PDA

View Full Version : Josh McRoberts



Dr. Awesome
02-24-2011, 04:04 PM
So what happens now?

This type of fiasco could mess with his head. He can't feel good about this. Also, whats the motive for him to re-sign here now? We just tried to trade him. Obviously offering him a contract would show we want him, but I don't know. This whole thing could really mess with our team.

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 04:10 PM
Oh come now, certaionly if he was able to get through the year and a half with JOB he can get through this. See JOB toughened Josh up

smj887
02-24-2011, 04:10 PM
Larry tells him it's a business, that even though he'd rather keep McRoberts he felt the deal would have been an upgrade.

Then if the team had been intending on re-signing McBob in free agency, they get to work on the preliminary details of a new deal.

If they don't intend on re-signing him, they get to work on the preliminary details of a new deal then "negotiations collapse" during the offseason thus to keep his confidence and effort at a max.

smj887
02-24-2011, 04:10 PM
Larry tells him it's a business, that even though he'd rather keep McRoberts he felt the deal would have been an upgrade.

Then if the team had been intending on re-signing McBob in free agency, they get to work on the preliminary details of a new deal.

If they don't intend on re-signing him, they get to work on the preliminary details of a new deal then "negotiations collapse" during the offseason thus to keep his confidence and effort at a max.

rel
02-24-2011, 04:14 PM
We need a JOSH MCROBERTS JOSH MCROBERTS chant friday...show him we want him here

Aw Heck
02-24-2011, 04:15 PM
I'm not worried. He knows this is a business. It wouldn't have been the first time he's been traded.

If Josh decided to bolt next offseason because of this, fine. He's not irreplaceable.

If this pisses him off, maybe it'll motivate him to play better (I'm not saying he's playing bad, but maybe this will make him step his game up).

thewholefnshow31
02-24-2011, 04:22 PM
I have no worries unless McRoberts one to take everything personnel.

If McRoberts gets his panties in a bunch over this he will just hurt himself. He has the rest of the season to showcase his talents to the rest of the league. Him going into some kind of funk or pitty party will just hurt his value on the open market.

If he does feel slighted by the Pacers the best thing he could do is continue to develop and play great. When we come to re-sign him he leaves us hanging and goes some where else.

thewholefnshow31
02-24-2011, 04:22 PM
I have no worries unless McRoberts one to take everything personnel.

If McRoberts gets his panties in a bunch over this he will just hurt himself. He has the rest of the season to showcase his talents to the rest of the league. Him going into some kind of funk or pitty party will just hurt his value on the open market.

If he does feel slighted by the Pacers the best thing he could do is continue to develop and play great. When we come to re-sign him he leaves us hanging and goes some where else.

DEEman
02-24-2011, 04:25 PM
McRoberts isnt playing for Bird, he is playing the best he can for himself, trying to get a better contract next year, he is playing for the fans, the city and his teammates. I have absolutely all faith in him he will play 100% next game. The guy is a fighter, he has been is worser situations

cdash
02-24-2011, 04:27 PM
Not that big of a deal. He knows it's a business and he will continue to play hard and do the same things he's been doing. Nothing will change. No need to be dramatic about it.

Dr. Awesome
02-24-2011, 04:29 PM
I'm not being dramatic...I just fail to see how he just brushes this off like nothing happened.

Unclebuck
02-24-2011, 04:32 PM
If he goes into a funk, he'll only hurt himself as you tries to get a new contract beyond this season

BillS
02-24-2011, 04:33 PM
It always kills me when folks think teams and players become enemies when a player is involved in a trade or even just a discussion. Have we decided RonRon is the norm?

cdash
02-24-2011, 04:34 PM
I'm not being dramatic...I just fail to see how he just brushes this off like nothing happened.

I meant Josh :laugh:

Like others have mentioned, he's playing for a contract and showing what he can do. It would not behoove him to dwell on this.

Dr. Awesome
02-24-2011, 04:39 PM
It always kills me when folks think teams and players become enemies when a player is involved in a trade or even just a discussion. Have we decided RonRon is the norm?

It always kills me when folks put words in other peoples mouths.

I said this could get in his head. That is quite different than being enemies. Multiple players came out and said how the rotations messed with their mentality under O'Brien, is it so crazy to think that a trade might do the same?

Pacemaker
02-24-2011, 04:53 PM
Actually I'm relieved I don't wanna see anyone go if is not by trading our expiring contracts for talent or assets.

flox
02-24-2011, 05:02 PM
I have always maintained that Josh was not a part of our core, and this to me further proves the point.

Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.

flox
02-24-2011, 05:03 PM
I have always maintained that Josh was not a part of our core, and this to me further proves the point.

Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.

PacersAllDay
02-24-2011, 05:08 PM
What if McRoberts gets interviewed and says, "The deal didn't actually go through so it's irrelevant."?

xIndyFan
02-24-2011, 05:11 PM
I have always maintained that Josh was not a part of our core, and this to me further proves the point.

:iagree: think you're right on both counts.


Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.

:laugh: true and funny



I have always maintained that Josh was not a part of our core, and this to me further proves the point.

Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.

still funny, but funnier the 1st time. :p

Sparhawk
02-24-2011, 05:13 PM
Josh has to feel pretty good. He was almost traded for a former #3 pick in OJ Mayo. Hot Damn!

Mackey_Rose
02-24-2011, 05:19 PM
I think this whole situation proves two things about McRoberts:

1) The Pacers know they aren't willing to pay Josh his market value to keep him after this season.

