Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

  1. #1
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    I'm not. But I get tired of so many criticizing contracts two and three years later, while no one ever complains when contracts are first signed.

    So here is your chance to criticize something when it actually happens.

    Anyone think that it is too much or too long. If no one complains then I and others can rightfully say, well no one complained when he signed the contract.

  2. #2
    How are you here? Kegboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Northside Bias
    Posts
    12,959

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Of course not. My question to you is, a year ago did you ever think you'd be okay with us signing him to this deal?
    ---
    Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

    "What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  3. #3
    flexible and robust SoupIsGood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lappy Go Hucky
    Age
    26
    Posts
    17,540

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Tins for President!
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  4. #4
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Kegboy
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Of course not. My question to you is, a year ago did you ever think you'd be okay with us signing him to this deal?
    ---
    Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

    "What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.

    Kegboy, you are correct about that. But Tinsley finally got into shape, which has really helped him in all aspects of the game. He is so much better on defense it is amazing, and now he can create off the dribble. Those were the two areas where I was most concerned. His shooting and his "decision making" never concerned me that much.

  5. #5
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Yeah, that could end up being a pretty good deal.

    If we could shake loose from Pollard's/Croshere's deals, I'd feel great.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  6. #6
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,699

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    This deal is great for many reasons:

    1. Mel Mel is happy with it, which means no disgruntled player, no trouble with a restricted FA etc.
    2. It proves to everyone that the P's have faith in Tins to be our PG for a long time coming and that Larry's talk about him as not just "wild thoughts".
    3. Stability in player movements


    I for one am very happy with this deal, and we will in 1 or 2 years time most likely thank our lucky stars that he was signed to so long an extension for so little money, just as we will and already should thank those same people for the contract Ron signed.

    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  7. #7
    Fat, Drunk and Stupid Lord Helmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Richmond, IN
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,576

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    I like the deal and I like Tins.He has lost more weight and is probably alittle faster.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions





  8. #8
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,762

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, that could end up being a pretty good deal.

    If we could shake loose from Pollard's/Croshere's deals, I'd feel great.
    Careful there, those are our starting power forward and center right now.

  9. #9
    Fat, Drunk and Stupid Lord Helmet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Richmond, IN
    Age
    24
    Posts
    15,576

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, that could end up being a pretty good deal.

    If we could shake loose from Pollard's/Croshere's deals, I'd feel great.
    Careful there, those are our starting power forward and center right now.

    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions





  10. #10
    Formerly PacerFanInAZ Cactus Jax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Tucson AZ
    Age
    30
    Posts
    4,118
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal


    In terms of just comparing him with other players in the NBA, the $40 million over six years is a bit much. I believe Carlos Arroyo got a 4 year, $16 million dollar contract and I count them to be about equal in terms of talent.

    But young good PG's are hard to come by and if the Pacers were to let him become a free-agent, they might have either gotten him for less than the $40 million, or had a repeat of Brad Miller with teams that need a PG.

    Overall, I don't think it's horrible but the price is a little high especially because PG's can wear down fast and the 6 years is a little scary. I'm not going to say he's overpaid but I think to say he's a bargain isn't correst either.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

  11. #11
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yeah, that could end up being a pretty good deal.

    If we could shake loose from Pollard's/Croshere's deals, I'd feel great.
    Careful there, those are our starting power forward and center right now.
    That's kinda my point. Between the two of them, they make 14 mil this year. I'm trying hard to imagine a scenario where we wouldn't be better off putting that money other places. Ask yourself this question: how much of a dropoff would there be if we replaced Croshere with Holcomb? Cause Holcomb is 8 million dollars cheaper.

    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  12. #12
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,245

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    carlos arroyo did sign a 4-year $16M deal with utah. that does seem to be a good bargain.

    here are what some free agent point guards recently signed for:

    rafer alston 6 years, $24M
    dereck fisher 6 years, $35M
    steve nash 6 years, $60M

    tony parker is reportedly asking for close to $70M over 6 years (that's brad miller money). his agent even suggests that parker will get a max offer next summer if the spurs don't sign him now. i like parker, but he's not that good. the market for pg's must be getting as bad as for centers.

    all in all, i think pacers locked up tinsley at a reasonable price.

    one concern though is that the team payroll has ballooned to over $70M next year. if reggie retires then it won't be a problem, but otherwise pacers may look to cut salary. fortunately, pollard's contract is expiring next year so it may not be too hard to move.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    As you look at next year's payroll, looks like the P's are looking for Reggie to retire. And, yes, Scot's contract mercifully ends.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    And Cro's contract will be gone a couple years after that too
    Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

  15. #15
    MZahm
    Guest

    Default Re: Tinsley's contract 6 yrs, $40M. Anyone going to say this is a bad deal

    I think a 6 year 36 million contract would have seemed "fair" to me, so 40 mil is decent. Still, I like Tins and I think he has the potential to make the contract seem like a good deal in a year or two - probably not the sort of bargain Artest's looks like though.

Posting Permissions

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