Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 91

Thread: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

  1. #1
    #RiseOfTheKing imbtyler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Nashville, IN
    Posts
    1,631
    Mood

    Sports Logo

    Default Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    John Hollinger wrote an article about the Pacers-Mavs deal, probably saying the Pacers' FO are idiots, etc. but I'm interested in reading the story. Would anyone with Insider please post this article?

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...cers-mavs-deal
    witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

    Quote Originally Posted by Day-V View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
    Quote Originally Posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.



  2. #2
    Member PaulGeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    298

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...cers-mavs-deal


    I don't get it.

    On the first day that teams could start making official deals, we had one of the most baffling trades in a while -- Indiana's move of Darren Collison and Dahntay Jones to Dallas for a signed-and-traded Ian Mahinmi.

    Pacers fans complained that they were trading a starting-caliber point guard, one who led the team in PER in the playoffs, for a backup big man, but even that misses the more flabbergasting point.

    Indiana was several million dollars under the cap. Mahinmi was an unrestricted free agent. There was no reason to deal anything to Dallas because Indiana could have just signed him straightaway.

    I have no problem with the Mahinmi part. This was a good value deal for a big guy who has been consistently productive and is fairly young. He'll certainly be an upgrade on Louis Amundson.

    So help me out here. Why in the name of all that is holy would Indiana agree to donate two helpful players on low-dollar salaries to the Mavericks? I know the Pacers were worried about paying Collison beyond this season, but that doesn't mean he had negative trade value. Sources confirm there were no draft picks involved. This was just a straight giveaway, with Indiana giving away two useful players for a marginal cap savings.

    NBA Free Agency
    NBA free agency is under way, and ESPN.com has you covered with all the latest deals, trades and potential moves.
    Free agents | Trade Targets | RC

    Insider: Free-agent PER rankings
    More: TrueHoop | Trade Machine

    As for Dallas, it's hard to know how the team got through the call without laughing hysterically. After being snubbed by Deron Williams and Steve Nash and not getting on the radar for Dwight Howard, the Mavs have been working on the difficult task of building a credible team around one-year deals and plunging back into the market next year.

    The Pacers made that task a whole lot easier. Jones is exactly the type of active defender against big wings that the Mavs' roster was missing, and he comes with a reasonably sized expiring deal of $2.9 million. Collison, meanwhile, offers an immediate upgrade on Jason Kidd at the point, and his cap hold for next year is small enough, $6.9 million, that the Mavs probably can play the free-agent market and still keep him in restricted free agency.

    Between this highway robbery and the solid one-year, $8 million deal for Chris Kaman, the Mavs appear to have most of their work done. The team has more than $5 million in cap space available (I mistakenly tweeted $4 million Wednesday, but I hadn't removed Mahinmi's cap hold), which might be enough to win an amnesty auction for another solid player on a one-year deal: Elton Brand. If not, other frontcourt options are out there.

    Once that's done, Dallas can use the under-cap midlevel exception worth $2.575 million to fill out the backcourt by re-signing Delonte West or bringing in another player. That wouldn't leave the Mavs with a championship-caliber team, but they'd be pretty good and have a lot of options going forward.

    Some other thoughts on a busy day:

    The rest of the league can breathe a little easier now that Brooklyn's pursuit of Howard has been called off. The Nets did everything they possibly could and got creative putting together the potential deal, an incredibly complicated one that involved six sign-and-trades, Sundiata Gaines getting the full midlevel exception and Kris Humphries being paid $9 million in 2012-13. (All this is thanks to base-year compensation rules involving sign-and-trades; let's not get started or we'll be here all day).

    The irony is that Howard wanted Brooklyn and Brooklyn wanted Howard, yet neither side could make it happen. For that, blame two events. First, Howard's decision to sign the opt-in in March when it appeared he was about to be traded to the Nets. Second, the Nets' bizarre trade of the No. 6 pick in the draft for Gerald Wallace. Although this was part of the team's strategy to appease Williams at all costs, it almost certainly cost it the key trade piece in a Howard deal. If not for that trade, the Nets likely could have had a Howard deal lined up on draft day to be executed July 11.