2) Josh has a lot more value than vnzla (just a throw-in) and a lot of other people thought.

naptownmenace
02-24-2011, 05:23 PM
Josh has to feel pretty good. He was almost traded for a former #3 pick in OJ Mayo. Hot Damn!

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. He can go into negotiations this summer with that little feather in his cap.

McKeyFan
02-24-2011, 05:26 PM
Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.I like Josh so I couldn't thank the post. But that was a pretty good one-liner.

Sookie
02-24-2011, 05:27 PM
Well it could be a confidence builder. OJ's a big name, and he was almost traded for him.

I think Josh wants to stay in Indy, which is why it's a bit of a shame, but I think he knows this is a business, and he'll be fine.

cdash
02-24-2011, 05:27 PM
I think this whole situation proves two things about McRoberts:

1) The Pacers know they aren't willing to pay Josh his market value to keep him after this season.

2) Josh has a lot more value than vnzla (just a throw-in) and a lot of other people thought.

My devil's advocate response to your transparent pro-McRoberts agenda: The free agency of Josh McRoberts and inability to pay him likely had very, very little to do with this deal. It was about finding an upgrade at the shooting guard spot, and it just so happens that Memphis has one hell of a logjam at the wings and needed to get rid of a guy who has fallen out of favor with them. They could use more size up front, so a match was made. The first round pick was probably a nice carrot as well. I do agree that McRoberts has more value than I previously thought though.

pacer4ever
02-24-2011, 05:29 PM
Well it could be a confidence builder. OJ's a big name, and he was almost traded for him.

I think Josh wants to stay in Indy, which is why it's a bit of a shame, but I think he knows this is a business, and he'll be fine.

so was it a confidnce booster to Kwame Brown that he was traded for Pau Gasol? I dont buy ur logic

Sookie
02-24-2011, 05:33 PM
so was it a confidnce booster to Kwame Brown that he was traded for Pau Gasol? I dont buy ur logic

Well all right, Memphis isn't the brightest.

But I'm just saying, that Josh got a good idea of what his market value is on this move. And it seems like it's a little higher than some thought.

cdash
02-24-2011, 05:36 PM
Really, if anyone's head is going to be screwed up by this, it has to be Brandon Rush, right? We have been trying to trade that guy for a year now and twice it has seemed imminent and twice it has fallen apart at the last minute. The writing is on the wall for Rush here, I'm afraid.

Mackey_Rose
02-24-2011, 05:46 PM
My devil's advocate response to your transparent pro-McRoberts agenda: The free agency of Josh McRoberts and inability to pay him likely had very, very little to do with this deal. It was about finding an upgrade at the shooting guard spot, and it just so happens that Memphis has one hell of a logjam at the wings and needed to get rid of a guy who has fallen out of favor with them. They could use more size up front, so a match was made. The first round pick was probably a nice carrot as well. I do agree that McRoberts has more value than I previously thought though.

So we "upgrade" the shooting guard position while leaving only one power forward on the roster. That seems counterproductive.

cdash
02-24-2011, 05:50 PM
So we "upgrade" the shooting guard position while leaving only one power forward on the roster. That seems counterproductive.

Hey, I agree. That was my first reaction to the trade if you look through that huge OJ Mayo thread.

presto123
02-24-2011, 06:10 PM
I have always maintained that Josh was not a part of our core, and this to me further proves the point.

Who we get in FA will be leaps and bounds ahead of Josh McRoberts in everything but leaping and bounding ability.



Passing ability??? Nobody on the team is better not even the guards. So many of you still under-rate Josh's contribution to this team.

Mackey_Rose
02-24-2011, 06:15 PM
Passing ability??? Nobody on the team is better not even the guards. So many of you still under-rate Josh's contribution to this team.

O'Brien didn't like him, so in flox's eyes, he doesn't belong in the NBA.

Sookie
02-24-2011, 06:19 PM
Hey, I agree. That was my first reaction to the trade if you look through that huge OJ Mayo thread.

Right, which is a shame.

He seems like a perfect third wing to PG/Granger.

Although with Larry talking up Lance as he is, I still wonder if the plan isn't that PG will be Granger's backcourt mate, but rather will be his replacement. And Larry's either looking for a star SG, or hoping Lance pans out.

flox
02-24-2011, 06:31 PM
Passing ability??? Nobody on the team is better not even the guards. So many of you still under-rate Josh's contribution to this team.

At last point I checked, there's only one ball to share between Collison, Granger, and soon George. I don't care if he is going to pass- he's not getting the ball to pass with.


O'Brien didn't like him, so in flox's eyes, he doesn't belong in the NBA.

I was vocal of my distaste of him before you even joined the board. I have basketball opinions- they happen to align with O'Brien.

flox
02-24-2011, 06:32 PM
Hey, I agree. That was my first reaction to the trade if you look through that huge OJ Mayo thread.

I don't think this trade was made in mind for this year. Besides, we play Foster more, which makes me happy.

Eventually one of Granger/Rush would make way for an upgrade at the four.

presto123
02-24-2011, 06:33 PM
[QUOTE=flox;1177650]At last point I checked, there's only one ball to share between Collison, Granger, and soon George. I don't care if he is going to pass- he's not getting the ball to pass with.



That's officially one of the dumbest things I've read on here.

Sookie
02-24-2011, 06:34 PM
At last point I checked, there's only one ball to share between Collison, Granger, and soon George. I don't care if he is going to pass- he's not getting the ball to pass with.



