PDA

View Full Version : The "How would you upgrade the shooting guard position" thread



Anthem
10-10-2010, 10:24 PM
I've not been thrilled with our shooting guard spot for years. I like Rush and think he can be a solid Bowen-type guard for us, but I'd also like to see us get more firepower out of that spot. I like Dunleavy and George, but neither one is a natural two.

So, having given the caveat that I like all of those guys, the question is "who could we get that's better than them?"

What shooting guards are out there that are available and better than what we've got?

Thoughts?

Infinite MAN_force
10-10-2010, 10:29 PM
I don't really have any problem grooming Paul George for the position. Why shouldn't he play the two? He's certainly quick enough.

pacer4ever
10-10-2010, 10:30 PM
George

Dr. Awesome
10-10-2010, 10:32 PM
I don't really have any problem grooming Paul George for the position. Why shouldn't he play the two? He's certainly quick enough.

Yea, a lot of scouts had him pegged as a two coming out of college. I think a lot of people just look at the height and assume he isn't a natural two. I personally think he is very capable of playing the two guard.

Hicks
10-10-2010, 10:37 PM
If I just had to upgrade right now.... I'd trade Danny for one.

BringJackBack
10-10-2010, 10:37 PM
This is never going to happen, and even if I were Larry I don't know if I would do this. But I wan't you guys to hear me out. I don't want hatemail or whatever. :laugh:

Stephen Jackson.

He has molded into a mature player that plays scrappy defense and has an uncanny ability to get to the line. He is extremely good at the triple threat and can teach Paul a thing or two about how to get his own shot.

He has two years left with about 8.5 million owed each season. He is about a 20/5/5 guy and would help us tremendously.

Charlotte is not very good right now and they are not headed in the right direction. Jackson is not in their best interests because they want youth and a clean slate. They have not been managed well and they just lost their point guard. If we send TJ, Rush, and a 2nd I bet we could snag him.

It won't happen though.

Other options: Courtney Lee (fresh in my mind :mad:), Gerald Henderson, Marquis Daniels, Francisco Garcia, or Ronnie Brewer maybe. I can't think right right now.

Sookie
10-10-2010, 10:41 PM
I think George can be that guard in a few years.

His shot looked pretty in summerleague, despite the misses. Although now it looks like he's forcing things. But he's just raw. Very talanted though.

and quite frankly, if we're going to have Collison (or Price) looking for their shot, I think it's okay to have a passive Rush. Who shoots threes and defends well.

vnzla81
10-10-2010, 10:42 PM
Damn I just waisted one minute of my life reading the previous post :rolleyes:

Edit: the post before sookie ;)

xBulletproof
10-10-2010, 11:12 PM
Edit: the post before sookie ;)

:laugh:

Whoops!

McKeyFan
10-10-2010, 11:13 PM
I like Lance as a possibility.

He can create. That's what we need on the floor. Or we need to trade for someone who can create their shot. I feel like the closest thing we have right now is Hansbrough.

Danny doesn't create very well. Dun is still struggling to do so. Hibbert can when he gets it down low. I does look like Collison can create his own shot, so that will help us.

But we need one, solid, effective player who can create their own shot. Besides the handful of untouchable superstars, I don't know who we could obtain who fits the bill. Zach Randolph could do it but he has too many other liabilities. I've always liked Barbosa as someone who can create off the dribble. He's getting a bit old, though. Terry from Dallas could help us somewhat.

Those are some thoughts, but I don't think its easily fixable. If Lance decided to be a serious defender and avoids the law and matures as an offensive force, I do think he could help us. He can certainly create off the dribble.

imawhat
10-10-2010, 11:30 PM
I see this discussed all the time.

What is the difference between a shooting guard and a small forward? I'd like to know the clear cut differences before I can think of the perfect solution.

1984
10-10-2010, 11:49 PM
George

Too young. Paul needs to be developed correctly. Much like Danny was.

If it were possible, I think the best complement to Danny is Andre Iguodala. Danny could continue to be an outside force. Meanwhile Andre could attack the rim.

Thus far, Andre Iguodala doesn't seem available. However, if Evan Turner were to become a candidate for the rookie of the year award I could imagine him becoming expendable. Perhaps a first round pick and a few young players. I love Paul George, but I would trade him and a first round pick for Iguodala. Regardless of whether or not it is realistic he is on my wishlist.

Hicks
10-11-2010, 12:05 AM
I see this discussed all the time.

What is the difference between a shooting guard and a small forward? I'd like to know the clear cut differences before I can think of the perfect solution.

Quicker, better ball-handler. Other than that......?

vnzla81
10-11-2010, 12:06 AM
I was looking at some of the shooting guards in the NBA and to upgrade the position they would have to be better than Brandon or Dunleavy, they have to be good defenders like Brandon and score more than 10ppg like both of them, here is a list of player that could maybe be the answer at the 2 spot:


Monta Ellis: He average over 25ppg last year and is a really good defender, the only problem with him is that he is a black hole, is not a good passer and at times he is to small to guard bigger shooting guards.

Gerald Henderson: we don't know how good he is, is he better than Rush and Dun?

Jamal Crawford: another black hole that does not play D

Daniel Gibson: Only shoots threes and plays no D, he play the point but is a two.

Antony Parker: Decent player but is not an improvement.

Jason Terry: no going to happen

JR Smith: really good player can score in bunches but no way that Larry brings that guy here

Aaron Affalo: really good player but is not an upgrade

Richard Hamilton: too old and too much money

Ben Gordon: too much money and does not play D

Courtney Lee: good player he average 12ppg last year, plays good D but in no way Houston let him go

Eric Gordon: we can only dream right?

OJ Mayo: he could be an improvement but his defense is not that good and Memphis is not letting him go either

Michael Red: old and broken down

Corey Brewer: he is a really good player, his shot from outside is not that good in general he is just an small improvement I think.

T will: how good is he? NJ is not letting him go

Jeff green: he is 6'9'' but he is listed at SG, really good player but again he is out of reach

James Harden: here is one guy that could be the answer he average 9.9ppg on his 1st season, Oklahoma is not going to have the cash to pay everybody, this guy is an starter playing backup right now.

Iguadola: not going to happen

Jason Richardson: free agent next year, decent defender amazing offensive player but I think somebody else is going to pay him big money.

Rudy Fernandez: he does not want to play in the NBA anymore

Francisco Garcia: he average 8.8 ppg last year, is he better than Rush and Dun? I'm not sure

George Hill: San Antonio is not trading him right now

this are most of the guys I can come up with, the other ones have either big contracts or the teams are not going to trade them for anybody(Kobe,Dwade, etc)

Sookie
10-11-2010, 12:11 AM
Quicker, better ball-handler. Other than that......?

I would say shooting guards tend to be better shooters too. (Although not always)

Funny thing is, to this day, the best team I've ever seen used their SF like a PF and the SF, PF, and C were pretty much interchangeable.

1984
10-11-2010, 12:12 AM
I see this discussed all the time.

What is the difference between a shooting guard and a small forward? I'd like to know the clear cut differences before I can think of the perfect solution.

In high school, I played shooting guard and point guard. When I was young and not yet a starter, I played SF briefly because of an injury to a teammate. I was undersized for the position, but I learned a lot about it.

I can tell you there is a difference. However, those differences vary based on the system. As a ball handler, I was able to utilize that skill on the top of the key. Though I was not effective because I was not strong enough to post and too small to be a flexible defender. In a traditional system a "2" has the responsibility of scoring, and a "3" has the responsibility of perimeter defense and support rebounding. The best "2" has an outside shot and can drive in order to create distance between a defender. The best "3" post and jump shoot. It certainly advances his game if he can shoot from the outside and drive. Essentially, I think the best "3" is a balanced player and a flexible player. In a practical situation (if an all-star isn't available) he is a jack of all trades and a master of a few. A player who can do a lot well and equip the stars around him to shine. A friend of mine referred to the small forward as "the glue." I'm not sure I disagree, even as a combo guard. If I were looking to build a team I would search for a "glue" guy at small forward. Pippen was a beautiful example of this - though he did more than a few things well. Scottie played inside and outside. He could rebound and defend. He could guard the 2, 3, 4. He was extremely balanced and flexible, and he did many things well and that is what made him incredible.

Can George play "2"? Certainly. George is the prototypical small of the modern NBA. Athletic and dynamic. I think George is much, much more equipped to play the two in most senerios. Think of it like this, would you rather a mature George guard Martin or Battier? Kature George could keep pace with a Martin on the defensive end. Meanwhile, he would likely be abused by a player like Battier in the post.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 12:23 AM
Quicker, better ball-handler. Other than that......?


You put the better rebounder at 3 for sure.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 12:42 AM
In high school, I played shooting guard and point guard. When I was young and not yet a starter, I played SF briefly because of an injury to a teammate. I was undersized for the position, but I learned a lot about it.

I can tell you there is a difference. However, those differences vary based on the system. As a ball handler, I was able to utilize that skill on the top of the key. Though I was not effective because I was not strong enough to post and too small to be a flexible defender. In a traditional system a "2" has the responsibility of scoring, and a "3" has the responsibility of perimeter defense and support rebounding. The best "2" has an outside shot and can drive in order to create distance between a defender. The best "3" post and jump shoot. It certainly advances his game if he can shoot from the outside and drive. Essentially, I think the best "3" is a balanced player and a flexible player. In a practical situation (if an all-star isn't available) he is a jack of all trades and a master of a few. A player who can do a lot well and equip the stars around him to shine. A friend of mine referred to the small forward as "the glue." I'm not sure I disagree, even as a combo guard. If I were looking to build a team I would search for a "glue" guy at small forward. Pippen was a beautiful example of this - though he did more than a few things well. Scottie played inside and outside. He could rebound and defend. He could guard the 2, 3, 4. He was extremely balanced and flexible, and he did many things well and that is what made him incredible.

Can George play "2"? Certainly. George is the prototypical small of the modern NBA. Athletic and dynamic. I think George is much, much more equipped to play the two in most senerios. Think of it like this, would you rather a mature George guard Martin or Battier? Kature George could keep pace with a Martin on the defensive end. Meanwhile, he would likely be abused by a player like Battier in the post.

George is very long and jumps like a kangaroo.
I think he'd be sending Battier shots back on a regular basis.
I'm also not sure we wouldn't be better off with him up front given those attributes.
He'd also have more of a quickness advantage against bigger 3's.

I'm not sure that PG as Danny's heir apparent doesn't make more sense long term. With Danny being moved (at some point, not now) for a 2 or a big with a 2 being drafted.

pacers74
10-11-2010, 12:52 AM
To add to the list vnzla81 had quoted Kevin Martin is a great shooter kind of in the Reggie Miller type mode, and Marcus Thorton from New Orleans looks like he is about to become a stud at the SG spot.

I would love to get Eric Gordon, but we would at least have to give up Granger for him. That is too much.

I really hope that George can grow into the position, but there is going to be a lot of growing pains with him. I also like having a combo guard in there for a change of pace. Lance should be able to do that for us.
If we just stay patient and let our rookies mature, then the SG spot should be filled for the future. I don't think we need to upgrade it right away. It looks like Dunleavy will start and should get us around 12-15 pts a game and hopefully our rookies can come in and contirbute some early on. I just wish someone would bite and take Rush and D.Jones off of our hands for a PF. J.Thompson, or C.Landry would do just fine in my book.

ReginaldWayne
10-11-2010, 01:02 AM
Right now George has good handles but is looking really slow with the ball in his hands in the half court.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 01:59 AM
Right now George has good handles but is looking really slow with the ball in his hands in the half court.

