PDA

View Full Version : Pacers, Bulls, Clippers (Trade)



ABADays
02-05-2004, 04:19 PM
Anybody heard anything about a 3-team deal that would involve Harrington, Foster, Jones and Johnson?

Ragnar
02-05-2004, 04:58 PM
We better not do that trade. I cant imagine Donnie making a trade when we have the second best record in the NBA.

Of course Minny is catching up fast.

indygeezer
02-05-2004, 05:19 PM
This from Chad Ford's Q&A column posted a few minutes ago...


max(la): any trade rumors with my beloved clips?? by the way, you see my boy Q last night with eight 3's, and winning their 3rd straight on the road??? i smell playoffs.......

Chad Ford: (1:36 PM ET ) Playoffs? That may be going a bit far. I do agree that Q, along with Elton Brand and Corey Maggette are having a great year. The question is really about Q. The Clips are trying to pawn off Melvin Ely so that they can get a little more cap room to make a run at Kobe. Obviously if they sign Kobe, they'll lose Q. If that happens, look for the Nuggets to swoop in and nab him.

=======

Well? See the P's anywhere in there? Rumor said P's Clips and BUlls...nope.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 05:57 PM
I'm reading through that thread on IS, which for the curious is here:

http://www.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56721

And basically there's one thing I"m not clear on yet: Who gets Quentin Richardson. I think we get him.

So we'd be trading:

Harrington
Foster
F.Jones
Johnson

But we be getting:

Jamal Crawford
Quentin Richardson
Eddy Curry

Damn. :o I'd have to seriously think about that one.

Curry is lazy right now, but if that boy gets his *** in gear we have a better C/PF tandem than Miller/JO was. Wow.

BigMac
02-05-2004, 06:01 PM
We better not do that trade. I cant imagine Donnie making a trade when we have the second best record in the NBA.

Of course Minny is catching up fast.


Can someone elaborate what they heard about this rumor, please?

I.E. specific players involved and who would go where. I'm very curious. I love rumors and am aware that they almost never come true. Thanks.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:02 PM
My guess as to our lineup:

Starters (backup):

Tinsley (Anderson)
Miller (Crawford)
Artest (Richardson)
O'Neal (Croshere/Bender)
Curry (Pollard/Croshere)

I'd really have to think about this one...

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:03 PM
Can someone elaborate what they heard about this rumor, please?

I.E. specific players involved and who would go where. I'm very curious. I love rumors and am aware that they almost never come true. Thanks.

The link I posted above tells the details. This is all supposed to be coming from ESPN News (as a rumor, not a done deal).

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:04 PM
My guess as to our lineup:

Starters (backup):

Tinsley (Anderson)
Miller (Crawford)
Artest (Richardson)
O'Neal (Croshere/Bender)
Curry (Pollard/Croshere)

I'd really have to think about this one...

Wouldn't Crawford start over Tins? :o

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:05 PM
If you want to look, here are the profiles of the guys we'd be receiving:

Jamal Crawford (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/jamal_crawford/)
Eddy Curry (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/eddy_curry/)
Quentin Richardson (http://www.nba.com/playerfile/quentin_richardson/)

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:06 PM
My guess as to our lineup:

Starters (backup):

Tinsley (Anderson)
Miller (Crawford)
Artest (Richardson)
O'Neal (Croshere/Bender)
Curry (Pollard/Croshere)

I'd really have to think about this one...

Wouldn't Crawford start over Tins? :o

Well, it'd be up to Carlisle and what he wanted, a smoother running team offense, or Chauncey Billups Jr. It's possible.

Ragnar
02-05-2004, 06:13 PM
Man I hope not. Crawford plays less D than Tins did last year. Plus Tins is a way better pg than Crawford. I would imagine that if we needed a 3 at the end of the game he would be in at point with Reggie at the 2 but otherwise I hope not.

If we are getting Q-Rich and we can substitute Pollard for Foster I am all aboard.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:19 PM
Man I hope not. Crawford plays less D than Tins did last year. Plus Tins is a way better pg than Crawford. I would imagine that if we needed a 3 at the end of the game he would be in at point with Reggie at the 2 but otherwise I hope not.

If we are getting Q-Rich and we can substitute Pollard for Foster I am all aboard.

Don't forget this means your Bane Anthony Johnson leaves. :D

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:21 PM
Chicago would be recieving QRich, not us.