    As for Howard, just about all of his leverage has vanished. He gave Orlando a one-team list of destinations, and now it's virtually impossible for him to get there, at least until midseason when Brook Lopez is trade-eligible again and the bizarre base-year compensation rules governing this deal go away. Additionally, there is no credible threat of Howard bolting to Brooklyn as a free agent.

    The next step is Howard's. He can give a wink and a nod to one of the other contenders for his services -- Houston, Atlanta, Los Angeles or Dallas -- and set the wheels in motion for a trade, or he can (gasp!) tell Orlando he is staying. It appears unlikely he'll be able to wait until January for a Brooklyn deal, given the Magic's wishes to end this thing quickly.

    And before you think it, sorry -- nobody is trading for Howard just to flip him to New Jersey in February.

    Minnesota and Portland continue to engage in a fascinating game of chicken regarding Nicolas Batum, highlighted by the fact that the Timberwolves are promising money they don't necessarily have to free agents.

    Minnesota allegedly has a four-year, $45 million deal in place with Batum but hasn't signed an offer sheet yet, apparently trying to goad the Blazers into a sign-and-trade to remove the threat of Portland matching. So far, the Blazers haven't budged.

    A secondary highlight is all the money Minnesota has promised to other free agents. The Timberwolves, can generate a maximum of $12.3 million in cap room. To do so, they have to cut the partially guaranteed contracts of Brad Miller and Martell Webster and use the amnesty tag on Darko Milicic.

    The problem is that they've promised much more than that: a deal for Batum starting a little more than $10 million, another $5.2 million for Brandon Roy, plus whatever they've promised Russian guard Alexey Shved. That's to say nothing of their dalliances with Greg Stiemsma and a couple of other free agents.

    All told, the Timberwolves need to cut at least $5 million and likely more; I haven't seen a dollar figure on their agreement with Shved, but we can assume it's for much more than the minimum.

    This problem goes away if the Blazers match Batum's offer sheet, but the Timberwolves aren't going into this hoping Portland will match. If not, Minnesota likely can clear $4 million by trading Luke Ridnour and another $2 million by paying somebody to take Wayne Ellington, so it's still workable. But it's all getting very complicated.

    Count me in among those who think the Knicks will match Toronto's ridiculous offer sheet for Landry Fields. New York doesn't care about salary. The Knicks have proved this, and they have just a three-year window with the Anthony-Stoudemire-Chandler group before they'll need to blow it up anyway. Fields' deal fits perfectly on that timeline, as do the arrangements for Kidd and Marcus Camby.

    Besides, New York needs somebody to start at the 2 this season while it waits for Iman Shumpert to return from his late-April ACL injury. If the Knicks don't keep Fields, they need to use either Kidd or some minimum contract guy as their starting shooting guard. It will be bloody expensive, but New York has shown time and again that cost isn't going to stop it from getting a player.
    I'm a Beast

  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PaulGeorge For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    PROUD 2 B A PACERS FAN! xtacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    TURKEY
    Age
    30
    Posts
    1,748

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    i'm trying my best not to think about this trade because the more i think/read the more pissed i become.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to xtacy For This Useful Post:


  6. #4

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by xtacy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    i'm trying my best not to think about this trade because the more i think/read the more pissed i become.
    think of it as a augustin/mahinmi trade for collison/jones. imo backup center has been our biggest need for a while now, and we finally got him so i don't get why everyone is all mad, probably cuz most don't even know who mahinmi is. i am a collison supporter and would probably be a little mad if we didn't end up getting augustin.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MrHale For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    George Hill Apologist mattie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,520

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Just think of this way and you'll feel better:

    The Pacers kept the starting lineup the same. They then completely overhauled their bench removing all that was negative (except Tyler) and adding positives at nearly every position. How that can't be seen as a gain is beyond me.
    Find me on the internets @mattiecolin

    Read it and weep:

    When George Hill is above 15% usage we won 73.5% of games. Below 15% usage we won 61.9%

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mattie For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Think of the offseason as a collective. Don't judge any individual move. We're a 50-win team, we don't make trades for the immediate gratification of sportswriters.

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to rexnom For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Obviously ur not a golfer 5_7_Clash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    332

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulGeorge View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...cers-mavs-deal


    Collison, meanwhile, offers an immediate upgrade on Jason Kidd at the point, ...
    I know Kidd is as old as dirt but does anyone else think this is... uh... a bit of a stretch?