I was vocal of my distaste of him before you even joined the board. I have basketball opinions- they happen to align with O'Brien.

Actually, he's the best guy on the team at getting the ball to Roy. Getting the ball to Roy is going to be extremely important so long as we are running a decent offense.

flox
02-24-2011, 06:39 PM
That's officially one of the dumbest things I've read on here.

Grangers getting better at ball sharing. But still, Collison and Granger are ball dominators.


Actually, he's the best guy on the team at getting the ball to Roy. Getting the ball to Roy is going to be extremely important so long as we are running a decent offense.
I'm not so sure that we'll be running the offense through Roy (in the future) as much as we do now if Collison and George are the players we think they are.

I'm not thinking of this as right here right now, but more of the makeup of the team next year or 2 years from now, when Pacer basketball should be really exciting.

Hibbert
02-24-2011, 07:24 PM
I'm not being dramatic...I just fail to see how he just brushes this off like nothing happened.

Because nothing happened. He plays professional sports, it comes with the territory. Every player knows its a business, thats the most used term by NBA players ever.

Hibbert
02-24-2011, 07:30 PM
Really, if anyone's head is going to be screwed up by this, it has to be Brandon Rush, right? We have been trying to trade that guy for a year now and twice it has seemed imminent and twice it has fallen apart at the last minute. The writing is on the wall for Rush here, I'm afraid.

Rush is no different than any other player, no player is safe when it comes to trade talks and no player is untouchable, this past week should of proved that much. If the writting is on the wall for Rush he'd of been gone already, we just gave him that extension which is the real writing. He's apart of this team.

ilive4sports
02-24-2011, 07:48 PM
Seriously, if players do not understand the NBA is a business, then they won't be in the NBA long. Players know they can be traded at any point, regardless of play. Do you think this is the first time Rush or McBob have been talked about in trades? What about Danny? He's been thrown around in trade talks according to the media more than anyone else.

clownskull
02-24-2011, 08:14 PM
So what happens now?

This type of fiasco could mess with his head. He can't feel good about this. Also, whats the motive for him to re-sign here now? We just tried to trade him. Obviously offering him a contract would show we want him, but I don't know. This whole thing could really mess with our team.

it shouldn't make much of a difference. i think there is a difference between trading someone because management believed it would improve the team than because there are issues with a players attitude or some other kind of unpleasant issue.
if someone can't handle the business side of this business (being traded or almost being traded) they need to find another business to be in. if he is a grown up, he will keep playing and doing his job like he should.

cdash
02-24-2011, 08:33 PM
Rush is no different than any other player, no player is safe when it comes to trade talks and no player is untouchable, this past week should of proved that much. If the writting is on the wall for Rush he'd of been gone already, we just gave him that extension which is the real writing. He's apart of this team.

We didn't give him an extension, we picked up his rookie option--a no-brainer move unless the guy isn't worth his weight in salt. He's worth that money to us and everyone else.

The writing on the wall is that we have tried to trade him at two straight deadlines, and I've read countless times that he has been shopped around and that we would like to move him. If that's not writing on the wall, then you tell me what is. He's apart of this team, but unless he goes gangbusters and soon, he won't be part of our future.

owl
02-24-2011, 09:07 PM
Josh will get 5-8 million. Pacers probably don't want to pay that.

righteouscool
02-24-2011, 09:34 PM
Josh will get 5-8 million. Pacers probably don't want to pay that.

If Josh gets over 5 I hope the Pacers don't even try.

8 million a year for Josh McRoberts. That would be absurd.

MyFavMartin
02-24-2011, 09:45 PM
I'm not sure that this wasn't a trade that would set up for a bigger move this summer. We'd have had a big hole to fill at the starting PF position, but potentially be stocked at the wing spots with some very attractive assets in 1/2/3 positions with Mayo/Rush/PG/DG and maybe even Lance...

Shabazz
02-24-2011, 10:39 PM
I'm not being dramatic...I just fail to see how he just brushes this off like nothing happened.

You aren't being dramatic. McRoberts has been tempermental in the past. This will be a good test to see how much he has grown up over the last few years. Can he accept the reality that this is a business and this stuff happens all the time?

joeyd
02-24-2011, 10:40 PM
I'm glad Josh is staying. I have seen signs of improvement in him, and under Vogel, he may yet continue to develop. He stagnated under JOB IMO.

I think it's crazy that the teams could not keep a lid on the deal until it became official.

Shabazz
02-24-2011, 10:49 PM
I think it's crazy that the teams could not keep a lid on the deal until it became official.


Some of these journalists must have bugs and wire taps in the GM offices around the league.

I can envision a GM getting off the phone after proposing a deal to another team, turning on ESPN, and seeing Chris Broussard discussing the proposed trade 30 seconds later.

15th parallel
02-24-2011, 10:51 PM
If he becomes disturbed about it, it's his loss. Rush have been there, and we don't see any negative reaction from him. Same with TJ Ford, who have been in numerous trade rumors and right now is kept inactive and being rumored to be bought out, yet has kept himself composed.

If anything, Josh should consider this as a positive more than a negative. I mean, the fact that other teams want him should raise up his value come FA time, if there's no extension offer for him.