You had to ruin it didn't you? :mad:

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:24 PM
Chicago would be recieving QRich, not us.

You had to ruin it didn't you? :mad:

Sorry. It's not going to happen anyway.

You had to ruin it didn't you? :mad:

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:27 PM
There absolutely no way you trade 4 bench players and get back QRich, Crawford, and Curry. The P's wouldn't even be clearing any long term salaries except Foster. The Bulls have been desperately wanting QRich for a long time.

We can still dream... :devil:

ChicagoJ
02-05-2004, 06:29 PM
Let's not forget that there are reasons Chicago is shopping Crawford and Curry.

And one of those is that Pax realizes neither of these guys will ever be the best or second best player on a championship caliber team. However, for the Pacers, these guys would be somewhere around the third through fifth options. With all the hype they've been given, would they be willing to accept that role? Also, how in the world would we create enough cap space to re-sign them? Giving up Al, with a nice, cheap, long contact in exchange for two guys who have not been winners at the college or professional levels and might be disgruntled with their roles... I don't know if I'd do that. If we don't get Q, I almost certainly wouldn't do it.

Also, in my opinion, Crawford would start at SG before he would start at PG, simply because Tinsley/ Crawford is a better lineup than Crawford/ Miller.

beast23
02-05-2004, 06:33 PM
Damn. :o I'd have to seriously think about that one.

Curry is lazy right now, but if that boy gets his *** in gear we have a better C/PF tandem than Miller/JO was. Wow.
Al, Foster, Foster and AJ for Crawford, Curry and Richardson.

Nope, I wouldn't have to think about that one. I'd pass for two reasons.

1. Bad timing. It's too big of a risk to make this change because we look like a favorite in the east right now with what we have. That isn't a tweak, that is a major trade involving 4 players that are seeing big minutes in the rotation.

2. It is not worth it from the Pacers perspective. You exchange the name Chandler for the name Curry and then let's talk about it.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:34 PM
ok, so we wouldnt get Q-Rich.

I think crawford and curry is still very nice.

and also is this a legit rumor or did someone make it up?

Someone made it up.

Says who? The guy said he saw it on ESPNNews, not ESPN(or 2).

Will Galen
02-05-2004, 06:37 PM
ok, so we wouldnt get Q-Rich.

I think crawford and curry is still very nice.

and also is this a legit rumor or did someone make it up?

The new PFFL on the Indy Star forum said he saw Chad Ford on ESPN, but others were watching ESPN at the time and they don't confirm it. Probably a rumor.

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:38 PM
ok, so we wouldnt get Q-Rich.

I think crawford and curry is still very nice.

and also is this a legit rumor or did someone make it up?

Someone made it up.

Says who? The guy said he saw it on ESPNNews, not ESPN(or 2).

He's Mr. Omniscient remember? :cool:

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:40 PM
Btw, btown, you guys at IU get ESPN, ESPN2, AND ESPNews? Damn, what kinda service do they give you guys?

Natston
02-05-2004, 06:43 PM
Btw, btown, you guys at IU get ESPN, ESPN2, AND ESPNews? Damn, what kinda service do they give you guys?

We just get the first two on campus. I was at someone's house most of the day after class, or at least for an hour before and after that "rumor" was posted.

Yeah I would kill to have ESPNews in my dorm... :devil:

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:48 PM
:( I was genuinely excited about this for half an hour. I think it's dead, though.

Will Galen
02-05-2004, 06:49 PM
This trade would work, but which team would get which player?



Chicago trades: PF Marcus Fizer (6.5 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 0.9 apg in 13.8 minutes)
C Eddy Curry (13.3 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 0.9 apg in 27.8 minutes)
SG Jamal Crawford (17.1 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 5.5 apg in 34.9 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -36.9 ppg, -12.9 rpg, and -7.3 apg.

Indiana trades: PF Al Harrington (13.4 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 1.8 apg in 31.1 minutes)
C Jeff Foster (5.6 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 0.9 apg in 23.2 minutes)
PG Fred Jones (3.9 ppg, 1.6 rpg, 1.8 apg in 16.9 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -22.9 ppg, -15.5 rpg, and -4.5 apg.