  13. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to 5_7_Clash For This Useful Post:


  14. #8
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,628

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Think of the offseason as a collective. Don't judge any individual move. We're a 50-win team, we don't make trades for the immediate gratification of sportswriters.
    I don't want to sound to contrarian here but I have to ask, is that the goal? I know I'm about to be lectured by all of the "you can't build a dream team in a season" type of people and I know someone is going to explain to me how I need to be happy with the progress we made last season as well.

    I get all of that.

    But till proven otherwise we have to beat the Miami Heat.

    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

    Sorry Rexnom not aiming this at you btw, I'm Just using this as a Jump off point.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Peck For This Useful Post:


  16. #9
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't want to sound to contrarian here but I have to ask, is that the goal? I know I'm about to be lectured by all of the "you can't build a dream team in a season" type of people and I know someone is going to explain to me how I need to be happy with the progress we made last season as well.

    I get all of that.

    But till proven otherwise we have to beat the Miami Heat.

    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

    Sorry Rexnom not aiming this at you btw, I'm Just using this as a Jump off point.
    The goal is a championship, of course (I don't follow the "just contend" conspiracy theory).

    I think that our front office thinks that this starting five can win a championship. I think they have a lot of faith in the abilities of Roy, Paul, and George (whether that is justified or not is up for debate).

    I think this offseason has been about keeping our core five together and finding complementary pieces while maintaining future financial flexibility. They're hoping that giving these guys more time to gel, a training camp and complimentary pieces will lead to improvement. I think we're right on track in this regard.

    The trade/FA signings were about shuffling around our bench to make the pieces fit a bit better with our core. I think we would have preferred to have Chris Kaman and OJ Mayo as well but those guys clearly wanted more money than we wanted or should have given them.

    A lot rests on the shoulders of Paul, Roy, and George improving. If they don't, we will reassess this strategy.

    Personally: I'm all for this strategy. I just love the clarity of vision, the long-term thinking, the focus. It's a great way to build a championship contender without hitting the draft lottery jackpot. We're already a 50-win team. I'd be surprised if we don't hit 54 next season (that's less than 2 additional wins, pro-rated). Difficult not to call a 54+ win team a contender.
    Last edited by rexnom; 07-13-2012 at 04:51 AM.

  17. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to rexnom For This Useful Post:


  18. #10
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,266

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't want to sound to contrarian here but I have to ask, is that the goal? I know I'm about to be lectured by all of the "you can't build a dream team in a season" type of people and I know someone is going to explain to me how I need to be happy with the progress we made last season as well.

    I get all of that.

    But till proven otherwise we have to beat the Miami Heat.

    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

    Sorry Rexnom not aiming this at you btw, I'm Just using this as a Jump off point.
    I think Kstat said it best in another thread - as Plan B's go this wasn't bad.

    Of course us fans would prefer a championship move, and we kind of talked ourselves into expecting a big move didn't we, but in reality such moves mostly involve forces outside the Pacers' control. For example, Deron having a shortlist of only 2 teams that he would consider. Dwight Howard having an even shorter list of just one team that he'd re-sign with. Nash choosing LA to stay close to his kids.

    The argument really is over the FO's willingness to gamble on such a big move, isn't it. On the one hand, it's difficult to blame the Pacers for a conservative approach, knowing that the odds of a big move paying off are so low. For example, if we had gone after Eric Gordon in a big way, we'd still have dumped DC and Dahntay to get cap space, but we'd be waiting on NOH right now, instead of signing Augustin, Green, and Mahinmi to fill roster holes. The timing is crucial because once Hibbert and Hill's new deals kick in, the cap space disappears. And the most likely end game is still NOH matching, leaving us with nothing to show.

    On the other side of the spectrum, Morey in Houston is showing us the kind of moves a GM desperate for a superstar would pull. Of the top minutes guys in Houston's rotation last season (and they were a .500 team), 8 out of 11 have now been traded for draft picks, waived for cap space, or allowed to leave as FAs. All of these moves are aimed at trading for Dwight Howard, who even then might end up as a one year rental only. It's like staking your rent money on the longshot in a horse race. Sure the payoff is spectacular if you win, but what happens in the 99% likely event that you don't?

