Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

[SMosley21]

So the Draft Lottery Gods look kindly upon us and we land a top 2 or 3 pick, and we do end up drafting Evan Turner. Turner is 6'7", 210 pounds (likely to add a little weight leading up to the draft camps). His natural position seems to be more of a SG/SF. I think we're set at SG with Rush, if for no reason other than his defense. If he can chip in 10-15 points a night, then we're really set at the position.

Then we have Turner, this uber-talented kid who is being compared to Brandon Roy, who would most likely fit into the role of a do-it-all SF. Here's the big question...

Do we look at possibly trading Danny for an all-star caliber PF, ala the Granger-for-Al Jefferson deal?

I realize it would be a bit of a risky move since we don't know for sure how Turner is going to produce in the NBA. But if he turns out to be the player that most professionals think he will be, he will likely at least match Danny's production level, and possibly eclipse it. Danny seems to have settled into this mindset that he has to have the ball in his hands in order to be productive. Problem is, he's not really a playmaker.

Turner seems to be just that. Seems like the kid can pretty much do it all with relative ease. I'd say it's something that's at least worth discussing.

[PacerDude]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

I wouldn't do anything until I saw what Turner can do. Let's say he's good. Real good. Take into consideration the expiring contracts that the Pacers will have, create a package that includes Granger and an expiring (or 2) and it might bring back a good player along with draft picks or an all-star level guy and filler ........... there are just so many possibilities at that point.

If Turner ends up being a bust ........... well, nothing lost.

[SMosley21]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

I wouldn't do anything until I saw what Turner can do. Let's say he's good. Real good. Take into consideration the expiring contracts that the Pacers will have, create a package that includes Granger and an expiring (or 2) and it might bring back a good player along with draft picks or an all-star level guy and filler ........... there are just so many possibilities at that point.

If Turner ends up being a bust ........... well, nothing lost.

I would agree with that. Maybe wait until the all-star break to see how well Turner is actually playing, or more importantly how well Turner and Granger are playing together. If they're meshing well, then no need for a trade really.

[Tom White]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

Do we look at possibly trading Danny for an all-star caliber PF, ala the Granger-for-Al Jefferson deal?

I'd sure be tempted to do just that.

Turner seems to be just that. Seems like the kid can pretty much do it all with relative ease. I'd say it's something that's at least worth discussing.

While Granger is somewhat bigger than Turner, I don't think there is much difference in what either brings (or would bring, in the case of Turner) as far as rebounding and defense. Turner's advantages are his quickness and ball handling skills.

I wouldn't do anything until I saw what Turner can do. Let's say he's good. Real good. Take into consideration the expiring contracts that the Pacers will have, create a package that includes Granger and an expiring (or 2) and it might bring back a good player along with draft picks or an all-star level guy and filler ........... there are just so many possibilities at that point.

If I'm the other team, I might reduce my offer if the Pacers insisted on throwing in Murphy or Dun.

If Turner ends up being a bust ........... well, nothing lost.

I know it happens, but I don't think it is a concern with Turner.

[owl]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

I just don't see Turner and Granger as being mutually exclusive. With Turners handles he needs to play sg and some pg. If anyone is traded, trade Rush.

[SMosley21]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

I just don't see Turner and Granger as being mutually exclusive. With Turners handles he needs to play sg and some pg. If anyone is traded, trade Rush.

I'm not a fan of trading the only player on our team who plays defense. Also, trading Rush isn't likely to bring back much at this point that will really help the team in the long haul.

[Brad8888]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

If we keep Rush and Granger and Dunleavy, then add Turner, we would be one step closer to having O'B's (and IT's) dream lineup, the completely interchangeable small ball lineup that IT dreamed of to fully execute the "quick".