L.A. Clippers trades: PG Keyon Dooling (4.3 ppg, 1.1 rpg, 2.0 apg in 15.3 minutes)
SG Quentin Richardson (18.0 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 2.0 apg in 35.8 minutes)
PF Melvin Ely (4.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 0.5 apg in 14.1 minutes)
PF Predrag Drobnjak (4.1 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 0.5 apg in 14.1 minutes)
Change in team outlook: -26.4 ppg, -10.2 rpg, and -4.5 apg.

TRADE ACCEPTED

Due to Chicago and Indiana being over the cap, the 15% trade rule is invoked. Chicago and Indiana had to be no more than 115% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:51 PM
:( I was genuinely excited about this for half an hour. I think it's dead, though.

Now I'm just kinda annoyed. The only place I've seen anything similar to what was mentioned in this thread was a post made at 10AM this morning on the RealGM Pacers board. A very similar trade to what was "rumored", but more lopsided in our favor.

The new "pffl" probably just got it from that. :unimpressed:

:cry:

Suaveness
02-05-2004, 06:52 PM
This is NOT going to happen. Period.

Hicks
02-05-2004, 06:54 PM
This is NOT going to happen. Period.

Way to educate. :unimpressed:

Suaveness
02-05-2004, 06:56 PM
This is NOT going to happen. Period.

Way to educate. :unimpressed:

:D Of course.

BigDawg44
02-05-2004, 07:46 PM
That trade would be nice, but i am skeptical about trading away Freddy. This kid is really starting to come into his own this year, and a year or 2 down the road he could be something special and a great replacement for Reggie. So I say substitute Jones and I'd think about it.

Bball
02-05-2004, 07:53 PM
Is there any way to get Bender and Pollard included? ;)

-Bball

Suaveness
02-05-2004, 08:00 PM
That trade would be nice, but i am skeptical about trading away Freddy. This kid is really starting to come into his own this year, and a year or 2 down the road he could be something special and a great replacement for Reggie. So I say substitute Jones and I'd think about it.

I agree. I think next year.

BigMac
02-05-2004, 10:22 PM
Can someone elaborate what they heard about this rumor, please?

I.E. specific players involved and who would go where. I'm very curious. I love rumors and am aware that they almost never come true. Thanks.

The link I posted above tells the details. This is all supposed to be coming from ESPN News (as a rumor, not a done deal).

I posted 4 minutes after yours. Yours wasn't on there when I first read the link and I went back and posted. I wasn't trying to slight your post. Excellent post on your part.

indygeezer
02-05-2004, 10:44 PM
The new PF4L claimed to have heard Chad Ford talking about it.

Natston
02-05-2004, 10:49 PM
The new PF4L claimed to have heard Chad Ford talking about it.

Go re-read my posts. I addressed that.

:flirt:

All Hail Mr. Omniscient!

:king:





































:unimpressed:

indygeezer
02-05-2004, 11:06 PM
Yeah I already had noticed that. Plus note that in my 1st post in this thread I showed that it wasn't in Chad Ford's daily column...the P's weren't mentioned at all.

Dead rumor


PF4L has zero cred IMPO. (I'm suspecting him of secretly being another poster referred to as Polly)

Peck
02-06-2004, 02:03 AM
Two things.

1. No way in hell this trade ever happens for reasons that have already been mentioned.

2. If this trade was possible & people were not wanting to do this, for any reason, is beyond me.

Let me get this straight we end up with a young starting caliber center, a young starting caliber guard who can play point or shooting guard & we end up with a shooting guard who can tear it up & we don't have to give away Jermaine?

If Donnie (or Larry or whoever) could pull this off then I personnaly would lead a caravan of fans to the field house to :king: at the feet of whoever did this.

Anthem
02-06-2004, 02:07 AM
I'll admit, a backcourt of Crawford and Tinsley would be fun to watch on O, although UncleBuck wouldn't last the season after seeing how many points they give up.

Suaveness
02-06-2004, 02:25 AM
Two things.

1. No way in hell this trade ever happens for reasons that have already been mentioned.

2. If this trade was possible & people were not wanting to do this, for any reason, is beyond me.

Let me get this straight we end up with a young starting caliber center, a young starting caliber guard who can play point or shooting guard & we end up with a shooting guard who can tear it up & we don't have to give away Jermaine?

If Donnie (or Larry or whoever) could pull this off then I personnaly would lead a caravan of fans to the field house to :king: at the feet of whoever did this.