To me he just looks like he is a little afraid. Give him a few weeks to get comfortable and he will be pretty good at the SG .

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:02 AM
In high school, I played shooting guard and point guard. When I was young and not yet a starter, I played SF briefly because of an injury to a teammate. I was undersized for the position, but I learned a lot about it.

I can tell you there is a difference. However, those differences vary based on the system. As a ball handler, I was able to utilize that skill on the top of the key. Though I was not effective because I was not strong enough to post and too small to be a flexible defender. In a traditional system a "2" has the responsibility of scoring, and a "3" has the responsibility of perimeter defense and support rebounding. The best "2" has an outside shot and can drive in order to create distance between a defender. The best "3" post and jump shoot. It certainly advances his game if he can shoot from the outside and drive. Essentially, I think the best "3" is a balanced player and a flexible player. In a practical situation (if an all-star isn't available) he is a jack of all trades and a master of a few. A player who can do a lot well and equip the stars around him to shine. A friend of mine referred to the small forward as "the glue." I'm not sure I disagree, even as a combo guard. If I were looking to build a team I would search for a "glue" guy at small forward. Pippen was a beautiful example of this - though he did more than a few things well. Scottie played inside and outside. He could rebound and defend. He could guard the 2, 3, 4. He was extremely balanced and flexible, and he did many things well and that is what made him incredible.

Can George play "2"? Certainly. George is the prototypical small of the modern NBA. Athletic and dynamic. I think George is much, much more equipped to play the two in most senerios. Think of it like this, would you rather a mature George guard Martin or Battier? Kature George could keep pace with a Martin on the defensive end. Meanwhile, he would likely be abused by a player like Battier in the post.

right now maybe but give him a year or two to grow into his frame. He will be a really good all around defender.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:09 AM
I was looking at some of the shooting guards in the NBA and to upgrade the position they would have to be better than Brandon or Dunleavy, they have to be good defenders like Brandon and score more than 10ppg like both of them, here is a list of player that could maybe be the answer at the 2 spot:

Just to let you know Jeff Green plays the PF for OKC. He is a hybrid 3/4 but he will be starting at the 4 this year like last year. Thabo Sefolosha will be thier SG with Harden thier 6 man. He could get the starting job from Thabo Sefolosha if he steps it up on D.



22 Jeff Green F 6-9

IndyPacer
10-11-2010, 02:12 AM
I don't see SG as our most pressing need at he moment. Considering we have a couple of very decent PGs now in Collison and Price, the SG position might be OK for now. A big issue for Rush and other players has been limited ball handling skills and thus difficultly creating. Collison should be able to help set guys up and reduce the impact of this weakness. I'd like to see our currently guards play together for a season.

cdash
10-11-2010, 02:19 AM
Paul George is a long way away from being an upgrade at any position. He hasn't shown me much of anything besides potential in college, summer league, or the preseason.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:25 AM
Too young. Paul needs to be developed correctly. Much like Danny was.

If it were possible, I think the best complement to Danny is Andre Iguodala. Danny could continue to be an outside force. Meanwhile Andre could attack the rim.

Thus far, Andre Iguodala doesn't seem available. However, if Evan Turner were to become a candidate for the rookie of the year award I could imagine him becoming expendable. Perhaps a first round pick and a few young players. I love Paul George, but I would trade him and a first round pick for Iguodala. Regardless of whether or not it is realistic he is on my wishlist.

the 76ers might jump on that trade. But too young isnt an excuse did you watch Tyrke Evans, Steph Curry, Brandon Jennings last year, and other rookies who were rookies starting?




Jonas Jerebko 2 rd

Marcus Thornton 2 rd

Jonny Flynn

DeMar DeRozan started some

Omri Casspi

Jrue Holiday

and many others payed 20+ Mintues a nite who were behind really good players Darren Collison,Terrence Williams,DeJuan Blair and some others.

Trophy
10-11-2010, 07:35 AM
I think someone who will be comfortable playing next to Danny would be Mike, but going down the road I think Paul can take over that position.

I wouldn't trade Danny. He's an important piece to get us in the playoffs.

Speed
10-11-2010, 11:57 AM
The most effective shooting guard so far in the preseason has been AJ Price with Lance playing the point. I'm not advocating this and I know AJ is Point Guard sized, but honestly AJ has scored very effectively so far and if you noticed, they'd have Lance bring the ball up and AJ would run one of the wing spots at times. Just something to throw out there. Wouldn't work with Collison, but I think it's something the coaching staff is toying with so because AJ can score and of course it's an excuse to play small.

graphic-er
10-11-2010, 12:07 PM
I like the idea of prying away Iggy too. They will need some cap relief as they have Brand's terrible contract for many more years. send them Dunleavy, Rush, and Lance. Hell send them anyone but Granger, Hibbert and Collison.

Trophy
10-11-2010, 01:58 PM
I like the idea of prying away Iggy too. They will need some cap relief as they have Brand's terrible contract for many more years. send them Dunleavy, Rush, and Lance. Hell send them anyone but Granger, Hibbert and Collison.

The price is high for Iggy, but with Danny's shooting ability and Iggy's defense, that would be fun to see.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 02:31 PM
Eric Gordon would be ideal for coach JOB's system

Justin Tyme
10-11-2010, 05:14 PM
Just to let you know Jeff Green plays the PF for OKC. He is a hybrid 3/4 but he will be starting at the 4 this year like last year. Thabo Sefolosha will be thier SG with Harden thier 6 man. He could get the starting job from Thabo Sefolosha if he steps it up on D.



22 Jeff Green F 6-9


Yep, Green is the PF and took the position from Collison. Sefolosha hasn't turned out as good as I thought he'd be. I still feel Philly made the mistake of trading him after drafting him to Chicago for Carney.

Justin Tyme
10-11-2010, 05:19 PM
Eric Gordon would be ideal for coach JOB's system


The absolute last thing is getting a player to play in Jimmy's system!!

MLB007
10-11-2010, 06:09 PM
Paul George is a long way away from being an upgrade at any position. He hasn't shown me much of anything besides potential in college, summer league, or the preseason.

Yeh, 7 steals in a game is nothing. ;)
He's certainly shown defensive ability and effort, which considering we got him for scoring, ain't that bad.

MLB007
10-11-2010, 06:11 PM
Tyreke Evans is tough, but he sure as heck looked like a rookie a whole bunch.
As did Jennings at times.
Didn't see Curry much.


the 76ers might jump on that trade. But too young isnt an excuse did you watch Tyrke Evans, Steph Curry, Brandon Jennings last year, and other rookies who were rookies starting?




Jonas Jerebko 2 rd

Marcus Thornton 2 rd

Jonny Flynn

DeMar DeRozan started some

Omri Casspi

Jrue Holiday

and many others payed 20+ Mintues a nite who were behind really good players Darren Collison,Terrence Williams,DeJuan Blair and some others.

1984
10-11-2010, 06:48 PM
the 76ers might jump on that trade. But too young isnt an excuse did you watch Tyrke Evans, Steph Curry, Brandon Jennings last year, and other rookies who were rookies starting?




Jonas Jerebko 2 rd

Marcus Thornton 2 rd

Jonny Flynn

DeMar DeRozan started some

Omri Casspi

Jrue Holiday

and many others payed 20+ Mintues a nite who were behind really good players Darren Collison,Terrence Williams,DeJuan Blair and some others.

Most of those players have one thing in common: their teams didn't make the playoffs. Young players can certainly become stars, but Paul George will need a little time to become one. In the mean time, I think he can be an electrifying role player. Time will tell.

Cheers.

cdash
10-11-2010, 07:24 PM
Yeh, 7 steals in a game is nothing. ;)
He's certainly shown defensive ability and effort, which considering we got him for scoring, ain't that bad.

That doesn't really impress me. Seven steals in a preseason game could be the result of crappy passes by fringe rotation and non-NBA guys. Steals are always a funny stat. A lot of guys get high steal numbers from gambling a lot on D (Iverson, Paul, etc.), it doesn't necessarily mean they are playing great defense. That said, he has played D pretty well and shown he is willing to put forth the effort on that end of the court, so that is a plus. But the rest of his game seems like a real work in progress. If I were to choose between giving PG or Lance minutes at the two right now, I'd probably pick Lance.

CableKC
10-11-2010, 07:40 PM
Rudy Fernandez anyone?

Justin Tyme
10-11-2010, 08:29 PM
I was never in favor of drafting Rush, but wanted Courtney Lee. I'd still take Lee over Rush in a heartbeat.

I hated to see him play so well the other night against the Pacers, but I enjoyed watching him play.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 08:41 PM
Most of those players have one thing in common: their teams didn't make the playoffs. Young players can certainly become stars, but Paul George will need a little time to become one. In the mean time, I think he can be an electrifying role player. Time will tell.

Cheers.

brandon jennings

ksuttonjr76
10-11-2010, 09:14 PM
Paul George is a long way away from being an upgrade at any position. He hasn't shown me much of anything besides potential in college, summer league, or the preseason.

If he showed you potential in college, summer league, and preseason, what's left other than the actual season :confused:?

cdash
10-11-2010, 09:16 PM
If he showed you potential in college, summer league, and preseason, what's left other than the actual season :confused:?

He showed potential, not production.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 10:26 PM
He showed potential, not production.

he wasnt productive in college or summer league? lol he was very productive just google his stats and watch some games. You will see once he gets comforable he will be rea lly really good.

Mackey_Rose
10-11-2010, 10:29 PM
I would love to get Eric Gordon, but we would at least have to give up Granger for him. That is too much.

Gordon for Granger seems like a serious upgrade to me. I can't imagine there is any way that the Clippers would even entertain that.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2010, 10:32 PM
I see this discussed all the time.

What is the difference between a shooting guard and a small forward? I'd like to know the clear cut differences before I can think of the perfect solution.

If we're playing a four-out, then both guards handle the ball a lot and initiate the offense. There's a pretty substantial difference between the skills of a guard and the skills of a forward.

However, if we're playing a triple-wing, then at least one of the "wing" players is a baseline player.

In the old days of a point, two wings, and two posts, you could call the SG and SF interchangeable. But I'm not sure that's true anymore.

As for the primary point of the thread, I think I wait to see what's available in next year's draft. SG is one of the easiest positions to acquire in the draft. I'm still open to having Rush in that role, although he'd be a better sixth man. I think even those of us that like Rush's game have said that all along.

Granger and George are going to be playing forward.

I still think Collison - Rush - George - Granger - Hibbert sounds like our best lineup whenever George is really ready to play that kind of a role. Dunleavy or Posey can fill that role until then.

If we sour on Rush, then its back to the draft (unless somebody gives us a desirable young SG like Henderson or Gordon).

ChicagoJ
10-11-2010, 10:35 PM
He showed potential, not production.


There's a huge difference. Its a shame that you have to point out the obvious.

Is everyone just checking on on the actual NBA games once in a while so they can stay focused on their fantasy leagues and Playstation games?

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 10:37 PM
Gordon for Granger seems like a serious upgrade to me. I can't imagine there is any way that the Clippers would even entertain that.

The clippers would hang up on us. They wont trade EG for carmelo so i doubt they would do it or Grannger. I would do that deal in a heartbeat EG plays good D and is a lights out shooter. I think he could have a breakout season maybe ave 25 pts with griffen and his work in the offseason. and will only be 22 on christmas

Mackey_Rose
10-11-2010, 10:43 PM
The clippers would hang up on us. They wont trade EG for carmelo so i doubt they would do it or Grannger. I would do that deal in a heartbeat EG plays good D and is a lights out shooter. I think he could have a breakout season maybe ave 25 pts with griffen and his work in the offseason.

