Millsap and Hayward and we have a deal, Burks? meh.
I would have probably done Granger + Orlando + 1st for Millsap and Burks, Lance is a bit too much to just add.
Doesn't really matter though, some team with cap space or something will potentially take a gamble on Danny in the offseason.
"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
Deal couldn't have gotten that far considering Utah would've needed to add at least ~4 mil to make it legal.
Interesting. If true, how does this jive with the FO saying that keeping west is a priority?
Doesn't mean west was gone. Milsap would be a good 6th man. I still wouldn't do this deal unless u replace lance with a first or Orlando or something. Lance is too good of a prospect.
Yeah, that deal isn't worth Danny and Lance. I'm wondering if that's why it didn't go through. Paul Millsap would be one helluva 6th man though.
Milsap would of probably been our starting 3 if we were making that trade. I don't do it because of the stage this team is in. Last year though I would of been all of this not an insant no like I am now. I would of had to think long and hard about it. Alec Burks is a good prospect and he really needs a fresh start. He needs a coach like Frank who will give you a role and believe in you. He along with Gordon and the bigs in Utah get yanked around way to much. Corbin is always changing guys roles and I am not a fan of how he uses that personal at all.
Plus that trade hurts us vs Miami IMO takes away two good defenders for Wade and Lebron.
Milsap is going to command at least 9+ mil a year ( if not more ).
Having a frontcourt rotation of Hibbert, West, Mahinmi and Milsap would be great....but makes little sense given the amount of money that Milsap would command. The only way that it would make sense would be to play Milsap at the Starting 3 spot and then playing some backup PF minutes.
Of course, I would have no problem paying Milsap $9 to 10 mil a year to be the Starting SF / backup PF as opposed to having Granger being paid $14+ mil next year.
Last edited by CableKC; 03-09-2013 at 03:53 AM.
Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.
But what is Danny going to make on his next deal if he doesn't come back playing better than Milsap? And if he does play better than Milsap as a more natural SF and 3pt threat, then he makes the Pacers much better until they have to punt due to the looming contract.
To me the only thing that makes sense if you have to move Danny is that you don't take salary back. Otherwise just keep Danny. Moving Danny for Milsap says you are giving up on keeping West, not changing your SF. And to also give up Lance for that change? It makes NO sense.
Of course the deal didn't get done so that matches the idea that it didn't make sense. My guess is that the Pacers were feeling out what Danny's market value was, Utah was obviously looking to clear out some of their frontline money (everyone thought they would make a deal for sure), and the two teams started talking about what they would be interested in. Utah says "Danny, sure, but what do you want?" Pacers say "Milsap". Utah ups price to Lance and Danny. Talks die, rumor shows up a month later. Simple as that.
The main reason Indy will end up moving Danny (if they do) is CAP ONLY...or injury which would mean no one wants him. A healthy Granger finishes his career in Indy if they could afford it. But with Lance coming on and OJ having a strong 2nd half, Danny starts to look like the only place you can save money to keep West and Paul. Its been this way all year, no news there. But I think some people forget that with their trade scenarios and start throwing salary coming back to the Pacers which defeats the point of letting DG leave.
Either add Hayward or take out Stephenson and replace him with a 1st and I would have done the deal in a heartbeat.
Why trade Lance? He's the most fun to watch on the team. He's really good for us on both sides of the court, and he's cheap (for now). We pick up a prospect like Lance once in a blue moon and are going to trade him away? Bad idea, unless you have something really special coming back.
"I like our group of people," Ainge told USA Today. "I'm trying to teach them about basketball, and they're trying to teach me about analytics."
Yea, the inclusion of Lance makes this a no go for me.
He then went on to tweet
Alex Kennedy @AlexKennedyNBA
One source said the Jazz and Clippers discussed deal that would've swapped Paul Millsap and DeMarre Carroll for Eric Bledsoe and Lamar Odom.
So in other words the "source" was somebody in Utah or an agent of one of the players and there is zero way for us to know if it was a mutual two way conversation where there was serious negotiations or if it was the G.M. of the Jazz picking up the phone and calling saying "hey how about this" only to be told no. Also understand that this could totally be agent driven, most likely Milsap's, and it could be that they made the call.
Never EVER right out believe unnamed sources from sports writers on twitter. Since there is so much competition now to break things and seem like an insider we now have a lot of agent manipulation and probably some GM manipulation as well.
Having said that this is a tough one for me as I have always liked Milsap but I am pretty sure that he does not wish to be a 6th man and Lance being in the deal is an absolute killer for me unless they threw in Kanter & Haywood and even then I would probably still rather not do it.
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
That's an unbalanced trade unless Granger is about to retire.
While it is fun discussing potential deals and realeted topics. I think it is worth mentioning that if we had a list of everything that was "discussed" the two weeks prior to the trade deadline, we would have hundreds of different potential deals
I have a feeling this "discussion" about trading Lance was one-sided on Utah's part. Can't see the Pacers trading him right now, especially not as part of this deal.
Getting Milsap - where does this leave West. If Milsaap is to come off the bench, where does this leave Hanbrough?
I'd much rather have Jefferson or Favors over Milsap
"So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.
Milsap would have started at the 3. He's done that before and it fits what Frank likes to do.
You don't part with Lance right now, not after the rapid progression he's shown in just his first season of playing time. Born Ready is a keeper.
This would have been a bad trade. While I'm skeptical about Granger's ability to contribute this season, I'm certainly not ready to write him off beyond this year. But Lance is the main reason why this would have been a bad deal.
Last edited by Sollozzo; 03-09-2013 at 11:47 AM.
News Flash, this starting up line is set for the next 4 years. Its proven to be one of the best in the league. If Danny is traded this offseason it will be for a young PF prospect to take the place of Tyler, and to be groomed to replace West in a few years.
You can't get champagne from a garden hose.
Very weird that within a year of last season's playoffs, most of us are more ready to part with Danny than Lance.