Would you really? :laugh:

PaceBalls
02-06-2004, 08:07 AM
this has to be a bad joke. just wanna say this: WHERE"S THE DEEF?

Tim
02-06-2004, 09:08 AM
this has to be a bad joke. just wanna say this: WHERE"S THE DEEF?

I don't know why it is, but people will not be happy until they get Al traded out of here.

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 09:16 AM
Curry and J.O together would not work.

Hicks
02-06-2004, 09:17 AM
I'm with Peck in that if you'd turn down this trade, you're likely nuts.

Some ask what about defense, well what about it? Ron Artest and Jermaine O'Neal stay right here. And the coaching staff has a team D in place that when the players hustle, it makes up for lack of individual defensive talent.

Still, this is more than likely made up, so it's a moot point anyway.

Peck
02-06-2004, 09:21 AM
Curry and J.O together would not work.

I strongly disagree.

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 09:22 AM
Two things.

1. No way in hell this trade ever happens for reasons that have already been mentioned.

2. If this trade was possible & people were not wanting to do this, for any reason, is beyond me.

Let me get this straight we end up with a young starting caliber center, a young starting caliber guard who can play point or shooting guard & we end up with a shooting guard who can tear it up & we don't have to give away Jermaine?

If Donnie (or Larry or whoever) could pull this off then I personnaly would lead a caravan of fans to the field house to :king: at the feet of whoever did this.


I grant you that Curry has the talent to be a better low post offensive player that J.O. But I don't think Curry and J.O would work well together. Curry is lazy and overweight

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 09:23 AM
Curry and J.O together would not work.

I strongly disagree.


Why, explain how they can work well together

Peck
02-06-2004, 09:24 AM
Curry and J.O together would not work.

I strongly disagree.


Why, explain how they can work well together

Nope, you explain first why they won't.

BigMac
02-06-2004, 09:35 AM
Curry and J.O together would not work.

I strongly disagree.


Why, explain how they can work well together

Nope, you explain first why they won't.

Do you two need to be separated? :laugh:

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 09:39 AM
Peck, you are in a different mood this morning.

Do you want Curry guarding Duncan, Garnett, or anyone for that matter. His defense is terrible.

Offensively, he can't pass, can't shoot from the outside, but he can score in the low post, but that is where J.O flourishes.

But as I said a few minutes ago, Curry has the talent to be the best low post player in the whole NBA. he has a big body, great hands.

Peck, Curry is all potential at this point and who knows if he will ever reach his potential even 70% of it.

If this trade takes place, Pacers throw away this season, if Crawford and Curry reach their potential and learn how to play the game, it will make the pacers really strong for years in the future.

Peck
02-06-2004, 09:59 AM
BTW, I'm feeling fine. :rock:

Ok, this is going to be another one of those philisophical issues that we are going to disagree about & suprise Jeff Foster is at the center of this.

Is Curry a great defender? No.

Is Curry a good defender? Not really.

Is Curry a capable defender? He can be.

Is Curry potentially the best low post player in the league in the next 5 years? You bet.

Of course there is that word potential again though.

Do I want him guarding Garnett? Not really. Do I want him guarding Duncan? he could if he had to.

But then could he guard Oliwankandi? Yes, absolutely. Could he guard Nestorvich? Yes, aboslutely.

I know you have your opinion of him & I have mine. But in all honesty I think you are way overvaluing Jeff Foster. To me, he is a good backup.

Eddy Curry is a starter & should be for years to come. Yes, he plays low post but not exactly the way that J.O. does. To me it would be no differant than Al & J.O. playing together (& as of this a.m. you stated that it was good to keep another low post player as opposed to the confirmed outside shooter we gave away) so IMO that point is moot.

The wide body part is the part I like the most. We need that, God do we need that.

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 10:06 AM
Peck, I am starting to wonder if that is really you. Have you been awake for 36 hrs staright or something :laugh:


I take back everything I said, read this. he'll probably score 35 pts Tuesday night



http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull062.html



Curry's game finally shaping up

February 6, 2004

BY LACY J. BANKS Staff Reporter Advertisement





HOUSTON -- In his last three games, Bulls center Eddy Curry has scored at least 23 points, shot 61.2 percent from the field and looked more and more like the player who averaged 20.7 points and shot 66 percent in his final nine games of last season.

