Page 14 of 31 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516171824 ... LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 762

Thread: Jermaine O'Neal heading to Toronto for T.J. Ford, #17 pick. Pacers get Baston, give up pick #41

  1. #326
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by SoupIsGood View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I hope this happens, although if Shawne is included I'd rather they give us like a future second or something.

    #11 and #17 could be a lot of fun to watch next year. Plus, did anyone ever give a good answer to rexnom's Q about the massive expiring? Is there a point where JO's expiring contract would actually be too big to be useful?
    Yeah, I'm still wondering about that.

  2. #327
    flexible and robust SoupIsGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lappy Go Hucky
    Age
    26
    Posts
    17,540

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, I'm still wondering about that.
    I think it's a pretty great Q. Maybe it's a snag that can be explained away, but I don't know anyway around it. It seems like the ideal expiring would be in the 8-12 mil range.
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  3. #328
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    180

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by SoupIsGood View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I hope this happens, although if Shawne is included I'd rather they give us like a future second or something.

    #11 and #17 could be a lot of fun to watch next year. Plus, did anyone ever give a good answer to rexnom's Q about the massive expiring? Is there a point where JO's expiring contract would actually be too big to be useful?
    I think Bird is lighting a fire under Shawne to clean up his act and distance himself from his childhood friends.

    Talent still rules the day in the NBA and Shawne probably has more talent than any other pacer including Granger.

    I do think Hibbert is the Pacers target at 17 and if Toronto drafts him i wouldn't be surprised to see something happen still.........but if a PG is drafted at 11 (and one almost surely will be) than TJ ford becomes yet another bad long term committment.

    I really think the whole thing is nothing more than chatter between teams. The only way I can still see it happenning is if there is some muti team trade that puts Ford in NY, Phx or with the Clips , JO in Toronto and Hibbert and an 09 #1 coming back to us. All other filler would have to expire next summer.

    I'd sign on to a JO for Hibbert and the Clips 09 #1 right now though.

  4. #329

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    I think it's a huge problem. What do you do with $23M aside from let it expire? Getting the ideal match of players from another team would require a perfect storm, I'd think.

  5. #330
    It Might Be a Soft J JayRedd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Age
    33
    Posts
    12,158

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    My opinion is that rex is correct in that moving a $23 million expiring will be difficult. The fact that it is syncronized with the LeBron/DWade sweepstakes helps us a little, but it's still going to be just as difficult next year to $20 million+ of salary that we actually want -- whether that be expiring other expirings or fairly paid useful players and filler -- from New Jersey, Chicago, Phoenix or whatever other free agent destination is trying to recruit either guy.

    That said...I don't think we should trade JO's expiring for a bad contract next year either.

    I may be the only person on PD that feels this way, but I'm absolutely fine with letting him expire as a Pacer.

    There's a reason expirings are considered beneficial and I'd rather just wait it out and get that benefit ourselves rather that add more long-term salary problems. The whole notion of "we need to get something for him" is flawed in my mind if, to get that "something" it also requires you to take on a negative asset that counteracts any benefit you actually receive from that "something."
    Last edited by JayRedd; 06-25-2008 at 12:08 PM.

  6. #331

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by JayRedd View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My opinion is that rex is correct in that moving a $23 million expiring will be difficult. The fact that it is syncronized with the LeBron/DWade sweepstakes helps us a little, but it's still going to be just as difficult next year to $20 million+ of salary that we actually want -- whether that be expiring other expirings or fairly paid useful players and filler -- from New Jersey, Chicago, Phoenix or whatever other free agent destination is trying to recruit either guy.

    That said...I don't think we should trade JO's expiring for a bad contract next year either.

    I may be the only person on PD that feels this way, but I'm absolutely fine with letting him expire as a Pacer.

    There's a reason expirings are considered beneficial and I'd rather just wait it out and get that benefit ourselves rather that add more long-term salary problems. The whole notion of "we need to get something for him" is flawed in my mind if, to get that "something" it also requires you to take on a negative asset that counteracts any benefit you actually receive from that "something."
    That's why you move JO now! Why on God's green earth do the Simons want to pay JO 44 mil of THEIR MONEY? Just to wait for JO's expiring to come off the books?

    Mark my words, JO WILL BE TRADED B4 THE TRADE DEADLINE! Make book on it. The Simons aren't going to payout 44 mil to JO.

  7. #332

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by SoupIsGood View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    It seems like the ideal expiring would be in the 8-12 mil range.
    Absolutely!

    I'll ask this question AGAIN, has there been a bigger expiring contract than Theo Ratiff's 11.6 mil? And that wasn't until this past season.

    Overly large expirings are difficult if not near impossible to trade, unless it gets to trade deadline time and the team holding the expiring has paid half the salary of the player with the expiring. If the player has attitude problems, loss of skills, or injury problems, it makes them extremely difficult to trade.

  8. #333
    J.O. To The T.O. Oneal07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,459

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by JayRedd View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My opinion is that rex is correct in that moving a $23 million expiring will be difficult. The fact that it is syncronized with the LeBron/DWade sweepstakes helps us a little, but it's still going to be just as difficult next year to $20 million+ of salary that we actually want -- whether that be expiring other expirings or fairly paid useful players and filler -- from New Jersey, Chicago, Phoenix or whatever other free agent destination is trying to recruit either guy.

    That said...I don't think we should trade JO's expiring for a bad contract next year either.

    I may be the only person on PD that feels this way, but I'm absolutely fine with letting him expire as a Pacer.

    There's a reason expirings are considered beneficial and I'd rather just wait it out and get that benefit ourselves rather that add more long-term salary problems. The whole notion of "we need to get something for him" is flawed in my mind if, to get that "something" it also requires you to take on a negative asset that counteracts any benefit you actually receive from that "something."
    I wouldn't mind him staying and letting him expire. But I am also a Raptors fan so it's a win/win for me

    I seriously think this deal is going down on draft night
    R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

  9. #334
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,911

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How much sweeter would they want?
    Handing them the rights to Lorbek? OR MAYBE do the unthinkable by including.... [pauzes] ..... the rights to Stanko in aswell? :hide:

    I can allready see the mob forming in front of Conseco were that to happen!!!
























    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  10. #335

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    So they are going to pay 44 million to other players? I agree with Jredd that it is better to wait it out two years than to take on more bad contracts. That is one reason the Knicks are in such bad shape. They traded bad contracts for more bad contracts.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

  11. #336
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    But what if we traded JO and got an asset and an 8 to 12 mil expiring? That way we don't lose the asset of JO and we can just keep that expiring for ourselves.

  12. #337

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    I'm not saying there aren't good trades. I'm saying this isn't one of them.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

  13. #338

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Rick Bucher just said on ESPN that Clevland, Toronto, New Jersey, and New York have all shown interest in Jermaine. He said Jermaine is by far the most likely to be traded by the draft.

  14. #339
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    38
    Posts
    8,911

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcadian View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So they are going to pay 44 million to other players? I agree with Jredd that it is better to wait it out two years than to take on more bad contracts. That is one reason the Knicks are in such bad shape. They traded bad contracts for more bad contracts.
    I thought Rasho and Graham were both expiring? IF so then that saves the franchise the 2nd year in which JO's contract is still active, but those two are off our books.

    Granted we need the money hard too, because even with Marquis contract expiring and these two expirings (of which I suppose we could keep one), we also have Granger coming up for a new contract aswell as a completion of the rest of our squad complete with smaller contracts.

    Regards,

    Mourning
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  15. #340
    Lifer 2minutes twowa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Middletown, IN
    Age
    38
    Posts
    618

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by rock747 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Rick Bucher just said on ESPN that Clevland, Toronto, New Jersey, and New York have all shown interest in Jermaine. He said Jermaine is by far the most likely to be traded by the draft.
    Turn out the lights, this party's over!

  16. #341

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Having that much interest in Jermaine can only help his value. Bucher mentioned Wally, Verajo, and #19 for Jermaine.
    Last edited by rock747; 06-25-2008 at 01:48 PM.

  17. #342
    DIET COKE! Trader Joe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Troll Hunting
    Age
    26
    Posts
    30,368

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    I'd rather do the Toronto trade over the Cleveland trade.

