Well put BB33. I like this trade too.
I'm not so sure though that I would agree with taking Augustin at 11 if we
were to bring in Ford. He may not be there anyway.
But I do like Nesterovic as well. He has a competitive spirit and at least
tries to play with some intensity - he is not at all lackadaisical from what
I've seen. Would make a nice reserve center for us, and good guy to have
Last edited by RamBo_Lamar; 06-24-2008 at 09:43 AM.
O'Neal-Ford trade rumor losing steam
Jun 24, 2008
It's early but it looks like it's over.
The brief firestorm of online reportage that erupted after Indianapolis Star beat writer Mike Wells broke the story yesterday of trade discussions between the Pacers and Raptors built around an exchange of Jermaine O'Neal and T.J. Ford has abated with last night's report from Yahoo! Sports columnist Adrian Wojnarowski the talks had broken off because of health concerns on both sides.
We may find out more during Larry Bird's pre-draft press briefing today at 11 a.m, but the team president has had no comment about the reports to this point and the presence of a room full of media isn't likely to change his policy. Just so you know, today's session has been scheduled since last week, so don't read anything into the timing.
Admittedly, it was a sexy deal, at least superficially, for both teams. Ford would bring much-needed speed and playmaking to the up-tempo Pacers. O'Neal would provide a strong defensive complement to Chris Bosh with the Raptors. Had the 17th pick been thrown in (along with Rasho Nesterovic and possibly one other Toronto player to make the cap numbers work) , the Pacers would've held two first-round picks and at least one expiring contract.
But both teams have reason to be concerned about the physical viability of the deal. Ford missed all of the 2004-05 season with a spinal cord injury and 31 games last year, most of which were due to a neck injury from a hard fall. O'Neal has missed 107 games due to a variety of injuries in the last four seasons, including 40 with knee problems in 2007-08.
Both players may ultimately be reolcated. O'Neal has been the subject of widespread trade speculation, occasionally self-induced, the past two years. The Raptors reportedly are shopping Ford in order to commit to Jose Calderon as the starting point guard.
This rumor, at least for now, doesn't appear to be the answer. But stay tuned. Heading into the NBA Draft, you never know.
Jun 24, 2008 8:59 AM EDT
"I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05
I think this deal was doomed when we heard of its existence. Too bad, it seemed like a nice deal for both sides, with an equal amount of risk and reward for both. Potentially, it could have worked out REALLY well for both, REALLY bad for both or REALLY well for one but not the other.
Ford and Rasho combined make about $16.5M THIS YEAR.
This coming year is the last on Rasho's contract. The Pacers would be saving big bucks the following year, after his contract has expired. They would only be paying Ford's contract of about $8.5M (plus whatever fillers were still around) instead of O'Neal's $23M (or whatever close figure it is).
See the difference?
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill
“If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird
True, but if I had to pay $24mm two years in a row, or a little less for one year, and much less the two years after that, I'd probably do it.
I believe that, if the deal was done in (late) July so that you could use the draft pick's salary and Ford clears BYC, the total contracts would be around $40mm coming in from Toronto vs. $44mm going out.
Ford - $24.8
Rasho - $8.4
#17 - $7.0 (over four years)
JO = $44.4 mm
It would also put us in a position to stay below the luxury tax for next year with a full 14- or 15-man roster, whereas virtually any scenario with JO on the roster for next year puts us as $71mm in guaranteed salaries (the estimated tax threshhold) with only 12 players under contract.
Yes, it does add Ford's $8.3mm to the 2010-2011 season, as well as around $2mm for the draft pick, but those would be two relatively young players, and our total cap commitment (prior to Danny and the 2009 & 2010 1st Rounders) would be about $42mm.
It's not a perfect solution, but I think the tax savings, coupled with the revenue enhancement (for being below the tax) would reasonably offset that third year issue. Not to mention that $38.5mm (Murphy, Dunleavy, Tinsley (or substitute), and Ford) of that commitment would be movable, expiring contracts going into that season.
If it's dead or at least currently cooling its heels, wonder what the impediment was? Seems like Toronto would have more reasons to balk.
-Other Ford suitors?
-Don't want to include 17?
The injury histories of both Ford and JO in and of themselves seem to cancel out those respective concerns. Add the price tag to each player, however, and that seems to attach more risk to Toronto's investment in the deal.
I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
Let's face it. Toronto worries less about having $8M per year wrapped up in a player with health concerns, than they would have to worry if they were paying $23M per year to a player with health problems.
After reading 261 posts on this, I can't imagine a time I've disagreed on a topic with more people here.
This trade is horrible. I'd rather set JO on fire than add yet another example of overpaying for mediocrity to our roster.
If we really want an undersized PG who can't guard anyone and projects to be at best the 20th best starting PG in the League, why not just take DJ at 11 for 1/5 of TJ's price tag and without the congential spine disorder?
This deal disgusts me.
Last edited by MyFavMartin; 06-24-2008 at 11:52 AM.
JayRedd, can you describe what you think a palatable deal for JO might include at this point? I don't think this one is all that shabby given my estimation of his value. Of course, I have doubts as to his ability to raise that value if we keep him And cannot say with much confidence that I think we'll be much better than the last couple years with him.
I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
Here's what I want:
A) One Rasho/Wally-sized expiring
B) One fairly paid player of value
I really don't think that's unreasonable, regardless of JO's plummeting value. I mean, I wasn't in love with that Cleveland deal proposed earlier, but that was more in line with what we need.
Becauset the number one -- and unconditional -- factor is that we take on no more problems.
And, to me, TJ Ford is just another problem. It's basically refinancing your Tinsley mortgage on a guy with even less upside. He's another rigid asset that you can't move easilly because he's overpaid and locked up for multiple years. No GM in this league wants that anymore. Nor is he capable of playing over 30 mpg due to fragility and defensive liabilities. We wanna pay 8.5 for that for the next three years? Champ-ion-ship!
Last edited by JayRedd; 06-24-2008 at 11:57 AM.
Its pretty hard to have less upside than Tinsley.
flamer as you seem to be, i'm not tremendously thrilled with the deal. that being said, i see the financial benefit of paying TJ $8mil for 2 seasons than paying JO $22mil for 1. especially when we need to re-sign danny.
i agree completely about overpaying mediocrity (which we clearly have a history of) but i think that at this point choosing to pay $17mil for TJ's mediocrity vs. paying $44mil for JO's mediocrity is something to consider.
how do you feel this compares to the hughes/gooden rumors that were floating after the season ended?
Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 06-24-2008 at 11:59 AM.
This is the darkest timeline.
I question whether the people claiming Ford is mediocre have ever seen him play more than a very small handful of times.
If he's traded here, and plays 30-35 minutes a night, he'll give us between 14-18 ppg and 8-10 apg.
If we trade for Larry Hughes I will set him on fire. That's even worse. He has zero upside.
I've seen TJ Ford play probably 100 games. He has talent. He does not have 8.5 million a year for the next three type talent though.
This is the darkest timeline.
On the basis of "I'd rather someone spit in my eye than punch me in the face"...sure.
But if taking on more problems are our only options, then let's just keep JO and wait it out.
I know, I know, and I'm not thrilled with that either...but trading our problems for other problems is why our roster is so horrible right now. No reason to continue to do that just for change's sake.
Last edited by JayRedd; 06-24-2008 at 12:14 PM.
This space for rent.