That torrid finish enabled the 6-11, 285-pounder from Harvey to lead the NBA in field-goal accuracy (58.5 percent) and gave rise to optimism that he was coming into his own as one of the league's dominant centers.

"Unfortunately, I started out slow this year, and I have myself to blame,'' Curry said. "I wasn't in the best of shape, and a knee injury made matters worse. Now I'm healthy and in shape again, and I'm getting back my touch, my rhythm and confidence.''

If Curry continues his surge, and if Kirk Hinrich and Eddie Robinson give him the outside scoring help they provided Wednesday in a 95-79 rout of the Utah Jazz, the Bulls could bring home a two-game winning streak from this seven-game trip. They visit the Houston Rockets tonight at the brand-new Toyota Center.

The victory at Utah snapped a five-game losing streak and a 26-game skid in Western Conference arenas as Curry dominated the paint with game highs of 23 points and 12 rebounds. Hinrich scored 17 points, going 4-for-7 from three-point range, and Robinson added 16 points on 7-for-8 shooting.

"We had a game plan, and we followed it,'' coach Scott Skiles said. "Our defense was very good, and our offense has been good for a few weeks now. It was a great performance by a lot of guys -- especially Curry. He's a huge factor out there when he is aggressive. When he maintains his poise and doesn't do anything too quick and kind of looks at the defense, he is good out there. It's only when he gets going too fast and people attack him [that he struggles].''

Curry easily handled Jazz center Greg Ostertag, but he faces a much more formidable foe tonight in the Rockets' 7-6, 310-pound Yao Ming. How does Curry intend to deal with the Great Tall of China?

"I'm going to go at him extremely hard and play my game against him,'' Curry said. "I know he's going to bring his game against me, and I'm looking forward to it. I'm feeling real good right now, and my teammates are doing a good job of getting me the ball. I'm also doing a better job of recognizing double-teams quicker and kicking the ball back out when the defenses sag back in on me. That's how I was able to get four assists [Wednesday]. Those are Jamal Crawford numbers.

"Yao will be tough because he has great length and size and is a good defender. We're going to try to take it to him as a team first, and if I can get a couple of easy baskets to get us off to a good start, that will be great.''

If Curry wants some extra encouragement, all he has to do is lend an ear to teammate Antonio Davis.

"All Eddy has to do is keep playing the way he's playing, and it doesn't matter who he plays,'' Davis said. "If Eddy gets it in his mind that he's going to go out and play the way he is capable, I don't think it will be about his scoring 20 points and grabbing 12 rebounds. It's about his presence in the middle. When we get him the ball and he puts forth the effort he put forth [Wednesday], he's going to score from the field or get to the line. So I'd just tell him to keep up his confidence, play his game -- and please stay out of foul trouble.''

indygeezer
02-06-2004, 10:27 AM
Here's a question back to a few folks. What is wrong with looking at a trade if it improves the team? I am willing to trade anybody on this team (with the possible exception of Reggie) if it gets us over the top. Al is most often mentioned because he is not BYC and because he is a marketable player in a position of strength for us.
Why am I so willing to trade? I don't believe in waiting that long for potential to develope. Do I know I will be alive in 2, 3, 4 seasons? Or that any of us will? I want a championship and that is the bottom line. I would like for it to include Reggie because he's been here so long...but...I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.

Peck
02-06-2004, 10:47 AM
Here's a question back to a few folks. What is wrong with looking at a trade if it improves the team? I am willing to trade anybody on this team (with the possible exception of Reggie) if it gets us over the top. Al is most often mentioned because he is not BYC and because he is a marketable player in a position of strength for us.
Why am I so willing to trade? I don't believe in waiting that long for potential to develope. Do I know I will be alive in 2, 3, 4 seasons? Or that any of us will? I want a championship and that is the bottom line. I would like for it to include Reggie because he's been here so long...but...I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.

I nominate this for the greatest post of all-time. :dance:

ChicagoJ
02-06-2004, 11:08 AM
Here's a question back to a few folks. What is wrong with looking at a trade if it improves the team? I am willing to trade anybody on this team (with the possible exception of Reggie) if it gets us over the top. Al is most often mentioned because he is not BYC and because he is a marketable player in a position of strength for us.

