RealGM

Alright guys, if you have random trade thoughts, feel free to let them fly in this thread. Please include any draft pick trades, player trades, etc.

Please, only start a new thread if there is some sort of substantiated or rumored trade concept being floated out by some credible news source.

Let 'er rip!

I was reading on bleacher report the other day and it was talking about trades that would shake up the NBA and one of them said Granger for Eric Gordon. Now correct me if I'm wrong would getting Gordon would probably cost us George am I right? Gordon makes around 14 mill and has a couple years left in his contract

mikepacernation wrote:I was reading on bleacher report the other day and it was talking about trades that would shake up the NBA and one of them said Granger for Eric Gordon. Now correct me if I'm wrong would getting Gordon would probably cost us George am I right? Gordon makes around 14 mill and has a couple years left in his contract

Pretty much. Or, we'd have to dump a ton of other guys for no salary to make it all work. Or, we'd have to go back on our promise to not pay luxury tax, and then give up any revenue sharing payment and luxury tax distributions. Going a few million over the luxury tax could cost is $15+m in other money that would rightfully be ours.

If we trade for Eric Gordon, we have to deal other 2014 guaranteed salary. However, many other writers just have no idea about Salary structures, luxury taxes, or the Pacers in particular and just junk of Gordon as an Indy guy and Granger from New Orleans and say "Oh my gosh, how did no one else think of this?!?! I am super smart!!!"

Hypothetically speaking (because it will never, ever happen) is there any way Rondo comes to Indy without us losing George?

If we hope to retain George, that means Granger has to stay on roster, and therefore what can we offer? Hill+Stephenson+picks?

Jake0890 wrote:Hypothetically speaking (because it will never, ever happen) is there any way Rondo comes to Indy without us losing George?

If we hope to retain George, that means Granger has to stay on roster, and therefore what can we offer? Hill+Stephenson+picks?

I don't think Rondo coming to Indy is impossible. Something like George Hill and Lance Stephenson might work from our perspective. Now, whether that's the best return Boston could get is another thing. So, maybe there is no way.

Paul George would be nuts to turn down the max deal he will probably be offered this fall. That means you are looking six years down the road before he's unrestricted. I'd be surprised if Danny is even playing by that time. The best way to keep Paul here is to have a situation (well run, consistently successful team, that can compete for a championship) that's difficult to leave when he becomes unrestricted.

Would we still have the money to pay Rondo and offer George a max?

mikepacernation wrote:Would we still have the money to pay Rondo and offer George a max?

That's what I was trying to say. I think if we send George Hill and retain Granger's expiring contract, we do.

Jake0890 wrote:

mikepacernation wrote:Would we still have the money to pay Rondo and offer George a max?

That's what I was trying to say. I think if we send George Hill and retain Granger's expiring contract, we do.

If we acquired Rondo we'd have close to 27 mill expiring in 2015. This is more than sufficient.

I posted a similar package on the Trade board and concluded the value is about right.

My offer accounts for the difference in salary for the upcoming season.

Hill/Stephenson/Mahimi/ 2016 1st <--------------> Rondo/ Melo

Boneman2 wrote:

Jake0890 wrote:

mikepacernation wrote:Would we still have the money to pay Rondo and offer George a max?

That's what I was trying to say. I think if we send George Hill and retain Granger's expiring contract, we do.

If we acquired Rondo we'd have close to 27 mill expiring in 2015. This is more than sufficient.

I posted a similar package on the Trade board and concluded the value is about right.

My offer accounts for the difference in salary for the upcoming season.

Hill/Stephenson/Mahimi/ 2016 1st <--------------> Rondo/ Melo

I honestly dont like that trade I just think were losing way to much we won't have a decent back up center we won't have a shooting guard. And we would be losing scoring because rondo has never been know for scoring every game.

mikepacernation wrote:

Boneman2 wrote:

Jake0890 wrote:
That's what I was trying to say. I think if we send George Hill and retain Granger's expiring contract, we do.

If we acquired Rondo we'd have close to 27 mill expiring in 2015. This is more than sufficient.

I posted a similar package on the Trade board and concluded the value is about right.

My offer accounts for the difference in salary for the upcoming season.

Hill/Stephenson/Mahimi/ 2016 1st <--------------> Rondo/ Melo

I honestly dont like that trade I just think were losing way to much we won't have a decent back up center we won't have a shooting guard. And we would be losing scoring because rondo has never been know for scoring every game.

Yet that offer isn't close to satisfying Boston. We give them them the worst contracts, and yet they have to give us their young center, in addition to the best player?

If the roles were reversed, would you do it?

Scoot McGroot wrote:

mikepacernation wrote:

Boneman2 wrote:
If we acquired Rondo we'd have close to 27 mill expiring in 2015. This is more than sufficient.

I posted a similar package on the Trade board and concluded the value is about right.

My offer accounts for the difference in salary for the upcoming season.

Hill/Stephenson/Mahimi/ 2016 1st <--------------> Rondo/ Melo

I honestly dont like that trade I just think were losing way to much we won't have a decent back up center we won't have a shooting guard. And we would be losing scoring because rondo has never been know for scoring every game.

Yet that offer isn't close to satisfying Boston. We give them them the worst contracts, and yet they have to give us their young center, in addition to the best player?

If the roles were reversed, would you do it?

. If it were up to me I wouldn't do it whatever side I was on. As much as I love rondo I just wouldn't wanna give Stephenson and hill even though he probably worth more then that

Sent from my PantechP9070 using RealGM Forums mobile app

mikepacernation wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

mikepacernation wrote:
I honestly dont like that trade I just think were losing way to much we won't have a decent back up center we won't have a shooting guard. And we would be losing scoring because rondo has never been know for scoring every game.

Yet that offer isn't close to satisfying Boston. We give them them the worst contracts, and yet they have to give us their young center, in addition to the best player?

If the roles were reversed, would you do it?

. If it were up to me I wouldn't do it whatever side I was on. As much as I love rondo I just wouldn't wanna give Stephenson and hill even though he probably worth more then that

Sent from my PantechP9070 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Yup. You got it. That's the toughest part of trade ideas. It can be fair in value, but still not appeal to either team. It is an awful lot for us to give up two core guys (30+ minute per night guys) for Rondo. It can also not make sense to Boston.

Hoesntly I would rather trade like a Granger and hill for rondo. But I think that would probly mean the lose of Stephenson right.??

mikepacernation wrote:Hoesntly I would rather trade like a Granger and hill for rondo. But I think that would probly mean the lose of Stephenson right.??

Well, trading Granger and Hill combined for Rondo isn't legal. Ultimately, Rondo makes $12m, so Boston can take back up to $15m in a deal as a tax-paying team. Granger makes $14m, and Hill makes $8m, so they would be taking back $22m. To make the deal work, Boston would have to send out another $5.6m. Ideally for us, Boston would include Keith Bogans and Marshon Brooks to make the money work, as Bogans is non-guaranteed after this year, and we could decline Brooks' option to clear space. At that point, then you could try and re-sign Lance. However, Boston would likely want to dump Brandon Bass' or Courtney Lee's contracts in the deal, and they each are owed $5+m next year and the year after. If that's the case, then we can't even try and re-sign Lance.

Yea I forgot that hill made around 8 mill. But if they would add brooks and bogans I think that would be a trade that could benefit both teams I think. Our back court would be awesome with rondo and Stephenson.

You don't just pass up a chance to send 2 solid players for a franchise one. If the opportunity presented itself to send Hill and Lance for Rondo, I accept in a heartbeat.

From the other perspective, there's really no reason Boston would take that.

Hill is better for us than Rondo for several reasons.

1. He's paid about 4 mil less a year

2. He's a more versatile defender and doesn't gamble nearly as much as Rondo does

3. Rondo can't shoot. West, Hibbert, and Scola need to work down low which takes away lanes for Rondo as well.

4. Rondo is coming off a major injury and we're a team that very possibly has a short window due to the CBA. You don't trade away the backcourt of last year's most productive starting 5 for someone who has some major question marks at the most watered down position in the league.

Either way Boston doesn't do it from their POV unless a third team is involved that gives picks and prospects. I don't think we make any trades unless someone specifically wants out.

pacers33granger wrote:
3. Rondo can't shoot. West, Hibbert, and Scola need to work down low which takes away lanes for Rondo as well.

I don't think this would be as big an issue this year. Say we sent Hill and Lance for Rondo (dream scenario), we'd still have Granger and George starting on the wings, both solid long-range shooters. We'd still have Watson, OJ, Copeland, and Solo off the bench, all solid long-range shooters (though we'll see if Solo's long-range shooting translates to the NBA distance). I think this would be better off than last year.

But yeah, I'm happy to keep playing George Hill for now. I wouldn't necessarily overpay for Rondo, which is what we'd have to do.

Scoot McGroot wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:
3. Rondo can't shoot. West, Hibbert, and Scola need to work down low which takes away lanes for Rondo as well.

I don't think this would be as big an issue this year. Say we sent Hill and Lance for Rondo (dream scenario), we'd still have Granger and George starting on the wings, both solid long-range shooters. We'd still have Watson, OJ, Copeland, and Solo off the bench, all solid long-range shooters (though we'll see if Solo's long-range shooting translates to the NBA distance). I think this would be better off than last year.

But yeah, I'm happy to keep playing George Hill for now. I wouldn't necessarily overpay for Rondo, which is what we'd have to do.

. But what would we do when Granger would most likely leave next summer we would have no 2 guard at all because OJ defiantly isn't a starter

Sent from my PantechP9070 using RealGM Forums mobile app

mikepacernation wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:
3. Rondo can't shoot. West, Hibbert, and Scola need to work down low which takes away lanes for Rondo as well.

I don't think this would be as big an issue this year. Say we sent Hill and Lance for Rondo (dream scenario), we'd still have Granger and George starting on the wings, both solid long-range shooters. We'd still have Watson, OJ, Copeland, and Solo off the bench, all solid long-range shooters (though we'll see if Solo's long-range shooting translates to the NBA distance). I think this would be better off than last year.

But yeah, I'm happy to keep playing George Hill for now. I wouldn't necessarily overpay for Rondo, which is what we'd have to do.

. But what would we do when Granger would most likely leave next summer we would have no 2 guard at all because OJ defiantly isn't a starter

Sent from my PantechP9070 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Lance is going to be an unrestricted free agent at years end, too. We could lose him and have no SG anyway. At that point, though, you could use the full MLE to go after a starting SG. Or, you play Solo Hill or Chris Copeland with Paul George on the wings.