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 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 5111213141516 LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 399

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

  1. #351
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,333

    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
    To lose that type of talent for nothing, and to watch the team almost certainly regress significantly, over a matter of NBA pocket change ($2-3M), is just silly. Lance should take priority over anyone on this team not named Paul George or Roy Hibbert.
    If it were just $2M-$3M you'd be right. But to pay Lance $14M actually ends up costing PS&E $15M-$20M more, not just $2M-$3M more. For some people that may not matter. For some people it matters a lot.
    BillS

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

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


  3. #352
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    20,794

    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 BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The other extreme is that Herb Simon owes it to the city to go as far over the LT threshold as needed, so absolutely yes.
    Yes, that's an extreme, but that's not what the argument is either. I would draw the line at the $5M mark, where the penalty really gets stiff and I think they'll be able to shed less than $5M to avoid the repeater tax.

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If it were just $2M-$3M you'd be right. But to pay Lance $14M actually ends up costing PS&E $15M-$20M more, not just $2M-$3M more. For some people that may not matter. For some people it matters a lot.
    96% of us don't want to go that high.
    Last edited by Since86; 01-30-2014 at 02:40 PM.
    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.

  4. #353
    Member Wage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    405

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Actually, I don't think there's much argument over how good Lance is. The argument seems to be over whether we can keep 2 max players plus one near-max player without having to dump quality at the fourth best player position in order to dump salary.
    In my opinion, if we want to keep a championship caliber team together, we HAVE to. A core of Paul George, Roy Hibbert, and any number of role players isn't a legitimate contender. Not a knock on our guys, I just don't think they can carry that type of load. We keep going to OKC as an example, so I will say I don't think Westbrook, Ibaka, and any number of role players can compete for a championship either. It's a top heavy league, and spending $1 on a star is better than $1 on 3 role players.

  5. #354
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,092

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So basically you are justifying paying PG, Roy, and Lance the same total amount that OKC pays Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka, which for them is OK because they have two of the best 5 players in the NBA.
    I think this argument is as faulty as the one that said Lance isn't worth $12m because better players like Tony Parker and Steph Curry are making $12m. It doesn't matter what Durant and Westbrook are getting paid, because we can't get them at the same price (or at any price). The point is, we paid market price to retain Roy and Paul (and thanks to the artificial max contract cap, that price point is close to Durant/Westbrook), and we'll need to do the same to retain Lance.

    Are we doomed because our big 3 isn't as good as OKC's big 3? If being possibly the second best team in the NBA is being doomed, then maybe. But the point is that someone needs to explain how NOT retaining Lance would make us better than OKC's big 3. What combo of players would you spend that $12m on (keeping in mind that for external FA's, we can only offer up to the MLE) that would make us better than we are right now?

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


  7. #355
    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?

    Man, I did not know DeRozan is scheduled to make $9.5 per over the next 3 years.

    Let's do a sign and trade. We will give Born to be the G.O.A.T. his $12m+ and ship him to the great White North for DeRozan.

    21.8 - 4.7 - 3.6?

    without reservation.

    Of course, Toronto wouldn't be dense enough to bail us out a second time, would they?

  8. #356
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,285

    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
    Man, I did not know DeRozan is scheduled to make $9.5 per over the next 3 years.

    Let's do a sign and trade. We will give Born to be the G.O.A.T. his $12m+ and ship him to the great White North for DeRozan.

    21.8 - 4.7 - 3.6?

    without reservation.

    Of course, Toronto wouldn't be dense enough to bail us out a second time, would they?
    I wouldn't do a S&T of Lance for DeRozan. That would still put us over the LT. DeRozan is a very solid scorer but he'd just be another Starting Quality scorer on this Team. Not sure if that is the direction I'd be headed in. If we do a S&T of Lance...I'd be looking for a TPE, young quality Talent that is on a rookie Contract and draft picks.
    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.

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


  10. #357
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wouldn't do a S&T of Lance for DeRozan. That would still put us over the LT. DeRozan is a very solid scorer but he'd just be another Starting Quality scorer on this Team. Not sure if that is the direction I'd be headed in. If we do a S&T of Lance...I'd be looking for a TPE, young quality Talent that is on a rookie Contract and draft picks.
    I was being facetious.

    But, as a matter of fact, they are the same age, DeRozan isn't the head case that the G.O.A.T. is and DeRozan is a proven consistent scorer who can ball. And he's a lot cheaper than 12+ million.

    I understand in some areas there would be a step back but we would certainly score the ball and the West Coast trips would be fun.

  11. #358
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,092

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

    DD is actually a year older than Paul G or Lance (1989 vs 1990).

    I'm not sure how serious you are, but I think DD's gaudy numbers are misleading. On paper it looks like he's a more deserving All-Star than Lance, but I think it's very much the opposite.

    Put it this way, if we were to S&T Lance to Toronto, I'd much rather get Lowry back than DD.

  12. #359
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,880

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

    I would love to see Lance in the all-star game, but this can only help our negotiating position. I hope this keeps his price tag right at 10M.

    BTW, I wish I could change my vote to the 10-12M range, but it's too late. I agree that we cannot afford anything 12M+ and still retain enough of a supporting cast. I also think that's too high.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to BlueNGold For This Useful Post:


  14. #360
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    7,755

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

    Whatever happens in the playoffs will have an infinitely greater affect on Lance's next contract than him not making the all-star game.

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


  16. #361
    The Last Great Pacer BlueNGold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    14,880

    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
    Whatever happens in the playoffs will have an infinitely greater affect on Lance's next contract than him not making the all-star game.
    Croshere was definitely some proof of that. So I can buy that in at least some instances. At the same time, perceptions of a player change when they are an all-star. GM's who want a guy use that label to justify spending millions. Agents can brag about that and directly compare salaries to other all-stars that make it difficult to refute. It's just more tangible than a good outing in the playoffs which could very well be another Croshere situation. An all-star stamp will stick firmly at least for a solid year...well after the ink has dried.

  17. #362
    Member Ace E.Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,958

    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 wintermute View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    DD is actually a year older than Paul G or Lance (1989 vs 1990).

    I'm not sure how serious you are, but I think DD's gaudy numbers are misleading. On paper it looks like he's a more deserving All-Star than Lance, but I think it's very much the opposite.
    The guys that coach against both players seem to think differently.

  18. #363
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,092

    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
    The guys that coach against both players seem to think differently.
    They also somehow thought DD should get in before Lowry. No one, not even Toronto fans, think that is defensible.

    If Lowry and Afflalo had made it over Lance, I think that would be understandable. But DD and JJ? Wow.

  19. #364
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,333

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    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
    I think this argument is as faulty as the one that said Lance isn't worth $12m because better players like Tony Parker and Steph Curry are making $12m. It doesn't matter what Durant and Westbrook are getting paid, because we can't get them at the same price (or at any price). The point is, we paid market price to retain Roy and Paul (and thanks to the artificial max contract cap, that price point is close to Durant/Westbrook), and we'll need to do the same to retain Lance.

    Are we doomed because our big 3 isn't as good as OKC's big 3? If being possibly the second best team in the NBA is being doomed, then maybe. But the point is that someone needs to explain how NOT retaining Lance would make us better than OKC's big 3. What combo of players would you spend that $12m on (keeping in mind that for external FA's, we can only offer up to the MLE) that would make us better than we are right now?
    What I'm saying is that it is really not a matter of whether Lance is a great player. What I'm saying is that a combination of PG, Roy, Lance + very inexpensive roleplayers (and I'd be talking MLE or less, look at OKC's payroll for an example) may not be able to do as well as a combination of PG, Roy, an $8M player and a $6M player + inexpensive roleplayers.

    I'm never any good at picking talent from other teams - for one thing I don't watch enough non-Pacer games, for another we've seen over and over again how different players contribute completely differently when they change teams (both good and bad). All I'm trying to get across is that if your "big 3" can't carry the team on their backs with cheap roleplayers, then you either have to go over the LT or you have to use a different strategy to build your team. It doesn't mean the "big 3" plus cheap roleplayers won't be an extremely good team, but it may not be your best lineup for winning a championship.

    We don't need to sign the above-mid-range guys as FAs (since we couldn't). We can do some trading as long as we take back equal or slightly less salary than what we send out.
    BillS

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

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


  21. #365
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,067

    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 BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What I'm saying is that it is really not a matter of whether Lance is a great player. What I'm saying is that a combination of PG, Roy, Lance + very inexpensive roleplayers (and I'd be talking MLE or less, look at OKC's payroll for an example) may not be able to do as well as a combination of PG, Roy, an $8M player and a $6M player + inexpensive roleplayers.

    I'm never any good at picking talent from other teams - for one thing I don't watch enough non-Pacer games, for another we've seen over and over again how different players contribute completely differently when they change teams (both good and bad). All I'm trying to get across is that if your "big 3" can't carry the team on their backs with cheap roleplayers, then you either have to go over the LT or you have to use a different strategy to build your team. It doesn't mean the "big 3" plus cheap roleplayers won't be an extremely good team, but it may not be your best lineup for winning a championship.

    We don't need to sign the above-mid-range guys as FAs (since we couldn't). We can do some trading as long as we take back equal or slightly less salary than what we send out.
    Your $8M player is George Hill. So you're basically saying you think that Paul, Roy, Hill, and a $6M player is better than Paul, Roy, and Lance.

    I can't think of any $6M players that make that accurate.

  22. #366
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,067

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

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

    A quick list of some guys making around that $6M figure annually...

    Brandon Bass
    Michael Beasley
    Glen Davis
    Landry Fields
    Channing Frye
    Chuck Hayes
    Gerald Henderson
    Jarrett Jack
    Amir Johnson
    Kyle Korver
    Carl Landry
    Courtney Lee
    Robin Lopez
    Kevin Martin
    Wesley Matthews
    Zaza Pachulia
    JJ Redick
    Jason Richardson
    JR Smith
    Jason Terry
    Martell Webster

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mackey_Rose For This Useful Post:


  24. #367
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    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
    Your $8M player is George Hill. So you're basically saying you think that Paul, Roy, Hill, and a $6M player is better than Paul, Roy, and Lance.

    I can't think of any $6M players that make that accurate.
    Depends on the fit. I'm less interested in talent-stack than I am about a team unit and how they play with one another and what that results in as a team. But that's also not to say you're wrong.

  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  26. #368
    one long Grimp-season ECKrueger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Age
    23
    Posts
    3,831

    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
    Whatever happens in the playoffs will have an infinitely greater affect on Lance's next contract than him not making the all-star game.
    I'm in 100% agreement. If he has a good postseason again or has some key moments he will get paid. If he is the Lance of last regular season, or the 5th option he won't get as much.

    Being an All Star would've maybe changed things a little, but a noteworthy - good or bad - playoffs will have much m ore impact

  27. #369
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,067

    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 Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Depends on the fit. I'm less interested in talent-stack than I am about a team unit and how they play with one another and what that results in as a team. But that's also not to say you're wrong.
    Sure. But what are you looking for to fit with that group? Do any of the guys I listed making around that $6M amount fit the way you would want them to?

    If I'm looking for a fit, I think you need someone capable of getting his own shot, but who can also help space the floor a bit. I think you need someone capable of getting open shots for Paul, and who can feed the ball to Roy when he has a mismatch. I think you need someone who can help handle the ball in late game situations, and be willing to push the pace when the game calls for it. I think you need someone who can play the kind of individual and team defense for which this team is known.

    If it sounds like I'm describing Lance Stephenson, well I kind of am. The elite rebounding for his position is a just a bonus.

  28. #370
    Member PR07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,861

    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 Mackey_Rose View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A quick list of some guys making around that $6M figure annually...

    Brandon Bass
    Michael Beasley
    Glen Davis
    Landry Fields
    Channing Frye
    Chuck Hayes
    Gerald Henderson
    Jarrett Jack
    Amir Johnson
    Kyle Korver
    Carl Landry
    Courtney Lee
    Robin Lopez
    Kevin Martin
    Wesley Matthews
    Zaza Pachulia
    JJ Redick
    Jason Richardson
    JR Smith
    Jason Terry
    Martell Webster
    Off that list, I think you could make the case for Kevin Martin, Wesley Matthews, or Redick. Or at least, I don't think it's a slam dunk in Lance's favor.

  29. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PR07 For This Useful Post:


  30. #371
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    16,920

    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 Mackey_Rose View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Do any of the guys I listed making around that $6M amount fit the way you would want them to?
    Wesley Matthews. I can't believe that guy is only making ~$6 million. That's a bargain.

    Edit: JJ Redick would qualify too. To be honest, that list isn't as bad as I thought it was going to be.

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to cdash For This Useful Post:


  32. #372
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,333

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    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
    Your $8M player is George Hill. So you're basically saying you think that Paul, Roy, Hill, and a $6M player is better than Paul, Roy, and Lance.