Why am I so willing to trade? I don't believe in waiting that long for potential to develope. Do I know I will be alive in 2, 3, 4 seasons? Or that any of us will? I want a championship and that is the bottom line. I would like for it to include Reggie because he's been here so long...but...I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.

I nominate this for the greatest post of all-time. :dance:

I generally agree and I wanted to add one thing to Geezer's post for why I am willing to trade: I don't care if we're in first place at the all-star break or not. We've been here before, and still have zero championships. If we can improve the team, then I don't care if we're in first place, do it!

Now, I wouldn't do this trade. I'll repeat myself:

Let's not forget that there are reasons Chicago is shopping Crawford and Curry.

And one of those is that Pax realizes neither of these guys will ever be the best or second best player on a championship caliber team. However, for the Pacers, these guys would be somewhere around the third through fifth options. With all the hype they've been given, would they be willing to accept that role? Also, how in the world would we create enough cap space to re-sign them? Giving up Al, with a nice, cheap, long contact in exchange for two guys who have not been winners at the college or professional levels and might be disgruntled with their roles... I don't know if I'd do that. If we don't get Q, I almost certainly wouldn't do it.

(emphasis added)

So for those of you that would do it, explain to me where I'm wrong?

Unclebuck
02-06-2004, 11:41 AM
.
I don't believe in waiting that long for potential to develope. Do I know I will be alive in 2, 3, 4 seasons? Or that any of us will? I want a championship and that is the bottom line. I would like for it to include Reggie because he's been here so long...but...I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.


if you want a championship this season. Then you should not want this deal.

If you are tired of waiting on potential to develope, than you should not want Curry.


I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.

Has anyone ever said that they won't trade someone even if it makes the team better. I know I have never said that. The question is, will it make the team better. That is the only question I ask

For the record, I would trade everyone and anyone to win a championship

Arcadian
02-06-2004, 12:46 PM
I agree that if anyone can be traded to make the team better that deal should be done but...

Why is does it seem some think that that trading Al for any sg will make us better?

Why is everyone so sure we won't miss what Al brings?

Why is Al the most harped on Pacer and compared to "beloved" Pacers such as Jalen Rose and Travis Best?

I think that there is more going on in these trade talks than just wanting to improve the team. I tend to believe that many personally don't like Al and many don't apperciate him very much.

ABADays
02-06-2004, 01:00 PM
Jalen Rose? Beloved? Here in Indianapolis? By Pacer fans? I must have missed something.

waxman
02-06-2004, 01:01 PM
You can't put a bunch of players on the floor together that all want to be "The Man", and expect a championship... every championship team has to have role players... For every Shaq or Hakeem you need a Robert Horry/Horace Grant type,,, For every Jordan or Kobe you need a Ron Harper / Bruce Bowen type, you have the stars that make the big shots and spectacular plays and you have the role players that do everything else.

Brad Miller worked with Jermaine because Brad didn't need to post up... he created space for JO to operate by being a solid perimeter shooter and passer... Jeff Foster works because he doesn't have an offensive oriented game and spends most of the time on the perimeter setting picks for people and then crashing the boards. There is a reason Shaq and Eldon Campbell didn't work together... they were both low post players who needed the offense run through them...which didn't work with them on the floor at the same time. Or Olajuwan and Sampson...worked for a bit...but Sampson tried to become a more perimeter oriented player...at 7'4"?.

And the reason Duncan and Robinson worked is because Robinson was way passed his prime, and essentially became a role player next to Duncan.

Yeah this proposed trade looks neat and exciting on paper... and I like the players involved individually...but I'm afraid it wouldn't be helpful in the short term...and god knows about the long term. We have the pieces now...I believe we just need them all healthy.... playing smarter(which doesn't mean slower or more deliberate,)... and with more fluidity.

ROCislandWarrior
02-06-2004, 01:02 PM
if you want a championship this season. Then you should not want this deal.

Well what about getting Nick Van Exel?

I saw this on hoopshype.com, although their argument for him coming to indy seems to be weak.


Point guard has been an area of concern for Indiana, and Van Exel's mother lives in Indianapolis.

Sounds like another reporter pulling this one out of their a$$ as usual

indygeezer
02-06-2004, 01:05 PM
I agree that if anyone can be traded to make the team better that deal should be done but...

Why is does it seem some think that that trading Al for any sg will make us better?

Why is everyone so sure we won't miss what Al brings?