I have loved Gordon's game since high school, but just as trading Granger for him should be a no-brainer type of situation for us, trading him for Melo should have been a no-brainer for the Clips.

Trophy
10-11-2010, 10:44 PM
brandon jennings

Darren's leadership reminds me a lot of Jennings'.

I think that's why we're going to be a big surprise and make the playoffs this season like the Bucks were last year.

pacer4ever
10-11-2010, 10:45 PM
I have loved Gordon's game since high school, but just as trading Granger for him should be a no-brainer type of situation for us, trading him for Melo should have been a no-brainer for the Clips.

all reports are any1 on their roster is up for grabs except griffen and EG.

Hibbert
10-11-2010, 11:43 PM
Randy Foye would be nice. He has played both PG and SG but has done much better as a 2. He can shoot and plays very good defense, also handles the ball very well. Manny Harris would of been nice to add after he went undrafted. Rudy Fernandez if he wanted to play in the NBA still, I love his all around game. James Anderson, if he's available, would fit in very nicely. I don't think we will upgrade the SG position in any way this year. Our best bet is next year's draft. Hopefully a guy like Alec Burks is still on the board when we pick. If you have not heard of him before, you will this year. 2 guard out of Colorado, nasty dude.

Anthem
10-12-2010, 12:09 AM
I don't see SG as our most pressing need at he moment.
What is it then?

Mackey_Rose
10-12-2010, 12:40 AM
What is it then?

Head Coach?

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 01:16 AM
Until JOB is gone I don't see us with a winning record let alone making the playoffs. He is one of the worst coaches in the NBA and is terrible at developing young players. We need a new coach first and foremost. Our second biggest need is starting PF or ridding the team of TJ Ford.

pacer4ever
10-12-2010, 02:08 AM
Until JOB is gone I don't see us with a winning record let alone making the playoffs. He is one of the worst coaches in the NBA and is terrible at developing young players. We need a new coach first and foremost. Our second biggest need is starting PF or ridding the team of TJ Ford.

yepp job sucks

pacer4ever
10-12-2010, 02:09 AM
Head Coach?

matt painter is the man

pacer4ever
10-12-2010, 02:10 AM
Randy Foye would be nice. He has played both PG and SG but has done much better as a 2. He can shoot and plays very good defense, also handles the ball very well. Manny Harris would of been nice to add after he went undrafted. Rudy Fernandez if he wanted to play in the NBA still, I love his all around game. James Anderson, if he's available, would fit in very nicely. I don't think we will upgrade the SG position in any way this year. Our best bet is next year's draft. Hopefully a guy like Alec Burks is still on the board when we pick. If you have not heard of him before, you will this year. 2 guard out of Colorado, nasty dude.

or perry jones we need a 4 more than a two let's see what PG24 can do first.

Taterhead
10-12-2010, 03:38 AM
If I just had to upgrade right now.... I'd trade Danny for one.

I would love to see a trade involving Granger for Igoudala. It makes sense for both teams even though I expect Philly would want more than just Danny.

I am a huge Iggy fan. If you add him along with Collison, Dunleavy, Hibbert and McRoberts you are gonna be a tremendous passing team and a lot of fun to watch. And our defense would improve greatly too. The Pacers would still have a lot of solid options at SF to buy them time until the summer and there is a quite a few good SF's out there. (Jeff Green, Carmelo Anthony, Caron Butler, Tayshaun Prince, Andre Kirilenko, Shane Battier) And you still got a seemingly healthy Mike Dunleavy, Paul George, Brandon Rush and James Posey as options.

Kstat
10-12-2010, 07:22 AM
...we've got four SGs and five SFs. It's gotten to the point where we have to start one of our SGs at PG and one of our SFs at PF, after the last SF that we started at PF ruptured his achilles.

At this point, I just want to lose another wing or two, and we just lost two of them to injury.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 07:33 AM
...we've got four SGs and five SFs. It's gotten to the point where we have to start one of our SGs at PG and one of our SFs at PF, after the last SF that we started at PF ruptured his achilles.

At this point, I just want to lose another wing or two, and we just lost two of them to injury.

We don't have that many wins but we still play them at pf(DJ and Dun)

Kstat
10-12-2010, 07:35 AM
My issues is we have 2-guards that need to get shots.

I really like both Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon, and I think they would both score 20+ppg in their sleep in starting roles. I just don't like them together.

I wish someone would take Rip. I'd even deal Gordon, but I'd expect value.

Trophy
10-12-2010, 08:05 AM
My issues is we have 2-guards that need to get shots.

I really like both Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon, and I think they would both score 20+ppg in their sleep in starting roles. I just don't like them together.

I wish someone would take Rip. I'd even deal Gordon, but I'd expect value.

Just curious as to what your starting lineup will be because there's a lot of talent at the wing.

I don't really have any interest in Detroit's wing players since we need more defense like Iggy next to Danny who is more an offensive player.

vnzla81
10-12-2010, 08:22 AM
My issues is we have 2-guards that need to get shots.

I really like both Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon, and I think they would both score 20+ppg in their sleep in starting roles. I just don't like them together.

I wish someone would take Rip. I'd even deal Gordon, but I'd expect value.

That was the reason why I didn't like the signing of Gordon. I think he is a good player but he should be coming of the bench.

MLB007
10-12-2010, 12:20 PM
Randy Foye would be nice. He has played both PG and SG but has done much better as a 2. He can shoot and plays very good defense, also handles the ball very well. Manny Harris would of been nice to add after he went undrafted. Rudy Fernandez if he wanted to play in the NBA still, I love his all around game. James Anderson, if he's available, would fit in very nicely. I don't think we will upgrade the SG position in any way this year. Our best bet is next year's draft. Hopefully a guy like Alec Burks is still on the board when we pick. If you have not heard of him before, you will this year. 2 guard out of Colorado, nasty dude.

E'twaan Moore at Purdue is an assassin. If they didn't have so much help around him he could easily avg. 25 a game. Great intermediate game and equally nasty from deep and posting up.
Close to unstoppable this year.

MLB007
10-12-2010, 12:22 PM
That doesn't really impress me. Seven steals in a preseason game could be the result of crappy passes by fringe rotation and non-NBA guys. Steals are always a funny stat. A lot of guys get high steal numbers from gambling a lot on D (Iverson, Paul, etc.), it doesn't necessarily mean they are playing great defense. That said, he has played D pretty well and shown he is willing to put forth the effort on that end of the court, so that is a plus. But the rest of his game seems like a real work in progress. If I were to choose between giving PG or Lance minutes at the two right now, I'd probably pick Lance.

7 steals doesn't impress you but you'd give minutes to a guy that would have trouble keeping OB in front of him. ;) :eek: :p

MLB007
10-12-2010, 12:27 PM
or perry jones we need a 4 more than a two let's see what PG24 can do first.

lets see what Tyler and McBob can do before we think we need a 4 more than a 2.
I'm seeing more 3 in PG than 2.

ZepZach
10-12-2010, 12:43 PM
Ok, this might be insane, but why not figure out a way to trade dunleavy and TJ for a solid big man, and then sign... Allen Iverson.

All he can do is score, which is what we currently need from the SG position. It would sell a few more tickets, and bring a little excitement.

Hmmmm

Sookie
10-12-2010, 12:52 PM
Ok, this might be insane, but why not figure out a way to trade dunleavy and TJ for a solid big man, and then sign... Allen Iverson.

All he can do is score, which is what we currently need from the SG position. It would sell a few more tickets, and bring a little excitement.

Hmmmm

No.

Eleazar
10-12-2010, 12:55 PM
lets see what Tyler and McBob can do before we think we need a 4 more than a 2.
I'm seeing more 3 in PG than 2.

Personally I think we need to do that with the whole team. We have a lot of unknown going into this season.

We don't know how good McRoberts or Hansbrough will be.

We have 2 rookie SG's who could both be very talented, and another SG going into his 3rd season who, from what I have heard, is playing a lot more aggressive which is exactly what many people thought he needed to do.

We have 2 young PG's, and to be honest it isn't that far out of the realm to think that Price is at least as good if not better than Collison.

To me the only two positions that we know what we are getting are SF and C. The other positions have promise, but we need to see what we have first before we start thinking about how to improve the positions. Personally I think we have the players we need at the PG and SG positions. It is just a matter of figuring out who is best and developing the young talent. PF is still in question because I have a hard time seeing either McBob or Hans being starters in the league on a playoff team.

Justin Tyme
10-12-2010, 01:23 PM
[QUOTE=Hibbert;1073147]

Until JOB is gone I don't see us with a winning record let alone making the playoffs.

is terrible at developing young players. /QUOTE]


I can understand your statement and see validity in your feelings.

I'm not sure I can agree with that. He seems to play rookies and young'ns more than many coaches do. He might not be the best, but he's far from being the worst. Rush would have seen far more pine time with other coaches... Brown & Carlisle.

Justin Tyme
10-12-2010, 01:47 PM
PF is still in question because I have a hard time seeing either McBob or Hans being starters in the league on a playoff team.


I agree about this. But at the same time can you see Rush, Dunleavy, or Stephenson as starters at SG on a "good" playoff team.

I'd rather solidify the PF position 1st b4 the SG position. And I'm still pushing for Jason Thompson. With Thompson, it makes Solo & Foster expendable. A player with greater upside than Solo and a better scorer, not to mention, CHEAPER than Foster! He would have a future as part of the core with the Pacers where neither Solo or Foster does.

SG's are a dime a dozen and would be easier to fill later.

pacer4ever
10-12-2010, 01:50 PM
lets see what Tyler and McBob can do before we think we need a 4 more than a 2.
I'm seeing more 3 in PG than 2.

and you have seen him play how many times?

Trophy
10-12-2010, 02:05 PM
Until JOB is gone I don't see us with a winning record let alone making the playoffs. He is one of the worst coaches in the NBA and is terrible at developing young players. We need a new coach first and foremost. Our second biggest need is starting PF or ridding the team of TJ Ford.

So do you think this is a playoff team if JOB wasn't the head coach?

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 02:45 PM
[QUOTE=Hibbert;1073147]

Until JOB is gone I don't see us with a winning record let alone making the playoffs.

is terrible at developing young players. /QUOTE]


I can understand your statement and see validity in your feelings.

I'm not sure I can agree with that. He seems to play rookies and young'ns more than many coaches do. He might not be the best, but he's far from being the worst. Rush would have seen far more pine time with other coaches... Brown & Carlisle.

There is a lot more to developing a player than giving him playing time or more minutes than another coach does. I, along with any other sane pacers fan would rather have brown or carlisle over the bum we have now.

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 02:49 PM
So do you think this is a playoff team if JOB wasn't the head coach?

Read what I wrote. A lot of fans are all excited cause of the offseason we had but we still wont make the playoffs. A different coach though would definitely give us a better shot at making the playoffs. O'Brien can't coach, what is wrong with everybody who still sticks up for this joke?

Eleazar
10-12-2010, 02:59 PM
I agree about this. But at the same time can you see Rush, Dunleavy, or Stephenson as starters at SG on a "good" playoff team.

I'd rather solidify the PF position 1st b4 the SG position. And I'm still pushing for Jason Thompson. With Thompson, it makes Solo & Foster expendable. A player with greater upside than Solo and a better scorer, not to mention, CHEAPER than Foster! He would have a future as part of the core with the Pacers where neither Solo or Foster does.

