it's just the player's confidence in the knee. Price may not return the player he was or we thought he could be (same could be true for Dunleavy unfortunately) and the Pacers may have to look elsewhere, though I think they'll stick behind AJ

He should be fine, physically..when healed. Because it was a broken bone, not a ligament. (Although, when he's like 40...) He probably will have to have a minor surgery next summer to get rid of the screws and wires. But that's for later.

Mentally..well, it took AJ four months with the ACL until, IMO, the mental side was over. (Four months of being able to play) Although that's funny to say too, because at the begining of his senior year, he was only about 65%. But he was driving to the basket by January. I'd say, once again, this is going to be easier to get over. Regardless, he's gotten over the AVM and the ACL. This is baby stuff compared to that.

I'd be wary at the point position of leaving it up to AJ and Stephenson.
1. Well, truth is we don't know how well AJ will recover. He could have setbacks..and not be ready to play 35 + minutes a night.
2. I don't think Stephenson is a point guard. Plain and simple.

But I could be wrong, I think waiting til All Star break to do this would be our best bet. If Price is fine, and if Stephenson can handle spot minutes as backup (while hopefully giving him plenty of opportunity on the wings.) then why not?

Our other positions should be fine. Sure, the Han's situation is probably worse than the Price one..and we don't really know how he'll do. But we have McBob who could play the four, Rolle could play the four, and heck, Danny could play the four if need be..(and it's JOB, so he will play the four)

CableKC
07-08-2010, 01:13 AM
I can see Solo being bought out if Rolle pans out. As for everyone else, the only one that I see being bought out is Ford....if he can be bought out for a decent amount before the roster needs to be finalized or by February. I'd guess that Murphy is traded before February.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 01:17 AM
I don't mean to be a dick...but really? Murphy isn't worth the money he makes, and he is an awful defender, but McRoberts hasn't done anything but show flashes in limited minutes.

This isn't addressed to you Peck, just kind of a statement in general, but it's amazing how much people negatively value Murphy for his bad defense and don't give Rush glowing reviews for his good defense.

I'm rolling with Peck too. If you're hoping to get Murph's hollow double-double every game, then no McRoberts isn't the guy.

But I do think Josh is capable of putting up somewhat comparable numbers, more often than not, without getting completely abused like Murphy does on the defensive end. He may not be as good of a 3 point shooter, but he will only get better at that, and he's already pretty much better at every other facet of the game.

cdash
07-08-2010, 01:18 AM
I'm with Peck on this one. Murph is a negative on court no matter what his stats are on offense or however many easy rebounds he gets.

It isn't just his bad defense. He is has horrible rebounding fundamentals as well. I have never seen the guy execute a proper box out on his man for a rebound... ever... in any game he has played in. Try to find one next year, it will never happen. He is such an enigma in the NBA. Has there ever been a guy who averaged more rebounds who was such a **** poor rebounder? The guy can hit the three well and has a knack for that trailing, fast break 3pter that Jim just loves. That is it. That is his game. That is why Jim and Larry love him so much they claim he is the MVP of our team. :banghead:

The other big guys on the team.. especially McBob, who is much more talented in every facet of basketball than Troy, except for that fast break, top of the key, 3pt shot, are better options for our PF position.

So you think that if McRoberts played every minute that Murphy did last season, that we would have ended up with a better record?

Sorry, I just don't see it. McRoberts shows flashes, he does some nice things, but Murphy isn't that bad. His defense is atrocious, I will cede that. But offensively...he's actually pretty good. Joke about "stretching the court" all you want, but there is some logic to that strategy. Not only could he hit threes, but he peppered in the pump fake and drive when the defenses caved on him.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 01:22 AM
So you think that if McRoberts played every minute that Murphy did last season, that we would have ended up with a better record?

Sorry, I just don't see it. McRoberts shows flashes, he does some nice things, but Murphy isn't that bad. His defense is atrocious, I will cede that. But offensively...he's actually pretty good. Joke about "stretching the court" all you want, but there is some logic to that strategy. Not only could he hit threes, but he peppered in the pump fake and drive when the defenses caved on him.

I don't think that we would have been 1 game worse. Do you?

Josh McRoberts: $885,120

Troy Murphy: $11,968,253

Would we have be more than 13 times better with Murphy than McRoberts?

PaceBalls
07-08-2010, 01:26 AM
So you think that if McRoberts played every minute that Murphy did last season, that we would have ended up with a better record?

Sorry, I just don't see it. McRoberts shows flashes, he does some nice things, but Murphy isn't that bad. His defense is atrocious, I will cede that. But offensively...he's actually pretty good. Joke about "stretching the court" all you want, but there is some logic to that strategy. Not only could he hit threes, but he peppered in the pump fake and drive when the defenses caved on him.

Abso-freakin-lutely we would have won more games with McBob, we would have won more games with Solo, seriously. And yes, as the team record indicates, and from everything I have seen, Murphy really is that bad.

Look, he can hit a 3pt shot. So can alot of quicker, smaller, better guards. Troy is not a PF, he is really a super slow, flat footed, no defense playing SG. He is a gimmick player who should only see time when certain matchups can be exploited, preferably at the end of quarters when they can sub him in/out for offense/defense.

cdash
07-08-2010, 01:39 AM
Abso-freakin-lutely we would have won more games with McBob, we would have won more games with Solo, seriously. And yes, as the team record indicates, and from everything I have seen, Murphy really is that bad.

Look, he can hit a 3pt shot. So can alot of quicker, smaller, better guards. Troy is not a PF, he is really a super slow, flat footed, no defense playing SG. He is a gimmick player who should only see time when certain matchups can be exploited, preferably at the end of quarters when they can sub him in/out for offense/defense.

Well, I disagree, strongly.

cdash
07-08-2010, 01:41 AM
I don't think that we would have been 1 game worse. Do you?

Josh McRoberts: $885,120

Troy Murphy: $11,968,253

Would we have be more than 13 times better with Murphy than McRoberts?

Yeah, I think we would have been worse.

And I am not arguing that McRoberts isn't a better value. I was responding to the Peck saying that McRoberts is a better player than Murphy. For the money, yeah, absolutely I'd rather have McRoberts.

PaceBalls
07-08-2010, 01:44 AM
Well, I disagree, strongly.

And I totally respect that ;)

There are many ways to view the game and how it is supposed to be played. Murph, especially how he is used by Jim, is the antithesis for me of how I want to see it played. I have always valued defense and solid rebounding fundamentals over offense, especially the gimmiky kind. Just my opinion as always.

Pacers2012
07-08-2010, 01:47 AM
We would have dont worse which i actually would of been for lol. mcbob has been in the league 3yrs and played 83 games and averages 4 and 3. He is not the answer at all as our PF. He is an excellent spark off the bench but thats it. personally i think rolle will be our starter in his 3rd season if we dont trade for a PF cuz there aren't really any good ones in FA next year besides horford who is restricted

Peck
07-08-2010, 01:58 AM
I've come to the point with Murphy that I actually consider him a negative whenever he is on the floor.

Yes, I consider his defense to be so bad that it negates whatever value he brings on the offensive end and frankly having a power forward specialize in hitting three point shots does not really impress me in any fashion.

I saw at the Utah game what Josh can do defensively when given a chance and while Danny kicked on all cylinders on offense, that game was turned around in the 4th by the defense that Josh and Roy put on in the post and A.J. provided from the point.

