Many of the experts around here already know this, but I just realized how hard it will be to trade Jackson and Tinsley. Given salaries and Tinsley's Base Year Compensation status, there are very limited opportunities to trade either player.
There is no player on ANY of the following teams that match up with either Tinsley or Jackson one-for-one on the realgm trade checker:
According to the trade checker, there are 40 players in the whole NBA who could be traded under the rules of the Collective Bargaining Agreement for Jackson, and even fewer for Tinsley.
Of course, you only need to trade a player once, so 40 options may be plenty. But when you strike off the "old-and-busted" players that we wouldn't take in trade, and the "new hotness" players that we couldn't get, the list becomes very short indeed.
I have three observations.
1. Several of the names that stay on the list of possible trades have been tossed around on this board. (Earl Watson, Stromile Swift, Corey Magette, Morris Peterson, among others). Props to the Pacers Digest participants, who know what they are talking about!
2. The probability of the Pacers doing two-for-one trades or multi-player trades has to be pretty high. If TPTB expect to clear away the problems AND get talent in return, they're going to have to give to get. This means that the likelihood of Foster/Johnson/Jasikavicius/Harrison/Croshere getting caught up in a trade is pretty high, if Jackson and/or Tinsley go.
3. Maybe we need to consider "Getting under the cap" as part of the long-term strategy for righting the ship. As long as the Pacers are over that cap, the possibilities for improving the team are constrained. Walsh likes to field a good, playoff-calibur team every year, but it is costing too much.
Plus it bugs the heck outta me that my hometown team is one of the most overpaid, underachieving, fattest clubs in the league. I want the Knicks to be overpaid, and I want to hate them for it.