SG's are a dime a dozen and would be easier to fill later.

Dunleavy no.

Rush, PG, and Stephenson maybe. This is only going to be Rush's third season, more times than not it takes a player 3 years. PG and Stephenson are both rookies, and we really have no idea how good they will be. It would be stupid to give up on both of them already.

Anthem
10-12-2010, 09:38 PM
My issues is we have 2-guards that need to get shots.

I really like both Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon, and I think they would both score 20+ppg in their sleep in starting roles. I just don't like them together.

I wish someone would take Rip. I'd even deal Gordon, but I'd expect value.
Rip would be interesting, actually. His contract was ridiculous, but he's only got one more year after this one, right? His last year isn't guaranteed?

12.5mil/year... what do you think Dumars would be looking for? How much value do you think you could get for him?

BlueNGold
10-12-2010, 10:23 PM
Rip would be an excellent addition to this team...simply to train PG.

Rush, Lance, TJ...

pacer4ever
10-12-2010, 10:32 PM
Rip would be an excellent addition to this team...simply to train PG.

Rush, Lance, TJ...

lol if he was making 3mill a year it would be great. But 12.5mill for 3 more seasons no thank you. and what would rip teach the subbord TJ ford lol

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 10:36 PM
Would you really like to see a 32 year old RIP who is injury prone and still owed 12.5 mil each of the next three years in which he will be 35 years old?

cdash
10-12-2010, 10:39 PM
Would you really like to see a 32 year old RIP who is injury prone and still owed 12.5 mil each of the next three years in which he will be 35 years old?

No, and no one else would either. The Pistons are honestly kind of screwed. They have three awful contracts (Hamilton, Gordon, Chaz Villanueva) crippling them much the way the Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley deals killed us. I don't feel sorry for them.

Hibbert
10-12-2010, 10:51 PM
No, and no one else would either. The Pistons are honestly kind of screwed. They have three awful contracts (Hamilton, Gordon, Chaz Villanueva) crippling them much the way the Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley deals killed us. I don't feel sorry for them.

The two posters above seem to think it would be a great idea.

BringJackBack
10-12-2010, 11:14 PM
Honestly, we just need to wait it out instead of getting back into another black hole of contracts. I like Iggy's game, but it's not worth the rest of our cap space and Paul George or Josh McRoberts, same with RIP.

Best thing to do would be to pursue Jamal Crawford (if he hasn't signed an extension., Or we could go after a Gerald Henderson, Courtney Lee, Reggie Williams etc. However, we already have that low caliber, bang-for-the-buck type in Rush.

Best thing to do is show off Dunleavy and see if he can show enough interest (12-16 ppg with good overall play) to make a decent move to take care of us short term like Kevin Martin, Iggy, or even a very good spot up shooter like Martell Webster (who looks really good by the way) until Paul George is ready to take over.

CableKC
10-12-2010, 11:36 PM
My issues is we have 2-guards that need to get shots.

I really like both Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon, and I think they would both score 20+ppg in their sleep in starting roles. I just don't like them together.

I wish someone would take Rip. I'd even deal Gordon, but I'd expect value.
I have always thought that if Bird was looking for an experienced pure SG that could help mentor and provide a very solid veteran Player in the rotation that is constantly moving around screens ( a la Reggie ) and be a solid 2nd scoring option that Rip would fit that description.

I know that we discussed this before, I just don't recall what your exact response was. I thought that you had brought up concerns about his declining athleticsm and that it would clearly affect his game in the next couple of years.

Can you remind me of what you would think of Rip on the Pacers?

pacer4ever
10-13-2010, 12:17 AM
I have always thought that if Bird was looking for an experienced pure SG that could help mentor and provide a very solid veteran Player in the rotation that is constantly moving around screens ( a la Reggie ) and be a solid 2nd scoring option that Rip would fit that description.

I know that we discussed this before, I just don't recall what your exact response was. I thought that you had brought up concerns about his declining athleticsm and that it would clearly affect his game in the next couple of years.

Can you remind me of what you would think of Rip on the Pacers?

it would suck his contract is a HORRIBLE CONTRACT up there with okafor lol.

BringJackBack
10-13-2010, 12:22 AM
it would suck his contract is a HORRIBLE CONTRACT up there with okafor lol.

Meh, I don't know.

If we're in the playoffs with RIP this postseason, he could be the lone consistent player considering that he's been there done that.

His contract blows but I'd probably do a trade for him if they got sick of not having flexibility and we traded Mike for RIP (cap relief) and Austin Daye (consolation prize for taking poopy contract)

OTOH, I think Austin Daye will be very good in three years or so. He's just like Paul George in that way. Is he even 21 yet? What do you think about Daye, Kstat?

1984
10-13-2010, 12:24 AM
brandon jennings

"Sigh" You do understand what the word, "most" means, or are you trying to stir the pot?

Anthem
10-13-2010, 12:26 AM
The two posters above seem to think it would be a great idea.

I didn't say a great idea. I said his contract isn't as bad as I thought... it's just 1 more year after this one. ShamSports (who's usually pretty reliable) says the last year of his contract is unguaranteed.

I'd trade Ford/Posey for him without hesitation. I'm sure Dumars wouldn't do that trade. The question is how much we'd have to add. If the answer is "not much" then I'd happily take Rip. If the answer is "lots" then it's a no-go.

1984
10-13-2010, 12:29 AM
I didn't say a great idea. I said his contract isn't as bad as I thought... it's just 1 more year after this one. ShamSports (who's usually pretty reliable) says the last year of his contract is unguaranteed.

I'd trade Ford/Posey for him without hesitation. I'm sure Dumars wouldn't do that trade. The question is how much we'd have to add. If the answer is "not much" then I'd happily take Rip. If the answer is "lots" then it's a no-go.

I'd rather have Mike. Though I understand Rip has several qualities the Pacers lack.

DrFife
10-13-2010, 07:51 AM
Let's spin this discussion another way -- the bright sky, no-clouds sunshine way.

Let's assume that by midseason it is clear that, to the surprise and thrill of us all, each player in our entire core of youth is or soon will be regarded as a very-good-to-great player. Hibby, Hans, McBob, Rolle, Granger, Rush, PGeorge, Lance, Collison ... all of 'em.

We begin to have thoughts that, in fact, all the pieces are there. Already. Stunned, those of us who are addicted to scheming of ways to improve the team begin to wonder, "Hmmm, now what?!"

Size? Check. Athleticism? Check. Post play? Check. Rebounding? Improving. Penetration? Passing? Perimeter defense? Yep, check.

Thus, our discussion turns into one about which (super-) star to try to acquire in order to upgrade a position; to choose which player(s) might help propel us from playoff also-rans to championship contenders.

Would that player be at the shooting-guard position?

Kstat
10-13-2010, 08:28 AM
Meh, I don't know.

If we're in the playoffs with RIP this postseason, he could be the lone consistent player considering that he's been there done that.

His contract blows but I'd probably do a trade for him if they got sick of not having flexibility and we traded Mike for RIP (cap relief) and Austin Daye (consolation prize for taking poopy contract)

OTOH, I think Austin Daye will be very good in three years or so. He's just like Paul George in that way. Is he even 21 yet? What do you think about Daye, Kstat?

Austin Daye is actually 22.

He's getting lost in the wing shuffle, but Kuester is under a lot of pressure to use him, because of the tremendous work he put in during the offseason. I believe he could back up at SG, SF and PF this year.

He started at power forward for us Monday night and actually outplayed Josh Smith, but fouled out because he didn't add nearly enough muscle to play that position full-time.

Austin is tremendously skilled. I like those kinds of players. He's not very athletic, but he's a 7-footer that can shoot, pass, dribble, and defend. Can't have too many of those. I think he'll be a shot-blocking version of rashard lewis someday.

Kstat
10-13-2010, 08:35 AM
I have always thought that if Bird was looking for an experienced pure SG that could help mentor and provide a very solid veteran Player in the rotation that is constantly moving around screens ( a la Reggie ) and be a solid 2nd scoring option that Rip would fit that description.

I know that we discussed this before, I just don't recall what your exact response was. I thought that you had brought up concerns about his declining athleticsm and that it would clearly affect his game in the next couple of years.

Can you remind me of what you would think of Rip on the Pacers?

Rip would fit in just about anywhere that needs a starting SG, because he doesn't need to dominate the ball to get his 20+. He just needs minutes, which unfortunately is the one thing he can't get as much of here, with the logjam of guards.

Far as his age and athleticism, it's tough to tell, because Rip is a health and fitness nut. Time catches up to everyone, and it will to rip, eventually, but I don't see him waking up one morning and just losing his game. His dropoff lately here is more due to his severely sprained ankle (brought on by a faulty shoe that affected %75 of the guards on the team), and having his minutes cut. When he's on the floor, I see the same old rip.

Anthem
10-13-2010, 08:36 AM
Rip would fit in just about anywhere that needs a starting SG, because he doesn't need to dominate the ball to get his 20+. He just needs minutes, which unfortunately is the one thing he can't get as much of here, with the logjam of guards.

Far as his age and athleticism, it's tough to tell, because Rip is a health and fitness nut. Time catches up to everyone, and it will to rip, eventually, but I don't see him waking up one morning and just losing his game.
Agreed.

So what would be Joe's asking price?

Kstat
10-13-2010, 08:38 AM
for Rip? I'm guessing he'd simply want either a center he can use on some level, or a crappy player with a similar or slightly better contract, plus a draft pick.

My guess is he's looking to package both Rip and Tayshaun for a decent big man with a hefty contract, and maybe take on a cap slug in return.

Rip might have an undesirable contract, but he remains a pretty good player. Joe will want something of value for him, even if he's not getting equal value. He's not going to just give him away.

pacer4ever
10-13-2010, 10:11 AM
"Sigh" You do understand what the word, "most" means, or are you trying to stir the pot?

Im just trying to say if we play Paul he will progess faster. He may struggle at first but will be really good. He is 6'9 at the SG which is incridble with the hops he has. His shot will fall it is just a matter of time. He is a special talent he can shoot really well and can get to the rim at will.

beast23
10-13-2010, 12:18 PM
Im just trying to say if we play Paul he will progess faster. He may struggle at first but will be really good. He is 6'9 at the SG which is incridble with the hops he has. His shot will fall it is just a matter of time. He is a special talent he can shoot really well and can get to the rim at will.You never know what will happen when you throw a youngster into the deep end of a pool. Some will flail and drown; others will fight their way to safety and others will not panic while seeking a comfort level with their circumstances.

I think that playing young NBA players substantial minutes before they are ready can work in the same way. With the proper encouragement and mindset, some will work through their problems and emerge out the other end a better player. However, some can't handle the pressure of immediately playing big minutes and will flail and lose all confidence in themselves if they aren't successful, only to find themselves sitting the bench for several weeks as they are worked back onto the court a little at a time.

Even Reggie Miller came off the bench for several games before eventually starting. And, I don't think anyone can argue the fact that Miller had strong mindset and was full of self-confidence.

More often than not, I think that being a little cautious is the best way of developing a young player. Gradually build their minutes based on their knowledge of the system and their performance on the court. Correct their problems and praise their successes. Before long, perhaps even before the All-Star break, you may find that your young player is no longer playing 15 minutes per game, but instead is now capable of giving you 25 minutes or more of solid play.