    I get your point though, it's difficult to see this team getting past the 2nd round in its current configuration. Arguably though, "treading water" in terms of roster talent and maintaining future flexibility is probably the best we can do until a championship move does turn up. I think if it were someone rather than Walsh who is in charge (say, KP by his lonesome), Pacer fans would be more inclined to give the FO the benefit of the doubt that we're setting up for future moves rather than settling in for long term mediocrity. As it is, I guess we can only be patient.

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wintermute For This Useful Post:


  20. #11
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    http://www.nba.com/video/teams/pacer...e51f4v-2142300

    This is the last part of the Miles Plumlee presser. Listen to Donnie and KP talk about their plan--it is painfully obvious how they planned on building this team. Smoke-screens notwithstanding, there's real vision here.

  21. #12

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    While it may not look as sexy as what we are expecting, I think we made improvements for the better. Will the current cast achieve higher than the last season's cast? I'll say who knows.

    I think we are forgetting what last season's team has achieved. We thought they'll be just chasing for the 6th to 8th spot with how they were assembled. Nobody thought they'll be 3rd in the East, 5th best record in the league. Holding their own against the eventual champions.

    So far, our starting 5 was retained. Our bench improved in terms of offensive weapons and athleticism. I won't be surprised if the Pacers as of now will be fighting for #1 in the East.

    For me, that trade was made for the following reasons (just my theory):

    - Trying to go taller and more athletic in the frontcourt. We know our Pfs and Cs off the bench are small.
    - They're going to give more time to the other guys (Lance, Green, probably OJ too). It's time for the Pacers to reap the rewards in investing for Lance, and Green will be a legitimate backup SF that will provide better offense.
    - Giving the best situation for our good guys (DC and DJones) while getting the best asset they can get.
    - Just planning for future moves. We have a reputable FO. Let's trust what they'll do.

  22. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Everywhere. I live in a big motorhome and I travel the entire country
    Age
    67
    Posts
    3,288
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't want to sound to contrarian here but I have to ask, is that the goal? I know I'm about to be lectured by all of the "you can't build a dream team in a season" type of people and I know someone is going to explain to me how I need to be happy with the progress we made last season as well.

    I get all of that.

    But till proven otherwise we have to beat the Miami Heat.

    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

    Sorry Rexnom not aiming this at you btw, I'm Just using this as a Jump off point.
    I certainly agree with you but I saw more than one post here say that "If Jeff Foster had just been healthy, we would have beaten the Heat."

  23. #14
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,767

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't want to sound to contrarian here but I have to ask, is that the goal? I know I'm about to be lectured by all of the "you can't build a dream team in a season" type of people and I know someone is going to explain to me how I need to be happy with the progress we made last season as well.

    I get all of that.

    But till proven otherwise we have to beat the Miami Heat.

    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.

    Sorry Rexnom not aiming this at you btw, I'm Just using this as a Jump off point.
    I think most will agree with you. The biggest problem wasn't and isn't that our bench isn't good enough, but it is that our best players 1 through 3 are not good enough.

    But our bench needed an upgrade and that is much easier to do than to acquire players better than West, Roy and Granger. Only way IMO we could have acquired a player better than our best three is to take a huge chance on a player hoping they might turn out to be a better player than any of those three guys. Williams or Howard weren't coming here and neither was Nash. So we would have had to gamble, trade one of our best players for a potential player.

    That is usually a bad strategy. I think this is the correct approach, improve where we can, grow as a team, hope that Paul George becomes our best player and that chemistry and stability pull us through.

    This is not unlike the Pacers from 1994 - 2000. The team from 2002 - 2005 tried the other approach, gamble on some questionable guys and most of you didn't appreciate that approach.

    But overall no, we won't beat the Heat in 2013 if both teams are as they are now. But I'd love to see us in the ECF with the Heat next late May to have that chance.

    Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-13-2012 at 08:16 AM.

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Unclebuck For This Useful Post:


  25. #15
    Over the pond ballism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Baltics (Europe)
    Posts
    2,427

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by MrHale View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    think of it as a augustin/mahinmi trade for collison/jones. imo backup center has been our biggest need for a while now, and we finally got him so i don't get why everyone is all mad, probably cuz most don't even know who mahinmi is. i am a collison supporter and would probably be a little mad if we didn't end up getting augustin.
    yes, but we could've kept them all. From an asset standpoint, it's odd. That's an anti-Houston trade.
    I think the plan there might've been to go for another piece. Maybe a signing, maybe a significant amnesty bid.
    And we may still do it. So I don't think we should make any final evaluations on that trade yet.
    But I do wonder if not being able to get rid of Tyler derailed that plan.

