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 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 399

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

  1. #251
    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 Pacer Fan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Before the season started, would you honestly had signed Lance to 5 mil per year? I dont think I would have, I don't think we saw this coming to this degree.
    5 million a year for Lance would have been a no brainer. The team got to the ECF inspite of Lance's crazy turnovers and terrible shot selection, if he improves like he has this year, you have a bargain. If stayed mediorce and had the up and down games, then 5 million for starting SG is an easy trade asset.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

  2. #252

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cousy47 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    While I would NEVER question Mr. Bird, I don't understand why we didn't offer Lance an extension for 4 years at about 4-5 million before we resigned PG to his killer contract. I believe LS would have taken $5m at the start of the season and been happy for awhile. That would have still let us sign the Max deal with Paul by using Granger's expiring money to pay him. Depending on the Cap space we would be facing at the end of our Championship run season, we could have still offered DG the MLE and kept the core(6) on the team. Would this work money wise or am I dreaming? I just believe teams wait too long to make offers to their players(like we did with Roy) when they start showing signs of being special. IMHO, extensions for decent money, like we did with Hill and West, is a much desired outcome to the PANIC matching of offers from teams with Cap space and desperation on their side.
    There are rules that govern when teams can offer extensions and how much they can offer to players. Because Lance was making so little and was a second round pick, the most the Pacers could offer him in an extension was between 1 and 2 million per year.

    That's also why you see so few extensions in the NBA. The rookie scale is one common exception to that which is how Paul George signed an extension. Hill and West were both free agents (Hill restricted, West unrestricted) and signed new deals. Neither one of them signed extensions.

  3. #253
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,083

    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
    "camps" have grown and reason has left the ballpark ages ago, not sure i like it.
    I agree. That "Lance is overvalued" camp has become very unreasonable.
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “People talk about how quiet he [McKey] is, but he’s really been helpful. He gives a lot of insight to players in how to guard certain teams and what their weaknesses are. The whole team listens to him, and it makes my job a lot easier. Having players like him is what pro basketball is all about for me.” —Larry Brown

  4. #254
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,948

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

    Quote Originally Posted by graphic-er View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Tyson Chandler signed that contract after being the defense anchor on a championship team, and then of course won DPOY the next year in NYC. Not mention has averaged pretty much near a double double since being in NYC. In terms of a defensive specialist, he is the perfect example of what you want from a defense focused center. The reality is that Roy Hibbert isn't going to average a double double anytime in his career. He is infact, just like Lance....a product of a successful system that has really good defenders all around him. If you put Swap
    Hibbert and Chandler, the Pacers would still have the best record in the NBA. The Knicks would still be terrible.

    Roy will not get 18 million, a smart GM would never offer him that because he knows that the Pacers have a unique starting 5 that can guard their own man, thus eliminating the constant help defense or rotation that gets guys out of position. So you have to have the right kind of roster, if Hibbert had to constant rotate over the help he would be in foul trouble every game in the 1st qtr. Its easy to stay on the court when all you have to do is patrol the paint.
    Roy received a max 25% offer from Portland as a restricted free agent before he really proved anything other then a single all star appearance and you're saying he won't get a 30% max offer as an unrestricted free agent with multiple all star appearances and DPOY. He'll have teams planning their cap space to make a run at him as NY has already brought him up as a target. Roy is a unique franchise defender, far better then Chandler was. Stats are one thing but listen to any analyst talk about Roy and you'll hear them talk about his non blocks that alter the game. Players are afraid of going into the paint when Roy is in the game. There isn't another player in the game that alters the opponents game with defense the way Roy does and that wins games and GM"s know this and Larry Bird isn't going to let himself get put a position where he can't offer Roy the money that he has to. Paying Roy in 2015 trumps paying Lance in 2014.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Pacerized For This Useful Post:


  6. #255
    Intuition over Integers McKeyFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Free Lance!
    Posts
    8,083

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cubs231721 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are rules that govern when teams can offer extensions and how much they can offer to players. Because Lance was making so little and was a second round pick, the most the Pacers could offer him in an extension was between 1 and 2 million per year.

    That's also why you see so few extensions in the NBA. The rookie scale is one common exception to that which is how Paul George signed an extension. Hill and West were both free agents (Hill restricted, West unrestricted) and signed new deals. Neither one of them signed extensions.
    Thanks for this clarification.

    It seems, however, that if both parties of a contract agree to end that contract, they could do so. I don't think this happens, but common sense seems to say that a player and a team could agree to end their contract and declare immediate free agency. No?
    .

    .

    .

    .


    “People talk about how quiet he [McKey] is, but he’s really been helpful. He gives a lot of insight to players in how to guard certain teams and what their weaknesses are. The whole team listens to him, and it makes my job a lot easier. Having players like him is what pro basketball is all about for me.” —Larry Brown

  7. #256
    Indiana Pacers Forever Pacer Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    ya
    Posts
    3,824
    Mood

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

    Quote Originally Posted by graphic-er View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    5 million a year for Lance would have been a no brainer. The team got to the ECF inspite of Lance's crazy turnovers and terrible shot selection, if he improves like he has this year, you have a bargain. If stayed mediorce and had the up and down games, then 5 million for starting SG is an easy trade asset.
    I just don't see 8.8pts, 2.9 ast., 3.9 reb., 65% ft and 46% fg with his mental challenges a no brainer. Try to remember before this season started.
    .

    Frank Vogel says "Killer instinct, start strong, build a lead and then step on their throats."

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pacer Fan For This Useful Post:


  9. #257
    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?

    If somebody wants to pay Lance 12 million a year, more power to them...Im guessing its not an executive of the year candidate because I dont believe Larry is stupid enough to do such a thing...noone knows Lance better...and hence why Larry wouldnt go there for a multitude of reasons...

  10. #258

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

    Quote Originally Posted by McKeyFan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thanks for this clarification.

    It seems, however, that if both parties of a contract agree to end that contract, they could do so. I don't think this happens, but common sense seems to say that a player and a team could agree to end their contract and declare immediate free agency. No?
    It would if they were the only two parties involved, but in a setup like the NBA you also have the players union and league who have to also agree. Occasionally there are cases that are brought up in areas where the CBA is unclear (like Lin winning early Bird rights for example) but those are rare. I doubt a scenario like that would get approved since it had to come up in discussions for the CBA and they chose not to put that as an option.

  11. #259
    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 CJ Jones View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If I'm not mistaken, that Ben Wallace contract turned out to be one of the worst ever.
    This is because Ben Wallace was mostly a great defender because he played with a bunch of great defenders. That isn't Roy. Roy is the one who makes out defense great. I doubt you would ever see LeBron scared to drive at the basket because Ben Wallace was down there. You see LeBron catch a glimpse of Roy and stop in his tracks all the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by graphic-er View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Tyson Chandler signed that contract after being the defense anchor on a championship team, and then of course won DPOY the next year in NYC. Not mention has averaged pretty much near a double double since being in NYC. In terms of a defensive specialist, he is the perfect example of what you want from a defense focused center. The reality is that Roy Hibbert isn't going to average a double double anytime in his career. He is infact, just like Lance....a product of a successful system that has really good defenders all around him. If you put Swap
    Hibbert and Chandler, the Pacers would still have the best record in the NBA. The Knicks would still be terrible.

    Roy will not get 18 million, a smart GM would never offer him that because he knows that the Pacers have a unique starting 5 that can guard their own man, thus eliminating the constant help defense or rotation that gets guys out of position. So you have to have the right kind of roster, if Hibbert had to constant rotate over the help he would be in foul trouble every game in the 1st qtr. Its easy to stay on the court when all you have to do is patrol the paint.
    Dude you are just wrong here. Roy Hibbert is the player who makes our defense possible, without him there are maybe 2 or 3 other players in this league who could replicate what he does for this defense. We are able to implement this great defensive system because of Roy first and foremost. Without him we wouldn't be able to play defense the way we do. The Colts used to call Bob Sanders "The Eraser" because they said he erased all of the mistakes the other players made, which was a major reason for what may have been the worst run defense ever turned into a great run defense in the playoffs once he was healthy. Roy is Bob Sanders. He erases all the mistakes the other players make, and they do make a lot of mistakes. This isn't like Lance who is playing great feeding off of better players. Roy is the better player that everyone is feeding off of on defense. If Roy goes somewhere else, I can guarantee that they would implement a similar system, and they would have great success with it.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Eleazar For This Useful Post:


  13. #260

    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
    That may have been "totally the idea" of other posts in this thread, but that wasn't "totally the idea" of the post I was responding to.

    If you think we can find a player with Lance's overall game for anywhere near the money we'll have available, then I wish you good luck, because you're going to need it. Lance is probably one of the three or so most complete shooting guards in the league, and he has the makings of a superb scorer, too, as he's shown lately, all at the ripe old age of 23.



    Again, the post I was responding to clearly made it a keeping Lance vs. keeping Scola dilemma.

    As for your points, you're exaggerating. Keeping Lance isn't going to cost us two starters and a quality bench. It may cost us one of the three, I'll grant you that, but I'd easily choose Lance over any of the other three. I'd take the young SG on the brink of greatness over the aging, declining PF, the dime-a-dozen combo-guard, or a good bench.

    If sacrifices must be made, I don't think Lance should be one of them.




