View Poll Results: Comfortable w Pacers offering Lance the following contract?

Voters
134. You may not vote on this poll
  • 6-8 M

    8 5.97%
  • 8-10 M

    57 42.54%
  • 10-12 M

    50 37.31%
  • 12-14 M

    14 10.45%
  • 14+ M

    5 3.73%
  • Do not re sign and look elsewhere

    0 0%
Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 399

Thread: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

  1. #201
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,699

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    James & Durant were the 2 forwards in the ALL NBA 1st team last year, and Anrthony and Griffin in the 2nd PG was in 3rd, I would be astonished if he did not make at least 2nd team all NBA
    Funny enough Duncan was C in the 1st, not bad for a power forward, oh wait other thread

    would be amazed also if Roy was not in one of them
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to able For This Useful Post:


  3. #202
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,265

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    For those that think we can just add pieces to Lance, Paul and Roy.....

    If we were to pay Lance 12 mil, and figure that Roy will opt out and receive another Max extension (which is what will happen--esp after he wins DPOY this year) then you're going to be looking at $71.5 mil on the books for the 2015-16 season...with 6 players (not counting S.Hill, or other future rookies right now). Obviously we'd do some trades (good bye G.Hill) in order to make some room on the roster and field 13-14 players. But D.West's contract expires after that season, while Paul is receiving bumps of about 1.2 million every season.

    In order for our team to maintain the identity that's made us successful once D.West is gone, we are going to need another more-than-adequate PF who can score, and rebound at an above average rate. If we do not, then our team isn't nearly as effective, and we lose the traits that have been our equalizer against the "superstar teams"...our size strength, and toughness. But when you pay Lance $12 mil or more, it's going to make it tough to pay ANYBODY else more than a few million a year, because we will already be paying big money to Roy and Paul.

    It's not about looking at next season's financial situation; it's about looking at the books for the two to three seasons after that.

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


  5. #203

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by able View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    yes there is an option on Scola, not picking it up is not an option, no chance you get someone of his caliber in for that kind of money.
    and no, Copeland is not even close, why do you think he only plays garbage time, because he's so good he's outplaying the old Argentinian fox?
    A LOT harder to replace Lance than Scola. If it means keeping Lance we should let Scola walk IMO.

  6. #204
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,102

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleazar View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    At that point you would have Paul competing with LeBron, Durant, and Melo for the SF spot. I'm wouldn't say he wouldn't get in, but it would be much more difficult.
    There is no SF position on the All-NBA teams. There are 2 forward positions for the 1st team, 2 forward positions for the 2nd team, and 2 forward positions for the 3rd team.

    The only way that Paul doesn't get one of those spots would be an injury forcing him to miss most or all of the rest of the season, and nobody wants to see that happen. When he made the 3rd team last year, it basically sealed him getting the Rose Rule bump.
    Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 01-27-2014 at 12:28 PM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Mackey_Rose For This Useful Post:


  8. #205
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,699

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by brownjake43 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A LOT harder to replace Lance than Scola. If it means keeping Lance we should let Scola walk IMO.
    For the 12 million people want to pay him i can easily replace him, I can not replace Scola with a near likeness for under 5 million.

    this replacement crap fails badly on real numbers, paying Lance max or near max nunbers makes you need to replace him with someone that costs the same, not the 1 million he costs now, and for 12 - 15 million we can pretty assuredly buy an All star or so.

    and then ofcourse see half our team fall by the wayside because we would land in LT land and lose money hand over hand.
    (as i said elsewhere this 12 -15 million doubles in real money)
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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


  9. The Following User Says Thank You to able For This Useful Post:


  10. #206
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    17,372

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    The only way Paul George fails to make an All-NBA team this year is if he gets hurt.

  11. #207
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    8,045

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by able View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    James & Durant were the 2 forwards in the ALL NBA 1st team last year, and Anrthony and Griffin in the 2nd PG was in 3rd, I would be astonished if he did not make at least 2nd team all NBA
    Funny enough Duncan was C in the 1st, not bad for a power forward, oh wait other thread

    would be amazed also if Roy was not in one of them
    Shows how much I pay attention to All-NBA.

  12. #208
    You can call me Taz cinotimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,324

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    same as george hill....no more...