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ballism For This Useful Post:


  27. #16
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,267

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    IMHO, the starters were never the problem against the Heat. Aside from Game 5, we pretty much played neck and neck with the Heat, and actually led most qtrs. it wasn't until we went with our small, unathketic bench did we lose momentum. When the heat went small, their athleticism killed us. We're taking steps to become versatile enough to be able to match up better.

    Augustin easily replaces DC, just brings a different set of skills and mentality. Green is an athletic scorer who can also shoot the ball well. Ian gives us the long athletic shot blocking big that we've clamored for IDK how long. We still have some cap space to add a cheap vet on the wing. We also have a little bit of cap flexibility moving forward with 13 mil coming off the cap next yr potentially.

    Iike our approach of sticking to our guns and not overpaying Mayo nor Lee no matter how badly we wanted them.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  29. #17
    Member wseward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Age
    25
    Posts
    74

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    I know its a business and emotions shouldn't be involved, but is it out of question that the FO wanted to do right by DC after getting demoted to backup and signing Hill to a big contract? It kind of goes along the lines of why we don't chase RFA, we conduct business like "gentlemen".

  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wseward For This Useful Post:


  31. #18
    Play McRoberts and Price! BRushWithDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Johnson's Bay, Lake Wawasee
    Age
    28
    Posts
    5,299

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by ballism View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    yes, but we could've kept them all. From an asset standpoint, it's odd. That's an anti-Houston trade.
    I think the plan there might've been to go for another piece. Maybe a signing, maybe a significant amnesty bid.
    And we may still do it. So I don't think we should make any final evaluations on that trade yet.
    But I do wonder if not being able to get rid of Tyler derailed that plan.
    This is where I'm at. I have no problem with exchanging Collison/Amundson/Jones for Augustin/Mahinmi/Green. I don't think we really got any better but we didn't get worse. The issue is in the way it was done. We didn't have to dump Collison and Jones for Mahinimi. We could have just signed Mahinmi and Augustin and still gotten something of value for Collison. You don't give something away for free if it has any value. I was never a big Collison fan but he was worth more than we got for him. Which was nothing.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BRushWithDeath For This Useful Post:


  33. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,951

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    This trade should be looked at in a vacuum and as such I agree with everything in the article, the Pacers were fleeced. Giving away Jones, and DC for nothing wasn't necessary for any of the other moves that were made. We most likely won't even use the cap space the trade generated and both players came off our books this year anyway. We could have easily signed Ian to the exact contract and then moved Jones and DC for future picks. NY wanted Jones for a 2cd. and I really think we could have received a 1st. for DC. Whatever we end up with at the start of the season, we could have had this much more if we didn't donate the assets to Cuban. This trade is just something that I'll have to learn to live with.

  34. #20

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Unclebuck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think most will agree with you. The biggest problem wasn't and isn't that our bench isn't good enough, but it is that our best players 1 through 3 are not good enough.

    But our bench needed an upgrade and that is much easier to do than to acquire players better than West, Roy and Granger. Only way IMO we could have acquired a player better than our best three is to take a huge chance on a player hoping they might turn out to be a better player than any of those three guys. Williams or Howard weren't coming here and neither was Nash. So we would have had to gamble, trade one of our best players for a potential player.

    That is usually a bad strategy. I think this is the correct approach, improve where we can, grow as a team, hope that Paul George becomes our best player and that chemistry and stability pull us through.

    This is not unlike the Pacers from 1994 - 2000. The team from 2002 - 2005 tried the other approach, gamble on some questionable guys and most of you didn't appreciate that approach.

    But overall no, we won't beat the Heat in 2013 if both teams are as they are now. But I'd love to see us in the ECF with the Heat next late May to have that chance.

    Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs
    100% Agree. The best chance we have to be a true contender is to continue to winning, hope our internal talent reaches another level, and possibly have an opportunity to trade for a special talent by being in the right place at the right time, all while not being in cap hell and having manageable contracts across the board.