LoneGranger33
02-24-2011, 10:56 PM
As much as the NBA is a business, the game of basketball itself is not. Being a member of a professional sports team is different from a lot of jobs because teammates build closer bonds (not always, but quite often) than co-workers do. If I were Josh or Brandon, I wouldn't be happy with the news today, especially if I was happy and wanted to be a part of the future here in Indiana.

cdash
02-24-2011, 10:59 PM
As much as the NBA is a business, the game of basketball itself is not. Being a member of a professional sports team is different from a lot of jobs because teammates build closer bonds (not always, but quite often) than co-workers do. If I were Josh or Brandon, I wouldn't be happy with the news today, especially if I was happy and wanted to be a part of the future here in Indiana.

Yeah, but at the same time...it's still a business. As an employee of any company, you have to understand that the company is going to do what is best for them, and if you are in a profession like professional basketball, trades come with the territory. You understand that as a professional athlete. You understand it can happen. That doesn't mean you have to like it, but if you let it affect your performance, it says something about your mental capacities.

presto123
02-24-2011, 11:04 PM
As much as the NBA is a business, the game of basketball itself is not. Being a member of a professional sports team is different from a lot of jobs because teammates build closer bonds (not always, but quite often) than co-workers do. If I were Josh or Brandon, I wouldn't be happy with the news today, especially if I was happy and wanted to be a part of the future here in Indiana.


Who's to say Tyler isn't expendable as well? We don't know the details. Maybe it is just the case that Memphis wanted Josh over Tyler. Did they ask for Tyler? Would Bird have pulled the trigger if they asked for Tyler instead? Lets face it.....everybody on the team is expendable for the right price.

Day-V
02-25-2011, 12:06 AM
I expect Josh to play as he's played all season. If anything come out with even more of an edge.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but I think his teammates showing support for him on Twitter regarding the trade is a big positive.


Roy Hibbert: "Hold the Mayo."
Paul George: "Phewww coo we keep JMac!!! He been doin great for us wouldve been tough to lose him!"
T.J. Ford: "Sad if the Pacers really traded my good friend " Josh McRoberts" kids playing great this yr"



Glad he's staying.

Eleazar
02-25-2011, 12:16 AM
I'm more worried about no how he will play, but how will this effect the Pacers ability to re-sign him.

Hicks
02-25-2011, 12:32 AM
Well it could be a confidence builder. OJ's a big name, and he was almost traded for him.

I think Josh wants to stay in Indy, which is why it's a bit of a shame, but I think he knows this is a business, and he'll be fine.

That's what I'm thinking. It sucks to be nearly shipped from home, but at the same time you were almost traded for a somewhat big name, which has to be flattering with regards to how far his game has come.

Hicks
02-25-2011, 12:33 AM
So we "upgrade" the shooting guard position while leaving only one power forward on the roster. That seems counterproductive.

It's temporary. Season's over in 7 or 8 weeks or so. We knew it was likely that they were going to go after another PF this summer anyway, and for all we know Josh could have come right back in the off season with a new contract.

Plus, it was said we were getting some players from New Orleans. One of them was probably a big. Maybe even Landry.

wintermute
02-25-2011, 03:38 AM
Plus, it was said we were getting some players from New Orleans. One of them was probably a big. Maybe even Landry.

It wouldn't have been Landry. Reportedly they just won a bidding war with us for Landry, so why turn around and give him to us for the package that Sacto rejected? That doesn't make any sense.

According to Wells' latest report, the deal was:

"The Pacers were set to send forward Josh McRoberts and a first-round draft pick to Memphis for guard O.J. Mayo. The Pacers were also going to send guard Brandon Rush and forward Solomon Jones to New Orleans for a draft pick and two unnamed players."

The unnamed player bit suggests 2 things: one, the deal might not have been final yet for N.O. And two, those 2 players were throw-ins and not a central part of the deal. Solo for example was initially reported as "unnamed player" too. I doubt that N.O. views Landry as a throw-in - it would have been Jason Smith or David Andersen or someone like that.

Also, N.O. already traded their 2011 pick to Portland. The pick they're sending is either a 2nd rounder, or a 2013 pick at the earliest.

wintermute
02-25-2011, 03:42 AM
Maybe Josh is valued more than we think. Bulls reportedly offered Ronnie Brewer and 2 first rounders for Mayo, but were turned down:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/ct-spt-0225-trade-bulls-heat-chicago-20110224,0,1581666.story

Bulls fans have to be terribly frustrated - they have a dire need for an SG upgrade, much more than us, and they were sitting on a lot of assets, but couldn't get anything done.

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 07:38 AM
The first round pick was probably a nice carrot as well. I do agree that McRoberts has more value than I previously thought though.

The Grizzlies turned down Ronnie Brewer, 2 first round picks, and a second round pick earlier in the day. I don't think the Pacers lottery protected pick was their main agenda.

*Edit: Should have read page 2. Good call wintermute.*

MrHale
02-25-2011, 07:50 AM
Sucks that this didn't go through..

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 08:02 AM
I'm more worried about no how he will play, but how will this effect the Pacers ability to re-sign him.

I think it proves what I have been saying in the Mid-Level McCeption thread.

Josh's value is in the $5-6 million range. The Pacers know this. They also have no intentions of re-signing him. They're going to go after a bigger name and bigger dollar guy for that spot. And I still think that will be a mistake. Both Josh and Tyler are too good to be 3rd string PFs. I think you get better value out of 24 year old Josh at $6 million than you do with 31 year old David West at $12 million. I would rather go with Josh as PF 1-A with Tyler as PF 1-B while spending $10-12 million total than pay that amount to West (or Randolph but if they sign Randolph the front office has truly lost it) to be PF 1 with Tyler as PF 2. But that is what the Pacers will do. And it will come back to bite them in the *** when the big name PF they sign turns out to be another massively overpaid player.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 08:19 AM
I think it proves what I have been saying in the Mid-Level McCeption thread.