I personally think that George will be that player, but I don't think it is necessary or smart to force feed him minutes. He seems to be very driven and is reportedly a quick learner; let's let him grow at his own pace. I doubt we will be disappointed.

beast23
10-13-2010, 12:46 PM
As far as upgrading our SG position, I think the best course of action is to use at least 1/2 of this season to sort through the mess of wings that we currently have.

How will George develop? Will Dunleavy return to form and also play well enough in a team defensive scheme to compel the Pacers to attempt to re-sign him with a more reasonable contract? Do we have other players that perform well at SF and PF that will compel JOB to play Danny more at SG?

There are players that will be free agents next summer that might prove desirable at SG. These players would enable us to evaluate our current players for a season to see if we need to go a different direction. These players are Jamal Crawford, JR Smith or Marcus Thornton. If we can't wait until next summer, then obviously an in-season trade would be necessary.

There are so many questions to be answered about this team.

Hansbrough is healthy for now. So is Foster. McRoberts is playing better than last season and we now have Rolle. We no longer have Murphy's scoring at PF, but we likely will play much better defense at that position. But, with our cap space and our coming opportunity to improve the team and possibly acquire players that put us back into contention, I think we have to ask ourselves an important question. Are any of the current PFs good enough to provide what a contending team needs? I don't think we know for certain yet; although my personal gut feeling is "no"... I think we have one or two adequate backups but no real starter. We need this season to evaluate just how much upside Hansbrough, McRoberts and Rolle have.

So, bottom line is, we have a lot of evaluation to do. That doesn't mean that we don't move forward with a trade for a PF or SG if an exceptional player becomes available to us. But I do think we need to be prudent in making those trades while also trying to maintain a significant portion of the cap space that we will have.

Should the Pacers discover a glaring weakness during the season, I believe it will be that they do not have a player capable of aggressively scoring and rebounding in the front court. Despite a need to further evaluate Hansbrough, McRoberts and Rolle, the Pacers might find it necessary to acquire a PF mid-season to keep their season from totally going down the crapper.

So, I believe the first position to be acted upon will be PF rather than SG.

count55
10-13-2010, 01:14 PM
Even Reggie Miller came off the bench for several games before eventually starting. And, I don't think anyone can argue the fact that Miller had strong mindset and was full of self-confidence.

Reggie only started 1 of the 82 games he played as a rookie.

90'sNBARocked
10-13-2010, 03:03 PM
http://www.indycornrows.com/2010/10/12/1747444/starting-to-wonder-about-the-starting-two
By Tom Lewis


As summer waned, the focus of Indianaís starting lineup was, for the first time in truly forever, finally off the PG position, but it was clear there could be a gaping hole in replacing Troy Murphy at the power forward position. After all, anyone who looks at the names Josh McRoberts, Solomon Jones, and Tyler Hansbrough, set with a dash of Jeff Foster would be insane to think otherwise.

But who wouldíve guessed McRoberts would anchor the PF spot without question, and it would be the shooting guard position that would be the most tumultuous? But that question suddenly got raised into consideration when Brandon Rush, who wasnít even a lock heading into the season, was tacked with a five game suspension for substance abuse.

Talk about headaches. Rushís suspension could play against the strengths of the team regarding the starting lineup, but including him, Iíd like to breakdown Indianaís four potential suitors for the starting two, because to be honest, some names just plain sound better than others when youíre sitting at Conseco Fieldhouse.



Mike Dunleavy

Dunleavy appears to have rounded himself back into game shape after a year injured and a year floating like a ghost. This seems to include all the great Dunleavy trademarks: fluid offense, vomit inducing defense, and him taking a few pops in the head for no reason I can truly discern.

The good and bad news of it all is that it makes him a starter quality player. The good in that is that heís obviously the best option at that position for Indiana. The bad news is I donít like what he brings the starting lineup.

Against Orlando in the second preseason game, Dunleavy didnít get his first shot until the third quarter. I donít necessarily think thatís a preseason thing, I think thatís a byproduct of a lineup that will try to work through Roy Hibbert, still has one of the leagueís most competent scorers in Danny Granger, and Darren Collison features a flurry of offensive skill himself.

Obviously, this is a benefit for Josh McRoberts, who doesnít have to score as often as he has to hustle and rebound, but isnít it a bit of a crutch for Duns? Iíve seen Mike as an optimal sixth man for far longer than one should honestly think about where a player of Dunleavyís quality fits into an average NBA rotation, but the fluidity and flexibility Dunleavy offers the bench gives him more touches the team will need, and ultimately helps the team compete in games. Iíd pencil Mike in for opening night, but Jim OíBrien seemed on the right track against Houston when he tried Brandon out.

Paul George
Obviously, if Dunleavy isnít the best long term fit, then George would be the logical starter, yes? Eh, not necessarily. If not letting George cut his NBA teeth on the floor is bad, then asking him to ride a bike with no training wheels is just plain bad parenting. George has been a nice addition to the team in preseason, but is still trying to figure out where in Fresno he left his shot at. While Dunleavy lets too much offense go to waste in the starting unit, Iím not comfortable in believing George gives enough flexibility to the starting lineup yet.

Of course, thereís no reason to suspect George isnít going to eventually find the bottom of the net, but if Brandon Rush is an offensive paper weight, George is an anchor (not the foundation kind, either!). Georgeís defense is opportunistic, which is a notable upgrade over Dunleavy forgetting where he left his man, but itís still a step below Brandonís overall skills on that side of the ball.

If all goes as planned, and Iím not sure there is one, but Iím saying there is, George can find his shot early in the season and push his way into the starting two. Until then, I think heís a liability on offense, not a compliment. His inexperience in a high level atmosphere should still be a question, and Iím not comfortable expecting him to set the pace of the game in November. But experience only comes from taking the floor, I hope he can be the starter sooner rather than later.

Brandon Rush
So then, is it strange of me to actually still take Brandon Rush as the starting shooting guard? For a guy whoís been a severe disappointment, and doesnít look any different thus far, it doesnít make a whole lot of sense to move forward with him as the starter following his return.

But ultimately, the disappointments in Brandonís play has always been in what he isnít doing, not what heís doing. Rush could be one of the leagueís best all around players, but he wonít, so itís time to specialize him. Iím going to stand by Rush as the teamís best defender until Iím proven otherwise (donít care about advanced defensive stats; donít tell them to me, lalalala!), but his three point shot may be the best on the team as well.

And thatís actually an advantage. Over the past two years, itís been awful trying to expect Brandon to carry the offensive load, but with the starting lineup, he fits right in. Suddenly, it doesnít matter that heís just standing outside in case someone passes him the ball; itís what the starting lineup needs. The consistency Brandon can show from beyond the arc is, at least optimistically, just the thing the starting lineup needs from him.

Off the bench, heís going to be asked too much of. A.J. Price still isnít going to pass the ball to him (though to be fair, it doesnít seem like Price is going to pass the ball period), but outside of Price, the most consistent scorer if Dunleavy starts is Hansbrough, which isnít exactly the best thing Iíve heard today. Rushís strengths can certainly help set the tone on both ends of the floor. Itís always nice when a coach has to adjust to what you are doing.

Dahntay Jones
Somewhere, in the dark pits of the back of the lineup, Dahntay Jones is still a Pacer. And honestly, this should still be a possible option, if not the most logical. Jones, though not a nightly scorer, showed last season that he possesses that skill, a perfect solvent to a slow offensive start. Instead of taking away Dunleavyís assured punch, you can ask a little of D.Jones, who will more than comply.

Not to mention, it was the exact role he played in Denver the year they made the Western Conference Finals, and may have beaten the Lakers if Trevor Ariza didnít make Ed Reed jealous. Does D.Jones in the starting lineup equal an Eastern Conference Finals berth?

For the sake of hyperbole...yes. Yes, it does.

Though to be completely sane, of course it wonít, donít be silly. Jones offers a stout defensive reputation which Iím still trying to figure out is more weighted towards "defense" or "reputation," but think of the advantages here: Jones to start gives a slow offense a scoring punch. Dunleavy can slide into the three in the second unit and Rush can be a sniper at the 2.

Deeper in the rotation, it seems to be a logical sort of step, but doing so takes away the sniper edge Rush gives you, and may (or may not, Iím still not sure) take away some defensive abilities as well. Given Obieís offensive ideals, Rush standing beyond the three point line is far more useful than Jones taking home a thundering jam with the authority of Zeus, so thatís important to take into consideration, but letís not leave Jones out in the cold, because heís played the very role we need him to successfully (donít want to hear from Hollinger, lalalala!)

I can see the advantages in each of the potential starters, so much so that Iíve successfully convinced myself that itís a really tough choice because none of the options are particularly engaging. Itíd be a little easier if the Pacers were able to pull off that Kobe Bryant trade I tried on NBA 2K11, but alas, I canít use trade override, and I donít think Bird can either.

But with what they have, Iíd be pleased to see either Rush or Jones take the starts. Both have the experience George lacks, but arenít a waste of offensive overkill like Dunleavy is. Of course, starting doesnít mean majority minutes. I donít expect, nor really want to see lots of minutes from Rush or Jones, but specialties are specialties, and if this starting lineup can produce like they should, they seem like the most useful.

So gather around the roulette wheel, spin it, andÖtake Brandon Rush as the Pacers starter for the 2010-11 regular season. Though doubtful, maybe the first five games are perfect opportunities to see how Dahntay Jones looks. Itíd be a lot more fun than wasting it on Dunleavy. Itís possible we could not be in misery when the second unit gets drilled into the ground on a 14-2 run with that possibility

cordobes
10-13-2010, 07:38 PM
Austin Daye is actually 22.

He's getting lost in the wing shuffle, but Kuester is under a lot of pressure to use him, because of the tremendous work he put in during the offseason. I believe he could back up at SG, SF and PF this year.

He started at power forward for us Monday night and actually outplayed Josh Smith, but fouled out because he didn't add nearly enough muscle to play that position full-time.

Austin is tremendously skilled. I like those kinds of players. He's not very athletic, but he's a 7-footer that can shoot, pass, dribble, and defend. Can't have too many of those. I think he'll be a shot-blocking version of rashard lewis someday.

I'm hoping that Jerebko's injury opens some minutes for Daye at the 4, even though I'd rather see him at the 3 at least for the time being.

I like Daye too, an interesting prospect going forward. Very versatile offensively and a good rebounder.


I didn't say a great idea. I said his contract isn't as bad as I thought... it's just 1 more year after this one. ShamSports (who's usually pretty reliable) says the last year of his contract is unguaranteed.

I'd trade Ford/Posey for him without hesitation. I'm sure Dumars wouldn't do that trade. The question is how much we'd have to add. If the answer is "not much" then I'd happily take Rip. If the answer is "lots" then it's a no-go.

No, the 3rd year is $9 million guaranteed and the remaining $3.5 million become fully guaranteed if he isn't released in July (reduced value as a trade asset in that off-season). Sham has this, pass the cursor over Rip's name.

That's too large of a contract for a player like Rip, who's been declining a bit in the last two seasons. I believe he's been hurt by Detroit's backcourt messy situation more than anything, but still... $34 million over the next 3 years is a lot of money. Good for a contender needing a short-term solution for the position.

Not sure if Dumars should just dump him though. I actually like the Stuckey+Gordon+Hamilton backcourt.

Anyway, why are you assuming Paul George can't the be the solution?

pacer4ever
10-13-2010, 10:27 PM
2 MUCH 4 U

Mackey_Rose
10-14-2010, 05:26 AM
Anyway, why are you assuming Paul George can't the be the solution?

I think it to be more likely that George would make a viable solution at Small Forward if we were to move Granger.

Until he improves his ball handling anyway.

90'sNBARocked
10-14-2010, 11:03 AM
No, and no one else would either. The Pistons are honestly kind of screwed. They have three awful contracts (Hamilton, Gordon, Chaz Villanueva) crippling them much the way the Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley deals killed us. I don't feel sorry for them.

I tend to agree , however I wouldnt say Ben Gordons contrct is all that horrible

Speed
10-14-2010, 11:21 AM
Interesting to revisit this thread now. I'm actually good with the Dunleavy/Paul George combo right now. It looks like a good rotation to me. Guy who plays the right way and a high upside youngster. We'll see what the real games bring, though.

cordobes
10-14-2010, 06:23 PM
I think it to be more likely that George would make a viable solution at Small Forward if we were to move Granger.

Until he improves his ball handling anyway.

I agree he isn't ready, also think it's early to assume he'll never be.

His ball-handling is very subpar now, he tends to play very high and stiff when dribbling the ball. It's unlikely he'll ever be a natural ball-handling wing, he won't be someone who can reliably dribble in traffic or under pressure consistently. But he should improve to some extent, to the point of being able to take pressure off the point-guard and the other wing if needed. A backcourt of Collison + an improved George + Granger doesn't have enough ball-handling ability? It'd depend on how much would you want the PG to handle the ball, but I see no reason to not give it a try if George shows he's starting material.

pacer4ever
10-14-2010, 06:28 PM
I agree he isn't ready, also think it's early to assume he'll never be.

His ball-handling is very subpar now, he tends to play very high and stiff when dribbling the ball. It's unlikely he'll ever be a natural ball-handling wing, he won't be someone who can reliably dribble in traffic or under pressure consistently. But he should improve to some extent, to the point of being able to take pressure off the point-guard and the other wing if needed. A backcourt of Collison + an improved George + Granger doesn't have enough ball-handling ability? It'd depend on how much would you want the PG to handle the ball, but I see no reason to not give it a try if George shows he's starting material.

you gotta understand he has only been playing the 2/3 for one year. He played PF his freshman yr and center in highschool. I am excited by how good his ball handling is for only been playing the wing for a year.

BringJackBack
10-14-2010, 06:58 PM
I really don't see how you guys think his handles are so terrible. They're loose, but that can get better. I don't see him getting ripped off the dribble; it's mostly when he dribbles into traffic.

pacer4ever
10-14-2010, 07:23 PM
I really don't see how you guys think his handles are so terrible. They're loose, but that can get better. I don't see him getting ripped off the dribble; it's mostly when he dribbles into traffic.

I think he has good handles. but his decsion making isnt great but he is a rookie that should get a lot better.

Anthem
10-14-2010, 09:16 PM
I'm actually good with the Dunleavy/Paul George combo right now. It looks like a good rotation to me. Guy who plays the right way and a high upside youngster.
Danny Granger plays the game every bit as much "the right way" as Mike Dunleavy does.

Anthem
02-10-2011, 12:24 AM
:bump:

DrFife
02-10-2011, 12:37 AM
I'm an Iggy fan, but never mind. Those with strong opinions on Wes Matthews, please weigh in.

Taterhead
02-10-2011, 12:47 AM
I still feel like Paul is a 3 once he has the body to play an 82 game schedule at that position. He has a nice all around game for a 3, and incredible quickness for a forward. He could become a dominant SF in time IMO, as a player who is a standout at both ends of the floor.

I would trade Danny for one. Especially if we could pry Eric Gordon from the Clippers. The Clippers might consider it. Danny is a huge upgrade at SF for them and a Granger-Griffen forward tandem is pretty nice and would definitely get them excited.

This franchise needs something to spark the cities interest again. The crowds aren't growing as they should. The hardcore fans are still around but the casual fan has vanished. And they aren't coming back until something big happens. Adding to that problem, we are pretty much irrelevant on the national scene these days. A future combo of Gordon, George and Hibbert could be a legit "Big 3" with a lot of nice pieces remaining and a lot of resources to add even more.

BornReady
02-10-2011, 12:47 AM
has anybody mentioned Jason Richardson yet? what are your guys's thoughts on him?

pacer4ever
02-10-2011, 12:48 AM
I still feel like Paul is a 3 once he has the body to play an 82 game schedule at that position. He has a nice all around game for a 3, and incredible quickness for a forward. He could become a dominant SF in time IMO, as a player who is a standout at both ends of the floor.

I would trade Danny for one. Especially if we could pry Eric Gordon from the Clippers. The Clippers might consider it. Danny is a huge upgrade at SF for them and a Granger-Griffen forward tandem is pretty nice and would definitely get them excited.

This franchise needs something to spark the cities interest again. The crowds aren't growing as they should. The hardcore fans are still around but the casual fan has vanished. And they aren't coming back until something big happens. Adding to that problem, we are pretty much irrelevant on the national scene these days. A future combo of Gordon, George and Hibbert could be a legit "Big 3" with a lot of nice pieces remaining and a lot of resources to add even more.
No they won't for good reason.

Taterhead
02-10-2011, 12:49 AM
I'm an Iggy fan, but never mind. Those with strong opinions on Wes Matthews, please weigh in.

Mathews would be a nice addition for sure. I like his attitude and all around game. He seems like a winner. Not sure why they would be giving up on him so soon though? He has played pretty well and helped keep them afloat through a pretty rough time.

Jared Sullinger
02-10-2011, 12:49 AM
Is Portland rumored to be moving Matthews? I did a little search (Google News + a Blazers' forum) and found nothing.

Taterhead
02-10-2011, 12:52 AM
No they won't for good reason.

Whats the reason? When have you ever heard of the Clippers not being interested?

The Clippers have openly complained about being too young. If you make a good offer you can get it done. You might have to overpay, but sometimes it's worth it.

bshall
02-10-2011, 01:01 AM
This franchise needs something to spark the cities interest again. The crowds aren't growing as they should. The hardcore fans are still around but the casual fan has vanished. And they aren't coming back until something big happens. Adding to that problem, we are pretty much irrelevant on the national scene these days. A future combo of Gordon, George and Hibbert could be a legit "Big 3" with a lot of nice pieces remaining and a lot of resources to add even more.

Don't forget that Darren Collison is only a 2nd year point guard. We may already have a future "Big 3" in place.

imawhat
02-10-2011, 01:05 AM
I like Matthews a lot, but he's been highlighted in two very good motion systems. He wouldn't do as well here, and then he'd be overpaid.

How do we upgrade SG? Keeping playing Paul George and Brandon Rush. Or we can acquire an Iggy level player. No, that does not include Kevin Martin.

pacer4ever
02-10-2011, 01:07 AM
Whats the reason? When have you ever heard of the Clippers not being interested?

The Clippers have openly complained about being too young. If you make a good offer you can get it done. You might have to overpay, but sometimes it's worth it.

no you can't he is untouchable trust me. I read all my Clipper news and watch every game they arent trading EJ. They wouldnt for Melo and sure as hell wont for Granger.

EJ>DG

and EJ is just 22 him and Blake are the perfect compliment to each other.

How many times do we have to go over this???
They are buliding around EJ and Blake and Deandre Jordan (lol but he is the perfect fit with Blake Griffen)
anyone eles on there roster could be had

CableKC
02-10-2011, 03:12 AM
has anybody mentioned Jason Richardson yet? what are your guys's thoughts on him?
He's had a lot of miles under the hood....but he's going to be 30 and is considered a scorer. If he could be had for $9-10 mil a year for 4 years...I'd consider it.

ilive4sports
02-10-2011, 03:46 AM
Whats the reason? When have you ever heard of the Clippers not being interested?

The Clippers have openly complained about being too young. If you make a good offer you can get it done. You might have to overpay, but sometimes it's worth it.

In overpaying I think we would be giving up to much in the thought that George/Granger and who we trade will be just as good as Gordon/George.

I haven't seen anything suggest that George will be any more effective at the 3 than the 2. He is quick enough to guard the 2 and his size makes a match up problem for other 2's.

IndyPacer
02-10-2011, 07:55 AM
I've not been thrilled with our shooting guard spot for years. I like Rush and think he can be a solid Bowen-type guard for us, but I'd also like to see us get more firepower out of that spot. I like Dunleavy and George, but neither one is a natural two.

So, having given the caveat that I like all of those guys, the question is "who could we get that's better than them?"

What shooting guards are out there that are available and better than what we've got?

Thoughts?

I don't have enough data on the guys we have to know what would be need to significantly upgrade the position. I've noticed that many have completely written Rush off already, but he's been injured and hasn't had the chance to show us anything under Vogel. I've said for quite some time that JOB was a horrible fit for Rush and Hibbert in particular, and I wonder if anyone would debate this point about Hibbert at this point. Rush should get a chance to demonstrate what he can do in a system that fits him. I'm quite confident that Vogel will make sure Rush's strengths are utilized.

George and Stephenson are both very young. George looks like he has a ton of potential. Supposedly George wouldn't be able to contribute anything for a couple of years, but that hasn't seemed to be the case recently. I think he could potentially play both SG and SF. I don't think one could justify saying he couldn't learn both spots given he's still so young. Lance is an uncertainty currently, but we'll see what we have depending on the legal outcome. He doesn't look bad in terms of talent for a guy off the bench.

NapTonius Monk
02-10-2011, 07:55 AM
I'm a Kevin Martin fan. A great shooter! Great!

pizza guy
02-10-2011, 11:23 AM
Looking at the free agents after this season...I'd wait on the draft.

I know the draft isn't being heralded as a very good draft, but there has to be someone in there, right? Maybe we find a way to pick up a higher draft pick than we're going to have? I don't know.

Count me in the "Do whatever it takes to get Eric Gordon" crowd. That'd be too good. The guy is a 20+ ppg scorer, has decent assist numbers, fits in with the "core" in age, and obviously he's a hometown boy. I doubt the Clips trade him, but there is no limit to the Clips' cheapness, and maybe they won't want to match a deal if we throw a max contract at him.

Otherwise, I really want to see Paul George excel and be "that guy."

LA_Confidential
02-10-2011, 11:40 AM
I think we need a SG who can work well in a PnR so that Darren can move without the ball sometimes. Im am not willing to trade Danny unless we rob someone blind. I like Iggy a lot, Not too big on Kevin Martin. I just haven't watched him enough. OJ Mayo?

CableKC
02-10-2011, 11:58 AM
I'm a Kevin Martin fan. A great shooter! Great!
I know that his defense sucks....but one thing that he's very good at doing is getting to the FT line.....he makes the 5th most FTA in the league. Add in that he's a career 85% FT shooter and you can see that he'd be a very solid scoring option.

PaceBalls
02-10-2011, 12:02 PM
I know that his defense sucks....but one thing that he's very good at doing is getting to the FT line.....he makes the 5th most FTA in the league. Add in that he's a career 85% FT shooter and you can see that he'd be a very solid scoring option.

He was number 1 for a while there. He isn't any worse than Mike D on defense, actually a much better 1 on 1 defender, but not as good in other ways. But we are talking a whole other class of offensive player.

The Pacers would have to make sure they get Josh signed and either bring Jeff back or pick up another big man as well. The good news is, the club has the enough dough to do all of that.