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


  14. #209
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,656
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by able View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For the 12 million people want to pay him i can easily replace him, I can not replace Scola with a near likeness for under 5 million.

    this replacement crap fails badly on real numbers, paying Lance max or near max nunbers makes you need to replace him with someone that costs the same, not the 1 million he costs now, and for 12 - 15 million we can pretty assuredly buy an All star or so.
    As has been pointed out before, we wont have $12M to replace Lance. We'll have pocket change. Barring a major lucky break, our team will be downgraded significantly all over a disagreement of $2-3M -- the same amount of money our end-of-the-bench towel-waver is making.

    Does that seem smart to you? It doesn't to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by able View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    and then ofcourse see half our team fall by the wayside because we would land in LT land and lose money hand over hand.
    (as i said elsewhere this 12 -15 million doubles in real money)
    If money is going to lead to the breakup of our current team, I'd make keeping PG, Roy, and Lance -- our young core -- top priority and work out the rest as we go. You don't break up a trio of young, talented All-Stars to keep an aging PF on your bench.

    Also, remember, folks: This isn't your money that's being spent. If our owners feel going into the luxury tax is worth it to keep a championship-caliber together, that's their prerogative, not yours. From the way some of you go on about the luxury tax and player salaries (pocket change to billionaires), you'd think it was coming out of your own pockets.

  15. #210
    bleed Blue & Gold PacersPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,245

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Also, remember, folks: This isn't your money that's being spent. If our owners feel going into the luxury tax is worth it to keep a championship-caliber together, that's their prerogative, not yours. From the way some of you go on about the luxury tax and player salaries (pocket change to billionaires), you'd think it was coming out of your own pockets.
    Correct me if I am wrong but I am under the impression the city of Indianapolis is paying 10 Million a year via the CIB agreement to keep the Pacers here. Technically that is taxpayer money but again I may be mistaken.

    If the above is correct then I do not see the city of Indy paying 10 Million to let the Pacers go over the LT.

  16. #211
    I'm on a MAC! graphic-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,443

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by PacersPride View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Correct me if I am wrong but I am under the impression the city of Indianapolis is paying 10 Million a year via the CIB agreement to keep the Pacers here. Technically that is taxpayer money but again I may be mistaken.

    If the above is correct then I do not see the city of Indy paying 10 Million to let the Pacers go over the LT.
    That 10 million is operational costs. Basically nothing to do with the actual basketball team. Is costs to operate the building, upgrade the facilities, etc...
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

  17. #212
    I'm on a MAC! graphic-er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,443

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    Also, remember, folks: This isn't your money that's being spent. If our owners feel going into the luxury tax is worth it to keep a championship-caliber together, that's their prerogative, not yours. From the way some of you go on about the luxury tax and player salaries (pocket change to billionaires), you'd think it was coming out of your own pockets.
    shut down the thread! Everything is irrelevant now.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

  18. #213
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Shamsports shows that Scola has an unguaranteed Contract in 2014-2015. It needs to be picked up by a certain date otherwise he's waived and his $4.87 mil salary goes to $941k ( the guaranteed amount that he is owed ).

    Does anyone know what the date is to decide what to do with his unguranteed contract?

    I am hoping that it is after the start of Free Agency...as opposed to before
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  19. #214
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    I have a question about how a "Sign and Trade" of Lance would work for a Team that is over the Salary Cap at $68 mil.

    NOTE - PLEASE READ BEFORE you jump off the deep end and declare from the highest mountain that you'd rather dump the entire Team before doing what I am asking below. I know what the opinion is of the forum of what the Pacers should and should not do regarding Lance....I am PURELY asking the questions below and exploring this option as "WORST CASE scenario - Option C" if we end up losing Lance.

    The Pacers have about $7.7 mil to spend before hitting the $75.7 mil LT ceiling. The Full MLE is around $5.38 mil. That would leave about $2.32 mil left over before going over the LT ceiling.

    Since we are over the Salary Cap...we can only AT MOST...sign a Free Agent ( not named Danny Granger ) to the Full MLE and either sign Granger to a contract that starts at $2.32 mil ( unlikely ) or one ( or both ) of the 2014-2015 2nd round draft picks that the Pacers have.

    Can the Pacers sign a Free Agent AT the FULL MLE ( thus pushing the Pacers to $73.38 mil in Owed Salary ) AND THEN execute a Sign & Trade for Lance while getting back a Player or Players that only had no more than $2.32 mil ( most likely a rookie Prospect along with Picks )?