Yea it was just one game but in that one game I saw everything that I have been missing since Troy came here.

Don't get me wrong I am not saying McRoberts is some all star in the making or that he is even that good of a player. I am however saying that Troy Murphy is that bad. Now I will caveat that by saying that Troy may not be as bad as he currently is but the combination of Troy & O'Brien is just downright disgusting.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 02:04 AM
Yeah, I think we would have been worse.

And I am not arguing that McRoberts isn't a better value. I was responding to the Peck saying that McRoberts is a better player than Murphy. For the money, yeah, absolutely I'd rather have McRoberts.

Offensively Murphy fits the system with JOB better, because he's a better three point shooter, but I don't think he does anything else better offensively besides shoot. McRoberts is the better ball handler, passer, leaper, etc.

When you are only demonstratively better at one facet offensively, and even more demonstratively worse at everything involving defense, with the exception of his hollow double digit defensive rebound totals, I don't know if you really are the better overall player.

rexnom
07-08-2010, 02:08 AM
If we can't trade any of those contracts by the trading deadline then, yes, absolutely, we should buy them all out (with the possible exception of Mike Dunleavy). It seems silly to buy them out now though.

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:13 AM
I could have been persuaded if you said a healthy Tyler Hansbrough would have been an improvement over Murphy (in fact, I wouldn't have to be persuaded), but McRoberts is pushing it a little. I dislike Murphy as much as the next guy, and I'll rejoice the day he is no longer a Pacer, but I don't think McRoberts is a better player.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 02:15 AM
I could have been persuaded if you said a healthy Tyler Hansbrough would have been an improvement over Murphy (in fact, I wouldn't have to be persuaded), but McRoberts is pushing it a little. I dislike Murphy as much as the next guy, and I'll rejoice the day he is no longer a Pacer, but I don't think McRoberts is a better player.

Why is that? What has Hansbrough done to make you think he's a better player than either of them?

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:18 AM
Why is that? What has Hansbrough done to make you think he's a better player than either of them?

He didn't play very well when he did play, but his toughness and his Foster-esque contributions would have been helpful. I think his mid-range jumper would have begun to fall. His knack for getting to the free throw line is a plus. He isn't a great defender, but he's better than Murphy and he shows the willingness to take charges and be physical down there.

I am not a Tyler fan either, I just really don't think that much of Josh.

Peck
07-08-2010, 02:19 AM
I could have been persuaded if you said a healthy Tyler Hansbrough would have been an improvement over Murphy (in fact, I wouldn't have to be persuaded), but McRoberts is pushing it a little. I dislike Murphy as much as the next guy, and I'll rejoice the day he is no longer a Pacer, but I don't think McRoberts is a better player.

Ok, let's work through this together.

I want to make sure that I'm not just using some blind hatred for Murphy to be my guide.

Let's start by judging what they do on the floor.

I'll ask the questions and you feel free to answer and please feel free to ask questions of your own.

Here is my first 5.

1. Who is the better passer?

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks?

3. Who has the better lateral quickness?

4. Who is the better rebounder?

5. Who is the better defender?

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:21 AM
Ok, let's work through this together.

I want to make sure that I'm not just using some blind hatred for Murphy to be my guide.

Let's start by judging what they do on the floor.

I'll ask the questions and you feel free to answer and please feel free to ask questions of your own.

Here is my first 5.

1. Who is the better passer? McRoberts

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks? I don't know, but I assume since you added it in here that you think McRoberts does

3. Who has the better lateral quickness? McRoberts

4. Who is the better rebounder? Murphy

5. Who is the better defender? McRoberts, with the caveat that he is not a good defender, he's just better than Murphy.

a

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 02:21 AM
Ok, let's work through this together.

I want to make sure that I'm not just using some blind hatred for Murphy to be my guide.

Let's start by judging what they do on the floor.

I'll ask the questions and you feel free to answer and please feel free to ask questions of your own.

Here is my first 5.

1. Who is the better passer?

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks?

3. Who has the better lateral quickness?

4. Who is the better rebounder?

5. Who is the better defender?

Answer these questions while comparing all three of Murphy, McRoberts, and Hansbrough.

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:24 AM
Ok, let's work through this together.

I want to make sure that I'm not just using some blind hatred for Murphy to be my guide.

Let's start by judging what they do on the floor.

I'll ask the questions and you feel free to answer and please feel free to ask questions of your own.

Here is my first 5.

1. Who is the better passer?

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks?

3. Who has the better lateral quickness?

4. Who is the better rebounder?

5. Who is the better defender?

1. Of the three, McRoberts
2. I honestly don't know
3. McRoberts
4. Murphy
5. McRoberts is probably the best, but none of them are good defenders

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 02:28 AM
I'm not even sure that Murphy is the better rebounder. He has the numbers, but the guy has never blocked out in his life. He just hopes the other 4 guys box out and he crashes the boards. It has effectively earned him millions of dollars, but I don't know if that really means he's a better rebounder. When you are the only guy going straight for the ball every time it's shot, it's pretty easy.

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:34 AM
I'm done with the discussion guys. You have your opinions, I have mine. Anything good that Murphy does, you will find ways to marginalize it. At least we can all agree that he needs to go.

Peck
07-08-2010, 02:36 AM
Actually no I didn't add the screen/pick setting thing in there as a trick to say McRoberts. It was just one of the questions.

Ok, here are 5 more.

6. Who is a better free throw shooter?

7. Who draws more fouls?

8. Who fouls more often?

9. Who has a better mid range game?

10. Who finishes better at the basket?

Edit: Sorry didn't realize that you were done. I was just trying to work through this and I was hoping you were going to ask me some quesitons but if not that's cool.

We can all agree to move on here.

cdash
07-08-2010, 02:43 AM
Actually no I didn't add the screen/pick setting thing in there as a trick to say McRoberts. It was just one of the questions.

Ok, here are 5 more.

6. Who is a better free throw shooter?

7. Who draws more fouls?

8. Who fouls more often?

9. Who has a better mid range game?

10. Who finishes better at the basket?

Edit: Sorry didn't realize that you were done. I was just trying to work through this and I was hoping you were going to ask me some quesitons but if not that's cool.

We can all agree to move on here.

6. Murphy
7. Murphy
8. On a per minute basis, I think McRoberts. Not really sure though.
9. Hmm...tough call. McRoberts I suspect.
10. McRoberts

rexnom
07-08-2010, 02:47 AM
Peck, without necessarily disagreeing with you, I'll add this: your analysis is overly bimodal.

By that I mean that you can't figure this out using yes-or-no question. McBob might be slightly better than Murphy at everything but one area where Murphy heavily outperforms him. That might be enough for 5 extra wins. Maybe in the long run those 5 wins don't matter but, ultimately, if you are solely talking about who is better for this team in the short term, it's nearly impossible to say definitely McBob, especially using a yes-or-no framework.

Ozwalt72
07-08-2010, 03:34 AM
6. Murphy
7. Murphy
8. On a per minute basis, I think McRoberts. Not really sure though.
9. Hmm...tough call. McRoberts I suspect.
10. McRoberts

9 is murphy, and it isnt close really

BRushWithDeath
07-08-2010, 03:47 AM
1. Who is the better passer?
McRoberts, Murphy, Hansbrough

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

3. Who has the better lateral quickness?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

4. Who is the better rebounder?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

5. Who is the better defender?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

6. Who is a better free throw shooter?
Murphy, Hansbrough, McRoberts

7. Who draws more fouls?
Hansbrough, McRoberts, Murphy

8. Who fouls more often?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

9. Who has a better mid range game?
Hansbrough, Murphy, McRoberts

10. Who finishes better at the basket?
McRoberts, Murphy, Hansbrough


As for order I prefer they play:

McRoberts, Hansbrough, anybody but Murphy.

Bball
07-08-2010, 04:01 AM
IF TPTB know they aren't trading anyone with a huge contract and will just let them expire (which I suspect that is the case) then I agree with your point of buying them out, taking our lumps with the young players, evaluating and developing them along the way, AND either having a nice draft pick at the end of the season or a nice surprise to find out we had a better roster/higher ceiling than thought.

OTOH... If TPTB really would like to trade these expiring contract players rather than just letting them expire then they basically have to live with them until the trade deadline in order to field any and all possible offers. That doesn't mean we have to overplay them at the expense of the younger players... but we will. That's what makes the idea of buying players out appealing (just remove the option of playing them in front of younger, developing players entirely).

It really wouldn't surprise me to learn that the FO knows the only trades they'd consider they won't be offered and that they fully plan to just let the contracts expire. In which case.... Buy them out.

And while they are at it... fire the coach too...

Peck
07-08-2010, 04:15 AM
Well here are my answers.

1. Who is the better passer? McRoberts

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks? Neither however Josh seems slightly better
3. Who has the better lateral quickness? McRoberts

4. Who is the better rebounder? McRoberts (sorry)

5. Who is the better defender? McRoberts (it's not even close)

6. Who is a better free throw shooter? Murphy

7. Who draws more fouls? McRoberts however this could be a flaw from being so used by JOB for Troy

8. Who fouls more often? McRoberts

9. Who has a better mid range game? Troy

10. Who finishes better at the basket? McRoberts

Now taking the same questions and adding Hansbrough into the mix I will say this.

1. Who is the better passer? Josh, Troy, Tyler

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks? Tyler, Josh, Tro

3. Who has the better lateral quickness? Josh, Troy, Tyler

4. Who is the better rebounder? Josh, Troy, Tyler

5. Who is the better defender? Josh, Tyler, Troy

6. Who is a better free throw shooter? Troy, Tyler, Josh

7. Who draws more fouls? Tyler, Josh, Troy

8. Who fouls more often? Josh, Tyler, Troy

9. Who has a better mid range game? Troy, Tyler, Josh

10. Who finishes better at the basket? Josh, Tyler, Troy

Peck
07-08-2010, 04:19 AM
Peck, without necessarily disagreeing with you, I'll add this: your analysis is overly bimodal.

By that I mean that you can't figure this out using yes-or-no question. McBob might be slightly better than Murphy at everything but one area where Murphy heavily outperforms him. That might be enough for 5 extra wins. Maybe in the long run those 5 wins don't matter but, ultimately, if you are solely talking about who is better for this team in the short term, it's nearly impossible to say definitely McBob, especially using a yes-or-no framework.

That's a fair criticism.

However I would contend that while you say that what he is good at might provide you with 5 more wins I will state that what he is bad at is worth at least 5 more losses.

He is so bad at defense he makes players around him worse because they have to cover for him.

Ozwalt72
07-08-2010, 04:20 AM
1. Who is the better passer?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

2. Who sets more fundamentally sound screens and picks?
Who the hell honestly knows? We don't work off of very many screens or picks.

3. Who has the better lateral quickness?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy....though it might not be as huge a lead as thought

4. Who is the better rebounder?
Murphy, Hansbrough, McRoberts

5. Who is the better defender?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy - no stats to back up this one

6. Who is a better free throw shooter?
Murphy, Hansbrough, McRoberts

7. Who draws more fouls?
Hansbrough, Murphy, McRoberts

8. Who fouls more often?
McRoberts, Hansbrough, Murphy

9. Who has a better mid range game?
Murphy, Hansbrough, McRoberts

10. Who finishes better at the basket?
McRoberts, Murphy, Hansbrough



82games.com or basketball-reference.com have stats to back up AT LEAST all but 2, 3, and 5.

Kuq_e_Zi91
07-08-2010, 04:29 AM
Remember the Synergy report on Brandon's defense? I would love to see one on Murphy.

wintermute
07-08-2010, 05:16 AM
If we can't trade any of those contracts by the trading deadline then, yes, absolutely, we should buy them all out (with the possible exception of Mike Dunleavy). It seems silly to buy them out now though.

yeah. our guys do have some value. maybe not a lot, not if we're not taking salary back. but surely more than being cut outright.

as an example, you don't think the bucks would trade for murphy and ford for michael redd's expiring contract along with a small asset like ersan or maybe a future pick? surely that's better than simply buying out murphy and ford.

thewholefnshow31
07-08-2010, 09:20 AM
I would give anything to just to see our young guys unleashed out there. Murphy, Foster, Solo, TJ, and Dunleavy are not going to lead this team anywhere. In the best case scenario we are an 8th seed who gets swept by the number one seed and then they are all gone because their contracts expire. More then likely we will just get the 10th pick in the draft once again and be below .500.

If Larry plans to just let them expire I would not be mad at all if they just bought them out. Sure we will take some lumps with Stephenson, Rolle, and George learning on the fly, but they will be getting much needed minutes to learn.

The most likely scenario I could see is holding onto them until the trade deadline and see what we can do with them. If we cannot move them then cut them lose.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 09:24 AM
we might want to see the kind of year this guys have first. if Dun comes back strong his value will increase, same with foster.
But it doesn't matter if his trade value improves. Bird doesn't want to move him, Bird wants the cap space.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 09:30 AM
as an example, you don't think the bucks would trade for murphy and ford for michael redd's expiring contract along with a small asset like ersan or maybe a future pick? surely that's better than simply buying out murphy and ford.
This is a good point, and it's one I thought of in theory but couldn't think of a concrete example. Nice work.

McKeyFan
07-08-2010, 10:16 AM
So, help me here: Since Bird wants the cap space, does that mean Murphy won't be traded until next summer?

:whoknows:

:banghead:

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 10:25 AM
So, help me here: Since Bird wants the cap space, does that mean Murphy won't be traded until next summer?

:whoknows:

:banghead:

Well Murphy won't be traded next summer, by then he'll be a free agent. He's either going to be traded this summer, which I hope is the case, or he's going to be traded during the seasaon, probably in February at the deadline.

I hope that Bird is tearing up the phone lines trying to trade Murphy for an established point guard right now.

PacerGuy
07-08-2010, 10:28 AM
So, help me here: Since Bird wants the cap space, does that mean Murphy won't be traded until next summer?

:whoknows:

:banghead:

Depends on the player & the contract.
If we can get a "star-quality" player, w/ a "reasonable" contract, then maybe, but if we do use a contract for a player, it won't be more then 1 & likely w/ more then 1-2 yrs left on that deal.

