Lance Stephenson

[Moooose]

That is a poo-poo platter for sure, with exception to the picks. What are their contracts like? What about top-3 protection on the 2017?

The 2015 definitely won't be in the lottery and from what I envision the 2017 is the only value here.

We can easily dump a contract to keep Lance if we want. Maybe if he had a viable suitor besides us I would feel differently about this trade, but at the moment, as long as Jordan chills, we're in the drivers seat to retain Lance or S & T him for a win-now piece.

Wright $5 Million Expiring
Mekel 2 years total $1,760,000 --816,482 this year 3rd year QO $1,216,000
Crowder $915,243 expiring ---next year QO $1,181,000



I would do Top 5-10 Protected 2017 ...I personally don't think Cuban lets us hit the lottery in 2017 either way . By then hopefully Parsons / Lance have really blossomed and Dallas should have more cap space in 2016 to add to it anyway

Better than not getting anything for Lance. I actually like Wright and Crowder and Mekel is not that bad either.

[Jake0890]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DavidGlennShow/status/488733639229079553[/tweet]

Hehehe

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

[pacers33granger]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DavidGlennShow/status/488733639229079553[/tweet]

Hehehe

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

Despite Hornets fans saying Bonnell is crap, I'm inclined to believe this. If they wanted him, he'd be there already.

[Jake0890]

In reality, I think if Lance doesn't get the money he wants, he'll re-sign for 1 or 2 years to try prove he's worth the big money again during the upcoming season.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

[chube]

And in two seasons, the projected salary cap is projected to be near $80m thanks to a new upcoming tv deal


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[blurchmill8]

I think a team that is going to kick the tires on Lance is Atlanta. They are sitting on 10-11 million after failing to land Deng and Gasol. He fills a need and although Lance doesn't fit the spurs model that they're trying to replicate in Atlanta there's no denying Lance's talent on the court. This could be a Paul Millsap signing by Danny Ferry ( late and out of nowhere last year ). What would happen if Atlanta offered a deal such as 2 years 17 million ( player/team option after year 1 )

[Boneman2]

What would happen if Atlanta offered a deal such as 2 years 17 million ( player/team option after year 1 )

The pacers offer is superior in every facet. I'm sure Bird would give him a PO after year 2 when we'll have 30+ million in expirings.

It will take an offer superior to the Pacers. If you want 2 years better make it 10-11 per.

[Wizop]

if no one offers Lance more than the offer on the table, what will his attitude be? he could blame himself and seek an early out thinking he will prove the doubters wrong or he could sulk and blame Bird and Herb for not giving him his due. I don't think we want him feeling disrespected.

[kirkirwin]

if no one offers Lance more than the offer on the table, what will his attitude be? he could blame himself and seek an early out thinking he will prove the doubters wrong or he could sulk and blame Bird and Herb for not giving him his due. I don't think we want him feeling disrespected.

Agreed - I don't see this situation turning out very well for the Pacers or Stephenson. It's becoming apparent that Lance isn't going to be happy with the contract he ends up with since he believes he's worth well more than $8.8 per year. Lance will likely be on a mission to prove a point that he is worth more than Hill, Hibbert, and West, which will further isolate him from a team that already has chemistry issues.

The Pacers need to keep him because he is a valuable asset and those aren't easy to come by for the Pacers. A sign-and-trade is definitely the best outcome, but it's just very hard to gauge the trade value of an Unrestricted Free Agent when a team can sign him outright.

[Scoot McGroot]

That is a poo-poo platter for sure, with exception to the picks. What are their contracts like? What about top-3 protection on the 2017?

The 2015 definitely won't be in the lottery and from what I envision the 2017 is the only value here.

We can easily dump a contract to keep Lance if we want. Maybe if he had a viable suitor besides us I would feel differently about this trade, but at the moment, as long as Jordan chills, we're in the drivers seat to retain Lance or S & T him for a win-now piece.

Wright $5 Million Expiring
Mekel 2 years total $1,760,000 --816,482 this year 3rd year QO $1,216,000
Crowder $915,243 expiring ---next year QO $1,181,000



I would do Top 5-10 Protected 2017 ...I personally don't think Cuban lets us hit the lottery in 2017 either way . By then hopefully Parsons / Lance have really blossomed and Dallas should have more cap space in 2016 to add to it anyway

Theoretically, it makes sense. In practice, we can't do it. We're deadset on not exceeding the tax. Doing this deal does that, and I'm not sure it'd be worth waiving Scola to sub in Wright, like it would be for Lance. We already have 5 backup big men behind Roy and David, so while Brandon is nice, he's simply a hindrance of a contract here.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Jake0890]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/rick_bonnell/status/489230483377885185[/tweet]

****

Alex Kennedy is reporting the Hornets will be meeting with Lance tomorrow as well.