CableKC
02-10-2011, 12:42 PM
Looking at our SG options, I think that we have 3 options:

Option 1
pursue a long-term Starting SG option through Trades or FA signing like Iggy ( doubtful ), Kevin Martin ( for the right price...specifically an Expiring+1st ONLY ) or JRich ( may need to overpay ).
Option 2
Simply ignore it and give all the SG/SF minutes to BRush/Granger/PG with Inferno/Lance/Posey getting the rest of the remaining minutes/
Option 3
Get a very short term Starting SG option ( maybe signed to a 1 year guaranteed / unguaranteed salary in the 2012-2013 season contract ) that would allow us to ease PG into the SG/SF rotation for his sophomore year and then take on the role in the 2012-2013 season.

The practical option to choose is Option 2....simply see what a BRush/Granger/PG SG/SF rotation looks like with full blown minutes. But I have a feeling that Bird is going to go with Option 1 to pursue a significant upgrade to the Starting SG spot sooner ( between now and the 2011-2012 offseason ) than later ( waiting for PG to be "that guy" )....assuming that the opportunity presents itself.

PaceBalls
02-10-2011, 12:50 PM
Looking at our SG options, I think that we have 3 options:

Option 1
pursue a long-term Starting SG option through Trades or FA signing like Iggy ( doubtful ), Kevin Martin ( for the right price...specifically an Expiring+1st ONLY ) or JRich ( may need to overpay ).
Option 2
Simply ignore it and give all the SG/SF minutes to BRush/Granger/PG with Inferno/Lance/Posey getting the rest of the remaining minutes/
Option 3
Get a very short term Starting SG option ( maybe signed to a 1 year guaranteed / unguaranteed salary in the 2012-2013 season contract ) that would allow us to ease PG into the SG/SF rotation for his sophomore year and then take on the role in the 2012-2013 season.

The practical option to choose is Option 2....simply see what a BRush/Granger/PG SG/SF rotation looks like with full blown minutes. But I have a feeling that Bird is going to go with Option 1 to pursue a significant upgrade to the Starting SG spot sooner ( between now and the 2011-2012 offseason ) than later ( waiting for PG to be "that guy" )....assuming that the opportunity presents itself.


PG might very well be the guy. Is he going to be more of a SF though? Right now he is athletic enough to cover both spots with ease. Also, we are looking at another year maybe 2 before I think Paul is considered one of the better starting SG/SF in the league, that is if everything goes well.

I really want us to have a good team now, not 2 or 3 years from now when Danny is 30ish. I want to see this team win 50 wins next year.

It is a tough choice to make for Bird and I would understand either way he goes with it.

troyc11a
02-10-2011, 12:58 PM
Looking at our SG options, I think that we have 3 options:

Option 1
pursue a long-term Starting SG option through Trades or FA signing like Iggy ( doubtful ), Kevin Martin ( for the right price...specifically an Expiring+1st ONLY ) or JRich ( may need to overpay ).
Option 2
Simply ignore it and give all the SG/SF minutes to BRush/Granger/PG with Inferno/Lance/Posey getting the rest of the remaining minutes/
Option 3
Get a very short term Starting SG option ( maybe signed to a 1 year guaranteed / unguaranteed salary in the 2012-2013 season contract ) that would allow us to ease PG into the SG/SF rotation for his sophomore year and then take on the role in the 2012-2013 season.

The practical option to choose is Option 2....simply see what a BRush/Granger/PG SG/SF rotation looks like with full blown minutes. But I have a feeling that Bird is going to go with Option 1 to pursue a significant upgrade to the Starting SG spot sooner ( between now and the 2011-2012 offseason ) than later ( waiting for PG to be "that guy" )....assuming that the opportunity presents itself.


Don't you guys think they will wait until a permanent coach is in place before making a significant move? Here is why: 1. The ID of the team has to be forged. Vogel would probably want a guy like Iggy because of his toughness, defense, and all around game. Mike Brown may want more offense so a guy like Martin would fit in. 2. The Collective Bargaining Agreement!

I want to see the direction the team is going in. The last thing I want is to bring in a coach who runs a system that is not built around the players he has.

Thoreau87
02-10-2011, 01:11 PM
Option start Paul "2 much 4 you" "Pauly G" George... Have him play 35 mpg and watch the wins rack up.:dance:

pacer4ever
02-10-2011, 01:39 PM
Option start Paul "2 much 4 you" "Pauly G" George... Have him play 35 mpg and watch the wins rack up.:dance:

I would like to try that for a week a see how he plays with all that PT

Gamble1
02-10-2011, 02:53 PM
Looking at our SG options, I think that we have 3 options:

Option 1
pursue a long-term Starting SG option through Trades or FA signing like Iggy ( doubtful ), Kevin Martin ( for the right price...specifically an Expiring+1st ONLY ) or JRich ( may need to overpay ).
Option 2
Simply ignore it and give all the SG/SF minutes to BRush/Granger/PG with Inferno/Lance/Posey getting the rest of the remaining minutes/
Option 3
Get a very short term Starting SG option ( maybe signed to a 1 year guaranteed / unguaranteed salary in the 2012-2013 season contract ) that would allow us to ease PG into the SG/SF rotation for his sophomore year and then take on the role in the 2012-2013 season.


I think there also might be an option 4, which is on the lines of option 3 but is more than just a 1 year contract player and has the potential to be a good fit next to danny while allowing PG to develop.

The guy who I am thinking of is Josh Howard. If he has been mentioned before I am sorry but I think he might fit well next to danny and could play sg like Dunleavy does for us now.

A few selling points.

He is on a 3 million dollar contract ending this year. NBA all star in 2007 and is 30/31 years old.

Some of the bad points are his injuries but he is coming back from them ie ACL tear in Feb 2010.

Is he worth a 3 year contract? I am not sure but he could be had maybe for 4-5 million which is a decent contract for a guy his caliber who stock is low at the moment.

Sookie
02-10-2011, 03:02 PM
I still like the idea of Iggy. If we could get him for Rush an Expiring and a first, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

A wing rotation of Iggy/Granger/PG is drool worthy, and allows PG to be brought on slowly..but still get plenty of time.

Gamble1
02-10-2011, 03:18 PM
I still like the idea of Iggy. If we could get him for Rush an Expiring and a first, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

A wing rotation of Iggy/Granger/PG is drool worthy, and allows PG to be brought on slowly..but still get plenty of time.

If we bring in Iggy I am not sure how our salary cap works out with the new CBA. If it stays the same or close to then our future team salary when Hibbert and Collison are off there rookie contracts looks something like this.

Iggy 14 mill
Granger 13 million
Hibbert 10 million (depending on progression)
Colliosn 9 million ( depending on progression)

This is all speculation but that puts 4 guys taking up 46 million of the cap which isn't too bad but it may hinder us from making other moves like signing West or a quality starting pf. I am not adding in bench players but you can see that we may get of the LT assuming there is one.

This is why I wouldn't mind signing Howard to a 3 year deal worth a lot less money. If we could get West and Howard I would call that a good summer.

HOOPFANATIC
02-10-2011, 03:32 PM
Someone on this thread asked what is the difference between the 2&3. Michael Jordan the best 2 of all time. Larry Bird the best 3 of all-time. I feel that there are definite differences in the position, and the teams that compete at high levels understand that.

troyc11a
02-10-2011, 03:45 PM
If we bring in Iggy I am not sure how our salary cap works out with the new CBA. If it stays the same or close to then our future team salary when Hibbert and Collison are off there rookie contracts looks something like this.

Iggy 14 mill
Granger 13 million
Hibbert 10 million (depending on progression)
Colliosn 9 million ( depending on progression)

This is all speculation but that puts 4 guys taking up 46 million of the cap which isn't too bad but it may hinder us from making other moves like signing West or a quality starting pf. I am not adding in bench players but you can see that we may get of the LT assuming there is one.

This is why I wouldn't mind signing Howard to a 3 year deal worth a lot less money. If we could get West and Howard I would call that a good summer.

Hey man, if we had Iggy who cares if we can't get a PF. Afterall, a team cannot have franchise players at all positions. With those four starting, our PF's would be more than capable of making us a contender. They are already playing well. Even the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, and Heat have starters who couldnt start for us. It's about maximizing the talent in 3-4 positions and the rest can be role players.

Justin Tyme
02-10-2011, 03:52 PM
[QUOTE=Gamble1;1162489]

This is why I wouldn't mind signing Howard to a 3 year deal worth a lot less money. QUOTE]


Didn't Howard have problems in Dallas? I'm not looking to bring in a player with baggage.

TinManJoshua
02-10-2011, 05:29 PM
I think Paul George's position depends on his ability to add muscle.

If he can get up around 230, he could be a great SF. If not, no biggie, he'll be one long, tall SG of the same quality.

Pacersalltheway10
02-10-2011, 05:47 PM
I cringe at the thought of trading Paul George AND a 1st round pick for Iggy.

Gamble1
02-10-2011, 07:03 PM
[QUOTE=Gamble1;1162489]

This is why I wouldn't mind signing Howard to a 3 year deal worth a lot less money. [QUOTE]


Didn't Howard have problems in Dallas? I'm not looking to bring in a player with baggage.

He had some problems in Dallas but I don't think he has had any since being in Washington.

Would you trade Rush for Howard?


Hey man, if we had Iggy who cares if we can't get a PF. Afterall, a team cannot have franchise players at all positions. With those four starting, our PF's would be more than capable of making us a contender. They are already playing well. Even the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, and Heat have starters who couldnt start for us. It's about maximizing the talent in 3-4 positions and the rest can be role players.

You honestly think Iggy would make us a contender? Our 3 to 4 positions of talent do not equal to what the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs and Heat have. Its not even close IMO.

We have to be a more balanced team than the Heat or any of the other team you listed in order to beat them in the playoffs.

Anthem
02-10-2011, 07:08 PM
The immediate goal isn't a championship contender. It's relevance.

Getting a really good 2guard at a good price can only be a good thing.

Kid Minneapolis
02-10-2011, 07:44 PM
I'm looking for PG to be our SG of the future. I think he's a year away, though. He may be 6'9" but everything in his game screams 2guard. A 6'9" SG is advantageous... a 6'9" SF is just normal. I think trying to cram him into the SF position is not his natural fit. Hell, Mike Dunleavy is 6'9" or more, and he's obviously also a SG.

BlueNGold
02-10-2011, 07:46 PM
I cringe at the thought of trading Paul George AND a 1st round pick for Iggy.

Paul will be better than both Granger and Iggy in 3 years. People will literally forget Granger was the franchise player.

So, the thought of the Pacers trading their best player for a guy who will soon be on the down-hill is a rather frightening thought.

vnzla81
02-10-2011, 07:53 PM
Trade Danny+1st pick for Erick Gordon, DO IT LARRY !!!!


DC,EG,PG,Josh and Hibbert ............:cool:

Gamble1
02-10-2011, 08:50 PM
The immediate goal isn't a championship contender. It's relevance.

Getting a really good 2guard at a good price can only be a good thing.
He said contender which i think is a stretch.

To me adding a guy like West is does as much as adding a guy like Iggy. The difference to me is what George is showing us right now. If George played as many minutes as Iggy then you have very similar results but for 10 million dollars less. Iggy is still better than George but when will the gap close?

Contrast that to our pf situation. West trumps either McBob or Tyler and I can't see them closing the gap anytime soon between West.

Justin Tyme
02-10-2011, 08:56 PM
[QUOTE=Justin Tyme;1162511][QUOTE=Gamble1;1162489]


Would you trade Rush for Howard?

Howard hasn't played much this season due to injury. It would depend on his injury status and what his problem was in Dallas. It's an intriguing idea.

pacer4ever
02-10-2011, 09:02 PM
Trade Danny+1st pick for Erick Gordon, DO IT LARRY !!!!