I could also just answer "yes" and point to the cost savings for a small market team by having a team made up almost entirely of contract under a new CBA agreement would bring.

wintermute
07-08-2010, 10:32 AM
This is a good point, and it's one I thought of in theory but couldn't think of a concrete example. Nice work.

thanks, but i stole that idea off a bucks' board :D

Mr. Sobchak
07-08-2010, 10:35 AM
1. Of the three, McRoberts
2. I honestly don't know
3. McRoberts
4. Murphy
5. McRoberts is probably the best, but none of them are good defenders

I slightly disagree here. The one thing that I actually was impressed with Tyler was the way that he defended. I remember watching him in college and never being that impressed with his on ball defense but when he started getting minutes for us I was floored at how good his defense actually was.

The guy is so strong that other players really have a hard time backing him down. IIRC in the game we played against Utah, Boozer was having a whale of a time backing Tyler down and getting post position. His quickness and foot speed was also better than I expected.

I'm not really a fan of Tyler per se, but I loved what he did on defense in limited minutes last year...If he can start hitting those mid range shots and raise his fg% to a respectable level I'll feel a lot better about the 4 position going forward. Anybody else feel the same way? :shrug:

btowncolt
07-08-2010, 10:40 AM
But it doesn't matter if his trade value improves. Bird doesn't want to move him, Bird wants the cap space.

I think you're simplifying things a little bit. I've gotten the impression that cap space was the #2 priority - #1 being the flexibility that potential cap space brings. With expiring contracts, you have the potential to trade those contracts for other assets more readily than you could with contracts that have multiple years. Bird, despite what you might read on here, isn't completely stupid. He's seen the list of potential free agents next year just like all of us have and has to be less than enthused.

That being said, with the potential of a lockout on the horizon, cap space may be moving up in priority. Better keep expenses down until you have some idea what the new CBA is.....

ChicagoJ
07-08-2010, 10:47 AM
don't you guys feel like we could get some valuable assets for our expiring contracts? just a thought..

No. We're trading expensive garbage. Since we are over the cap, we have to either take back similar contracts or find some team that's so damn dumb that they'd be willing to go over the cap for Murphy, Ford, Foster, or Dunleavy.

:dunce:

If there's a team that dumb... well, they fired Isiah and brought in Donnie so I'm not sure there is another team dumb enough to do that.

Expect to get fair value in return (which means, "expensive garbage".)

Why do that?

Just let them expire. I do like the idea of buying them out. Pretty sure I've been saying to buy some of these guys out since the summer of JO trade that brought us Roy Hope-bert and Brandon Future in the draft.

ChicagoJ
07-08-2010, 10:50 AM
as an example, you don't think the bucks would trade for murphy and ford for michael redd's expiring contract along with a small asset like ersan or maybe a future pick? surely that's better than simply buying out murphy and ford.

The Bucks want to make the playoffs again, so they don't want Murphy or Ford. Why would they make their team worse on the court just to switch around expiring contracts?

I'd love to see those two guys with Scott Skiles, though. Can you say "fireworks!!"

Anthem
07-08-2010, 10:52 AM
Pretty sure I've been saying to buy some of these guys out since the summer of JO trade that brought us Roy Hope-bert and Brandon Future in the draft.
You and me both.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 10:56 AM
[Murphy]'s either going to be traded this summer, which I hope is the case, or he's going to be traded during the season...
... or he won't be traded at all, and Bird will simply let his contract expire and let him walk.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 10:58 AM
I think you're simplifying things a little bit. I've gotten the impression that cap space was the #2 priority - #1 being the flexibility that potential cap space brings.
That's a fair point, and it was my impression as well. But Bird's interview yesterday seemed to say that he's committed to having $30mil in cap space next summer.

Unless he can get a superstar for expirings, it sure sounds like he's going to wait it out.

btowncolt
07-08-2010, 11:01 AM
That's a fair point, and it was my impression as well. But Bird's interview yesterday seemed to say that he's committed to having $30mil in cap space next summer.

Unless he can get a superstar for expirings, it sure sounds like he's going to wait it out.

Probably true, though I'm not sure if that's more of a business decision or a "no one wants Troy Murphy for three months for just three 1st round picks and X player??!?!" decision. I'm starting to get the impression they're fine just waiting out the lockout with minimal contracts on the books and seeing what the post-CBA apocalyptic world looks like.

Sidenote: My favorite part of the "3-year-plan" finally coming to a conclusion is that our cap space may be significantly less valuable if the cap goes down by any measurable amount. Yay!

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:03 AM
think TJ can play point for a team that needs a pg and has a lot of capspace? Both the Knicks and Miami need a pg, and there's only one Felton available in the FA :)


But there is also Watson & Ridnour still available at a lot less than 8.5 mil.

pacergod2
07-08-2010, 11:11 AM
This is a great thread so far guys.

To answer those questions:

I would say Hansborough is a FAR better screener than the other two. He gets a low base and keeps his arms in tight. Fundamentally sound screener who is extremely effective with it. I think Hansborough's upside is Carlos Boozer because of his effectiveness in screening situations.

Also, a very important category you have left out is shot blocking. McRoberts dominates the other two and Hansborough has the edge over Murphy.

Back to Anthem's topic. I have thought about this before. I don't think you buy out the big men. They have trade value for teams on the cusp of the playoffs. Ford is the guy you buy out this summer if you have a Murphy and draft pick for PG type of deal available. Dunleavy has upside to show he can still play so you let him play some early in the year and pawn him off to anybody you can in a trade. If not, you buy him out and let him go sign with the Heat for the veteran minimum. I think Foster and Murphy will be coveted by the deadline and should not be bought out.

I think the more important issue with all of this is to extend Hibbert and Rush next summer. That is going to be critical for us. Whether people like Rush at this point or not is irrelevant. If management sees Rush as a component of our future after this season, we have to prepare in case he has his break out year this upcoming season. Hibbert especially is a foundational piece to our young core and we must make it a priority to extend them. We also want to utilize our cap space next summer before we extend them because they only will count against our cap what their rookie salary is and it will be a perfect time to use the space without worrying about their Bird Rights being cap holds.

wintermute
07-08-2010, 11:20 AM
The Bucks want to make the playoffs again, so they don't want Murphy or Ford. Why would they make their team worse on the court just to switch around expiring contracts?


same reason they wanted murphy at the deadline last year - they think murphy will help them. plus they need a backup pg with ridnour leaving - and you know, they actually have fond memories of tj in milwaukee.



I'd love to see those two guys with Scott Skiles, though. Can you say "fireworks!!"

can't be any worse than with maggette and gooden.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:23 AM
If we can't trade any of those contracts by the trading deadline then, yes, absolutely, we should buy them all out (with the possible exception of Mike Dunleavy). It seems silly to buy them out now though.


As far as buy outs go, your suggestion of waiting until after the trade dealine is a good one. There still is 2 months of the season to be played and youth can be developed. Not to mention if the Pacers are playing at that point like the last 3 years they will be getting another lottery pick to help with the future.

I don't see Simon buying out players unless he can get a good discount, so I really don't see that happening. Not to mention buying out 5 players puts the team with a roster of 10 which is 2 below the NBA requirement. I know NBADL players can be used to fillout the roster.