Why is Al the most harped on Pacer and compared to beloved Pacers such as Jalen Rose and Travis Best?

I think that there is more going on in these trade talks than just wanting to improve the team. I tend to believe that many personally don't like Al and many don't apperciate him very much.



Comparison to TB...just my personnal frustration from the other night coming thru. Al was at the 3 pt line holding the ball (numerous times) trying to convince the defender that he was going to drive (bent over, holding ball 6" off floor, wagging back and forth). It didn't work any of the times he tried it and he ended up taking bad shots with the clock running out causing the offense to stagnate...thus the reference to TB. I haven't advocated trading him for anybody let alone "just" anybody. If an upgrade is available..do it. He's our most marketable commodity (see my earlier post regarding this aspect). Am I frustrated with him? Yes, but I don't advocate keeping or trading ANYBODY based on my like or dislike of them (personally I like AL and always have)...I base it solely on how it affects my chances of seeing a NBA CHAMPIONSHIP in Indianapolis.

PaceBalls
02-06-2004, 01:11 PM
the trade proposed gets rid of all our good defenders and replaces them with weak ones wtf would you do that? I mean cmon JC is the worst 2 guard defender in the game. Sure he can score 30 as a goto guy. But he wont be on the Pacers, more like 4th option off the bench.

beast23
02-06-2004, 02:34 PM
Here's a question back to a few folks. What is wrong with looking at a trade if it improves the team? I am willing to trade anybody on this team (with the possible exception of Reggie) if it gets us over the top. Al is most often mentioned because he is not BYC and because he is a marketable player in a position of strength for us.
Why am I so willing to trade? I don't believe in waiting that long for potential to develope. Do I know I will be alive in 2, 3, 4 seasons? Or that any of us will? I want a championship and that is the bottom line. I would like for it to include Reggie because he's been here so long...but...I want a championship and nobody is NOT expendable if it makes the team better.

I nominate this for the greatest post of all-time. :dance:

I don't know if I would go that far. IMO, Geezers post states the obvious. But needs to be mentioned as a consensus goal, nevertheless.

The problem we have is that we can all see the obviously rediculous (no-brainer) trades that would put us over the top. Al for Shaq. That's a great trade.... all of us would be for it.

But the problem is, no-brainer trades are virtually non-existent. Since this team is the acknowledged EC favorite to reach the finals, just how much risk to its continued success are we willing to assume to make the trade that MIGHT make us better?

For any trade that could be completed before the trade deadline, I think that's what our arguments really come down to. We all have our eye on the prize THIS SEASON (as well as the next 2-3 years) and disagree how we can best get there.

So what do we need? A better center and improved perimeter shooting. At least that's been the consensus opinion.

The trade definitely provides a good prospect at the center position. But I agree with earlier comments that Curry is just a PROSPECT. In fact, I believe that Curry would weaken this team for the remainder of this season, perhaps risking a chance to get to the NBA finals.

The other aspects of the trade to improve our perimeter shooting. But the losing 4 players out of our rotation would certainly be a significant risk to the continued success of the team for THIS SEASON.

I totally agree with Geezer..... I want a championship. But, our current roster when playing our best ball, is capable of beating any team in the league right now. I think it has a good chance of making the finals, with an outside chance of winning it all. So IMO, we should be looking for trades that will impact our rotation much less than the proposed trade. A 1-for-1, 2-for-1 or 2-for-2 trade at most. Byond that, scrubs can be thrown in as required.

indygeezer
02-06-2004, 02:58 PM
I can 98% agree Beast. My only fear is that IMO, like years past we started fast and now the rest of the league may be catching up with us. NJ, NO, NY, and <gulp> Milwaukee are quite capable of making us look really bad...even Atlanta gives us problems. Now if we can kick it up a notch I'm comfortable. BUT this club has not shown that it can keep a lead and perform at a high level in the PO's. With that in mind...I'm looking for ways to improve. But then I'm not DW or LB, am I?

Anthem
02-06-2004, 03:03 PM
I'm looking for ways to improve. But then I'm not DW or LB, am I?


Obviously not, as those two statements would be mutually exclusive.


:borg:
:laugh:

Anthem
02-06-2004, 03:16 PM
BTW, Croshere/Pollard/Al works for Ray Allen/Calvin Booth...

:devil: