Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 85 of 85

Thread: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

  1. #76

    Default Re: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

    UB-

    I remember that post and I laregly agree. I'm not sure it's quite that
    critical that we wait. But your inference is correct. 12-18 months
    from now, we could end up with several teams actually 'competing'
    for his contract to gain the advantage in clearing space for the
    Summer of 2010.

    Wether LB has the patience to wait it out remains to be seen.

  2. #77
    Smooth tadscout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Greenfield
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,838
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

    Quote Originally Posted by DanGrangerPwrRanger View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I like the Toronto trade 100 times better than the Cleveland trade.
    The thing is it takes two to tango (or trade rather)... so what we don't know is if Toronto is still wanting to do the deal...
    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

  3. #78
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,610

    Default Re: Ric Beucher on JO trade

    Quote Originally Posted by Shade View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In one year, JO becomes a $22 million expiring contract. If he reverts anywhere near to form this year, that's a lot of icing on the cake.

    Trading JO for crap one year before his value would be near it's peak would just be stupid.

    There is this line of thinking and I am not going to disagree with it.

    However, here is my fear.

    Do you know why teams next season will want J.O.'s expiring contract? Yes that's right, so they can get out of the money.

    Guess who else will be very tempted to do the same thing?

    Why trade for an expiring contract when you have one yourself.

    My fear is that if the team does not make a significant improvement in attendance this season that the Simons will be tempted to just keep the expiring contract and get out of the money.

    Then J.O. just walks away and we get nothing in return. Yes the Simons save some $$ but this will not put us in any position to get free agents.

    I would much rather trade J.O. for parts that we can use and still reduce salary than to have to set through another season of the "what if's" only to see him leave for nothing.

  4. #79
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,885
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

    I think we need to egt rid of dunleavy this offseason or by the deadline next year. I think he is in his prime, but I dont think the team is. He would be a perfect guy to send to a contender like phoenix or san antonio next year at the deadline and get rid of his last couple of years for an expiring and good young player from this years draft and a late first rounder.

    I think that would be the best thing the pacers could do in 2008/2009.

    Also Foster would be in that same boat.

  5. #80
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    28
    Posts
    17,392

    Default Re: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

    Varejao isn't Foster.

  6. #81
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,549

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Ric Beucher on JO trade

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I would much rather trade J.O. for parts that we can use and still reduce salary than to have to set through another season of the "what if's" only to see him leave for nothing.
    But isn't the point of letting a contract expire so that you have those $ to spend on a big free agent? Assuming we can be far enough under the cap with other moves, wouldn't we essentially be getting that FA for JO?

    Not that I agree with it, necessarily, but it isn't the "if we hold until JO expires we suck but someone else taking him and using him as an expiring contract is brilliant" hard line some might think.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  7. #82
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: Ric Beucher on JO trade

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I believe this to be an assumption based on very little, if any, evidence. A very, very dangerous assumption, at that.



    That may be at the back of their mind, but the reason there are offers are because teams are gambling on him being productive and (relatively) healthy.

    This argument doesn't work at all for the Cleveland deal, where they'd be taking on about $15mm more in guaranteed contracts, including $14mm additional in 2009-2010.

    The teams that are thinking expiring are NY and NJ, who are trying to foist Zach Randolph or Richard Jefferson on us. Those will get worse if JO spends another injury plagued year. It is very easy to see a point sometime in the next year where JO's maximum value to us comes in simply letting his contract expire and getting it off the books rather than taking back huge, onerous contracts that extend our misery.

    If JO"s sole value becomes as an expiring contract, then the offers we get will make the current rumors look like spun gold.
    First, I want to apologize for this post...it was a little (perhaps more than a little) rude.

    However, I believe that teams that are bidding on JO now are bidding primarily on the possibility that he can return to a reasonable degree of health and productivity, and help them make a leap. They're mitigating the risk with the fact that JO's contract expires in two years, but their primary interest in taking a shot at JO the player. (This would be especially true for Toronto and Cleveland.)

    I believe that JO's value will peak later only if he plays a relatively productive and healthy 2008-2009 campaign. This would be trending towards 70+ games, 16-18pts, 8-10 board, 2+ blocks by the time the trade deadline comes around.

    However, if he cannot be reliably healthy, or is plays, but is unproductive, then his value shrinks to simply that of an expiring contract. I believe the difference between that potential peak and the offers available this summer must be judged against the risk of a repeat of the 2007-2008 season and its accompanying decline in value.

    I think the Toronto deal is acceptable under this measurement, but the Cleveland deal is borderline.

    I cannot imagine why a large expiring contract on a player who has no value as a player would bring a more favorable package than a player who another team could see as risky, but a potential difference maker for their team, that also happens to have an contract that expires for the big FA summer of 2010.

    All of this, as UB mentioned, ignores the potential intangible benefits that might come from just moving on from JO.

  8. #83

    Default Re: Ric Beucher on JO trade

    Quote Originally Posted by count55 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The teams that are thinking expiring are NY and NJ, who are trying to foist Zach Randolph or Richard Jefferson on us. Those will get worse if JO spends another injury plagued year. It is very easy to see a point sometime in the next year where JO's maximum value to us comes in simply letting his contract expire and getting it off the books rather than taking back huge, onerous contracts that extend our misery.

    If JO"s sole value becomes as an expiring contract, then the offers we get will make the current rumors look like spun gold.
    NJ makes alot of sense to me, they want to clear money for LeBron, so JO's expiring contract is gold to them. Also, they have the best package to offer. I believe the Pacers should get some value in return, rather than just expiring contracts and picks, which would be the only thing they'll get a year from now.

  9. #84
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bloomington IN
    Posts
    182

    Default Re: Ric Bucher on JO trade (update: JO to Cavs??) (Update Post #41)

    Are we looking at a JO trade value upside down? Seems to me his highest value to another team is his potential to contribute to their success next season. Their insurance policy is his expiring contract if it turns out he's truly injured.

  10. #85
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Ric Beucher on JO trade

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    But isn't the point of letting a contract expire so that you have those $ to spend on a big free agent? Assuming we can be far enough under the cap with other moves, wouldn't we essentially be getting that FA for JO?

    Not that I agree with it, necessarily, but it isn't the "if we hold until JO expires we suck but someone else taking him and using him as an expiring contract is brilliant" hard line some might think.
    Wouldn't work that way; JO leaving would just bring us in that "no man's land" range where we are either just a bit over the cap, or under it to where the money we have to throw at a free agent is LOWER than the M.L.E., which is a bad place to be.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-23-2008, 01:06 AM
  2. The NBA Trade Deadline Thread
    By Kofi in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 10:49 PM
  3. Sheridan talks superstar trades
    By indygeezer in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-17-2008, 08:13 PM
  4. The trade almost one year later
    By Unclebuck in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 01:54 PM
  5. PERFECT NJN/IND TRADE!!!!!
    By croz24 in forum Trade Proposals
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-03-2008, 10:26 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
  •