Although there might be a reason for Herb to decide to do some buyouts, and that would be if the team was over the LT. If he could do buyouts and get under the LT, it would be a prudent financial move that would save the Pacers money plus pick up millions in LT sharing.

pacergod2
07-08-2010, 11:23 AM
Mr. Sobchak, I too think Hansborough's defense is very underrated. He has two VERY important qualities when it comes to playing defense as a PF in the NBA; strength and effort. He has decent lateral quickness for a 6'9" player and I think he is the kind of player who plays an effective all around game. He is fundamentally efficient in most areas of the game, such as positioning and help defense, but he needs more floor time against NBA competition. I am not saying he is any kind of All-Star, but just agreeing that his defense is very underrated, because he won't ever block a ton of shots and "show off" his defense.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:31 AM
yeah. our guys do have some value. maybe not a lot, not if we're not taking salary back. but surely more than being cut outright.

as an example, you don't think the bucks would trade for murphy and ford for michael redd's expiring contract along with a small asset like ersan or maybe a future pick? surely that's better than simply buying out murphy and ford.



I agree, but after the trade deadline if Murphy & Ford are still here, and would take a 15% or so buyout I'd have to think real hard not to do it.

judicata
07-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Abso-freakin-lutely we would have won more games with McBob, we would have won more games with Solo, seriously. And yes, as the team record indicates, and from everything I have seen, Murphy really is that bad.

Look, he can hit a 3pt shot. So can alot of quicker, smaller, better guards. Troy is not a PF, he is really a super slow, flat footed, no defense playing SG. He is a gimmick player who should only see time when certain matchups can be exploited, preferably at the end of quarters when they can sub him in/out for offense/defense.

I may not like Murphy's style of ball, but he produces consistently at the NBA level against starters. McRoberts has not produced at Murphy's level since High School.

If McRoberts got 100% of Murphy's minutes last season, this team is drafting Derrick Favors at number 3. I don't agree with how the minutes were distributed, but the mystique of McRoberts and the Murphy hate-on goes way too far here.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:39 AM
thanks, but i stole that idea off a bucks' board :D


And to think people feel honesty is dead. It's nice to know it still exists. ;)

Bball
07-08-2010, 11:45 AM
If there's a team that dumb... well, they fired Isiah and brought in Donnie so I'm not sure there is another team dumb enough to do that.



Donnie brought in two of those contracts in the first place AND in NY he signed Bender to the team.

So it would be a grand opportunity to show us their Pacer signing wasn't a mistake and he was right all along.

...But what do they have to offer us?

Which brings us back to your original point...

PaceBalls
07-08-2010, 11:45 AM
I may not like Murphy's style of ball, but he produces consistently at the NBA level against starters. McRoberts has not produced at Murphy's level since High School.

If McRoberts got 100% of Murphy's minutes last season, this team is drafting Derrick Favors at number 3. I don't agree with how the minutes were distributed, but the mystique of McRoberts and the Murphy hate-on goes way too far here.

I would say it is less of the mystique of McRoberts and more of the Murphy hate for me. I think McBob has alot of upside, but he has alot of room for improvement.

Actually I think Murph is a cool dude, I just hate his basketball game. Maybe my hatred for his game would be less with another coach. The combo of Jim and Murph is the worst of all possible scenarios for our team. I am just hoping to god that they don't give Jim an extension and resign Murph to a new contract next summer.

Putnam
07-08-2010, 11:46 AM
and frankly having a power forward specialize in hitting three point shots does not really impress me in any fashion.

You gotta give up on this, Peck.

Troy Murphy is not a bad power forward. He's something else altogether. And when he's on the floor, even if he's the second tallest and/or bulkiest Pacer, he's not playing power forward.

If a football team takes out a tight end and sends in a wide receiver, you wouldn't blame the wideout for failing to block out a blitzing linebacker. You'd blame the coach for making the substitution that created the vulnerability, but not the player who wasn't in the position to make the block. If the mayor chooses to deal with a backlog in the courts by laying off patrolmen to hire more clerks, you wouldn't blame those clerks for lack of street patrols.

It is the same with the Pacers and Murphy. Blame O'Brien all you want (as you do!) for a game plan that omits to provide what you consider a vital function on the court. But don't blame Troy for not being a power forward.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:48 AM
I think you're simplifying things a little bit. I've gotten the impression that cap space was the #2 priority - #1 being the flexibility that potential cap space brings. With expiring contracts, you have the potential to trade those contracts for other assets more readily than you could with contracts that have multiple years. Bird, despite what you might read on here, isn't completely stupid. He's seen the list of potential free agents next year just like all of us have and has to be less than enthused.

That being said, with the potential of a lockout on the horizon, cap space may be moving up in priority. Better keep expenses down until you have some idea what the new CBA is.....



I agree with your post. As much as I hound Bird, I believe he understands, it's just that others have had to school him to understand. He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer thus the reason Morway is GM.

Bball
07-08-2010, 11:52 AM
Maybe my hatred for his game would be less with another coach. The combo of Jim and Murph is the worst of all possible scenarios for our team. I am just hoping to god that they don't give Jim an extension and resign Murph to a new contract next summer.

QFT

Putnam
07-08-2010, 11:54 AM
As to the OP question:


The money aspect of the suggestion checks out, and the better-for-the-team aspect checks out.

How much humiliation is implied in a buy-out? Can we reasonably ask Dunleavy, Murphy, Foster and Ford to accept that level of "I-suck-ed-ness" in exchange for a short advance on cash they're going to get anyway? Aren't they going to treasure the fiction that they are legitimate NBA talent above that?

If we were dealing with a bunch of government clerks, I'd expect a good response to an early buy-out offer. But the players named in this thread have a lot more pride at stake.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 11:55 AM
same reason they wanted murphy at the deadline last year - they think murphy will help them. plus they need a backup pg with ridnour leaving - and you know, they actually have fond memories of tj in milwaukee.



can't be any worse than with maggette and gooden.


You are on a roll today with good comments. YOU NEED TO POST MORE!!

McKeyFan
07-08-2010, 12:04 PM
You gotta give up on this, Peck.

Troy Murphy is not a bad power forward. He's something else altogether. And when he's on the floor, even if he's the second tallest and/or bulkiest Pacer, he's not playing power forward.

If a football team takes out a tight end and sends in a wide receiver, you wouldn't blame the wideout for failing to block out a blitzing linebacker. You'd blame the coach for making the substitution that created the vulnerability, but not the player who wasn't in the position to make the block. If the mayor chooses to deal with a backlog in the courts by laying off patrolmen to hire more clerks, you wouldn't blame those clerks for lack of street patrols.

It is the same with the Pacers and Murphy. Blame O'Brien all you want (as you do!) for a game plan that omits to provide what you consider a vital function on the court. But don't blame Troy for not being a power forward.

I don't see Peck getting on Troy. It's all about getting on JOB.

And if Troy is not a PF, then I guess whenever he is playing (most of the game), then we are "going small" and have no center or a center with no PF. Which is a dumb idea. Which is Peck's point.

Putnam
07-08-2010, 12:17 PM
And if Troy is not a PF, then I guess whenever he is playing (most of the game), then we are "going small" and have no center or a center with no PF. Which is a dumb idea. Which is Peck' point.



Exactly!







.

ChicagoJ
07-08-2010, 12:22 PM
same reason they wanted murphy at the deadline last year - they think murphy will help them.

I wonder why that never happened. It seems to me that Murphy was considered to be an option by a number of teams, but not the first, second, or maybe even the third choice.

Murphy would be a nice sixth-man, change of pace player. Too bad about the contract.

Bball
07-08-2010, 12:33 PM
As to the OP question:


The money aspect of the suggestion checks out, and the better-for-the-team aspect checks out.

How much humiliation is implied in a buy-out? Can we reasonably ask Dunleavy, Murphy, Foster and Ford to accept that level of "I-suck-ed-ness" in exchange for a short advance on cash they're going to get anyway? Aren't they going to treasure the fiction that they are legitimate NBA talent above that?

If we were dealing with a bunch of government clerks, I'd expect a good response to an early buy-out offer. But the players named in this thread have a lot more pride at stake.

If it helps the future of the team in any way then I don't think management should give a rat's azz about any humiliation these players might feel.

Plus, it's an economic fact of today's NBA that teams with no short term potential look for ways to improve their long term potential. I'm not sure how much humiliation would really be attached to the Pacers going on a youth movement and buying out some veterans that are not part of the future. This wouldn't be the same as the Lakers or Celtics buying out a player(s) while in the midst of their championship window.

In fact, it could be perceived as a FAVOR to the players to not only allow them to be paid for the coming season by the Pacers but free to go negotiate with a better team with a better short term future (if not long term future as well).

Let's face it... we suck and will for quite some time as long as we remain on the path we are and with the coach we have. No player released from Pacer purgatory can feel too bad regardless of the circumstances.

Plus they won't have to play for Jim O'Brien....

Peck
07-08-2010, 12:49 PM
I'm fairly certain a player has to agree to a buy out, so the Pacers have to take their feelings into consideration if they are asking them to do this.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 12:55 PM
If it helps the future of the team in any way then I don't think management should give a rat's azz about any humiliation these players might feel.
Yeah, but the players have to agree to a buyout. So it does matter what the players think.


The money aspect of the suggestion checks out, and the better-for-the-team aspect checks out.

How much humiliation is implied in a buy-out?
As BBall said, if I was Murphy, Dunleavy, or Ford I'd be thankful. Give me 80% of the value of my final year and let me play for the Celts/Heat.

I could see us holding onto Foster, letting his contract expire, and re-signing him to a minimum contract. He's played his whole career here, it would be nice to let him be a Pacer for Life.

Bball
07-08-2010, 01:01 PM
Yeah, but the players have to agree to a buyout. So it does matter what the players think.

I wasn't even considering offering them less than their full contract. Just freeing the roster spots and forcing O'Brien's hand was benefit enough for me. Do the players have to agree to a buyout if it's a 100% payment?




As BBall said, if I was Murphy, Dunleavy, or Ford I'd be thankful. Give me 80% of the value of my final year and let me play for the Celts/Heat.



So maybe we have leverage to negotiate a buyout and save some money too. But I see benefits even at 100% pay.

McKeyFan
07-08-2010, 01:03 PM
Exactly!







.

Somehow, I feel like I just got punked.

d_c
07-08-2010, 01:04 PM
I wasn't even considering offering them less than their full contract. Just freeing the roster spots and forcing O'Brien's hand was benefit enough for me. Do the players have to agree to a buyout if it's a 100% payment?

A 100% buyout is just essentially waiving them. No, you wouldn't need to do that consult them for that.

But it would be a completely unprecedented move to waive around $30M in expiring deals. That would truly be a first in this league and I really don't think any owner in the league would pay that much money to 3 players to have them not play for them.

McKeyFan
07-08-2010, 01:05 PM
I'm fairly certain a player has to agree to a buy out, so the Pacers have to take their feelings into consideration if they are asking them to do this.

Even for a total buyout (no discount)?

Edit. DC beat me to it.

ChicagoJ
07-08-2010, 01:07 PM
I wasn't even considering offering them less than their full contract. Just freeing the roster spots and forcing O'Brien's hand was benefit enough for me. Do the players have to agree to a buyout if it's a 100% payment?

No, you can just cut them. Doesn't even require a buy out, just pay them over the remainder of their contract. Usually that's a bad idea because you're paying full price for the player to join somebody else's team.

But in this case, I'd gladly pay full price for somebody other than O'Brien to be coaching Murphy, Ford and Foster.

I'd keep Dunleavy.

naptownmenace
07-08-2010, 01:08 PM
think TJ can play point for a team that needs a pg and has a lot of capspace? Both the Knicks and Miami need a pg, and there's only one Felton available in the FA :)

If NYK, NJ, or Miami fails to land Lebron they'll have a lot of capspace left and we could possibly trade TJ to them or another team with unused capspace for a 2nd round draft pick.

A very unlikely scenario but it's a possible option as well. I think it's way more likely than the Pacers buying out any of their big salary expiring contracts.

BillS
07-08-2010, 01:15 PM
OK, have people just gotten so full of hate and frustration that they can't see the forest for the JOB-shaped tree?

You REALLY would just drop $30mil in February with nothing at all to show for it rather than just wait for the expiring at the end of the season?

You'd then fill out the roster with what - 10-day contracts? D-League guys?

You'd convince the city that you needed a renegotiation on the Fieldhouse so you could crap money onto the street?

Oh, wait, I know. There are 10,000 fans a game just waiting for those players to be gone, and they will be so overjoyed they will rush to the games, paying so much over face value at the ticket office that the Pacers will break even on it.

And, of course, there's that whole "lose in the regular season and you are guaranteed the best player in the draft" thing, all while filling the stands with fans who love seeing losing if it is done THEIR way.

:banghead:

Anthem
07-08-2010, 01:30 PM
Oh, wait, I know. There are 10,000 fans a game just waiting for those players to be gone, and they will be so overjoyed they will rush to the games, paying so much over face value at the ticket office that the Pacers will break even on it.
Yes, actually. People want to see the kids play. They have for over a year.


You REALLY would just drop $30mil in February with nothing at all to show for it rather than just wait for the expiring at the end of the season?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs

You're paying the $30mil either way. This way you can save a little bit of that (thus helping the bottom line), give the fanbase a more entertaining product, improve the development of the kids, and not really hurt yourself in terms of games won/lost. What do you lose?


And, of course, there's that whole "lose in the regular season and you are guaranteed the best player in the draft" thing, all while filling the stands with fans who love seeing losing if it is done THEIR way.
Au contraire, actually. I'm convinced that the team would actually be BETTER. At the very least, it would be just as good. Imagine that last September we'd bought out Murphy, Dunleavy, Ford, and Foster. Do you really think we'd have won fewer than 32 games?

Putnam
07-08-2010, 01:30 PM
Somehow, I feel like I just got punked.

No, not at all. You just came at the point from another direction and expressed it equally well.


.

cdash
07-08-2010, 01:31 PM
A 100% buyout is just essentially waiving them. No, you wouldn't need to do that consult them for that.

But it would be a completely unprecedented move to waive around $30M in expiring deals. That would truly be a first in this league and I really don't think any owner in the league would pay that much money to 3 players to have them not play for them.

I agree. I don't think it's a wise move at all. Sure, we would like to see the younger guys get some action, but buy-outs are bad business in my book. I don't like the fact that you are paying a guy to not be on the team. With Tinsley, I understand that the situation forced our hand with a buyout. I don't have much of a problem with that one. Buying out all these guys so we can trot out a craptastic lineup would have people screaming "Tank!!!!" which as I recall, so many people around here were against for the "sanctity of the game". My biggest problem with it: All these guys could (and would) sign with contenders and I just hate that.

Like I said earlier, I think we end up trading a few of them before the deadline, so I think it's a moot point, but I don't want to see any buyouts.

BillS
07-08-2010, 01:46 PM
Yes, actually. People want to see the kids play. They have for over a year.