    Last I checked, EVERYONE has to beat the Heat, and no one did. While we aren't aiming for 2nd place, it's a tall order for any team. While we did not go toe to toe with Miami, we woke them up, and gave them the best challenge of the playoffs, with all due respect to the Celts.

    I like the strategy, I like the contracts, and all the moves were made as one vision I believe, as they seem to fit. We made room for Augustin, by shipping out Collison, who would have been gone for sure next year.

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to Phildog For This Useful Post:


  36. #21

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    I don't think we know the full scope of this trade yet. I might have a tin foil hat on here, but hear me out:

    No one (except for NBA executives) knows for sure how much cap room the Pacers and Mavs each have right now. However, I've read that Dallas has about $4 mil and the Pacers have about $4.5. The Pacers and Mavs have been noted as the two leaders in the Elton Brand amnesty sweepstakes. So...

    Was this trade secretly Collison & Jones for Mahinmi & Brand?

  37. The Following User Says Thank You to FlavaDave For This Useful Post:


  38. #22
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,267

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is where I'm at. I have no problem with exchanging Collison/Amundson/Jones for Augustin/Mahinmi/Green. I don't think we really got any better but we didn't get worse. The issue is in the way it was done. We didn't have to dump Collison and Jones for Mahinimi. We could have just signed Mahinmi and Augustin and still gotten something of value for Collison. You don't give something away for free if it has any value. I was never a big Collison fan but he was worth more than we got for him. Which was nothing.
    Everyone keeps saying that "we could've gotten more for DC" don't you think if we could get more value for him, we would have? Especially if we knew we were going to trade him anyways. Idk why we assume he had Sooo much value around the league. I mean we got him for Troy Murphy lol. I just don't think there's much of a market for DC. I could be wrong but I'd think if we could've gotten more for DC we would have.

  39. The Following User Says Thank You to Ace E.Anderson For This Useful Post:


  40. #23
    Play McRoberts and Price! BRushWithDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Johnson's Bay, Lake Wawasee
    Age
    28
    Posts
    5,299

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Everyone keeps saying that "we could've gotten more for DC" don't you think if we could get more value for him, we would have? Especially if we knew we were going to trade him anyways. Idk why we assume he had Sooo much value around the league. I mean we got him for Troy Murphy lol. I just don't think there's much of a market for DC. I could be wrong but I'd think if we could've gotten more for DC we would have.
    We didn't get little for Collison. We got nothing for Collison. No, I don't think he has much value. But I also don't think he has zero value. He wasn't a big asset but his contract made it so he wasn't a negative value. You don't send out an asset without getting an asset, no matter how small, back.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

  41. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BRushWithDeath For This Useful Post:


  42. #24
    The Nite Owl LA_Confidential's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    1,566

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Everyone keeps saying that "we could've gotten more for DC" don't you think if we could get more value for him, we would have? Especially if we knew we were going to trade him anyways. Idk why we assume he had Sooo much value around the league. I mean we got him for Troy Murphy lol. I just don't think there's much of a market for DC. I could be wrong but I'd think if we could've gotten more for DC we would have.
    Agree 100%. Right now the market is saturated with marginal talents at the PG spot. People say we could have just signed Mahinmi, which is true, but I think we got lucky that Dallas didnt just go out and sign a Felton or Flynn etc. this Trade gave us an opportunity to pick up a player that the FO obviously felt they wanted/needed without having to add salary.

  43. The Following User Says Thank You to LA_Confidential For This Useful Post:


  44. #25
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,738

    Default Re: Insider: "Pacers-Mavs Deal: Who won?" (need posted plz)

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    At no point in time during the playoffs did I ever think to myself, man if only we had a better backup center we could take these guys.
    We were winning when our starters were in. We lost when the bench was in.

    Upgrading the bench is a reasonable approach.
    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!

  45. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Anthem For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. What is the Pacers ceiling? "ESPN Insider"
    By indyblue47 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04-03-2012, 11:48 AM
  2. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 01-24-2012, 06:27 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-13-2010, 03:06 AM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-12-2008, 07:07 PM
  5. Insider request "Pacers Waiting"
    By Los Angeles in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-03-2006, 02:58 PM

Posting Permissions

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