Image

Pacers Turning to Sessions?

Moderators: pacers33granger, Grang33r, pacerfan, Jake0890, boomershadow

User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#21 » by Scoot McGroot » Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:29 pm

Foster/Tinsley/Diener for Sessions(@$5.8 million to start)/Bell/Gadzuric

Foster, Tinsley, and Diener combine to make $15,017,500. Bell and Gadzuric would combine to make $10,352,220. Sessions would make around the MLE (this could be fudged a bit to make numbers work), meaning we'd take on a total of $16,152,220. Milwaukee would technically send out only $13,252,220 due to Sessions' BYC status, meaning they could take on a maximum of $16,665,275 in return, meaning this deal works financially.

If Indy is dead set on not taking on extra salary in this deal, we could possibly convince Sessions to sign a deal with a starting salary of less than $5.8 million, if he'd be interested. $5.8 is the largest he can sign for in a S&T, or with Milwaukee though.


My reasoning is this. Indy would get their starting caliber, young, PG in Sessions. Bell was added on by Milwaukee fans as a deal they'd like to move, and is a combo PG/SG that we could use as a backup at both positions in certain situations. Losing Foster hurts us at the center spot, meaning Murphy or McRoberts would have to play there, and that's also why I included the Tinsley/Gadzuric swap. Since Milwaukee would be moving 2 PG players, Tinsley could fill a decent need for them, while Gadzuric would be able to play spot minutes at the center as we need them, plus, they have almost the exact same contract, so it's essentially a wash. Plus, adding their salaries makes the deal large enough to solve any BYC issues with Sessions, and Diener is a salary sacrifice by Indy as well, so we don't take on too much salary in this deal.
Boneman2
General Manager
Posts: 8,314
And1: 1,665
Joined: Jul 07, 2003
Location: Indy
       

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#22 » by Boneman2 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 12:43 am

^^ I like it Scoot. I think Skiles is the type of guy JT could respond to. The way you broke it down really helps me believe Tinsley is movable.
"A man who fears suffering is already suffering from what he fears." -Michel de Montaigne
8305
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 632
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#23 » by 8305 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 1:21 am

cdash wrote:I keep seeing Jamaal Magloire's name mentioned in various places. Seriously? The ONLY reason people want to bring him in is because he made one wholly undeserved All-Star game years and years ago. Even then he wasn't that good, but I could at least understand the interest. Lately though, the guy has been abysmal. He is terrible. He has no place in the NBA anymore.

This is not a rant on you 8305. I have just seen it mentioned in a variety of places and I felt the need to comment on it finally. My apologies.


No offense taken. I was in fact doing exactly what you described referencing Magloire because he was the most recognizable name on the list. Can't say that I've noticed anything he's done on the court for years. I'm sure everyone on this board see's posts where the comment is so misinformed you feel something has to be said.
8305
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 632
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#24 » by 8305 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 1:59 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:Foster/Tinsley/Diener for Sessions(@$5.8 million to start)/Bell/Gadzuric

Foster, Tinsley, and Diener combine to make $15,017,500. Bell and Gadzuric would combine to make $10,352,220. Sessions would make around the MLE (this could be fudged a bit to make numbers work), meaning we'd take on a total of $16,152,220. Milwaukee would technically send out only $13,252,220 due to Sessions' BYC status, meaning they could take on a maximum of $16,665,275 in return, meaning this deal works financially.

If Indy is dead set on not taking on extra salary in this deal, we could possibly convince Sessions to sign a deal with a starting salary of less than $5.8 million, if he'd be interested. $5.8 is the largest he can sign for in a S&T, or with Milwaukee though.


My reasoning is this. Indy would get their starting caliber, young, PG in Sessions. Bell was added on by Milwaukee fans as a deal they'd like to move, and is a combo PG/SG that we could use as a backup at both positions in certain situations. Losing Foster hurts us at the center spot, meaning Murphy or McRoberts would have to play there, and that's also why I included the Tinsley/Gadzuric swap. Since Milwaukee would be moving 2 PG players, Tinsley could fill a decent need for them, while Gadzuric would be able to play spot minutes at the center as we need them, plus, they have almost the exact same contract, so it's essentially a wash. Plus, adding their salaries makes the deal large enough to solve any BYC issues with Sessions, and Diener is a salary sacrifice by Indy as well, so we don't take on too much salary in this deal.


It would be pretty remarkable if this deal could get done. The only on court value in this deal is the Foster for Sessions part. Foster, as much as I've appreciated him over the years, is a backup center on a good team. If he's playing more than 20 to 24 minutes per night you are probably not a very good team. Moving Foster for a guy who could be a very good pg and money being basically equal would be a rare opportunity. In fact, I would be willing to substitue Ford for Tinsley in this deal.