Then why didn't the attendance go up toward the end of the season when they were playing more minutes? Or will you say "they want to NOT see the veterans play"?


You're paying the $30mil either way. This way you can save a little bit of that (thus helping the bottom line), give the fanbase a more entertaining product, improve the development of the kids, and not really hurt yourself in terms of games won/lost. What do you lose?

Cash up front. Credibility when you say "we don't have cash" and then come up with it. You also have to assume that it isn't the coach who is the problem, it's the players, which clearly people would get an argument over.



Au contraire, actually. I'm convinced that the team would actually be BETTER. At the very least, it would be just as good. Imagine that last September we'd bought out Murphy, Dunleavy, Ford, and Foster. Do you really think we'd have won fewer than 32 games?

We've had the argument about Murphy, but Foster hardly played, Dunleavy was out a chunk of the season, and Ford rode the bench practically the last half. Which of the losses during those times would we have won if those guys were officially off the team rather than just on the bench or in suits?


It seems to me that every single argument for this kind of move stems from the fact that the players on the team not named Murphy, Dunleavy, Foster, and Ford are good enough that they would actually win more games - and that the Pacers' FO (as well as other teams around the league) are too stupid to see what is clearly obvious to the armchair coach fans of the Pacers.

Development, OK, I buy that at a certain level, it is one of the reasons I have the avatar I have. But at another point you have to realize that if certain players' upsides were so high there would be other teams begging to make a cheap trade to get those guys off our hands (BYC notwithstanding for some of them, of course). Given the prevalence of really stupid rumors that hit the streets, the fact that we've heard NO ONE actively probing about Josh (for instance) means that, while there is CLEARLY an upside that needs to be explored, not doing so really isn't as stupid as many make it sound. There is a big difference between developing an asset that we can make fit a role (which I agree we are NOT doing well) and failing to develop an asset that would be so valuable it deeply harms us to not do so.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 01:50 PM
You REALLY would just drop $30mil in February with nothing at all to show for it rather than just wait for the expiring at the end of the season?

You'd then fill out the roster with what - 10-day contracts? D-League guys?

You'd convince the city that you needed a renegotiation on the Fieldhouse so you could crap money onto the street?

Oh, wait, I know. There are 10,000 fans a game just waiting for those players to be gone, and they will be so overjoyed they will rush to the games, paying so much over face value at the ticket office that the Pacers will break even on it.

And, of course, there's that whole "lose in the regular season and you are guaranteed the best player in the draft" thing, all while filling the stands with fans who love seeing losing if it is done THEIR way.




By the trade deadline if this team is on another 32-36 season, what good are those expirings then after the trade deadline? Do they turn into better assets or do they just remain on the roster SOS?

If necessary.

They are going to get paid no matter what anyway. The Pacers threw how much money away last year on Foster, Dunleavy, and Hansbrough being injured? Why not let the young players of the future get more PT to develop?

You mean the same 10,000 that are just chopping at the bit to see Murphy, Dunleavy, Foster, Ford, And Solo play next year?

Those fans aren't coming to watch a team lose with Murphy & Co anyway, so why not take advantage of losing? Turn it into a future asset.

If the Pacers are over the LT after the trade deadline, you wouldn't be willing to buy out contracts in order get them under the LT, and to make the Pacers better financially?

mildlysane
07-08-2010, 01:59 PM
Don't cut them. Just make them play 2nd fiddle. Bench 'em. If you gotta pay them anyway, and want to develop other players, then just don't play them very much. Like we did with TJ.

Bball
07-08-2010, 02:36 PM
If the 3 year plan is to just let the contracts expire anyway... and there's no hope or even intention of going after a player(s) in trade (and thus taking on more salary commitments), or a total lack of interest in the players we're offering making the idea of trading them moot... then let's just move on and properly use a lost season in the record books as a building block for the future.

If a buyout saves us money... great...

NuffSaid
07-08-2010, 03:27 PM
I think we all need to settle down and see this "buy out" aspect alittle clearer.

While I'm sure the big FA lotto won't be as lavish for 2011 as it is this year, the Pacers would still be in a much better bargaining position in 2011 than they are right now. Besides, if they bought out every contract the fans viewed as "wasteful" no contract would be worth much after it's first year in the eye of most fans anyway. So, unless you really must do it, i.e., for a troubled players just to be rid of him, I think the Pacers should just stay put for now.

As the Pacers' roster currently stands, they have 13 players under contract:

PG - TJ Ford*, AJ Price
SG - Dunleavy*, Rush, George#
PF - Murphy*, Hansborough, S. Jones*, McRoberts
SF - Grange, D. Jones
C - Hibbert, Foster*

* = In last year of contract
# = recently signed draftee

Note: Tinsley's salary is still on the Pacers' payroll despite being bought-out and subsequently signing w/the Grizzlies last year.

So, technically, the Pacers still have two roster spots open which they could use to sign their remaining two draft picks, Stephenson and Rolle. Frankly, I'd rather they went this route than to try and force a trade or buy-out contracts, but if they did do a trade I hope they do move Murphy and Solo for a youngster, cash and maybe a future draft pick. The PF position needs to be thinned out some.

As I stated above, staying put would place them in a much better position to bargain for FAs next year. Besides, getting Dunleavy & Foster back healthier (and hopefully a more stable Hansborough as well), the team should be much better. My hope is that JOB puts forth a better mix of players among the starters. Example:

C - Hibbert
PF - McRoberts
SF - Dunleavy
PG - TJ Ford
SG - Granger

Why start McRoberts and Dunleavy?

IMO, McRoberts is much more athletic and doesn't have a problem going after loose balls or getting banged around underneath the basket. Murphy won't get down and dirty w/the big boys, but you can't discount his 3-pt shooting. Still, I'd bring him off the bench provided that Dunleavy's long-ball has returned and McRoberts shows any kind of inside/post-up game.

If Murphy does get traded, that would move Hansborough up which would suit me just fine, but in the meantime Mangum "PI" Rolle (or would y'all prefer Ultra Magnus! :D ) would backup McRoberts temporarily until we knew for sure that Hansborough would be ok to play extended minutes.

As to the overall rotation:

C - Hibbert/Foster
PF - McRoberts/Hansborough/Rolle
SF - Dunleavy/D. Jones
PG - TJ Ford/AJ Price/Stephenson
SG - Granger/Rush/George

This assumes Murphy and Solo get traded. If not, move Rolle to Center behind Foster and start Murphy at PF (a notion I don't favor very much, but if he's still here you have to start him).

ChicagoJ
07-08-2010, 04:10 PM
Cash up front. Credibility when you say "we don't have cash" and then come up with it.

Nope. At the trade deadline, there will be only be four paychecks remaining to be paid (End of February, mid-March, end of March, mid-April.) (Unless the player negotiated a non-standard payment schedule, which is permissable. Not sure how common it is.) First of all, any discount for a lump-sum payment would be negligible. Secondly, most likely the players would just be released and paid according to the remaining terms of their contracts. This is money they are obligated to pay next spring either way.

beast23
07-08-2010, 04:59 PM
yeah. our guys do have some value. maybe not a lot, not if we're not taking salary back. but surely more than being cut outright.

as an example, you don't think the bucks would trade for murphy and ford for michael redd's expiring contract along with a small asset like ersan or maybe a future pick? surely that's better than simply buying out murphy and ford.I think out of all posts in the thread, I agree with this the most.