No, thanks...I think I would get completely dehydrated and malnourished if I had to watch that consistently, though it may be a marketable weight loss program. Maybe that would be a way to market season tickets, also, as long as they don't mind losing revenue from concession sales. They could probably boost ticket prices enough to make up for that loss, though, with all of the billions of dollars that are spent annually on weight loss programs in this country. They could have large paper bags emblazoned with Pacers logos on one side and advertising from pharmaceutical companies, drug stores, and related businesses on the other side as corporate sponsors as fan giveaways. Fans could wear these over their heads, or use them for emetic containment devices. And fans who choose not to soil the bags would have to run back and forth to the restrooms (which may need modified to accomodate more people at taxpayer expense) and probably will have both heaved and dry heaved enough to have gotten both a cardio work out and some killer ab development by the end of the games. Some fans might actually stay til the end of games to maximize this effect.

And think of all of the Pacer ponchos that could be sold for clothing protection! And the Pepto and Tums concessions could replace some of the lost food sales, too!

I tell you, the possibilities, while not endless, may be worth considering, after all.

[knucklecup]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

Granger and Turner isn't an ideal combo, but I don't think that it would be impossible for them to play off eachother.

Either way, I'd rather trade Turner than Granger if both had similar value.

It appears as if the Timberwolves have deemed Jefferson available for the right player. With the way they have been drafting, it appears as if they're trying to piece together the most talent, regardless of needs or position - I think this is the right mindset to have being a team that is so far away from being competitive.

With that said, the Pacers and Timberwolves make a perfect match for a trade. The Pacers will likely get a top five pick, but unless a Bulls-esque luck of the draw occurs, they won't be getting John Wall, the most appropriate fit for this roster.

This is a talented draft, but at this point, the Pacers need to be creative to become relevant again. With a superstar in his prime, rebuilding through the draft seems unnecessary given the available talent on the trade market. They have adequate pieces in Hansborough, Rush, Hibbert, etc. but lack the starting firepower needed to compete.

Instead of taking a gamble on Cousins or Patterson or some of the other talent available after Wall and Turner, trading the pick would be wise. The Timberwolves, who aren't ready to compete seem ready and willing to trade Jefferson for younger players who will be in their primes around the same time as Rubio, Flynn, Love, Brewer, etc.

Lets assume the Pacers get a 3-5 pick with the Timberwolves getting Turner at 2, which is a very likely scenario.

Indiana gets: Al Jefferson, Ryan Gomes
Minnesota gets: 3-5 pick, Mike Dunleavy, Jeff Foster (expiring contracts)

Minnesota drafts the consolation prize of Evan Turner and a big with the 3-5 pick given to them as compensation for Jefferson, for the sake of making this easier, we'll say they draft DeMarcus Cousins.

With Rubio staying in Spain for one more year, you can assume that next year is the final rebuilding year for them, giving valuable playing time to their young core. They'll let Dunleavy and Foster expire and use that money to either lock up their youth to long term extensions or possibly go out and sign a free agent. With another lottery pick in sights, when they begin the 2011-2012 season, their rotation will be:

Rubio/Flynn/Sessions
2011 lottery pick/Brewer/Flynn/Ellington
Turner/Brewer
Love/Veteran free agent
Cousins/Hollins/Veteran free agent

Color me impressed with a roster consisting of this much talent. Obviously young, they've successfully put together an incredibly talented core with ample finances to keep this unit together for an extended period of time. Every one of those starters has all-star potential and though I see Flynn and Brewer as slightly less talented as a potential lottery pick shooting guard, either one as the ability to play the two and play it very efficiently. I like Cousins and Love in the paint - it's clear to me that Love is better suited for the four and Cousins seems like the big bodied center that doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective, which is a must for this line up.

I honestly think they make this trade. Yes, they're getting rid of Al Jefferson, but I'm pretty certain they've rationally thought about their 2010/11 chances and know that they're best suited for stockpiling talent and making a run the following year.

What a talented nucleus and the money to keep them together long term makes this a hard scenario to dislike for the Timberwolves.

On the Pacers end, they get a 26 year old (heading into next season) center that would fit into O'Brien' style of play. It doesn't seem likely that Bird will let O'Brien go without giving him what he deems a fair chance - whether or not I disagree with this assertion is irrelevant.

The Pacers are also able to acquire a key bench cog in Ryan Gomes, who has the ability to start for most teams. I love his grittiness off the bench.