    What I have come to consider is the option that the Pacers do a S&T of Lance ( IF Pacers/Simon/Bird decide that re-signing Lance is not an option cuz he's being priced beyond the Pacers reach ) and getting back SOME assets in a S&T scenario. The way that I look at it is that Lance Trade Value is AT WORST worth a Trade Exception + Rookie Prospect ( or a Draft Pick ) or AT MOST worth a Trade Exception + Rookie Prospect + Draft pick.

    What I don't know is what the Pacers can do in a S&T scenario AFTER signing a Free Agent ( not named Lance or Granger ) to the full MLE. Keep in mind...the Pacers are already OVER the Salary Cap. So I am not sure how being over the Salary cap can affect taking back Players in a S&T.

    The reason I bring this up is that I just realized that the Pacers are in a similar scenario as the Thunder are when it came time to pay Harden. The Thunder decided to get something back in return for their Star Player instead of losing him for nothing in Free Agency. I look at the possibility of losing Lance in the same light....if "push comes to shove" and the Simons/Pacers/Bird decide that they cannot afford to keep Lance cuz the Free Agent Market is making him too costly....I can see them trying to get something in return for losing an asset like Lance ( again, PLEASE just look at this as "Option C" ).

    NOTE - To be clear...I know that Harden being traded to the Thunder wasn't a S&T scenario ( like what I am suggesting above ) nor that it is the SAME EXACT scenario...I'm just saying that I am approaching this from the scenario where both Teams didn't want to lose their Star Player nothing is similar and therefore made moves to ensure that they get something back in return for trading him to another Team.

    Thank you in advance for your response...but please try to keep your response to this particular topic at hand. I don't want this to tangent into another "We should do whatever we can to keep Lance" discussion. I am trying to understand what ALL of our Offseason options are ( like it or not...a S&T scenario is one of our Options )...especially when it comes to ( what I think ) is a very strong possibility that the Pacers can lose Lance to Free Agency.
    Last edited by CableKC; 01-27-2014 at 03:05 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  20. #215
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by able View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    perhaps i should have posted this here, instead of elsewhere but so many threads with the same outcome ....

    for those who want to throiw the kitchensink at Lance (i.e. pay more than 8 mio) realise this:

    going into the LT doesn't only mean that you pay X for Y in a progressive scale, but it also means you get less of the shared income and NONE of the poenalty income, which by careful estimates is about 7 mio for the P's this year so going over means dropping that income as well, see, 10 mio now not only costs you the 10 mio in salary and perhaps 3 mio in tax but it also costs you the other income say 7 mio so it ends up costing you 10 mio more aka 20 mio, and trust me, Lance is not worth that kind of money, not even near.

    So be darned sure we are not going into LT and we wont lock up anything we cant correct if we need to nex year.
    And take it as a given that George falls under the Rose rule he already fullfilled the needed "all-star starter" criteria
    I could be wrong....but I think that there is only a small minority that suggest that the Pacers should go over and pay the LT just to re-sign Lance.

    I think that the majority of the "throw the entire kitchensink at Lance" contingent are heavily leaning towards the "Trade GH" or "Don't pick up Scola's Contract" factions JUST to avoid going over the LT.
    Last edited by CableKC; 01-27-2014 at 03:06 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to CableKC For This Useful Post:


  22. #216
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For those that think we can just add pieces to Lance, Paul and Roy.....

    If we were to pay Lance 12 mil, and figure that Roy will opt out and receive another Max extension (which is what will happen--esp after he wins DPOY this year) then you're going to be looking at $71.5 mil on the books for the 2015-16 season...with 6 players (not counting S.Hill, or other future rookies right now). Obviously we'd do some trades (good bye G.Hill) in order to make some room on the roster and field 13-14 players. But D.West's contract expires after that season, while Paul is receiving bumps of about 1.2 million every season.

    In order for our team to maintain the identity that's made us successful once D.West is gone, we are going to need another more-than-adequate PF who can score, and rebound at an above average rate. If we do not, then our team isn't nearly as effective, and we lose the traits that have been our equalizer against the "superstar teams"...our size strength, and toughness. But when you pay Lance $12 mil or more, it's going to make it tough to pay ANYBODY else more than a few million a year, because we will already be paying big money to Roy and Paul.