Josh's value is in the $5-6 million range. The Pacers know this. They also have no intentions of re-signing him. They're going to go after a bigger name and bigger dollar guy for that spot. And I still think that will be a mistake. Both Josh and Tyler are too good to be 3rd string PFs. I think you get better value out of 24 year old Josh at $6 million than you do with 31 year old David West at $12 million. I would rather go with Josh as PF 1-A with Tyler as PF 1-B while spending $10-12 million total than pay that amount to West (or Randolph but if they sign Randolph the front office has truly lost it) to be PF 1 with Tyler as PF 2. But that is what the Pacers will do. And it will come back to bite them in the *** when the big name PF they sign turns out to be another massively overpaid player.

Back off on your pro-McRoberts agenda. He's only worth $3 million per and trade throw-in status.

MyFavMartin
02-25-2011, 08:23 AM
Josh is still our starting PF.

Hicks
02-25-2011, 11:05 AM
Back off on your pro-McRoberts agenda. He's only worth $3 million per and trade throw-in status.

You do have a pro-McRoberts agenda (or act as if you do), and no, not everyone who feels that way thinks he's only worth $3 million per and trade throw-in status.

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 11:45 AM
You do have a pro-McRoberts agenda (or act as if you do), and no, not everyone who feels that way thinks he's only worth $3 million per and trade throw-in status.

That doesn't change the fact that most were calling those of us who put his value significantly higher than $3 million crazy. Despite all the evidence saying we were right, the majority seemed to be in the opposite line of thinking. Or at least that is how they felt to borrow Justin Tyme's phrasing.

Hicks
02-25-2011, 11:51 AM
That doesn't change the fact that most were calling those of us who put his value significantly higher than $3 million crazy. Despite all the evidence saying we were right, the majority seemed to be in the opposite line of thinking. Or at least that is how they felt to borrow Justin Tyme's phrasing.

So? Doesn't mean you can lump all of us together.

BringJackBack
02-25-2011, 12:36 PM
mg_indy Michael Grady
JMAC got a lot of love today and rightfully so...Don't think I can announce him last (as some have asked) but I'll find out for sure...
13 minutes ago

presto123
02-25-2011, 01:21 PM
Josh has a payday coming after this season no matter who it is from.

cdash
02-25-2011, 02:03 PM
That doesn't change the fact that most were calling those of us who put his value significantly higher than $3 million crazy. Despite all the evidence saying we were right, the majority seemed to be in the opposite line of thinking. Or at least that is how they felt to borrow Justin Tyme's phrasing.

I've already admitted that Josh has more value than I previously thought, but what is this evidence you speak of? This proposed trade?

You can pat yourselves on the back all you want, but I still maintain that I would not want to pay Josh McRoberts the MLE on a long-term deal to play for us. He might get it somewhere else, but I will still think they are overpaying for his services. Only time will tell.

BrownBearCoffee
02-25-2011, 02:09 PM
Personally, I think this will light a fire under McBob. Maybe we see him a bit less tentative tonight (some nights it seems that the only thing he's trying to score is the SportsCenter top 10...)

Maybe he proves he's worth the MLE in these last 20 something games. Maybe he proves he's worth some other team's MLE over the summer. Stay tuned.

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 02:13 PM
I've already admitted that Josh has more value than I previously thought, but what is this evidence you speak of? This proposed trade?



I am speaking of the fact that every similar player in the league makes that kind of money.

The proposed trade is further confirmation that the price range is accurate. But I was mainly speaking of the fact that they will not re-sign Josh. That they'll go for someone more expensive. A 35 year old David West could end up being massively overpaid. If Josh is the same exact player at 28 as he is now, he'll be slightly overpaid. I believe the odds are better than David West has a major drop as he ages than that Josh doesn't improve. I just don't think that makes sense for us. But that is what we're going to do.

cdash
02-25-2011, 02:17 PM
I am speaking of the fact that every similar player in the league makes that kind of money.

The proposed trade is further confirmation that the price range is accurate. But I was mainly speaking of the fact that they will not re-sign Josh. That they'll go for someone more expensive. A 35 year old David West could end up being massively overpaid. If Josh is the same exact player at 28 as he is now, he'll be slightly overpaid. I believe the odds are better than David West has a major drop as he ages than that Josh doesn't improve. I just don't think that makes sense for us. But that is what we're going to do.

Taking liberties with David West's age? :laugh: I get what you're saying but West doesn't have the mileage that a lot of other players his age do. No deep playoff runs and he played four years of college. His legs are fresher than most 30 year old's.

My thing is that I don't see Josh dramatically improving upon what he already is. He will get better I'm sure, but I just don't see him growing into a difference maker at the power forward position, and that is what we need.

Sookie
02-25-2011, 02:29 PM
I don't think that this shows the Pacers have no interest in re-signing McRoberts.

Josh was the best young asset we have. Brandon hasn't played much, and although he's a great defensive player and a very good shooter, because he's so offensively inconsistent and was the only young guy (well, him and Lance) not part of the rotation, his value isn't high

Josh on the other hand, has been showing up in highlights after highlights. His unique skills as a post player have been on display. And the Pacers have a significantly better record when he's starting than when he's not.

