Image

Pre-Season Games

Moderators: pacers33granger, boomershadow, Grang33r, Jake0890, pacerfan

pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#41 » by pacers33granger » Fri Oct 11, 2019 6:22 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:So when Hill and Lopez expire, they're just not going to sign players to fill that roster/cap space?


Not what I said at all.

Scoot McGroot wrote:If your belief is that Milwaukee was going to let Brogdon walk for anything, and that Simon just up and called and gave up picks, I'm not sure how you can keep following the franchise with that kind of malfeasance. We've negotiated with a lot of RFA's, but usually waited until we get them to be renounced. Simon also isn't the only owner who tends to stay away from restricted free agents. The number that avoid it is probably larger than the few who dive in fully.


I have not heard of any other owner who has a similar rule in place. It's been reported as "old school" and not something other owners do. I've heard of plenty of teams avoiding certain RFAs out of fear their space will be tied up, but that's more risk aversion than policy. I also cannot remember any RFAs we've actually negotiated with and assume any you're referencing were solely for the event they were renounced.

I understand Simon's policy from a businessman's standpoint and commend him for having morals he believes in. Doesn't mean I can't believe it is a stupid policy and the sole reason picks changed hands. It's the one thing I dislike about ownership. He's been great in all other regards and that's still better than the vast majority of owners.

The evidence strongly points to it being unnecessary. Bucks ownership and management has repeatedly implied they knew they could not keep Brogdon. And history has plenty of RFA sign and trades with minimal value greasing the wheels, not firsts. I love that we got Brogdon and ultimately it's not a giant deal, but it was a stupid thing to do that was borne out of policy and not necessity.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,742
And1: 3,210
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#42 » by Scoot McGroot » Fri Oct 11, 2019 7:31 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:So when Hill and Lopez expire, they're just not going to sign players to fill that roster/cap space?


Not what I said at all.

I didn't say or intimate that was what you said. I was asking you a question in response to your written statement.

pacers33granger wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:If your belief is that Milwaukee was going to let Brogdon walk for anything, and that Simon just up and called and gave up picks, I'm not sure how you can keep following the franchise with that kind of malfeasance. We've negotiated with a lot of RFA's, but usually waited until we get them to be renounced. Simon also isn't the only owner who tends to stay away from restricted free agents. The number that avoid it is probably larger than the few who dive in fully.


I have not heard of any other owner who has a similar rule in place. It's been reported as "old school" and not something other owners do. I've heard of plenty of teams avoiding certain RFAs out of fear their space will be tied up, but that's more risk aversion than policy. I also cannot remember any RFAs we've actually negotiated with and assume any you're referencing were solely for the event they were renounced.

The two bolded parts are linked and answer itself. Think of Copeland and Bogs specifically. We had a negotiated contract ready and the players went to their teams, and asked them to either match the offers, or renounce them so they could sign it with Indy. Both teams chose to renounce the players rather than match the offers as a courtesy to not hold up Indy's cap and allow the deals to go through ASAP. However, both guys were negotiated with when they were restricted, not in the 1-3 minutes between them being renounced and our agreements being publicized. And, again, we clearly negotiated with a restricted Brogdon. We had the deal ready before Simon approached the Bucks with his S&T offer.

pacers33granger wrote:I understand Simon's policy from a businessman's standpoint and commend him for having morals he believes in. Doesn't mean I can't believe it is a stupid policy and the sole reason picks changed hands. It's the one thing I dislike about ownership. He's been great in all other regards and that's still better than the vast majority of owners.

The evidence strongly points to it being unnecessary. Bucks ownership and management has repeatedly implied they knew they could not keep Brogdon. And history has plenty of RFA sign and trades with minimal value greasing the wheels, not firsts. I love that we got Brogdon and ultimately it's not a giant deal, but it was a stupid thing to do that was borne out of policy and not necessity.


Again. They could've kept him. They chose Brook Lopez and George Hill (both needed to be signed with cap space) and then used their room exception on Robin Lopez and their BAE on Wes Mathews. They could've easily chosen Brogdon, as Brook/Hill make just as much as Brogdon/vet minimum, essentially. Still could've had Robin/Mathews, too. However, they chose a different path with the additional picks they got. Would they have paid Brogdon the same amount we did? Who knows. They certainly could've, and they'd have had a much better player than Hill/Mathews at the guard. Could it be that once they were approached with an offer of a 1st to get the deal done immediately, the Bucks pivoted and decided to work the other half of their free agency situation since they had a good offer ready to go, and were able to snag a couple extra 2nds, as well?

This is where the whole "Indy may have saved $10-20m" comes in. At the time that we called up their owner and offered the picks to get it done, they could've still matched the offer, or prioritized Brogdon.

Obviously, I'd have loved to have gotten Brogdon without giving up any picks, or even just keeping the 1st. However, in that moment, Brogdon was assumed to be returning to Milwaukee, and no other teams even really made offers until after the S&T was rumored/announced by Woj/Shams. If any news of Milwaukee not being willing to match had leaked out, the cost for Brogdon would have probably raised substantially.
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#43 » by pacers33granger » Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:54 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:So when Hill and Lopez expire, they're just not going to sign players to fill that roster/cap space?


Not what I said at all.

I didn't say or intimate that was what you said. I was asking you a question in response to your written statement.


But this completely ignores the fact that Brogdon's money would have caused a giant tax bill in those years. They clearly valued flexibility in that first year of the Giannis extension. They felt they could spend $20 mil better or get multiple pieces like Hill/Lopez cheaper. They'd have a tough time filling out the roster if they had another big contract on the books for those years.

Scoot McGroot wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:If your belief is that Milwaukee was going to let Brogdon walk for anything, and that Simon just up and called and gave up picks, I'm not sure how you can keep following the franchise with that kind of malfeasance. We've negotiated with a lot of RFA's, but usually waited until we get them to be renounced. Simon also isn't the only owner who tends to stay away from restricted free agents. The number that avoid it is probably larger than the few who dive in fully.


I have not heard of any other owner who has a similar rule in place. It's been reported as "old school" and not something other owners do. I've heard of plenty of teams avoiding certain RFAs out of fear their space will be tied up, but that's more risk aversion than policy. I also cannot remember any RFAs we've actually negotiated with and assume any you're referencing were solely for the event they were renounced.

The two bolded parts are linked and answer itself. Think of Copeland and Bogs specifically. We had a negotiated contract ready and the players went to their teams, and asked them to either match the offers, or renounce them so they could sign it with Indy. Both teams chose to renounce the players rather than match the offers as a courtesy to not hold up Indy's cap and allow the deals to go through ASAP. However, both guys were negotiated with when they were restricted, not in the 1-3 minutes between them being renounced and our agreements being publicized. And, again, we clearly negotiated with a restricted Brogdon. We had the deal ready before Simon approached the Bucks with his S&T offer.


With Bogie we had cap space sitting there for awhile and only signed Bogie when it became clear Washington was going to renounce him to match on Porter. Sure he was technically still a RFA, but everyone knew Washington simply could not afford him. IIRC Copeland was a similar situation where he was technically a RFA, but NY spent their money elsewhere and couldn't offer him more than the minimum. Both Washington and NY simply could not give them anywhere close to their market value and kept the RFA rights in case they needed them for a move, but had no intentions of resigning them.

Brogdon is somewhat dissimilar and moreso implicates the intent of Simon's general rule, but is still a guy the incumbent team planned on losing to free agency.

Scoot McGroot wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:I understand Simon's policy from a businessman's standpoint and commend him for having morals he believes in. Doesn't mean I can't believe it is a stupid policy and the sole reason picks changed hands. It's the one thing I dislike about ownership. He's been great in all other regards and that's still better than the vast majority of owners.

The evidence strongly points to it being unnecessary. Bucks ownership and management has repeatedly implied they knew they could not keep Brogdon. And history has plenty of RFA sign and trades with minimal value greasing the wheels, not firsts. I love that we got Brogdon and ultimately it's not a giant deal, but it was a stupid thing to do that was borne out of policy and not necessity.


Again. They could've kept him. They chose Brook Lopez and George Hill (both needed to be signed with cap space) and then used their room exception on Robin Lopez and their BAE on Wes Mathews. They could've easily chosen Brogdon, as Brook/Hill make just as much as Brogdon/vet minimum, essentially. Still could've had Robin/Mathews, too. However, they chose a different path with the additional picks they got. Would they have paid Brogdon the same amount we did? Who knows. They certainly could've, and they'd have had a much better player than Hill/Mathews at the guard. Could it be that once they were approached with an offer of a 1st to get the deal done immediately, the Bucks pivoted and decided to work the other half of their free agency situation since they had a good offer ready to go, and were able to snag a couple extra 2nds, as well?

This is where the whole "Indy may have saved $10-20m" comes in. At the time that we called up their owner and offered the picks to get it done, they could've still matched the offer, or prioritized Brogdon.

Obviously, I'd have loved to have gotten Brogdon without giving up any picks, or even just keeping the 1st. However, in that moment, Brogdon was assumed to be returning to Milwaukee, and no other teams even really made offers until after the S&T was rumored/announced by Woj/Shams. If any news of Milwaukee not being willing to match had leaked out, the cost for Brogdon would have probably raised substantially.


Yeah of course they could have kept him, but it was clear from even before free agency they were going to prioritize Lopez first after Middleton. They could have easily let Hill go as Brogdon is better, but Hill was much cheaper. So if it's Brook/Hill or Brogdon/minimum, I'm not sure I really get the argument beyond semantics. They were never going to opt for that, even if they could get Robin (whose about 10% as useful as Brook) and Matthews still.

I don't believe one bit that Brogdon was ever a priority over Brook and once they handed out big deals to Bledsoe, Middleton, and Brook, their plan was always to fill in the gaps with multiple players, not one guy and hope for minimum guys to come to Milwaukee. The only way I see that changing was if Middleton or Brook walked, which was a possibility. But if they were retaining those guys, all indications are they didn't have the spending power (want) to keep him

Nor do I believe that the plan was for Brogdon to be back provided they kept their major guys (especially considering locking up their other PG midseason), but rather the writing was on the wall well before free agency:

Per Gery Woelfel of Woelfel's Press Box, one NBA official is expecting Brogdon to receive a deal worth $14 million to $16 million per season.

"There are several teams that need a quality guard," the official said. "I would say he'll get between $14 million to $16 million. That would be my guess."

If Brogdon gets a contract worth that much money this offseason, it will likely be the end of his time with the Milwaukee Bucks.


On the most recent episode of The Lowe Post podcast, ESPN’s Zach Lowe alluded to the Bucks having a “walk away” price for Brogdon in free agency, although it isn’t currently known just what that amount would be.


ESPN's Bobby Marks said on Thursday's episode of The Jump, "The concern for Milwaukee is where that Brogdon offer sheet is going to come in. We're hearing four years, $80 million from a team like the Chicago Bulls."


“The Bucks are in trouble; they got big, big salary-cap problems,’’ a front office official said. “They haven’t done a good job managing their budget.

“They can’t keep everybody; they know that. If you ask me, Brogdon will be one of the guys that gets away from them.’’
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#44 » by pacers33granger » Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:02 am

As for the actual preseason games, the Chicago game was pretty sloppy all around. The defense is going to need a lot of work, though that's to be expected with so many new players and several guys who are known poor defenders.

But Chicago sat Lavine, Porter, Sato, Thad, Lauri, and WCJ. So basically all of their real rotation guys. While we sat Holiday and Goga and our starters all played at least 27 minutes.We should have won by a lot more than 18 points as the Bulls basically trotted out a G-League team.
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 10,179
And1: 1,545
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#45 » by Wizop » Sat Oct 12, 2019 12:36 pm

pacers33granger wrote:We should have won by a lot more than 18 points as the Bulls basically trotted out a G-League team.


turnovers. was any of that unfamiliarity? new guy jitters playing first home game? I have no explanation but we all know what's going to be said by the coaches.
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#46 » by pacers33granger » Sat Oct 12, 2019 2:48 pm

Wizop wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:We should have won by a lot more than 18 points as the Bulls basically trotted out a G-League team.


turnovers. was any of that unfamiliarity? new guy jitters playing first home game? I have no explanation but we all know what's going to be said by the coaches.


Yeah some of it was definitely too many new faces, but still, the talent discrepancy is far too big for the game to be as "close" as it was. I suppose the long layoff of a week between games and coming back from India didn't help either.

The optimist in me says that we were trying to force feed Doug and Leaf off the bench (which lead to stagnation on offense), are still trying to figure out where exactly Myles and Domas should be on offense, and we were playing a team of hungry guys who were battling for a roster spot. We also seemed to be missing Aaron's aggressiveness a bit.

It's preseason so not a big deal. But it looks like we may be in for some ugly games in the first half of the season.
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 10,179
And1: 1,545
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#47 » by Wizop » Sat Oct 12, 2019 3:02 pm

First game home after long road trip is often a trap game. I'm hoping to see a much better game Tuesday. Planning a pregame stop at 5 Guys.

Sent from my phone.
Topofthekey
Senior
Posts: 666
And1: 211
Joined: Nov 18, 2017

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#48 » by Topofthekey » Sat Oct 12, 2019 8:17 pm

Here's my way too early take: Jeremy Lamb, not great
basketballwacko2
RealGM
Posts: 15,045
And1: 2,061
Joined: May 11, 2002
Location: Just outside of No where.
     

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#49 » by basketballwacko2 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 4:03 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:So when Hill and Lopez expire, they're just not going to sign players to fill that roster/cap space?


Not what I said at all.

Scoot McGroot wrote:If your belief is that Milwaukee was going to let Brogdon walk for anything, and that Simon just up and called and gave up picks, I'm not sure how you can keep following the franchise with that kind of malfeasance. We've negotiated with a lot of RFA's, but usually waited until we get them to be renounced. Simon also isn't the only owner who tends to stay away from restricted free agents. The number that avoid it is probably larger than the few who dive in fully.


I have not heard of any other owner who has a similar rule in place. It's been reported as "old school" and not something other owners do. I've heard of plenty of teams avoiding certain RFAs out of fear their space will be tied up, but that's more risk aversion than policy. I also cannot remember any RFAs we've actually negotiated with and assume any you're referencing were solely for the event they were renounced.

I understand Simon's policy from a businessman's standpoint and commend him for having morals he believes in. Doesn't mean I can't believe it is a stupid policy and the sole reason picks changed hands. It's the one thing I dislike about ownership. He's been great in all other regards and that's still better than the vast majority of owners.

The evidence strongly points to it being unnecessary. Bucks ownership and management has repeatedly implied they knew they could not keep Brogdon. And history has plenty of RFA sign and trades with minimal value greasing the wheels, not firsts. I love that we got Brogdon and ultimately it's not a giant deal, but it was a stupid thing to do that was borne out of policy and not necessity.


I was a bit surprised that we gave the #1, I thought when I first saw the deal that it was just the 2 2nds. which I'm fine with. I don't think they could have matched out offer sheet if we'd offered him $20 million. If they did they'd be deep in the tax. So we might have given up the #1 too easily. I would have like to have seen it top 25 protected and dropping to 2 2nds after 3 years.
basketballwacko2
RealGM
Posts: 15,045
And1: 2,061
Joined: May 11, 2002
Location: Just outside of No where.
     

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#50 » by basketballwacko2 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 4:11 pm

pacers33granger wrote:
Wizop wrote:
pacers33granger wrote:We should have won by a lot more than 18 points as the Bulls basically trotted out a G-League team.


turnovers. was any of that unfamiliarity? new guy jitters playing first home game? I have no explanation but we all know what's going to be said by the coaches.


Yeah some of it was definitely too many new faces, but still, the talent discrepancy is far too big for the game to be as "close" as it was. I suppose the long layoff of a week between games and coming back from India didn't help either.

The optimist in me says that we were trying to force feed Doug and Leaf off the bench (which lead to stagnation on offense), are still trying to figure out where exactly Myles and Domas should be on offense, and we were playing a team of hungry guys who were battling for a roster spot. We also seemed to be missing Aaron's aggressiveness a bit.

It's preseason so not a big deal. But it looks like we may be in for some ugly games in the first half of the season.


Not really on the winning margin in the game. I didn't get to watch it, but it's preseason! The game doesn't matter and the bulls guys were all trying to win a spot on the team, trying to impress the coach and the GM. In a game like that a G-leaguer can look like an NBA All Star.
Topofthekey
Senior
Posts: 666
And1: 211
Joined: Nov 18, 2017

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#51 » by Topofthekey » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:00 am

Ugh, Goga made his debut and I missed it, because I was watching the DNC debate instead - I guess I'll look for the highlights on YouTube

Did anyone watch the game though - how did Goga look?
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 10,179
And1: 1,545
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#52 » by Wizop » Wed Oct 16, 2019 11:39 am

Topofthekey wrote:Ugh, Goga made his debut and I missed it, because I was watching the DNC debate instead - I guess I'll look for the highlights on YouTube

Did anyone watch the game though - how did Goga look?
We went to the game. Figured I'd see debate highlights ad nauseum.

Goga was ok but a step behind. He did hit some 3s but generally seemed not up to the speed of the game. Is he a step slow or just used to a slower tempo? Too early to tell.

