RealGM

Thought about this off and on for the last week. Could the Pacers offer to buy Ford out for roughly 6 million (which I think is fair value) and simply let him walk. He's next to no good for the Pacers and it would be different from the Tinsley debacle in that the Pacers are willing to buy him out vs. trading him, but I'd sit him or send him home if he didn't take or until he does.

Sorry to rant, but this thing got to me.

Why, what does it do for us? He is expiring and will be gone next season. He ain't like Tinsley and be stuck on the team. Only reason Pacers bought out Tonsley is because they had Ford, Jack, and Diener at point. If we cut TJ all we would have is Lance and Price when he comes back.

I could see it happening (a TJ buyout). Hard to imagine not having at least 18 mil in expirings even if one is used to get an expensive pg. Its unlikely an opportunity requiring exprinigs totaling more than that would present itself. Say you trade Dunleavy for Calderon when Price returns from the DL you've potentially got three pg's without TJ. I could see where saving a little money would make more sense than having TJ on the roster but never dressing.

I could see a buyout, but only if another pg is on the way in. The Pacers aren't going to buy out Ford and have only Stephenson and Price on the roster.

But, say the Pacers are on the verge of re-signing Earl Watson and are looking for a way to ensure that they stay under the luxury tax threshold. They buy out Ford, figuring someone else will then pick him up at the vet's minimum salary, which should reduce the Pacers' payroll just enough to add Watson and still be under the luxury tax threshold.

Essentially, the Pacers would have traded Ford for Watson and avoided the luxury tax. Sounds good to me. Of course, I'm premising that on the expectation that Ford has little to no trade value even as an expiring contract.

why would TJ take a penny less than what he is owed? plus, it doesn't really do anything for us unless we're short a roster spot. have to think they are trying their best to trade him and if that can't happen, Bird will need to sit TJ and OB down and make peace. it is TJ's contract year after all and he really needs to show the league he can play to avoid heading for Europe next summer.

I think TJ jumps at a buyout if he staring at a season in the land of Jamal Tinsley.

He would be gettin less money. He won''t get bought out. It doesn't help either side. TJ loses money, Pacers are left with Stephenson at point.

TJ>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Watson. Earl Watson is theworst startin point in the NBA. He is best as a 3rd string point.

Ford wouldn't have to take less money, and in fact he could end up making more money, if he is bought out and then re-signs with another team.

And you've got to think he wants out of Indiana, and that Indiana wants him out. It's never good to have an unhappy veteran on the roster, even if Ford has been a good soldier and refrained from saying anything negative in public.

Pacers won't pay him no more than 6, Cuz if they want to sign Rolle and possibly Watson they would be right the luxury tax. If TJ takes the 6, he will most likely sign for the vets min. It won't come out to $8.5 million. He has the leverage. If the Pacers sit him they are stuck with Stephenson as the only healthy point. They will have to play him and in his contract year he will probly have his best year of his career. If he ain't traded he will be the starter.

Actually no, if Ford takes 6 million in a buyout, it leaves the Pacers. 2.5 million more then what they had before.

That would give Indiana more then enough to resign Watson at 3.6 million for a year, plus Rolle.

Best case, they let S. Jones and Rolle duke it out for the final roster spot, worst case, the Pacers pay roughly 200K in Luxury taxes. I'll take that small amount in luxury tax if it means we don't lose a major player or make an unnessessary trade to get by.

We still lose money and are a worse team. TJ>>>>>>>>>>Watson. If his attitude is so bad they can just trade him for nuthin later in the season. Right now he is the only point you can rely on. He is in his contract year, so he will play his best and won't cause any problems. He hasn't caused any problems. The only player he had a problem with is in Toronto. He played better and is better than Watson. You don't buy him out because a coach, that hasn't been able to get the team to .500, doesn't see eye-to-eye with him. Both Ford and O'brien will probly be gone next season anyways, why spend extra money on two things that will be gone?

Yeah, I think TJ would accept a buyout when you consider he might only lose a million after he resigns with another team. The caveat for him is to choose a destination that allows him to showcase his skills. If he stays here his value will plummet even further down. If he goes elsewhere, and plays well, I could see him securing another 20 mill when you consider what all these other marginal pg's just got paid this offseason.

If he hates it so much, then he might accept less. Or if he has no confidence in himself and is content to fake injuries for another season, he won't accept a buyout.

Like someone else mentioned, we shouldn't buy him out until we have another pg coming back.

.

That point guard not bein Watson, Calderon, or Hinrich. Only places where he would get playin time is Charlotte and maybe Miami. Would Miami sign him? Indiana is the place where he gets the most playin time. He won't get benched unless Stephenson is god or just better than TJ. He will stay here until his vaue is a little higher than he will be traded. You can't trade him and hope Watson can have a good season. Watson had a bad year last season because, wait get this, HE IS A BAD PLAYER. TJ ain't the answer but buyin him out won't help either.

This is the dumbest thing Ive ever heard! He will be off the books in a year so why bother?

Indy2thaWindy wrote:That point guard not bein Watson, Calderon, or Hinrich. Only places where he would get playin time is Charlotte and maybe Miami. Would Miami sign him? Indiana is the place where he gets the most playin time. He won't get benched unless Stephenson is god or just better than TJ. He will stay here until his vaue is a little higher than he will be traded. You can't trade him and hope Watson can have a good season. Watson had a bad year last season because, wait get this, HE IS A BAD PLAYER. TJ ain't the answer but buyin him out won't help either.

Wow, I think almost every point you make in this post is wrong.

First I'll take any of Watson, Calderon or HInrich over TJ. At least these guys have some idea how to play their position.

TJ is a total non-fit in Miami. In Miami he'd have to play without the ball. I believe that involves some competancy as a shooter and some feel for how to move without the ball. He possess neither.

Not accepting a buy out if offered would be a hudge risk for TJ. For two years he has demonstrated not only an inability to run the Pacers offense but also the inability to adapt/evolve to his teams needs. If he want's to be playing in the NBA in 2011 he needs to send a different message to the league. That probably won't happen here.

8305 wrote:Wow, I think almost every point you make in this post is wrong.

First I'll take any of Watson, Calderon or HInrich over TJ. At least these guys have some idea how to play their position.

TJ is a total non-fit in Miami. In Miami he'd have to play without the ball. I believe that involves some competancy as a shooter and some feel for how to move without the ball. He possess neither.

Not accepting a buy out if offered would be a hudge risk for TJ. For two years he has demonstrated not only an inability to run the Pacers offense but also the inability to adapt/evolve to his teams needs. If he want's to be playing in the NBA in 2011 he needs to send a different message to the league. That probably won't happen here.

What was wrong? No point guard has been able to run O'brien's offense, why would TJ be able to. You look at it the wrong way. TJ has been benched the last 2 seasons for players not as good as him. When he was benched for Jack, He was playin better than Jack. How can argue Watson is better than Ford? Ford has proven to be a starter in the league, Watson is a career back-up. You was probly one of those, we gotta fire O'brien people, but now you know he is stayin, you turn your attention to Ford. No point guard has ever been successful under O'brien. Don't look at TJ like he's the problem. Hinrich doesn't fit, he needs a ball dominant 2 next to him. Are you ready to start Stephenson at shootin guard? Calderon is overpaid and don't play D. You wanna see Hibbert get in more foul trouble than he has been the last two seasons? Ford is our best option for this season. The best option is to fire O'brien, but that won't happen until Bird is gone.

TJ would come off the bench in Miami, Chalmers is the point they need playin with the Big 3, but Ford would come off the bench and provide some scorin when they ain't in.

For three consecutive seasons the team on which Ford was playing responded better to the other guy. Whether the other guy was Calderon, Jack or Watson. In every case going in Ford was in theory the superior player based on his having been a starter and the other guy a career backup. Athletically Ford is more gifted than everyone who has ever taken his position. I can only conclude the other guy brought something TJ didn't. Shooting, feel for the game, ability to make others better, leadership? Take you pick.

I don't think it can be pinned on O'Brien. This happened in Toronto and Milwaulke for that matter.

Exactly, Larry Bird believes that O'Briens system is the attributed success to Danny Granger, so why change the system. Why change head coaches on the chance we will get better, but risk making Granger mediocre. When it comes to players and the system, if the players are wrong for the system, culture, and direction of the team, you get rid of them and keep going. The failure of this team has always been on Bird for not providig the right players and making the moves that can bring this team success, not on O'Brien, not on any of our top players.

DWCP2 wrote:Exactly, Larry Bird believes that O'Briens system is the attributed success to Danny Granger, so why change the system. Why change head coaches on the chance we will get better, but risk making Granger mediocre. When it comes to players and the system, if the players are wrong for the system, culture, and direction of the team, you get rid of them and keep going. The failure of this team has always been on Bird for not providig the right players and making the moves that can bring this team success, not on O'Brien, not on any of our top players.

You don't build teams around systems, but around players. Systems won't win you championships, players will.

You make Danny Granger sound like Troy Murphy when you say he's successful because of the system. A versatile player like Danny will thrive in any system.

And what more could Bird have done? It's not like he's not trying. He just hasn't had any wiggle room to work with. Simon doesn't want to go over the lux tax, and why would he for a team that isn't contending. So the idea has always been to acquire assets, not take on any more bad contracts, and free ourselves of the bad contracts we currently have. Bird is doing a good job of not making a move just for the sake of doing so.

Patience people. We've come this far with this rebuild, let's not ruin it now.

Indy2thaWindy wrote:TJ has been benched the last 2 seasons for players not as good as him. When he was benched for Jack, He was playin better than Jack.

That is flat out WRONG. Were you paying attention when that change happened? Ford was playing absolutely TERRIBLE basketball, Jarrett Jack called him out for it in the huddle vs. Dallas. Jack was sent to the locker room for the rest of the game because he was about to clock Ford. Very next game, Jack starts at PG and responds with 31 points on 13/14 FG attempts, and had 6 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals, 1 block and only 1 turnover. From that point on to the end of the season, Jack was phenomenal as our starting PG.