We aren't going to give up Roy and PG, and most likely not Darren, Josh is the best young asset we've got. Unfortunately, he plays a position of need for us.

I'd like to see how the players grow through the rest of the year, hopefully through a playoff series (or two :D) and then decide what we need. Josh could really bust out of his shell and it could be pretty obvious we have our starting PF. Or, it could become obvious that we need an upgrade. (I'm still on the "get an all star PF, and keep Josh around to play backup C, and backup PF if needed..with Hans playing backup PF. Josh is a really really unique kind of post player, it'd be silly to give that up just yet, IMO. He's only 23.)

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 02:33 PM
Taking liberties with David West's age? :laugh: .
No. 4 years into his new contract David West will be 35. 4 years into his new contract Josh McRoberts will be 28.


My thing is that I don't see Josh dramatically improving upon what he already is. He will get better I'm sure, but I just don't see him growing into a difference maker at the power forward position, and that is what we need.

I think the combination of Josh and Hansbrough is already a difference maker at the PF position. And I expect them both to improve.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 02:47 PM
You do have a pro-McRoberts agenda (or act as if you do), and no, not everyone who feels that way thinks he's only worth $3 million per and trade throw-in status.

cdash has been harping on his worth around the league being at that level all year.

Some of us who knew he was wrong, tried to tell him. He didn't listen.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:06 PM
cdash has been harping on his worth around the league being at that level all year.

Some of us who knew he was wrong, tried to tell him. He didn't listen.

Yet people take what you say with a grain of salt, because it is so blatantly obvious that you have some sort of pro-McRoberts agenda. I'm not the only one who sees it.

For what it's worth, I just said I wouldn't want to pay McRoberts the MLE (and I still don't). I don't think his contributions on the court are worth that. Is it possible I'm wrong? Absolutely. Wouldn't be the first time. But even with improvements from Josh/Tyler, I still don't see that being a big enough improvement for this team. Is David West the answer? I have no idea. He's not a perfect solution by any means and I also worry about his age.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:08 PM
No. 4 years into his new contract David West will be 35. 4 years into his new contract Josh McRoberts will be 28.



I think the combination of Josh and Hansbrough is already a difference maker at the PF position. And I expect them both to improve.

Ah, gotcha. Wasn't clear at first, but not I see.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 03:12 PM
Yet people take what you say with a grain of salt, because it is so blatantly obvious that you have some sort of pro-McRoberts agenda. I'm not the only one who sees it.

For what it's worth, I just said I wouldn't want to pay McRoberts the MLE (and I still don't). I don't think his contributions on the court are worth that. Is it possible I'm wrong? Absolutely. Wouldn't be the first time. But even with improvements from Josh/Tyler, I still don't see that being a big enough improvement for this team. Is David West the answer? I have no idea. He's not a perfect solution by any means and I also worry about his age.

At what point has anything I've said not been 100% accurate?

Think about that, and take it with a grain of salt.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:16 PM
At what point has anything I said not been 100% accurate?

Think about that, and take it with a grain of salt.

It's been your opinion, so there's not really absolute accuracy with anything. I'd love to bring up your comical comparison of McRoberts to Lamar Odom, but that was just your opinion and you were talking about his ceiling, which is a pretty vague term that can mean just about anything you like it to mean. Just like everything I've said has been my opinion as well. I will continue taking your diatribes about McRoberts with a grain of salt.

Eleazar
02-25-2011, 03:18 PM
Yet people take what you say with a grain of salt, because it is so blatantly obvious that you have some sort of pro-McRoberts agenda. I'm not the only one who sees it.

For what it's worth, I just said I wouldn't want to pay McRoberts the MLE (and I still don't). I don't think his contributions on the court are worth that. Is it possible I'm wrong? Absolutely. Wouldn't be the first time. But even with improvements from Josh/Tyler, I still don't see that being a big enough improvement for this team. Is David West the answer? I have no idea. He's not a perfect solution by any means and I also worry about his age.

When it comes to taking things with a grain of salt people on here tend to do that more with what you say than what Mackey says.

Anyways there is a reason why Mackey and many others are pro-McRoberts. It is because he is a damn good player. He may not show up much in the stats, but stats don't make a player good. It isn't even arguable that this team plays better with McRoberts on the court, that has been true since he was traded to this team.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 03:21 PM
It's been your opinion, so there's not really absolute accuracy with anything. I'd love to bring up your comical comparison of McRoberts to Lamar Odom, but that was just your opinion and you were talking about his ceiling, which is a pretty vague term that can mean just about anything you like it to mean. Just like everything I've said has been my opinion as well. I will continue taking your diatribes about McRoberts with a grain of salt.

You brought up the question of his ceiling. I gave you my answer. You never said what you thought.

You then said my opinion doesn't count because I have a pro-McRoberts bias, and then later in the same thread said "I just like Hansbrough more." Isn't that also a bias?

When it came to Josh's market value, you were wrong. That's all.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:22 PM
When it comes to taking things with a grain of salt people on here tend to do that more with what you say than what Mackey says.

Anyways there is a reason why Mackey and many others are pro-McRoberts. It is because he is a damn good player. He may not show up much in the stats, but stats don't make a player good. It isn't even arguable that this team plays better with McRoberts on the court, that has been true since he was traded to this team.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but why is that?