In 2010, that leaves the Pacers with a rotation of:

Ford/Watson/Price
Rush/Head/2nd round pick
Granger/Gomes/D. Jones
Murphy/Hansborough/Gomes
Jefferson/Hibbert/2nd round pick

I like what Rush has been able to do of late and my love of Danny Granger isn't going to fade after an injury riddled season.

I like Murphy's game in O'Brien system and think this line-up is capable of competing.

[Hicks]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

If you want to compete for a title, you need at least a couple of good bench players. Brandon Rush could fill that role nicely.

But defensively, Danny would have to step it up to give our starting swingmen combo a chance. And I think he's still capable of doing that, especially if Turner lightens the load offensively for him to give him more energy.

[SMosley21]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

If you want to compete for a title, you need at least a couple of good bench players. Brandon Rush could fill that role nicely.

But defensively, Danny would have to step it up to give our starting swingmen combo a chance. And I think he's still capable of doing that, especially if Turner lightens the load offensively for him to give him more energy.

A SG combo of Turner and Rush (off the bench) could be VERY troubling for opposing teams. I still think we need Wall more than Turner, but if we end up with Turner it would still put us in a very promising situation.

[MillerTime]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

So the Draft Lottery Gods look kindly upon us and we land a top 2 or 3 pick, and we do end up drafting Evan Turner. Turner is 6'7", 210 pounds (likely to add a little weight leading up to the draft camps). His natural position seems to be more of a SG/SF. I think we're set at SG with Rush, if for no reason other than his defense. If he can chip in 10-15 points a night, then we're really set at the position.

Then we have Turner, this uber-talented kid who is being compared to Brandon Roy, who would most likely fit into the role of a do-it-all SF. Here's the big question...

Do we look at possibly trading Danny for an all-star caliber PF, ala the Granger-for-Al Jefferson deal?

I realize it would be a bit of a risky move since we don't know for sure how Turner is going to produce in the NBA. But if he turns out to be the player that most professionals think he will be, he will likely at least match Danny's production level, and possibly eclipse it. Danny seems to have settled into this mindset that he has to have the ball in his hands in order to be productive. Problem is, he's not really a playmaker.

Turner seems to be just that. Seems like the kid can pretty much do it all with relative ease. I'd say it's something that's at least worth discussing.

Heres what I would do (if we drafted Turner):

• Trade Ford, Rush and 2011 first rounder (top 10 protected) to Nets for Harris http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade...radeid=5491730
  
• Trade trade Murphy for Okafor (next Feb) http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade...radeid=5491733

That will still leave us with Dunleavy, Foster and Tinsley (yes we're still paying him so he is relevant) coming off the books which will help our cap situation and make Indy a better looking destination in 2011 with the new roster

Harris/Price
Turner/D Jones
Granger/Dunleavy
Okafor/Hans/McRoberts
Hibbert/Foster

[SMosley21]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

Heres what I would do (if we drafted Turner):

• Trade Ford, Rush and 2011 first rounder (top 10 protected) to Nets for Harris http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade...radeid=5491730
  
• Trade trade Murphy for Okafor (next Feb) http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade...radeid=5491733

That will still leave us with Dunleavy, Foster and Tinsley (yes we're still paying him so he is relevant) coming off the books which will help our cap situation and make Indy a better looking destination in 2011 with the new roster

Harris/Price
Turner/D Jones
Granger/Dunleavy
Okafor/Hans/McRoberts
Hibbert/Foster

That would definitely be a nice looking lineup on paper. Not sure how it would actually work out, but if we could pull it off I'd love to find out.

[Shade]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

If the Pacers draft Turner, then they should move Rush, not Granger. We're trying to find someone to pair with Danny, not to replace him.

[Trophy]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

I'd still keep Brandon and use Turner at either SG or SF and try and move Mike ahead of anyone else.

[MillerTime]

Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

That would definitely be a nice looking lineup on paper. Not sure how it would actually work out, but if we could pull it off I'd love to find out.

I think its relatively realistic to pull off. The 2 trades seem pretty fair, and considering that NJ is the most likely destination for Wall, they might move Harris

Hornets are looking for clear some cap space and Okafor isnt exactly working out for them. He doesnt seem to like the C position, he is more suited as a PF.