DC,EG,PG,Josh and Hibbert ............:cool:

Not gonna happen EJ= untouchable for he 15th million time

Gamble1
02-10-2011, 09:03 PM
[QUOTE=Gamble1;1162718][QUOTE=Justin Tyme;1162511]

Howard hasn't played much this season due to injury. It would depend on his injury status and what his problem was in Dallas. It's an intriguing idea.
In Dallas he basically admitted to smoking weed in the off season. He also had some really dumb America comments at a football game that showed his immaturity.

Rush hasn't shown he can be a good overall basketball player and he has had some bad PR with the press. Howard on the other hand has had success as basketball player and has had some bad PR in the past although its further back than Rush's. To me its an easy upgrade considering George and Djones are insurance just in case it doesn't work out. I also think Howards strengths would help this team and aren't duplicating Grangers.

pacer4ever
02-10-2011, 09:04 PM
I think we need a SG who can work well in a PnR so that Darren can move without the ball sometimes. Im am not willing to trade Danny unless we rob someone blind. I like Iggy a lot, Not too big on Kevin Martin. I just haven't watched him enough. OJ Mayo?

thats Eric Gordon u just decribed he is good in the PnR and good moving without the ball. 2 bad the Clipps wont trade him.

vnzla81
02-10-2011, 09:09 PM
Not gonna happen EJ= untouchable for he 15th million time

Hey nobody is asking you for the 16th million time, Let me dream OK? .....:-p

Thoreau87
02-10-2011, 09:15 PM
Trade Danny+1st pick for Erick Gordon, DO IT LARRY !!!!


DC,EJ,PG,Josh and Hibbert ............:cool:

EJ not EG... I wish Pacer4ever wasn't right, but he is. I'd give the Clips a lot more then that, but that's just my fandom speaking ;)

itzryan07
02-10-2011, 10:38 PM
well in a video before he was drafted he said he wanted to be a SG

CableKC
02-11-2011, 12:17 AM
I think there also might be an option 4, which is on the lines of option 3 but is more than just a 1 year contract player and has the potential to be a good fit next to danny while allowing PG to develop.

The guy who I am thinking of is Josh Howard. If he has been mentioned before I am sorry but I think he might fit well next to danny and could play sg like Dunleavy does for us now.

A few selling points.

He is on a 3 million dollar contract ending this year. NBA all star in 2007 and is 30/31 years old.

Some of the bad points are his injuries but he is coming back from them ie ACL tear in Feb 2010.

Is he worth a 3 year contract? I am not sure but he could be had maybe for 4-5 million which is a decent contract for a guy his caliber who stock is low at the moment.
Josh Howard is more of SF....not really a SG. On top of that...I thought that he had some on/off court issues in Dallas...which I think was one of the reasons why Dallas moved him.

CableKC
02-11-2011, 12:21 AM
I still like the idea of Iggy. If we could get him for Rush an Expiring and a first, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

A wing rotation of Iggy/Granger/PG is drool worthy, and allows PG to be brought on slowly..but still get plenty of time.
If all it took was BRush+Expiring+1st, then I'd do it...but ( at a minimum ) I'd think that it would be PG as he would fit in better with Turner. But realistically, moving Iggy wouldn't be a good/smart move for the Sixers since they are doing really well now.

luis3ep
02-11-2011, 12:27 AM
No monta ellis love?

pacer4ever
02-11-2011, 12:28 AM
No monta ellis love?

lol we would have the worst defensive backcourt in the NBA plus how are we gonna get him?

CableKC
02-11-2011, 12:53 AM
No monta ellis love?
Yeah...I'd love to get Monta...but they aren't giving Monta up without asking for a 1st and PG.

Most top Tier SGs that we've been talking about are great...but will likely cost ( at a minimum ) a 1st+PG and an Expiring.

CableKC
02-11-2011, 12:56 AM
lol we would have the worst defensive backcourt in the NBA plus how are we gonna get him?
No...that would be if we traded for Kevin Martin...which I'm okay with....if it costs us an Expiring+1st ONLY.

Monta is actually a decent defender...he's not great...but he's ( at worst ) slightly above average.

Lord Helmet
02-11-2011, 12:56 AM
Kareem Rush

cdash
02-11-2011, 01:02 AM
No...that would be if we traded for Kevin Martin...which I'm okay with....if it costs us an Expiring+1st ONLY.

Monta is actually a decent defender...he's not great...but he's ( at worst ) slightly above average.

:confused:

We are using the term "average" very loosely around here :laugh:

Sookie
02-11-2011, 01:07 AM
lol we would have the worst defensive backcourt in the NBA plus how are we gonna get him?

I think we've already got the worst defensive starting backcourt in the NBA..

Monta and Darren wouldn't work. Let poor DC dribble guys! :laugh:

pacer4ever
02-11-2011, 01:08 AM
No...that would be if we traded for Kevin Martin...which I'm okay with....if it costs us an Expiring+1st ONLY.

Monta is actually a decent defender...he's not great...but he's ( at worst ) slightly above average.

expiring and a 1st isnt gonn happen

Gamble1
02-11-2011, 04:27 AM
Josh Howard is more of SF....not really a SG. On top of that...I thought that he had some on/off court issues in Dallas...which I think was one of the reasons why Dallas moved him.
He is 6'6.5 with shoes and under 220 in wieght. He can play sg as much as Dunleavy can but normally plays SF because his 7'2 wing span gives him that leeway.

See my response to JT for his Dallas problems.

I think at some point we are going to have the heal the wounds of the past with the bad PR of previous Pacers. We have jumped the PR hurdels now with Lance and Brandon Rush so I think taking a player like Howard on a cheap 3 year contract with a team option on the third is alright. If he can regain his form from his ACL tear I think he is better than Rush at this point.

Edit:
Are players like Nick young or Courtney Lee viable options to replace Rush.

troyc11a
02-11-2011, 09:51 AM
Paul will be better than both Granger and Iggy in 3 years. People will literally forget Granger was the franchise player.

So, the thought of the Pacers trading their best player for a guy who will soon be on the down-hill is a rather frightening thought.

That is possible. But it boils down to which theory you hold too. Do you want potential or proven commodities. We "think" PG will be better, but we know Iggy is an all-star.

I personally dont think it would take that much nor would I give it. If you remember last summer, teams were giving away quality players with large contracts AND 1st round picks in order to reduce salary (Hinrich!). So I think Iggy's contract would make him less movable. Rush/Dun and a bag of chips might get it done - or some team may give us the player and a pick just to take the contract. I'd wait it out.

Gamble1
02-11-2011, 11:01 AM
That is possible. But it boils down to which theory you hold too. Do you want potential or proven commodities. We "think" PG will be better, but we know Iggy is an all-star.

Its the same argument you made in the other thread concerning Tyler H. and his production with increased minutes.

Take Paul Georges production (per 36 minutes) and Iggy's (per 36) and you have 2 very similar levels of production.

Of course Iggy gets recognized for doing it longer than PG but its not crazy to think that PG coud reach Iggy's level in 1-2 years.

troyc11a
02-11-2011, 11:14 AM
Its the same argument you made in the other thread concerning Tyler H. and his production with increased minutes.

Take Paul Georges production (per 36 minutes) and Iggy's (per 36) and you have 2 very similar levels of production.

Of course Iggy gets recognized for doing it longer than PG but its not crazy to think that PG coud reach Iggy's level in 1-2 years.

The main difference between PG and Tyler is that George's position would require more production because it is traditionally a more offensive position. Tyler and Josh are more of a sure thing because less would be asked of them. PG on the other hand, would have much more pressure. Are we confident he can handle it? Getting Iggy would only help PG because he could grow into the position. Tyler and Josh are already what we need. And they are only getting better. I have no problem bringing in Iggy and then waiting to see what George has.

CableKC
02-11-2011, 11:52 AM
:confused:

We are using the term "average" very loosely around here :laugh:
Okay...fine....let's just put it this way...he's no worse then Dunleavy when it comes to defending Wing Players....he's certainly not THE worst...as that title apparently belongs to Kevin Martin.

IMHO...Monta is not bad...he's not super great....he's just "average" then. :D

CableKC
02-11-2011, 11:59 AM
expiring and a 1st isnt gonn happen
Despite his horrible defense, Kevin Martin IMHO is worth it for the right price. I'm not saying that he's as great as someone like Granger, Iggy or Monta Ellis....I just think that he's an above average shooter that will help any offense if they need ( what we need ) a reliable and efficient 2nd scoring option.

The only reason why I wouldn't want to pay more then an Expiring+1st is because of Kevin Martin's injury history. That guy is fragile...he's played 48, 51, 61 games in the last 3 full seasons.

At most, I'd offer them BRush+1st+Expiring...but then I'd want back one of their many wing Players...maybe Budnger or ( more then likely ) Terrence Williams to offset the loss.

Thoreau87
02-11-2011, 12:00 PM
I think we've already got the worst defensive starting backcourt in the NBA..

Monta and Darren wouldn't work. Let poor DC dribble guys! :laugh:

Curry dribbles just fine... Avgs 19 and 6 (DC=14 and 5). IMO he'd create more opportunities for DC. Defensive would def be an issue tho :mad:.

CableKC
02-11-2011, 12:01 PM
Are players like Nick young or Courtney Lee viable options to replace Rush.
Nick Young played his way into "untouchable" territory for the Wizards.

But if you're looking at Wing Player replacements for BRush from the Rockets...ask Seth who he thinks should be available......I'll give you a hint...his name rhymes with "Werrence Tilliams". :D

Gamble1
02-11-2011, 12:45 PM
Nick Young played his way into "untouchable" territory for the Wizards.

But if you're looking at Wing Player replacements for BRush from the Rockets...ask Seth who he thinks should be available......I'll give you a hint...his name rhymes with "Werrence Tilliams". :D
A big pass on Twill.

We should see how much Nick Young is untouchable then. He is a RFA right?

Justin Tyme
02-11-2011, 12:55 PM
Kareem Rush


LOL! Been there, done that.

We have his twin now. :D

Justin Tyme
02-11-2011, 01:00 PM
He is 6'6.5 with shoes and under 220 in wieght. He can play sg as much as Dunleavy can but normally plays SF because his 7'2 wing span gives him that leeway.

See my response to JT for his Dallas problems.

I think at some point we are going to have the heal the wounds of the past with the bad PR of previous Pacers. We have jumped the PR hurdels now with Lance and Brandon Rush so I think taking a player like Howard on a cheap 3 year contract with a team option on the third is alright. If he can regain his form from his ACL tear I think he is better than Rush at this point.

Edit:
Are players like Nick young or Courtney Lee viable options to replace Rush.


I'd take Courtney Lee in a heartbeat, but Nick Young is probably too costly if he could be had at all.

cdash
02-11-2011, 01:34 PM
I'd take Courtney Lee in a heartbeat, but Nick Young is probably too costly if he could be had at all.

Nick Young is your classic, "good stats, bad team" guy. He does only one thing on the basketball court: he scores. He often scores by volume shooting too. He really is a black hole on offense. I want absolutely nothing to do with him, as I prefer Rush, Dunleavy, and Lance to Nick Young.

PaceBalls
02-12-2011, 01:14 AM
I've changed my mind about Kevin Martin, it just doesn't make sense.

We need to start Paul George every game from here on out as long as he is a Pacer. I am a believer now. Screw Kevin Martin, I like Paul's potential way more.

I would add in a caveat that if the club hands him the keys to the franchise he needs to stick with us and not pull a Lebron/Carmello in 4 years.