    I can't think of any $6M players that make that accurate.
    Not necessarily. If Lance leaves it changes the strengths and weaknesses of the starting lineup and they might be a reason to move Hill for a different fit.

    Think of it this way - how much of an effect is going to an MLE or less PG (or SG if you think Lance can play point. Which I still don't, particularly, but that's another thread) going to have on Hibbert, PG, Lance lineup? Remember we aren't likely talking about a really good player on a rookie contract because I don't know any of those teams would be willing to trade.

    All-in-all I would prefer to see Lance stay (knocking frantically on wood that his ego doesn't flare up and he gets even more focused on his own stats rather than which thing is needed by the team Right At This Moment In The Game). However, I think there is an argument to be made that unless your "big 3" only need minor fill-ins to carry you against your opponents, you need somehow to have a lesser 3rd option so you can get greater skills somewhere else.
    BillS

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

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


  34. #373
    Member Since86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Muncie
    Posts
    20,794

    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 PR07 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Off that list, I think you could make the case for Kevin Martin, Wesley Matthews, or Redick. Or at least, I don't think it's a slam dunk in Lance's favor.
    I agree on Matthews and JJ, but I think there only being 1-3 possible replacements that fit in talent and in salary shows just how hard it would be to make that replacement. Sure, it can be done, but the Pacers don't really have a shot at any of them, maybe other than Martin and I don't think he'd be a good fit.
    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.

  35. #374
    Droppin' knowledge, yo. Mackey_Rose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Dragon's Lair
    Posts
    4,067

    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 cdash View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wesley Matthews. I can't believe that guy is only making ~$6 million. That's a bargain.

    Edit: JJ Redick would qualify too. To be honest, that list isn't as bad as I thought it was going to be.
    My takeaway from the list was that you can definitely get a starting caliber SG for that number. Matthews, Redick, Korver, Henderson, Webster, Martin, and Lee are the ones I think you could make an argument for.

    I agree that Matthews and Redick would be great bargains at that level. When you are talking about guys like Korver, Webster, and Martin you're really only paying for them to play half the court, because they are mostly defensive liabilities. That probably explains why they are about half as expensive as Lance is likely to be. With all of those other guys, you're giving up something that Lance brings to the team to save money. That's obvious, and it's just basic economics. But is the opportunity cost worth it? There's definitely an argument for both sides, which is why this thread is closing in on 9 pages now.

    Paying Lance Stephenson $12M is a major risk, mainly just because of the kind of guy he is. He's a wild card. I'm still not totally convinced he won't do something this year to totally screw everything up. But you know the kind of player he is. He's one of the best SG's in the NBA right now. And he's 23. How much better can he get? My main argument is that paying him $12M is worth it to find out. If it requires paying more than that, I don't think we can make it happen. But I think he definitely should be considered 3rd in the pecking order going forward with the roster we currently have. Paul and Roy have been taken care of, as they should have been. I hope Lance is next.

  36. #375
    Whale Shepherd cdash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Sprawl
    Age
    29
    Posts
    16,920

    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 Mackey_Rose View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My takeaway from the list was that you can definitely get a starting caliber SG for that number. Matthews, Redick, Korver, Henderson, Webster, Martin, and Lee are the ones I think you could make an argument for.

    I agree that Matthews and Redick would be great bargains at that level. When you are talking about guys like Korver, Webster, and Martin you're really only paying for them to play half the court, because they are mostly defensive liabilities. That probably explains why they are about half as expensive as Lance is likely to be. With all of those other guys, you're giving up something that Lance brings to the team to save money. That's obvious, and it's just basic economics. But is the opportunity cost worth it? There's definitely an argument for both sides, which is why this thread is closing in on 9 pages now.

    Paying Lance Stephenson $12M is a major risk, mainly just because of the kind of guy he is. He's a wild card. I'm still not totally convinced he won't do something this year to totally screw everything up. But you know the kind of player he is. He's one of the best SG's in the NBA right now. And he's 23. How much better can he get? My main argument is that paying him $12M is worth it to find out. If it requires paying more than that, I don't think we can make it happen. But I think he definitely should be considered 3rd in the pecking order going forward with the roster we currently have. Paul and Roy have been taken care of, as they should have been. I hope Lance is next.
    I'm with you on this one. I was just surprised that there were even 2-3 quality options on that list. I don't really think we can let Lance go, and ultimately I don't think we will.

Posting Permissions

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