    Only time will tell if that's true, but, as I just said, if sacrifices must be made, I don't think Lance should be one of them.


    For those curious, here's Lance's current production vs. Paul George's production last year, his breakout season:



    Similar across the board, with Paul being more of a scorer and Lance being more of a passer. Paul walked away with MIP, and Lance is one of the frontrunners this season.

    My hunch is, Pacers management realize they've found yet another player on the brink of being special, and will make sure he's locked up long-term this offseason.


    I've posted this earlier, and I believe Able has too. Are you willing to pay Lance whatever it takes that it will cause the Pacers to not be able to re-sign Hibbert?

    If you do, then you are saying Stephenson is more valuable than Hibbert to the Pacers, and that assumption isn't even close to being correct. Hibbert is more important to the Pacers than Stephenson will ever be. Hibbert is the anchor to the best "D" in the NBA, and big men like Hibbert are hard to come by. You can't plug the loss of Hibbert in with Mahinmi or some other b/u journryman big. You can't draft a 5 and wait 4 or 5 years for him to develop and waste the prime years of PG and Stephenson. Bird either pays Stephenson what the Pacers can afford w/o losing Hibbert in the future, and the quality of the present bench, or Bird allows Stephenson to move on. Bird is astute enough to know the Pacers will survive w/o Stephenson, and has said so. He'll plug the hole, and move forward same as OKC did with Harden.

    I'll bet OKC fans said the same thing about re-signing Harden. OKC FO didn't pay him, and IIRC OKC presently has the 3rd best record in the NBA.

  14. #261

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

    Quote Originally Posted by graphic-er View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Also I'm not sold on the idea that Hibbert will get 18 million. He does not average enough points or rebounds to justify that kind of contract. You gotta be a double double type big man to get that kind of contract.

    I have to disagree. People didn't feel Hibbert would get 14 mil either. It only takes another Portland willing to spend the money. Big men always get overpaid especially quality ones.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Justin Tyme For This Useful Post:


  16. #262

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

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

    i suppose u can wish. But Bird will resign Lance. Book it.


    I'm "resigned" Bird won't re-sign Stephenson and put the Pacers in a finanical problem for the future.

  17. #263
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    21,090

    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 Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I have to disagree. People didn't feel Hibbert would get 14 mil either. It only takes another Portland willing to spend the money. Big men always get overpaid especially quality ones.
    Umm, not really. The discussion was whether or not Roy would simply re-sign or if he would look at other offers. Some (which I'll admit I was a part of) took Roy's comments about him not being a max player, not that he wasn't worth it, but rather that he wouldn't ask it of the Pacers.

    Saying he's not worth it, and saying he wouldn't sign a contract that big from another team are two different opinions. They might have the same outcome, that we didn't think Roy would sign a 14M/year contract, but they start at different places.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    What if someone from a school of business or management school were to ask, How did you do this? How did you get the Pacers turned around? Is there a general approach you've taken that can be summarized?

    Larry Bird: Yeah, patience.

  18. #264

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cubs231721 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are rules that govern when teams can offer extensions and how much they can offer to players. Because Lance was making so little and was a second round pick, the most the Pacers could offer him in an extension was between 1 and 2 million per year.

    That's also why you see so few extensions in the NBA. The rookie scale is one common exception to that which is how Paul George signed an extension. Hill and West were both free agents (Hill restricted, West unrestricted) and signed new deals. Neither one of them signed extensions.
    Thank you for the clarification, so could we have offered Lance an extension of $2 million a year for 2-4 years? If yes, then we completely screwed the pooch. Sometimes "He who hesitates" is more than a neat saying. Unless I'm not totally lost, we could have allowed PG to go all of this year and still matched whatever offer he received, yes?

  19. #265

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cousy47 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thank you for the clarification, so could we have offered Lance an extension of $2 million a year for 2-4 years? If yes, then we completely screwed the pooch. Sometimes "He who hesitates" is more than a neat saying. Unless I'm not totally lost, we could have allowed PG to go all of this year and still matched whatever offer he received, yes?
    The biggest extension we could've offered Lance would've been 4 years/and like 5.1 million. 5.1 million TOTAL, not per year. There'd be absolutely no reason for him to take that. The only pooch we screwed is getting a really good player in the 2nd round.

    Yes, we could've done that with PG. What's that matter? The only difference would probably be him saying screw you, gimme the full 30%.

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


  21. #266

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

    Quote Originally Posted by wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If you go on a neutral forum, I think most people will pick Lance over these guys (with the exception of maybe Afflalo) by a landslide. Note too that Lance is the youngest with only DD and Tyreke being close in age. Potential factors in to the high valuation of Lance, whether you think it's warranted or not.