McConnell way more effective than Aaron. He played some with Brogdon at 2. That works.

Sabonis at 4 is a rebounding machine.

Sent from my phone.
Grang33r
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 5,136
And1: 166
Joined: May 27, 2007
Location: Rochester, NY

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#53 » by Grang33r » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:22 pm

Topofthekey wrote:Ugh, Goga made his debut and I missed it, because I was watching the DNC debate instead - I guess I'll look for the highlights on YouTube

Did anyone watch the game though - how did Goga look?


Just getting back to basketball, and saw Goga made his debut last night. How come he didn't play in the earlier games?
The first rule of Basketball: Believe.
Follow on twitter @Grang33r
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#54 » by pacers33granger » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:30 pm

Wizop wrote:
Goga was ok but a step behind. He did hit some 3s but generally seemed not up to the speed of the game. Is he a step slow or just used to a slower tempo? Too early to tell.


I felt the same (was able to find a poor quality feed online), but thought it could also be due to coming back from the ankle issue. You could see the potential, but he was out of sorts in a lot of ways. A fairly impressive debut nonetheless imo.

Wizop wrote:McConnell way more effective than Aaron. He played some with Brogdon at 2. That works.


Yeah TJ knows what he's doing and knows his limitations. Aaron still doesn't. It seems like Nate has been experimenting with having him play off of Sumner and it seems more effective. Aaron is a good shooter, but not great at handling the ball and Sumner can get into the lane.
Tom White
Senior
Posts: 587
And1: 319
Joined: Aug 27, 2001
Location: Indiana

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#55 » by Tom White » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:34 pm

I didn't get to see the game, but from the stats it looks like Minnesota took the Pacers to school on the rebounding end of the game. Turner only had 2 boards in 17 minutes? That's not good. Was he just out of rebounding position, or did they have him playing "D" on a three point shooting big man, or what?
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 10,179
And1: 1,545
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#56 » by Wizop » Wed Oct 16, 2019 7:54 pm

Tom White wrote: or did they have him playing "D" on a three point shooting big man, or what?


wasn't really watching for that, but Towns took a lot of 3's and Sabonis got a ton of rebounds.

we played the 2nd unit guys a lot in the 2nd half - they even started the half. MN pulled away down the stretch and we were playing backups. it was close in the high 80's but MN went up 1 making them first to 90 which was my magic number and nothing went right from there. I walked to the car saying we aren't as deep as I thought we were.
pacers33granger
Forum Mod - Pacers
Forum Mod - Pacers
Posts: 12,162
And1: 4,983
Joined: Sep 26, 2006
 

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#57 » by pacers33granger » Wed Oct 16, 2019 8:01 pm

Wizop wrote: I walked to the car saying we aren't as deep as I thought we were.


I think the issue here is our projected bench is super inexperienced. While there's potential there, we have 4 guys who we aren't sure are rotation players yet (Holiday, Sumner, Leaf, Goga) and one guy whose hit or miss (Doug). Luckily we have guys like McConnell and Justin Holiday to fill in if there's some major issues and Lamb will head there once Vic is back. But it's going to be a work in progress.
User avatar
Pacersike
Analyst
Posts: 3,033
And1: 742
Joined: Jun 10, 2007
Location: Belgium

Re: Pre-Season Games 

Post#58 » by Pacersike » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 am

I have only been able to watch the highlights, so my impressions are also partially questions:

Brogdon's scoring was off, perhaps it can be explained by him not playing his best position, struggling to defend the quickest guards and having to initiate the offense too much. His best position in the past was the 2 and these 4 games don't show otherwise.

Lamb will be big for us as soon as he can start on the bench, where he belongs.

Warren: silent assassin who will be huge for us as first option on offense

Sabonis and Turner can play together, too much talent with different skill sets, but it ain't a great fit, so we need another Pacer to make the jump to greatness and multiple Allstar teams.

Aaron and Leaf didn't wow anyone, Sumner and Goga did. Goga can score and block shots, his defense is a bit stiff not playing against less athletic Euro players anymore.

TJ McConnell is a very important signing. The only true point guard on our team and energetic. I hope he gets bench minutes in the first game and I hope he gets them early in the game. Brogdon and Aaron as rotation players at the 1 just make me miss Mark Jackson.
The right combination of BBIQ, passing, quickness, it's been too long since we had such a guard.

Return to Indiana Pacers