    It's not about looking at next season's financial situation; it's about looking at the books for the two to three seasons after that.
    When it comes to re-signing Lance and EVENTUALLY re-signing Hibbert during the 2015-2016 season....I am willing to "kick the can down the street" when it comes to figuring out how to re-sign Hibbert. This doens't mean that I wouldn't consider the ramifications to re-signing Lance at whatever contract he gets and how it impacts re-signing Hibbert. I suggest this "sign Lance and then figure out what moves to make between now and the summer of 2015 ( when Hibbert becomes a FA )" approach only because I think that the Pacers would have more options to clear the necessary Capspace and/or make smaller FA signings to fill the roster that allows them to keep both Players. Unlike the Lance re-signing where the Pacers hands are tied due to guaranteed contracts....when it comes time to re-sign Hibbert....they have more flexibility to re-sign him.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  23. #217
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,740

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I could be wrong....but I think that there is only a small minority that suggest that the Pacers should go over and pay the LT just to re-sign Lance.

    I think that the majority of the "throw the entire kitchensink at Lance" contingent are heavily leaning towards the "Trade GH" or "Don't pick up Scola's Contract" factions JUST to avoid going over the LT.

    If going over the LT is what it takes, then they should do it.

  24. #218
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sollozzo View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If going over the LT is what it takes, then they should do it.
    Please clarify your post.

    Are you taking an "Initially go over the LT to re-sign Lance but then pay whatever costs before the Feb 2015 trade deadline to get under the LT so that the Simons/Pacers don't pay the LT before the end of the Season" stance on this?

    or

    Are you taking a "Go over the LT to re-sign Lance and if they can't get under the LT before the Feb 2015 trade deadline....so be it...stay over the LT" approach to re-sign Lance?


    My guess is that your answer is the former ( re-sign Lance and then pay whatever price it is to get under the LT before Feb 2015 trade deadline )...and not the latter.

    Please note that there is a difference in the answer to both questions. The first recognizes that we must match whatever offer Lance gets to re-sign while ensuring that the Pacers pay whatever subsequent price to remain under the LT ( such as trade off whatever assets....GH, Solo, draft picks... to get under the LT ) while the other answer considers doing the same to try to get under the LT....but if ( after Feb 2015 Trade deadline ) they can't get under the LT ceiling ( for whatever reason )....then ( so be it ), the Pacers pay the LT.

    What if the Simon's don't want to "pay whatever price" to re-sign Lance just to stay under the LT?

    What able ( and many here ) suggest is that it is not an unreasonable position to think that the Simons are willing to go over the LT to re-sign Lance due to the financial impact of taking a "do whatever it takes to re-sign Lance EVEN if it means paying the LT" approach to what we do. Nor is it unreasonable to think that the Simons/Bird/Pacers think that it is worth it to trade away assets just to remain under the LT while re-signing Lance to whatever the Free Agent Market dictates.

    Will it significantly impact the Pacers chance of repeating or bringing back the same core Players next season ( and affect the Team's ability to compete at a high level )? Yeah....it will....but it is not unreasonable to think that the Simons/Bird/Pacers would consider these ramifications ( the final cost ) when deciding to re-sign Lance due to Financial/SalaryCap/LT reasons.

    IMHO....the TOTAL COST to ultimately re-signing Lance ISN'T simply the $11-12+ mil a year contract that the Pacers would have to pay Lance.....it will end up including the additional cost of losing whatever assets it will take to re-sign Lance AND remain under the LT. Even if we just do a plain Salary dump of GH or not picking up Scola's 2014-2015 Salary....those are assets to this Team that contribute to the success of the Team and have enough value to impact the Team.
    Last edited by CableKC; 01-27-2014 at 03:59 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CableKC For This Useful Post:


  26. #219
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    221
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Since this little horsie has been beaten, buried, dug up, beaten, buried, dug up, rinse, repeat, let me first summarize the positions:

    ...pay him (in my best Dr. Evil voice) one BILLION dollars or
    ...12 million? I'm a Hoosier and we know the value of a dollar. We will not go over $9,123,001.99 per year.

    But let me ask a question slightly different from the one posed.

    How much would YOU, not the Pacers, you pay in order for Lance Stephenson to sign for 12m, plus the LT, plus the loss of revenue from the LT?

    The little lady and I just started buying season tix over the past 3 years after taking a hiatus following our little Bad Boys era. Didn't believe in rewarding bad behaviour. And, I'd like to add, we bought before the G.O.A.T started his little spree. Danny, Roy, GH and an emerging PG are why we came back. Now its only a mini package even though I tried to get her to go half this year. At this point, I think I am solid on a half next year. But...

    What if the Mr. Simon decides, "OK, since we all seem to agree we need to spend "whatever it takes", then everybody's going to contribute, right?".