    Oh I agree that we'll be in tough financial spot. Assuming PG and RH are the 2 guys we want to keep at all costs, the next question is who is most expendable among West, Hill, and Lance. In an ideal world, we get to keep all 3, but if you have to sacrifice one, who would it be? In your case I'm pretty sure it's Lance, but other people have different opinions.
    If it came down to sacrificing either Hill or West to keep Lance, it would be a tuff decision. Lance can replace Hil. OTOH, DWest is being paid 12 mil and Scola has been a starter in the past. I'd hate to lose DWest as I feel he's the heart n soul of this team. Tuff decision, but DWest contract ends in 2 years and Hill's not for another 3 years. I'd probably have to go with letting Hill go even tho he's younger and makes less money than DWest. Plus I feel it would be harder to replace DWest for the future than Hill.

  22. #267
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,603

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cousy47 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thank you for the clarification, so could we have offered Lance an extension of $2 million a year for 2-4 years? If yes, then we completely screwed the pooch. Sometimes "He who hesitates" is more than a neat saying.


    Like Lance would have taken that offer.

    Sometimes people forget there are TWO sides to a contract negotiation, and the player/agent side is not stupid.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

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


  24. #268

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

    Quote Originally Posted by graphic-er View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Tyson Chandler signed that contract after being the defense anchor on a championship team, and then of course won DPOY the next year in NYC. Not mention has averaged pretty much near a double double since being in NYC. In terms of a defensive specialist, he is the perfect example of what you want from a defense focused center. The reality is that Roy Hibbert isn't going to average a double double anytime in his career. He is infact, just like Lance....a product of a successful system that has really good defenders all around him. If you put Swap
    Hibbert and Chandler, the Pacers would still have the best record in the NBA. The Knicks would still be terrible.

    Roy will not get 18 million, a smart GM would never offer him that because he knows that the Pacers have a unique starting 5 that can guard their own man, thus eliminating the constant help defense or rotation that gets guys out of position. So you have to have the right kind of roster, if Hibbert had to constant rotate over the help he would be in foul trouble every game in the 1st qtr. Its easy to stay on the court when all you have to do is patrol the paint.

    Since when are all GM's are smart?!?!

  25. #269
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    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.
    I would enjoy having Lance on my team to be honest. That's why this thread is here to think of ways to keep Lance in Indy
    Smothered Chicken!

  26. #270
    Go Colts! Shade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Age
    36
    Posts
    44,276

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    I'd offer Lance 10 out of the gate with a willingness to negotiate as high as 12.5.

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


  28. #271

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

    Okay. That clears up why we didn't extend Lance for me then. Don't know, we might have tried. As far as the other point with PG, we would have been looking at another RH moment, correct? Some team would have offered all the money they could for Paul and we would have to match it to keep him? And no, I'm not so sure that Lance and his agent would have just refused to think about an extension if we could have done 2 million plus, but at 5.1 for 4 years, no way.

  29. #272
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,753

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    I just can't wrap my head around the fact that the gap in which many of us are debating is about as large as what Copeland or Mahinmi are making this year, or what Green made last year.

    Like I said, we've paid Granger about $27 million over the last two seasons for one year of not playing and another in which he is a 8.6 PPG bench player, yet it hasn't crippled the franchise. So yeah, I fail to see how paying Lance for his PRIME years is going to somehow doom the franchise. I don't care about a billionaire paying a luxury tax. It might not be my money, but this franchise has largely been built by our money as Indianapolis taxpayers.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to Sollozzo For This Useful Post:


  31. #273
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,603

    Sports Logo Sports Logo 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
    this franchise has largely been built by our money as Indianapolis taxpayers.
    LARGELY been built?

    You were fine up to this point, but you act as if the taxpayers basically paid most of the original cost of the team, the cost of BLF, and money spent on the team that wasn't covered by ticket income.

    The taxpayers paid half the cost of the building and cover $10M per year of operating expenses. That's not anywhere near a majority of the amount of money spent to build this franchise.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to BillS For This Useful Post:


  33. #274

    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
    Like I said, we've paid Granger about $27 million over the last two seasons for one year of not playing and another in which he is a 8.6 PPG bench player, yet it hasn't crippled the franchise.
    Our cap structure is entirely different now, our best players aren't on rookie contracts anymore, they're on maxes and almost supermaxes.

  34. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Heisenberg For This Useful Post:


  35. #275
    Member Sollozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    16,753

    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 Heisenberg View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Our cap structure is entirely different now, our best players aren't on rookie contracts anymore, they're on maxes and almost supermaxes.

    That's true, but as far as next season is concerned, you're basically trading Granger's contract for PG's. Granger makes $14 mil this season and PG will make $15.8 next year. So those come fairly close to cancelling each other out.

Posting Permissions

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