    “WE NEVER SURRENDER, WE NEVER GIVE UP, WE KEEP ATTACKING”- Frank Vogel
    momentarygodsblog.com https://twitter.com/momentarygods

  18. #343
    Member Mr. Sobchak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    704

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Me as well.

  19. #344
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Cleveland is offering us the pupu platter. Next, please. I'd like to trade JO and get one starter for a future contending team. That's all I ask. If Ford isn't going to be that then we shouldn't pull the trigger on that deal.

  20. #345

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mourning View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I thought Rasho and Graham were both expiring? IF so then that saves the franchise the 2nd year in which JO's contract is still active, but those two are off our books.
    If we don't resign both Graham and Rasho we save 11 mill. If we re-sign Graham that would take us down to saving about 8.5 minus whatever we re-sign Graham for.

    Ford on the other hand is still owed 17 million over the next 2 seasons. So we are committing 9 million for the season after JO is gone to save 11 mil, best case senario, the season right before JO leaves.

    I guess it comes down to how you feel about T.J. I think he is an upgrade for us. But that isn't saying much. Overall I think he is overpaid even if healthy and his history suggests he won't be.

    This deal doesn't help us.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

  21. #346

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    The Toronto deal is better by far. Maybe Cleveland will see that other teams are interested and up their offer somehow.

  22. #347
    Jimmy did what Jimmy did Bball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,877

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Ok... Why would we want to hold onto JO's contract until it expires? What is really in it for us to do that? Other than betting on him being a useful and needed piece to the team, and staying on the court, what value is in it for us?

    Conversely, if a team trades for JO for his 'expiring' contract... what are the scenarios where it helps them? If they just let JO expire that doesn't open up 23mil for them to go after Lebron does it? The cap then is still the issue isn't it? You only have the full 23mil in cap space to work with as long as you have JO as an asset to trade is how I understand it.

    If they trade 3 years of salary for 2 years of JO's salary then they have a savings in that 3rd year... and maybe the Pacers get some more manageable (read: usable or movable pieces) but I'm still a little lost on how the "Lebron factor" works here for the team getting JO.

    -Bball
    Last edited by Bball; 06-25-2008 at 02:17 PM.
    Nuntius was right. I was wrong. Frank Vogel has retained his job.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

  23. #348

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Money-wise the Cleveland deal is much better and less risky.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

  24. #349
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,881
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    With the assumption that the two trades are as follows:

    TOR - Ford, Rasho, Garbajosa (or Graham), #17

    CLE - Wally, Verajao, #19

    I would much rather take the Toronto deal. Ford is the best player out of that whole mix (he is 25 and is a very good PG - being our biggest need). Plus you get the same amount in expiring contracts. And the higher draft pick. I think the only thing that the cleveland deal has on the toronoto deal is that ford's deal is 3 years versus 2 for verajao. Of course I could also see Verajao opting out after next year saving two years of salary in the cle deal.

    Imagine if we then packaged the #11 and Marquis to Memphis for the #5 and Brian Cardinal.

    We can then get whoever the hell we want at 5.
    Last edited by pacergod2; 06-25-2008 at 03:00 PM.

  25. #350
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Wells: JO to Toronto?

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcadian View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Money-wise the Cleveland deal is much better and less risky.
    It's less risky because you're already assuming you're not going to get much, if any value on the court with the players. You have nothing to lose.

    The Toronto deal does give us some risk in terms of Ford's contract, but Ford could be a decent-to-good player and has an insured contract (80%).

    Yes, the money is significantly better, but I like the risk-reward on the the Toronto deal a lot better.

Similar Threads

  1. Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
    By Major Cold in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 2039
    Last Post: 06-27-2008, 11:43 PM
  2. Ford releases Mock 6.
    By Anthem in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 06-24-2008, 03:39 PM
  3. Chad Ford Mock Draft 4.0
    By MyFavMartin in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 06-13-2008, 12:16 AM
  4. The PD NBA Best Pick Left in the Draft 5
    By Hicks in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2008, 08:27 AM
  5. The PD NBA Best Pick Left in the Draft 3
    By Hicks in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-27-2008, 11:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •