Best laugh for the day!
Pacers can always match Hibbs and then trade him. Take that ***** for trying to go to Portland!
JO and particularly Tinsley were disliked for more reasons and circumstances than mere performance issues, but that's a whole other thread I don't want to even read, let alone participate in, right now.Quote:
How I miss those days of JO and Tinsley love later in their Pacers career, or the sweet sounds of affection they sang out every night when they heard the names of Croshere or Bender mentioned.
Bender was injuries first, performance second. Croshere was never as good or as important as Roy even is now, let alone if he ever improved anymore. A backup PF we thought could be the starter. WE ALREADLY KNOW ROY CAN START BECAUSE HE IS BETTER AND MORE VALUABLE THE CROSHERE EVER WAS, and center is much more valuable spot to have a good player than a PF. So don't waste anyone's time with such a silly comparison.
You're continuing to rationalize; assuming Roy will disappoint or get hurt, that the team won't do well with him back, and present the only alternative to be this fantasy where we make these great moves to stay as good or better than last year even without Roy and we win 80% of our early games. That's a false dichotomy.
Then we're simply back to basketball decisions, not appeasing fans, which I get and I'm fine with. I still say it's a bad idea.Quote:
So the "watch the fan reaction" cuts BOTH WAYS. Everything in these scenarios depends on results, not the initial action. If the choice works then fans will be happy, if the choice flops then fans will be mad, period. So make the choice you (TPTB) feel most comfortable with and fans-be-damned.
WE ARE IN A POSITION TO KEEP OUR STARTING FIVE AND STILL IMPROVE THE BENCH.Quote:
IMO spreading Roy out as more bench talent and less starters talent makes sense because the team is in no-mans-land now, halfway between consolidated and deep. Balanced starters but no star, and yet as the playoffs showed there really isn't much bench depth. So you are losing at the top end and the deep bench end. You have no point of advantage in terms of top end or deep.
If Barbosa, Tyler and Lou had given teams fits in the playoffs it would be different, but that's not what happened. What we thought was a strength started looking like a weakness.
Given all the known variables, I would find it totally unacceptable for the Pacers not to match Portland's offer ... PERIOD, end of story ...
Ya'll can think what you want about my reaction and what it will be if Roy isn't a Pacer come opening tip-off, but I am deadset in my mind on this and my conviction is strong..
So if you're going to stick with that, something I consider to be pure fantasy, you're basically endorsing him while he sits back playing the fiddle while Pritchard sets Rome on fire. Unbelievable.
FWIW (I know, off topic...kind of) Conrad is no longer employed with the Pacers.
Honestly I could care less at "overspending" at this point for Roy. It's not like we're getting any superstar to come here anyways and fat lot of good having cap space did us this summer every top free agent who was banging the "want to be competitive and go to best situation and get money" sure look like a bunch of hypocrites right now. It's a ****** situation because of who we are and where we are we have to keep our own players who got us to where we are at and hope beyond hope that someone on our team improves like crazy. Anyone is advocating for us to let Roy go on account that we could spend that money elsewhere on someone else later is just
. It didn't get us anywhere this summer it's not going to later when we're an even less attractive of a draw than we are now cause we let Roy walk. Unless we draft the next Michael Jordan we're never going to have a superstar on this team. I had a glimmer of hope for this offseason given the cirucmstances but that's pretty much been snuffed out.
A snippet, though there are positive points made in the blog too...
Originally Posted by clipperblog
I do not understand how Portland can do the Pacers a favor. The Pacers are the only team that can offer him 5 years and more than $58 million. If they think the offer Portland will be making is already overpaying why would they even consider going higher? What leverage do Roy and his agent have to demand even more money? Refuse to play or take the qualifing offer might do him more harm than good.
As for Mayo, as long as the contract's reasonable -- say, $7M per-season -- I'll be pleased with the signing. I trust that our management is smart enough not to offer him $11M per-season as Dumars did with Ben Gordon.
But I think when you put real names to this claimed Roy fair-market value things start to sound iffy. How can you pay a guy $14m if you're telling me he's not viewed as good enough to get a guy like Dwight when paired with Granger in a trade?
And if that deal can get done then I do think the Pacers should look at it.
As for options if you keep Roy, I'm not against keeping Roy and I keep saying that. I'm just mulling over the value add not just this year but the next couple of years. What if West continues to improve from the knee recovery and goes for 25-8 averages this year, wouldn't you want to keep him for 2-3 more years and wish you had the money to do so? What if a great player on one of these super teams isn't working out next season and they start looking for a team to absorb a bail out and change.
If you match Roy then you are buying into the team as Hill-Paul-Danny-West-Roy-DC-(one more guy). I loved what they could do at times this year so I'm not really against that as a future. I'm just concerned because it's a crossroads where you are committing to their own progress as the means for improvement to title status.
Roy and Paul could improve enough to get you there, but this is it, this is the moment of truth so to speak.
It's stupid not to question it a little and wonder if it's definitely the right thing to do. You are saying that the superstar the team needs is already here in the form of Roy. Roy showed nice signs, but "superstar" or regular all-star signs? I don't think he's come close to showing Smits' level of consistency and offensive threat.
That's fine. I didn't want to see it, either...
Putting down a large chunk of cash for two young talented backups is nice...but in the end, you're still paying for backups.
And if you don't think either guy is going to get massively overpaid, you don't understand the situation.
Nash and EJ came here to talk. They weren't offered as much money as they took elsewhere.Quote:
Honestly I could care less at "overspending" at this point for Roy. It's not like we're getting any superstar to come here anyways and fat lot of good having cap space did us this summer every top free agent who was banging the "want to be competitive and go to best situation and get money" sure look like a bunch of hypocrites right now.
Neither said "F Indianapolis, I'd take less to play elsewhere". Both said "well your team is good enough but so are other teams and they want to pay me more". If the Pacers threw a 3/39m at Nash he'd be a Pacer right now without a doubt. And as it was the Lakers had to give up 2 first round picks, one of which might have good value in a few years.
If the Pacers said "we are bailing on Roy because we want a superstar and we think Nash fits the bill", they'd have him. Dwight has been crying for the Nets for more than a year, and that includes ignoring LA too, so I don't think anyone had a shot at him. He's in love with the idea of Brooklyn which is one reason to not want him anyway, he's not focused on a title as much as a marketing situation.
The Pacers did the same thing with the other FAs as they've done so far with Roy - they've strongly mulled over what a fair, smart price is in order to be the best they can be within the cap limits.
Portland can get a 3rd team involved if they want Hibbert that badly. If we lose Roy, we need to replace his value or this fan base will turn on the pacers.
edit: above is presumed we match