It looked so promising for like 24 hours...

[Liver_Pooty]

Rick Bonnell is garbage, but when he reports something its 99% accurate. Too bad he rarely breaks a story. Were meeting with Lance tomorrow.

[Scoot McGroot]

Rick Bonnell is garbage, but when he reports something its 99% accurate. Too bad he rarely breaks a story. Were meeting with Lance tomorrow.

Hah! I'm sorry, I had to laugh at this a bit. Isn't this comment in conflict with itself, or is he garbage some other way!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Liver_Pooty]

Rick Bonnell is garbage, but when he reports something its 99% accurate. Too bad he rarely breaks a story. Were meeting with Lance tomorrow.

Hah! I'm sorry, I had to laugh at this a bit. Isn't this comment in conflict with itself, or is he garbage some other way!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Sorry, I didn't make myself completely clear. He "breaks" a story about once a year, but when he does its completely accurate. Aka it has to be through the mouth of Cho or Jordan himself.

He is garbage in the fact that his writing sucks, and we have to rely on other beat writers and national journalist to break stories for the most part, but when he does break a story he gets a hard on.

So basically were meeting with Lance tomorrow and if Haywards offer sheet means anything were going to offer him an insane amount of money.

[boomershadow]

In reality, I think if Lance doesn't get the money he wants, he'll re-sign for 1 or 2 years to try prove he's worth the big money again during the upcoming season.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

It seems you were correct, just that Larry wasn't the one willing to offer the shorter deal. It's a move I'm afraid I don't understand at all. Larry was invested in this kid back when there were very serious questions about whether he'd mature enough to make it in the NBA. And once he got proved right, he wasn't willing to be flexible enough in the contract to get a very talented player for a dollar amount we could afford.....even though we're strapped for cap space?

[Tartan937]

His whole thing has been somewhat baffling. Sorry for Pacers fans. I hope Rodney Stuckey is a lot better than I think he is.

[Scoot McGroot]

In reality, I think if Lance doesn't get the money he wants, he'll re-sign for 1 or 2 years to try prove he's worth the big money again during the upcoming season.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

It seems you were correct, just that Larry wasn't the one willing to offer the shorter deal. It's a move I'm afraid I don't understand at all. Larry was invested in this kid back when there were very serious questions about whether he'd mature enough to make it in the NBA. And once he got proved right, he wasn't willing to be flexible enough in the contract to get a very talented player for a dollar amount we could afford.....even though we're strapped for cap space?

My outside theory? Lance plays better when he's locked in long-term and not focused on his next deal. When he's a free agent in a year or two, I think he focuses more on controlling everything. He wants the most stats, the most focus, everything. However, locked in 4 or 5 years, he's a team player, and he has plenty of time to just play in the flow of the game without worrying about his contract.

I think Bird was willing to keep him if Lance was in the long-term "focused" outlook of his career; not if he was in the "gunning" for a new contract part of his career.

[Tartan937]

In reality, I think if Lance doesn't get the money he wants, he'll re-sign for 1 or 2 years to try prove he's worth the big money again during the upcoming season.

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

It seems you were correct, just that Larry wasn't the one willing to offer the shorter deal. It's a move I'm afraid I don't understand at all. Larry was invested in this kid back when there were very serious questions about whether he'd mature enough to make it in the NBA. And once he got proved right, he wasn't willing to be flexible enough in the contract to get a very talented player for a dollar amount we could afford.....even though we're strapped for cap space?

My outside theory? Lance plays better when he's locked in long-term and not focused on his next deal. When he's a free agent in a year or two, I think he focuses more on controlling everything. He wants the most stats, the most focus, everything. However, locked in 4 or 5 years, he's a team player, and he has plenty of time to just play in the flow of the game without worrying about his contract.

I think Bird was willing to keep him if Lance was in the long-term "focused" outlook of his career; not if he was in the "gunning" for a new contract part of his career.

That kind of makes sense actually.

[granger05]

I'm not all the way through this yet, but here's an article on Lance from Slate which is kind of interesting:

LINK

[granger05]

Meh, nothing really new in there. The writer seems to be deliberately antagonizing Charlotte fans, not with what he says about Lance but the team in general.