I'm not anti-McRoberts. I've said countless times that I like him and I like what he does on the court. It's all about the price to me. I just wouldn't want to pay the guy the MLE. I like Hardee's hamburgers for $3 but if they jacked the price up to $10 I'm going to look at other options. That's what this boils down to for me. The last thing I want to do after getting out from under these horrible contracts is start making the same mistakes all over again.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:28 PM
You brought up the question of his ceiling. I gave you my answer. You never said what you thought.

You then said my opinion doesn't count because I have a pro-McRoberts bias, and then later in the same thread said "I just like Hansbrough more." Isn't that also a bias?

When it came to Josh's market value, you were wrong. That's all.

I did say what I thought of that. Somewhere in whatever thread that was I responded to it.

I never said your opinion doesn't count, I said it's taken with a grain of salt because you really do seem to have an agenda here. Maybe I'm wrong, but you seem to do two things very consistently: Tout McRoberts and bash Granger. Why that is, I don't know. What I do know is that you rarely (if ever) condemn McRoberts or admit his faults. I prefer Tyler to McRoberts, but I admit that his game has some warts and that it is just my opinion. It's not really a bias I don't think. I don't crusade on behalf of Tyler like you do with Josh.

When it comes to Josh's market value, I'm not wrong. When he signs that contract in the MLE ballpark, then you can say I was wrong. Now, you can't say that.

Sookie
02-25-2011, 03:40 PM
I think people have their biases for a reason.

If you're a basketball fan, and you really like McRoberts, then that's going to suggest that you like a certain brand of basketball, that you value certain things in the game ect..ect..

Taking a post "with a grain of salt" from a poster, because a certain player is mentioned is illogical because that poster is going to approach every post with the same perspective, preferring that specific player is part of that perspective.

Quite frankly, I learn more about how a majority of the posters here think about the game of basketball by what players they prefer, rather than what they post.

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:44 PM
Taking a post "with a grain of salt" from a poster, because a certain player is mentioned is illogical because that poster is going to approach every post with the same perspective, preferring that specific player is part of that perspective.

Probably. I should actually have qualified that "grain of salt" comment by saying that I take it with a grain of salt. I shouldn't try to speak for other people with that.

dgranger17
02-25-2011, 03:55 PM
Actually, the Lamar Odom and McRoberts comparison isn't too far off. Lamar Odom was in his 4th year when he was 23 years old. His first 3 years, he was getting 34+ minutes per game so he was getting some heavy run. In his 4th year, he averaged 15 pts 7 rebs 4 assts 1 steal 1 block and 4 turnovers on 44% shooting. This is JMac's 1st year of getting more than 12 minutes per game and he's averaging 7 points 5 rebs 2 assts 1 steal 1 block and 1 turnover on 54% shooting. Per 36, that's roughly 12 pts 9 rebs 4 assts 1 steal 1 block and 2 turnovers. Not bad considering he hasn't had the benefit of playing 35 minutes a game during his career. I'd sign him to 4 years $20 million or maybe even 5 years $35 million and have no problem with it. We can always swing our 1st rounder for a SG and/or swing next years 1st rounder for a PF and move McRoberts to the backup C.

Larry will figure it out

cdash
02-25-2011, 03:57 PM
Actually, the Lamar Odom and McRoberts comparison isn't too far off. Lamar Odom was in his 4th year when he was 23 years old. His first 3 years, he was getting 34+ minutes per game so he was getting some heavy run. In his 4th year, he averaged 15 pts 7 rebs 4 assts 1 steal 1 block and 4 turnovers on 44% shooting. This is JMac's 1st year of getting more than 12 minutes per game and he's averaging 7 points 5 rebs 2 assts 1 steal 1 block and 1 turnover on 54% shooting. Per 36, that's roughly 12 pts 9 rebs 4 assts 1 steal 1 block and 2 turnovers. Not bad considering he hasn't had the benefit of playing 35 minutes a game during his career. I'd sign him to 4 years $20 million or maybe even 5 years $35 million and have no problem with it. We can always swing our 1st rounder for a SG and/or swing next years 1st rounder for a PF and move McRoberts to the backup C.

Larry will figure it out

Their games are similar. Their unique size and skills make them fairly comparable. I think Josh can be a poor man's Lamar Odom, absolutely. I'm just skeptical that McRoberts could ever be the third best player on a title winning team, as Odom has been the past two years.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 04:32 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you, but why is that?

I'm not anti-McRoberts. I've said countless times that I like him and I like what he does on the court. It's all about the price to me. I just wouldn't want to pay the guy the MLE. I like Hardee's hamburgers for $3 but if they jacked the price up to $10 I'm going to look at other options. That's what this boils down to for me. The last thing I want to do after getting out from under these horrible contracts is start making the same mistakes all over again.


Here are two posts you had before the season started. You went into this year thinking these things about his value. These posts indicate to me that you were going into the season already with you opinion made up on his value.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1077639&postcount=11


I am 90% certain that we as Pacer fans value Josh a hell of a lot more than the rest of the league. If he were on the open market, he would be hard pressed to get anything more than the veteran's minimum right now. That said, he has a golden opportunity to secure himself a long-term deal with a good season. I think his numbers will be around 6-9 ppg and 7-10 rpg, tops. Not sure what kind of deal those sort of numbers will secure in the new NBA.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1078466&postcount=286


I'm excited about our future, but I really don't think we are going to be very good this year. I know this is taboo to say around here because he is such a cult hero, but Josh McRoberts is easily the worst starting PF in the league.

Mackey_Rose
02-25-2011, 04:34 PM
It's been your opinion, so there's not really absolute accuracy with anything. I'd love to bring up your comical comparison of McRoberts to Lamar Odom, but that was just your opinion and you were talking about his ceiling, which is a pretty vague term that can mean just about anything you like it to mean. Just like everything I've said has been my opinion as well. I will continue taking your diatribes about McRoberts with a grain of salt.


Their games are similar. Their unique size and skills make them fairly comparable. I think Josh can be a poor man's Lamar Odom, absolutely. I'm just skeptical that McRoberts could ever be the third best player on a title winning team, as Odom has been the past two years.

Jesus man. Did you take a lesson in contradictions from JOB?

BRushWithDeath
02-25-2011, 04:41 PM
Their games are similar. Their unique size and skills make them fairly comparable. I think Josh can be a poor man's Lamar Odom, absolutely. I'm just skeptical that McRoberts could ever be the third best player on a title winning team, as Odom has been the past two years.

I'm skeptical that he could ever be either. But I don't think the thought is completely outrageous and that to me makes it a logical ceiling.

I think a poor man's Odom is a perfect comparison for Josh. And I absolutely love Odom's game. As in he is probably my favorite non-Pacer.

MainePacer31
02-25-2011, 04:42 PM
So what happens now?

This type of fiasco could mess with his head. He can't feel good about this. Also, whats the motive for him to re-sign here now? We just tried to trade him. Obviously offering him a contract would show we want him, but I don't know. This whole thing could really mess with our team.

Put yourself in Josh's situation. You gotta know that the NBA is a business and that teams will do whatever it takes to get better. If I was him I would let it go and use that as incentive to go out and play harder so they won't have to trade you.

cdash
02-25-2011, 04:53 PM
Here are two posts you had before the season started. You went into this year thinking these things about his value. These posts indicate to me that you were going into the season already with you opinion made up on his value.

http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1077639&postcount=11



http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost.php?p=1078466&postcount=286

Yeah, I absolutely thought those things before the season. You single me out, but it wasn't as if I was alone in thinking those things. That was a pretty common train of thought at the beginning of the season.

But quite simply, he proved to be a nice fit in the frontcourt with Roy. He played well enough for me to change my mind as the season went along. As I got more information, I altered my conclusions. Is that really so bad?

Edit: Let me actually point something out in defense of this post:


Originally Posted by cdash
I am 90% certain that we as Pacer fans value Josh a hell of a lot more than the rest of the league. If he were on the open market, he would be hard pressed to get anything more than the veteran's minimum right now. That said, he has a golden opportunity to secure himself a long-term deal with a good season. I think his numbers will be around 6-9 ppg and 7-10 rpg, tops. Not sure what kind of deal those sort of numbers will secure in the new NBA.

The context of this post right now is silly, and I know that is what you were going for. At the time though, is that statement really that far from the truth? Before the season Josh had really not had a great chance to show other teams what he could do. Spot minutes last year, but nothing that really was going to gain a whole lot of attention. His value, along with his play this season, has gone way up, to the point where the veteran's minimum sounds like a ludicrous statement right now, even I will admit that.

The first sentence in that paragraph--can you really argue it at the time of that post? The veteran's minimum thing, I grant you on skill set and age alone he probably would have gotten a little more, but not anywhere near MLE-type money.

The last two sentences are where I defend myself against something like what you just did. I said he had a golden opportunity to help himself this season. He has done exactly that. I said I thought he would average 6-9 ppg and 7-10 rpg. As of now, he averages 7.4 ppg and 5.4 rpg. Was I really that far off there? I said at the very end that I wasn't sure what kind of deal those numbers will secure in the new NBA. I still don't. The jury is out. It's partially why all this bickering about the MLE will ultimately be fruitless--we just don't know how the new CBA is going to affect things like this. In yesteryear's NBA, players like McRoberts have commanded the MLE (and sometimes more). In tomorrow's NBA, I'm just not sure.

cdash
02-25-2011, 04:57 PM
Jesus man. Did you take a lesson in contradictions from JOB?

:laugh:

I did. Here's the difference though: They have similar skill sets for their size, that I will grant you, but Josh is a very poor man's Lamar Odom. Yeah, their numbers aren't that far off, but Odom plays on a much better team that has won two titles and is in the running for a third. Josh is putting up these numbers on a middling team that will barely make the playoffs. The numbers are similar, but the overall impact just isn't the same, just like Al Jefferson and Kevin Garnett--comparable numbers, vastly different impacts on the game. I grant you that their skill sets are similar, but the impact on the game is what sets the two in completely different ballparks.

dgranger17
02-25-2011, 05:02 PM
Their games are similar. Their unique size and skills make them fairly comparable. I think Josh can be a poor man's Lamar Odom, absolutely. I'm just skeptical that McRoberts could ever be the third best player on a title winning team, as Odom has been the past two years.

Hopefully we're both wrong but I agree that he probably couldn't be the third best player on a title winning team....... Lucky for us, he won't have to be with Collison, Granger, and George in the picture. Not to mention Roy, Tyler, and possibly Lance. Also can't leave out whoever we acquire through the next couple offseason's via free agency, draft, and/or trade.

Wow, I just read that again and realized we're stacked. With a couple more years of seasoning this team will scare the living hell out of anybody who stands in their way. It could even be as soon as next year or you know what...? This year. Thank you Larry.