I wish the FO would see that last year we were one game away. If that's not a good enough reason to go over the LT then what is? The revenue the team would make from winning one or more titles would make up for the money spent on the tax by far. However, if Granger can actually play off the bench this year at least then I don't think the LT is necessary, but if something does happen to Danny's health to where he's out for the season...then they would be pretty stupid to not go over the LT....and frankly, I'd be pretty damn pissed off.
How are the Clippers going to trade Jamal at 5 million and take on Grangers 14 million? That means that they would have to trade Jordan as well. Which team under the cap would take him on? 76ers? Phoenix?
If we move Danny we would move Hill and Ian as well. That would mean that this team is not doing well.
We aren't trading Danny.
A trade with the Clippers doesn't work but I can see a team under the cap willing to take on the 14mil expiring for one or two of their players if the Pacers are willing to ad a pick.
Sacramento, Philly, Phoenix and the Bobcats, I could even see the Lakers wanting to make a deal if their season looks like crap in the beginning(I expect them to look like crap).
Charolette is losing Ben Gordon off their books. I doubt they need to lose another.
76ers. Maybe Young. We would have to kiss Lance goodbye unless we dump Ian. I really like Gani Lawal.
Send Danny and Ian for Young and Lawal.
I see no possible trade with the Suns. None. Unless they want to dump Dragic. Danny and Hill for Ian and the lesser of the Morris twins? I just don't see it.
Magic? http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ktukdf5I just don't see that as a possibility.
The Jazz don't need to dump any salary.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=l5audkyI would love to get Isaiah Thomas on this team. I think he is the next break out player.
Major Cold note that I'm talking about teams giving up some of their players for picks, there is no doubt that the Bobcats would be willing to move Ben Gordon for a pick plus the 14mil expiring.
Here are some quick examples I could come up with:
Ben Gordon for 14mil+ 2nd round pick.
Nash+Blake for 14mil+ pick.
Note that I believe there is an small chance the 14mil expiring goes anywhere.
Why would we ever want to do any of those trades?
As Kstats said the Pacers can keep Lance if they wanted to but I guess nobody knows for sure if Larry(and Simon)is willing to go over the cap for a shot at a championship.
If trading Granger makes sense, then fine. However, I'm not trading Granger for the sake of trading Granger. He offers cap space at the end of the season, so it's a win-win situation either way.
I'm sorry, but wouldn't trading for Nash mean a complete makeover of the way the Pacers play? Just can't see Nash bringing the ball down court, passing to West and going to stand in the corner for a possible 3. I do however see the Lakers being interested in Danny if he's healthy and Kobe is also. Kobe and Granger on the wing would give the a chance to at least compete this year?? Maybe Nash would come here as a backup for a chance for a title? Then we could have a 2nd unit lineup that would run and gun.
I think the only trade that makes sense is a Granger-Rondo swap where we also give up Stephenson (probably other stuff - picks, OJ/Solo - too). Move Hill to starting two spot, and have C.J. Watson serve as the third guard. I wouldn't do it, though.
Last edited by LG33; 10-27-2013 at 04:02 PM.
At this point, Granger might be a better player than a 40 year old Steve Nash. I'd definitely rather keep Granger since his contract ends this season. Nash isn't worth taking on all of that money next year.
And Nash is 38 by the way : )
If there was a good/smart trade to be made that would generate a legit shot creating guard within our starting 5, then it would make sense to complete that trade--no doubt.
They have the Bulls No 1. Above Miami. Yeah OK....
Just want to point out this is Bill simmons rankings and not Jalens, as Jalen himself has said many times.
Well if we coudl swap out Granger and Lance for Rondo, then i'd do it. But I wouldn't sell the farm for him. Giving up our young depth would be a mistake. Hill would do just find at the 2 and CJ would still be the back up point.
You can't get champagne from a garden hose.
Why would we want Steve Nash period? Where does he play? He can't start because he is perhaps the biggest defensive liability in the league.
Because he is Steve Nash? the Pacers still need somebody that can create his own shot and create for others Nash is the perfect candidate.
Backup point guard to Hill? Nash,Watson and Scola off the bench?Where does he play?
And nobody is saying that he is going to be the starter, he brings clutch shooting, amazing passing ability and is one of the best free throw/3 point shooters in the league, he could be our Dallas Jason Kidd(yes I know they are different so please since86 or others don't twist my words and derail the thread, thank you).He can't start because he is perhaps the biggest defensive liability in the league.