I believe Bird when he says this team will not pay the tax. Some team will overpay Lance and he will not be the same player he was here. NBA careers can change on a dime.
Bird made it clear he will replace those players we cannot afford. Cross that bridge when we get to it in the offseason.
Lance is a darn good player but I am not ready to see the Pacers overpay until Lance provides a significant uptick in consistency and demonstrates more maturity. Lance's antics do not bother me but I agree with UB. Pacers are promoting a family atmosphere. I don't think Parents appreciate those types of things in front of children. Possibly why Vogel and co expressed displeasure w Lance.
We are not that far removed from the Brawl.
on the court Lance still has way too many careless turnovers.. tossing the ball carelessly away way too often. W that said I hope we can retain Lance but Pacers have to do whats in the best interest of the Franchise.
If Lance isn't here, we'll plug somebody else in." and jump to the conclusion that he means we'll match any offer he gets and worry about the LT later. You didn't hear Larry say that about Paul George or Hibbert.
I can't understand how Lance plays the style of basketball that he does and only averages 2 free throw attempts per game. James Harden is over 4x that rate, and he just runs into people on purpose.
Is it a lack of respect? Lack of a beard? Something is amiss.
For people thinking that Granger will be a cheap fallback should Lance get overpayed - I'm thinking that he's going to get an offer in the $8-10m range too, depending on how well he plays this season. So he might not be all that cheaper, and definitely not a minimum level guy.
But for the record, the Pacers made what they considered a fair offer to Hibbert. And when the market proved to be higher, they met the market price. We won't know till next year what they'll do with Lance. And I don't think Larry knows either. I think you should focus on this statement: "If you look at our books, how does anyone know what's going to happen in the summer. How do they know we're not going to make trades or have more money or less money. We will try to sign Lance, but I don't worry about it."
To answer the question of this thread. How do we keep Lance? Well, we pay him enough to stay. That's probably going to be about 8M/yr. The bottom line is, I think we find a way to do that. If it means trading to shed salary (and that can be done btw), we will do it. The Pacers are not going to let him go and his value to the team is probably higher than everyone except Paul, Roy and maybe West. IF Granger gets his game on and it's clear he's totally back, things will get more interesting and the decision becomes more difficult. But no. George Hill and Scola will be dished like another Lance Stephenson assist if necessary to get Born Ready re-signed.
I first thought that a good starting point would be 6-7 million a year but as the season has progressed I would like to see an 8-9 million for 4 years. I think if it comes down to Lance or Danny they will keep Lance. I really like Danny a lot but after this year is it fair for him to be stuck on the bench when he could start for other teams.
I think all the tension between Larry and Herb is over spending and the LT. Lance is one of the more exciting players because he excels in at least 3 aspects of the game so he fills seats. Surely going over the LT and not by much can be kept to a year or two at the worst. I would definitely trade Hill and sign a lower cost PG to keep Lance. Hill keeps the team stabilized and balanced but as an assist man he leaves something to be desired. Assists come from the troika of George, Hill, and Stephenson. Lose Lance and your assists have to come from the other two and that's not enough. So there are several options-trades or dip over the LT for a year or two. I think Cope will be the first domino to fall as some teams like LAL could use him.
If we had the chance to move Copeland right now to a west coast team without giving anything to sweeten the deal I'd be in favor of it. Something like Copeland for a scrub with an expiring contract, or possibly a far off 2cd. round pick. That would be enough to be able to offer Lance the fair contract offer that Larry brought up. I'd never want to move George Hill to keep Lance. All I really want Larry to do is keep an eye on the following year when Hibbert opts out, we need to keep another 4-5 mil free for that when it happens. Sadly that's the same year Scola is up which might be where Hibbert's money comes from. We still have a lot of time for Lance to establish what his value will be and to see if Granger might be a viable plan B or not. One thing is almost certain, we'll be less deep as the next few years unfold.
It almost seems kind of moot to even attempt to guess what Lance might be worth when he re-signs this summer. Right now, he has had three straight exceptional games and everyone believes, based on his recent performance, that he is worth a huge contract. However, the next time Lance goes into a shooting slump or suffers from a lack of focus or excessive turnovers for a few games, half the board will cut the previous estimation by 40% and the debate will reach new heights.
And this roller coaster will likely carry forward throughout the entire season. Unless, of course Lance finds some level of performance that he is able to consistently maintain. Lance is a very talented young player still finding his way. He is going to have great games where he is our best player on the floor. And, he's going to have games where he stinks up the place and we are all begging for Granger to be inserted at SF so George can be switched to SG, with Lance going to the bench.
I think the bottom line is that Lance's payday is not going to be determined by the great games he has or the games where he is missing in action, but instead by whatever production he is able to provide on a consistent basis. If he wants to be paid as an upper level starting SG should be, proof of consistency is the key.
If he is able to do that, Bird will be willing to take some pretty extreme measures to assure that Lance's demands are met and that he remains a Pacer for another 5 years.
Here is a great article about what Lance brings to the Pacers even Hibbert think he is an all star:
He is improving game by game. His mid-range game is getting better lately both in quality and quantity. Let's take a look at his shooting splits from last season -> http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2013/
He took 767 shots in total (both RS and playoffs) and only 232 of them weren't at the rim or from 3. He shot 33.2% on those shots (77/232).
Now, let's take a look at his shot chart for this season ->
He has attempted 314 shots so far and 96 of them come from in between the rim and the 3 point line. His percentage so far? 36.4% (35/96).
The improvement is not huge but it's there. It's improvements like these that can open up his game more and help our team a ton.
While everyone is singing Bird's praises for believing in Lance since the beginning, apparently he didn't COMPELETELY believe, because he structured a four year contract that can't be matched and also couldn't be extended in a feasible way. I was championing Lance when he first came to summer league, and I would not have structured a contract for him like we have now. It's going to be the difference betweeen $4-$6 million for 4-5 years and $8-$12. Probably closer to $12.
The other big difference between a three year deal vs four is of course restricted vs unrestricted, but I don't see that as much of a problem in this case. The only times you worry about that is if a player wants to go to another team. In this case, where it is almost assured that Lance would pick Indiana if the money were equal, the difference is mostly meaningless. Maybe being restricted would limit his market a little bit because teams don't want to lock up their cap for three days on players they don't think they will get, but as we saw with Hibbert many times teams know whether teams are going to match before they even have to sign the players to that contract.
I am not sure what the norm is but I believe if a second round player is signed for 4 years the last year typically doesn't have a rfa label. This is the case of chandler Parson on the rockets as well where they will have to pay top dollar to keep him.
If a team is under the cap, they can give the Pacers a TE for Copeland. Personally, I feel that scenario won't transpire. Copeland would have to have a REAL VALUE for a team that is under the cap to tie up money on him when it could be used on a better more productive player. JMOAA
Another possibility of getting some salary to use in re-signing Lance is if Copeland or whoever is traded for a player has an expiring contract. Something like that scenario I woiuld have to feel would have to be sweetened with picks.
Certainly an interesting thread to read given what Born Ready is accomplishing this season:
Nice job, McKeyfan. Lance has been your guy since the 2010 Summer League.