    So if tix go up 10% or 15% to cover the additional dollars, everybody still good? And I really want to know about the folks in the lower bowl who have been there thru thick and thin. You good?

    Just curious. Cause its always easy spending someone else's money. Some places ..... Washington DC .... have it down to an art form.
    Last edited by seeker80; 01-27-2014 at 04:03 PM. Reason: line up

  27. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to seeker80 For This Useful Post:


  28. #220
    High Flyers ThA HoyA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Pasco, wa
    Age
    28
    Posts
    1,513

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is no SF position on the All-NBA teams. There are 2 forward positions for the 1st team, 2 forward positions for the 2nd team, and 2 forward positions for the 3rd team.

    The only way that Paul doesn't get one of those spots would be an injury forcing him to miss most or all of the rest of the season, and nobody wants to see that happen. When he made the 3rd team last year, it basically sealed him getting the Rose Rule bump.
    From reports I've read if Paul makes the all nba which he should it will not take his max to 30% but to 27% not the full supermax deal, in turn he got an opt out after the 4th year on his deal

  29. #221
    THE WITCH IS DEAD!!! Coopdog23's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Da Bank
    Posts
    2,916

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    I just hope money doesnt go to his head and he gets greedy
    Smothered Chicken!

  30. #222
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,265

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As has been pointed out before, we wont have $12M to replace Lance. We'll have pocket change. Barring a major lucky break, our team will be downgraded significantly all over a disagreement of $2-3M -- the same amount of money our end-of-the-bench towel-waver is making.

    Does that seem smart to you? It doesn't to me.
    I think the idea is that it wouldn't take a player making 12 mil (or anything really close) to replace (most) of what Lance brings to the team. Actually, that's totally the idea.



    If money is going to lead to the breakup of our current team, I'd make keeping PG, Roy, and Lance -- our young core -- top priority and work out the rest as we go. You don't break up a trio of young, talented All-Stars to keep an aging PF on your bench.
    It's not the aging PF on the bench we are worried about losing, it's the eventual loss (and downgrade) of our starting PG, PF...the backup PF is 3'rd or 4th on the worry list.

    Also, remember, folks: This isn't your money that's being spent. If our owners feel going into the luxury tax is worth it to keep a championship-caliber together, that's their prerogative, not yours. From the way some of you go on about the luxury tax and player salaries (pocket change to billionaires), you'd think it was coming out of your own pockets.
    I believe the fact that the owner has said numerous times that he will not go into the luxury tax for any reason, is why individuals are so adamant about not overpaying.
    Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 01-27-2014 at 08:02 PM.

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


  32. #223
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by seeker80 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Since this little horsie has been beaten, buried, dug up, beaten, buried, dug up, rinse, repeat, let me first summarize the positions:

    ...pay him (in my best Dr. Evil voice) one BILLION dollars or
    ...12 million? I'm a Hoosier and we know the value of a dollar. We will not go over $9,123,001.99 per year.

    But let me ask a question slightly different from the one posed.

    How much would YOU, not the Pacers, you pay in order for Lance Stephenson to sign for 12m, plus the LT, plus the loss of revenue from the LT?

    The little lady and I just started buying season tix over the past 3 years after taking a hiatus following our little Bad Boys era. Didn't believe in rewarding bad behaviour. And, I'd like to add, we bought before the G.O.A.T started his little spree. Danny, Roy, GH and an emerging PG are why we came back. Now its only a mini package even though I tried to get her to go half this year. At this point, I think I am solid on a half next year. But...

    What if the Mr. Simon decides, "OK, since we all seem to agree we need to spend "whatever it takes", then everybody's going to contribute, right?".

    So if tix go up 10% or 15% to cover the additional dollars, everybody still good? And I really want to know about the folks in the lower bowl who have been there thru thick and thin. You good?

    Just curious. Cause its always easy spending someone else's money. Some places ..... Washington DC .... have it down to an art form.
    This is more of a "put your $$$ where you mouth is" type of question. Would you be okay with paying Lance whatever it takes to retain him in the form of "passed along" costs to the Fan by the Business?