No matter how much we may dislike some of these players, the contracts have value. They are assets and as such represent "choices" that the Pacers have within their control. We can choose to use one or more of them to acquire other players and draft choices, or we can choose to create cap room by choosing not to use any or all of them. One thing is for certain, by not having them we lose the power of the options that we have from which to choose.

Anthem is undoubtedly correct in stating that JOB will significantly play Murphy and thus will hinder the growth of McRob and/or Tyler. Personally, I see this as a glass half full/half empty proposition, because I don't believe we have a PF on the roster that is our final solution.

Bird swung for the fences in the draft, and from what I see so far, he may have done quite well. So, my position is that he should use Murphy the same way. Hang on to him, wait for other teams to come to us as the season progresses, as they most certainly will.... somebody is bound to need/want a PF that can stretch the floor and provide them with a double-double. When they do, I'd be looking for a decent (rotational) backup with much lower salary in return, a low first or high second round draft pick and the trade exception of a few million that would be created by giving out more salary.

To hit a home run with DunJr, he's going to have to return to near the form he displayed a couple of years ago. If so, then perhaps he can be used similarly to Murphy around the trade deadline or as a sign-and-trade at reduced salary next summer. But the only way we will know for certain is to retain him now and give him some minutes. If he does return to form, he is an asset that should not be readily discarded.

As for Foster, I have too much loyalty and respect for him to cut him loose in the manner you suggest. I'd retain him, hoping that he regains his health. I would hope that he chooses to retire a Pacer. Healthy, he makes a good backup as long as his salary is more realistic. If he doesn't regain his health, then he might even retire next summer anyway.

My point is that the Pacers have worked very hard and have been very patient in gathering assets. Like any smart businessman would, they view their assets to be not just the talented, youthful players that they have, but also the soon-to-be expiring contracts that they have accumulated. Without them, their options are not nearly as plentiful as they would be.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 05:05 PM
As for Foster, I have too much loyalty and respect for him to cut him loose in the manner you suggest. I'd retain him, hoping that he regains his health. I would hope that he chooses to retire a Pacer. Healthy, he makes a good backup as long as his salary is more realistic. If he doesn't regain his health, then he might even retire next summer anyway.

Me too. Like tomorrow sounds good.

Anthem
07-08-2010, 05:56 PM
No matter how much we may dislike some of these players, the contracts have value. They are assets and as such represent "choices" that the Pacers have within their control. We can choose to use one or more of them to acquire other players and draft choices, or we can choose to create cap room by choosing not to use any or all of them. One thing is for certain, by not having them we lose the power of the options that we have from which to choose.
You've made some good points. I could see holding onto everybody to see if we can get an awesome deal from a team desperate to get under the cap.

But if we get past the All-Star Break and these guys are still on the team, we've already made the choice to let them expire. At that point, there's no reason NOT to buy them out. Let them sign with a contender.

Rupert Stilinski
07-08-2010, 06:03 PM
You've made some good points. I could see holding onto everybody to see if we can get an awesome deal from a team desperate to get under the cap.

But if we get past the All-Star Break and these guys are still on the team, we've already made the choice to let them expire. At that point, there's no reason NOT to buy them out. Let them sign with a contender.

Agreed, after the Trade Deadline it makes sense.

PacersPride
07-08-2010, 06:15 PM
I'm with Peck on this one. Murph is a negative on court no matter what his stats are on offense or however many easy rebounds he gets.

It isn't just his bad defense. He has horrible rebounding fundamentals as well. I have never seen the guy execute a proper box out on his man for a rebound... ever... in any game he has played in. Try to find one next year, it will never happen.

He is such an enigma in the NBA. Has there ever been a guy who averaged more rebounds who was such a **** poor rebounder? The guy can hit the three well and has a knack for that trailing, fast break 3pter that Jim just loves. That is it. That is his game. That is why Jim and Larry love him so much they claim he is the MVP of our team. :banghead:

The other big guys on the team.. especially McBob, who is much more talented in every facet of basketball than Troy, except for that fast break, top of the key, 3pt shot, are better options for our PF position.

one thing i nvr understood is why the hell murphy cannot try to establish some sort of low post game.. it may be job's fault but cheese n rice you big p*ssy POST UP once in a blue moon.

murph can score.. and has a couple nice moves.. ive bout had it with a pf playing like a sg.. and JOB doesnt really help matters either.

PacersPride
07-08-2010, 06:22 PM
i think the general consensus on this thread is murph sucks.. but what if murph made half of his salary.. which sounds better since he only is decent at half the game of basketball.

if murph made 6.5 mill per year.. would you resign him to be the backup pf/c on the team.

in answer to my own question.. probably no. he cant gaurd centers and just too slow. so murphs ideal salary is prob like 4.5 mill per year.

* this reminds me of a funny comment i once heard from pollard, most of ya have probably heard it.. but one fan was yelling "YOU SUCK" to scot pollard, and pollards was response was... "i get paid a helluva lot to suck"

perfect response to that comment. well murph sucks.. and gets paid way too much to do so.

Sookie
07-08-2010, 06:45 PM
I don't think Murph sucks at all.

And I'd be fine with him backing up a PF..or heck, even being a 25 MPG starter.

My issue is JOB makes the offense revolve around Murphy's threes. We all know, so long as Murphy is here, it'll be Murphy with a ton of minutes, and Hans and Josh getting what's left over. No one wants to see that.

BornReady
07-08-2010, 06:54 PM
i think the general consensus on this thread is murph sucks.. but what if murph made half of his salary.. which sounds better since he only is decent at half the game of basketball.

if murph made 6.5 mill per year.. would you resign him to be the backup pf/c on the team.

in answer to my own question.. probably no. he cant gaurd centers and just too slow. so murphs ideal salary is prob like 4.5 mill per year.

* this reminds me of a funny comment i once heard from pollard, most of ya have probably heard it.. but one fan was yelling "YOU SUCK" to scot pollard, and pollards was response was... "i get paid a helluva lot to suck"

perfect response to that comment. well murph sucks.. and gets paid way too much to do so.

I think 6.5 mil is fair for Murphy- I'd resign him for that much. Granted his defense does suck a lot, but there have been times when he has carried Indy with the scoring load. I feel like he'd be one of those great offensive sparks off the bench for a change of pace though.

Justin Tyme
07-08-2010, 07:11 PM
if murph made 6.5 mill per year.. would you resign him to be the backup pf/c on the team.


I'd have to think about it. Ok, I'm done thinking about it. NO!

Four years has been enough, it's time to move on and in a new direction.

speakout4
07-08-2010, 07:16 PM
You've made some good points. I could see holding onto everybody to see if we can get an awesome deal from a team desperate to get under the cap.

But if we get past the All-Star Break and these guys are still on the team, we've already made the choice to let them expire. At that point, there's no reason NOT to buy them out. Let them sign with a contender.
Not just desperate to get under the cap but what about a team that loses a key player to injury early in the season. Would that team just let the season go by or would they trade for a player that would help them make the playoffs and hope their injured player can come back. The pacers aren't the only team that shows desperation and an injured key player can result in big trading mistakes particularly when it comes to future draft choices. Our guys can start to look pretty good to teams that need to save their seasons.
i wouldn't buyout anyone but if JOB and Larry think that the young guys are their core then just play Mcrob more.