I think the key to getting something like this done would be for Sessions to want to come to Indy over Milwaukee. To a player in his postion I would think seeing an opportunity where the job is clearly his would be hudge. Putting Ford in the deal gets that done.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#25 » by Scoot McGroot » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:40 am

Didn't even think about substituting in Ford for Tinsley, though it would likely change the deal an awful lot, as there's no way in hell we'd take on Gadzuric at that point, and Milwaukee would have to add a bit of extra salary in the deal to make it work.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#26 » by Scoot McGroot » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:43 am

At that point, you're then looking at a possible Sessions/Bell/Gadzuric/Alexander for Foster/Ford/Diener, or a possible Sessions/Bell/and some combo of Amir Johnson, Kurt Thomas, Malik Allen, and Fracisco Elson for Foster/Ford.
basketballwacko2
RealGM
Posts: 22,028
And1: 4,335
Joined: May 11, 2002
Location: Just outside of No where.
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#27 » by basketballwacko2 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:56 am

Now if we could get them to do a deal of Sessions/Bell/Kurt Thomas for Foster/Jamaal/Diener I'd add 2nd round picks and maybe even a #1 protected.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#28 » by Scoot McGroot » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:20 pm

You'd have to add a 1st rounder to even come somewhere close. No way they give us the better player in Sessions, and take on the worst contract in Tinsley for expirings.
User avatar
count55
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,431
And1: 3
Joined: Dec 21, 2005
Location: In Memoriam: pf

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#29 » by count55 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:26 pm

I assume we're talking about therapy...
I have no idea what you're talking about, and clearly, neither do you.
User avatar
dawn_wan
Veteran
Posts: 2,738
And1: 612
Joined: Jul 10, 2009
Location: 416

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#30 » by dawn_wan » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:33 pm

the legacy of Zan Tabak lives on!
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#31 » by Scoot McGroot » Thu Jul 16, 2009 4:33 pm

count55 wrote:I assume we're talking about therapy...


If not, we should be.
8305
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 632
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#32 » by 8305 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:19 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:Didn't even think about substituting in Ford for Tinsley, though it would likely change the deal an awful lot, as there's no way in hell we'd take on Gadzuric at that point, and Milwaukee would have to add a bit of extra salary in the deal to make it work.


Scoot McGroot wrote:At that point, you're then looking at a possible Sessions/Bell/Gadzuric/Alexander for Foster/Ford/Diener, or a possible Sessions/Bell/and some combo of Amir Johnson, Kurt Thomas, Malik Allen, and Fracisco Elson for Foster/Ford.


If you are able to acquire Sessions, Ford becomes dead weight to the Pacers. Maybe worse an unhappy distraction.

Sessions (a young starting pg) is significantly more valuable than Foster (a good backup center). It stands to reason you would have to surrender some value to make this more worthwhile for the Bucks. Diener and Tinsley vs Bell and Gadzuric is at best for MIlwaukee a wash. If I'm them I don't do this deal either. Ford for Tinsley evens this up. If you can hold out and get a combination of more cap friendly contracts than Gadzuric great. I wouldn't pass the opportunity to get the pg postion solved for the long term haggling over the difference between Gadzuric vs the combination of contracts ending one year sooner.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#33 » by Scoot McGroot » Thu Jul 16, 2009 5:44 pm

Their PG situation is already "solved" for the long-term though in Brandon Jennings. Ridnour is there in the meantime.


However, the Diener and Tinsley vs Bell and Gadzuric is at worst a wash for Milwaukee. At best, it's the fact that they cut 2 years off of Bell's contract for swapping it for Gadzuric and save almost $9-10 million, while swapping Gadzuric for a guy that could at least play for them.


Either way, yeah, it's not an amazing deal. But it might be the best offer they have if they want to do something fiscally helpful if Sessions want's out.
8305
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 632
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#34 » by 8305 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:16 pm

In a trade that nets the Pacers a long term answer at pg (Sessions) I don't see that much difference who goes out Ford or Tinsley. History would indicate Ford's ego would not deal with being a backup. So you would need to deal him one way or another. If you put Tinsley in the Sessions acquisition trade and were then trying to move Ford after the fact it would seem there is a chance he could be moved for an expiring. Something that apparently isn't happening with Tinsley. So yea, the Pacers would prefer to move Tinsley first maybe save 6 mil in the 2010-2011 season. I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is the opportunity to get Sessions for 5 to 6 mil a year is pretty big long term and that opportunity is the over riding incentive.
WiscoKing13
RealGM
Posts: 11,976
And1: 1,441
Joined: Jan 03, 2009
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#35 » by WiscoKing13 » Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:07 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:Foster/Tinsley/Diener for Sessions(@$5.8 million to start)/Bell/Gadzuric

Foster, Tinsley, and Diener combine to make $15,017,500. Bell and Gadzuric would combine to make $10,352,220. Sessions would make around the MLE (this could be fudged a bit to make numbers work), meaning we'd take on a total of $16,152,220. Milwaukee would technically send out only $13,252,220 due to Sessions' BYC status, meaning they could take on a maximum of $16,665,275 in return, meaning this deal works financially.

If Indy is dead set on not taking on extra salary in this deal, we could possibly convince Sessions to sign a deal with a starting salary of less than $5.8 million, if he'd be interested. $5.8 is the largest he can sign for in a S&T, or with Milwaukee though.


My reasoning is this. Indy would get their starting caliber, young, PG in Sessions. Bell was added on by Milwaukee fans as a deal they'd like to move, and is a combo PG/SG that we could use as a backup at both positions in certain situations. Losing Foster hurts us at the center spot, meaning Murphy or McRoberts would have to play there, and that's also why I included the Tinsley/Gadzuric swap. Since Milwaukee would be moving 2 PG players, Tinsley could fill a decent need for them, while Gadzuric would be able to play spot minutes at the center as we need them, plus, they have almost the exact same contract, so it's essentially a wash. Plus, adding their salaries makes the deal large enough to solve any BYC issues with Sessions, and Diener is a salary sacrifice by Indy as well, so we don't take on too much salary in this deal.

Overall this is right about fair with value since you are taking on bell and gadz

1 problem the bucks would have no wiggle room if we took on 5 mil in raw capspace, maybe 3 would be the right number.

2. Are PG depth chart would be Jennings/ridnour/Tinsley
I know your taking gadz, but now we got 2 vets behind jennings and this would put tinsely on a very minimul role. So you'd probably have to include some type of protected first. Lotto protected for 2 years?
DanoMac wrote:
bullox wrote:That phone number was an asset to you. You had a direct line to the gm. You've squandered it.


I squandered an asset? Then Hammond taught me well.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 44,758
And1: 14,019
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#36 » by Scoot McGroot » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:51 am

WiscoKing13 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:Foster/Tinsley/Diener for Sessions(@$5.8 million to start)/Bell/Gadzuric

Foster, Tinsley, and Diener combine to make $15,017,500. Bell and Gadzuric would combine to make $10,352,220. Sessions would make around the MLE (this could be fudged a bit to make numbers work), meaning we'd take on a total of $16,152,220. Milwaukee would technically send out only $13,252,220 due to Sessions' BYC status, meaning they could take on a maximum of $16,665,275 in return, meaning this deal works financially.

If Indy is dead set on not taking on extra salary in this deal, we could possibly convince Sessions to sign a deal with a starting salary of less than $5.8 million, if he'd be interested. $5.8 is the largest he can sign for in a S&T, or with Milwaukee though.


My reasoning is this. Indy would get their starting caliber, young, PG in Sessions. Bell was added on by Milwaukee fans as a deal they'd like to move, and is a combo PG/SG that we could use as a backup at both positions in certain situations. Losing Foster hurts us at the center spot, meaning Murphy or McRoberts would have to play there, and that's also why I included the Tinsley/Gadzuric swap. Since Milwaukee would be moving 2 PG players, Tinsley could fill a decent need for them, while Gadzuric would be able to play spot minutes at the center as we need them, plus, they have almost the exact same contract, so it's essentially a wash. Plus, adding their salaries makes the deal large enough to solve any BYC issues with Sessions, and Diener is a salary sacrifice by Indy as well, so we don't take on too much salary in this deal.

Overall this is right about fair with value since you are taking on bell and gadz

1 problem the bucks would have no wiggle room if we took on 5 mil in raw capspace, maybe 3 would be the right number.

2. Are PG depth chart would be Jennings/ridnour/Tinsley
I know your taking gadz, but now we got 2 vets behind jennings and this would put tinsely on a very minimul role. So you'd probably have to include some type of protected first. Lotto protected for 2 years?


You're not going to get Bird to include a 1st rounder at all. He got burnt on the Al Harrington deal where he ended up giving the 11th pick to Atlanta.


As for the PG chart: I know you just invested heavily in Brandon Jennings, but he's still likely at least 1 year away, if not 2 years away from being able to be the full time starter. Ridnour is gone at the end of the year, and Tinsley is gone by the end of year 2. Really shouldn't be too huge of an issue.

As for saving $2 million, the deal could possibly be amended to not include Diener, saving around $1.7 million for Milwaukee, if the deal still works financially for Indy at that point though. That might put Indy in luxury tax territory, or infinitely close to it.


Or, the deal could be reconfigured with Ford instead of Tinsley, but that would likely still need Gadzuric included - which would then need Joe Alexander as salary filler, or dead weight like Elson or Allen and a 1st round pick to make up value - or Luke Ridnour instead of Gadzuric. Diener could be included if you wanted a 3rd PG for emergency situations.


Or, the deal could be blown up to massive levels and make it Foster/Ford/Dunleavy for Sessions/Redd. Though that would massively change each teams plans a bit for this season.
marcus_banks
Banned User
Posts: 25
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 16, 2009

Re: Pacers Turning to Sessions? 

Post#37 » by marcus_banks » Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:33 am

Return to Indiana Pacers