    From personal experience.....I can tell you the same exact thing happened in Oakland and the GSW. After the new Ownership and top $$$ signings ( Iggy, Lee and Bogut ) over the last 2 to 3 seasons.....the price of the tickets have gone up dramatically. Luckily, I am a fan of the Pacers....a Team that more and more people are becoming aware of...but isn't considered a top draw for fans. That means that I am still able to get seats in the lower bowl section at whatever price I paid before ( under $100 a ticket ) but I am further back than where I used to sit ( good luck getting sideline seats with that ). I used to go to a lot more games in previous seasons to see the Ws play against any random Team....but due to the higher costs from year to year ( such as parking costs rise $5 every year over the last 3 seasons ), I have no problem limiting visiting Oracle Arena to 2 to 3 games his season...compared to up to 6 to 7 games last season and the year before.

    But the broader question relates to the general fanbase and whether they would pay more to see a winning Team that is fielded with some combination of Lance/PG24/Hibbert.

    My guess is that winning will convince most fans to come back and pay "extra" just to see the Pacers make it to the 2nd round of the Playoffs and beyond....but I suspect that it would also be a deterrant as well.

    In the end...my opinion is that I can see the conseqeunce of raising ticket prices won't deter most of the die hard fans ( like us ) and that there would be a segment of the general Fanbase that will be willing to pay more to see the Pacers win. Unfortunately, I can also see the price point of going to a game as a motivating factor to deter the General Fanbase ( that may not have the disposable income to spend a little more to go see the game ) from going to games simply based off of the cost to see the game. More fans wll come out to games even if the cost is higher....but I suspect that the # won't be as high when it comes to going to see multiple games throughout the year.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  33. #224
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,618

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Coopdog23 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I just hope money doesnt go to his head and he gets greedy
    Why?

    The dude has been working hard for all his life to get to the NBA...he paid his dues since he came to the Pacers, he worked his butt off to get to this point and has been paid of a pittance of what he is worth now.

    I have ZERO problem with Lance taking more $$$ to go to a lottery bound Team.

    True...he may not end up on an Elite Team like the Pacers.....but the guy is young enough where he will have more opportunities later in his career. One can't blame him for going where the $$$ is offered. I want him to be a Pacer for life...and he may end up on a Team without the same type of FO support system that he has now....but I also realize that the dude has to take care of his family.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CableKC For This Useful Post:


  35. #225
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,699

    Default Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is more of a "put your $$$ where you mouth is" type of question. Would you be okay with paying Lance whatever it takes to retain him in the form of "passed along" costs to the Fan by the Business?

    From personal experience.....I can tell you the same exact thing happened in Oakland and the GSW. After the new Ownership and top $$$ signings ( Iggy, Lee and Bogut ) over the last 2 to 3 seasons.....the price of the tickets have gone up dramatically. Luckily, I am a fan of the Pacers....a Team that more and more people are becoming aware of...but isn't considered a top draw for fans. That means that I am still able to get seats in the lower bowl section at whatever price I paid before ( under $100 a ticket ) but I am further back than where I used to sit ( good luck getting sideline seats with that ). I used to go to a lot more games in previous seasons to see the Ws play against any random Team....but due to the higher costs from year to year ( such as parking costs rise $5 every year over the last 3 seasons ), I have no problem limiting visiting Oracle Arena to 2 to 3 games his season...compared to up to 6 to 7 games last season and the year before.

    But the broader question relates to the general fanbase and whether they would pay more to see a winning Team that is fielded with some combination of Lance/PG24/Hibbert.

    My guess is that winning will convince most fans to come back and pay "extra" just to see the Pacers make it to the 2nd round of the Playoffs and beyond....but I suspect that it would also be a deterrant as well.

    In the end...my opinion is that I can see the conseqeunce of raising ticket prices won't deter most of the die hard fans ( like us ) and that there would be a segment of the general Fanbase that will be willing to pay more to see the Pacers win. Unfortunately, I can also see the price point of going to a game as a motivating factor to deter the General Fanbase ( that may not have the disposable income to spend a little more to go see the game ) from going to games simply based off of the cost to see the game. More fans wll come out to games even if the cost is higher....but I suspect that the # won't be as high when it comes to going to see multiple games throughout the year.
    based upon relatively simple calculations of added cost to going over the LT and the amount of going over the LT and the missed incoe from going over the LT totalling 40 million, it would mean that you need an additionalt income of about 600K per homegame assuming you would make the other 40% back in added sales on merchandise and increased income share from away games. (a tall order)
    19k seats dividing 600K income remains close to $ 30 per seat, which in general averages means a 75% increase on tickets.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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


  36. The Following User Says Thank You to able For This Useful Post:


Posting Permissions

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