RealGM

Posting on my phone, so link will come later, but Woj is confirming what we've all assumed. George and Pacers are finalizing 5 year, $90+m deal.

Sounds like this would be a 30% max if eligible, kind of deal.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

Hmm. Keeping George was inevitable, but it'll be interesting to see how this effects the Pacers ability to keep their other free agents. I wonder if they aren't taking Hibbert a bit for granted. He's at least as important as George, and he'll be 28 heading into the 2015 offseason, looking for his last big pay day. The Pacers just gave up a lot of their leverage for a guy who (unlike George) can't be matched. Especially given teams chasing after him will likely include the Spurs and Mavs (no State tax, and buddies with Duncan), and the Lakers and Knicks (big markets to compensate for lost salary with endorsements).

Durins Baynes wrote:Hmm. Keeping George was inevitable, but it'll be interesting to see how this effects the Pacers ability to keep their other free agents. I wonder if they aren't taking Hibbert a bit for granted. He's at least as important as George, and he'll be 28 heading into the 2015 offseason, looking for his last big pay day. The Pacers just gave up a lot of their leverage for a guy who (unlike George) can't be matched. Especially given teams chasing after him will likely include the Spurs and Mavs (no State tax, and buddies with Duncan), and the Lakers and Knicks (big markets to compensate for lost salary with endorsements).

In terms of financial affordability, it won't be an issue at all, depending on what we do in the next couple seasons otherwise. However, fiscally, Lance and Paul George won't keep us from re-signing Hibbert.

What do you mean by "giving up leverage" with Roy? We gave him a max contract and still could when he hits free agency again. Is it more of a belief that it makes George as the lead image and not Roy? That Roy will only re-sign if he's the clear cut best player on the roster and will leave because George is paid more?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

Teams only get one super max contract last I checked, though I'm not as up on the new CBA as the old ones. If you blow yours on George, you can't use it on Hibbert. That takes away some of the advantage you currently have to retain him.

Durins Baynes wrote:Teams only get one super max contract last I checked, though I'm not as up on the new CBA as the old ones. If you blow yours on George, you can't use it on Hibbert. That takes away some of the advantage you currently have to retain him.

Hibbert isn't close to qualifying for it though. Hasn't yet met any of the requirements. George is halfway there with his All-NBA 3rd team from last year.

But the whole 25% or 30% is only an issue for guys coming off their rookie deal. By the time Hibbert expires, his max salary will be 30% of the salary cap (or 105% of his previous salary, whichever is higher), as he'll be in the next higher tier of salary restrictions as a 7-9 year vet, not a 4-6 year vet as he was on the previous deal. Ultimately, it really makes no difference.

State taxes and the playing with any one buddy are always possibilities to be concerned about with any free agent, though, I agree. But, can't do anything about that now other than win and try and make Roy feel valued here. We'll cross that bridge if we have to.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

George will be worth every single cent... the guys WANTS to be a Pacer (hard to find these days), seems to be a high character guy (HARD to find these days), and plays HARD on BOTH ends (SUPER HARD to find these days).

Congrats on the signing!

http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/2 ... lications/

Awesome in depth info about any question you may have on Paul's new deal courtesy of Tim Donahue at "8 Points, 9 Seconds" on the ESPN network of team blogs. Also, George's deal could actually be OVER $100 million if he qualifies! See why at the link!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

Still not sure how I feel about the massive extension. Could work out beautifully, or he could be one of those guys who stops playing after getting paid. I hope it's the former.

Jake0890 wrote:Still not sure how I feel about the massive extension. Could work out beautifully, or he could be one of those guys who stops playing after getting paid. I hope it's the former.

The question is simply, should we keep him, let him walk for nothing, or trade him for spare pieces like Harden?

If you want to keep him, there's no option. This is what you have to pay him. If you don't, someone else will offer him the max and you just have to match it in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

Someone else maxing him, then being matched, costs you (a lot) less.

I dunno if giving him the absolute max makes a lot of sense. Sure, it creates goodwill, but it's potentially going to constrain you too. I mean, the same logic will apply to Granger/Lance in the next offseason- want to keep them? Pay them. I agree you had to keep George, but I'm not sure the absolute max was necessary, because other teams can't offer it. This could easily create problems later. Maybe the front office decides they don't want to keep Lance/Granger in the offseason, to save money so they can keep Hibbert later. The team has 2 good but not amazing seasons, winning say 50 and 52 games, going out in the 2nd round two years running. Then Hibbert maybe looks around, says "I'm never going to get anywhere on a small market, that's why we lost Lance and/or Granger, and didn't add anyone else", and suddenly thinks NY/LA (or SA/Dallas) looks more attractive as an option. It'll look especially bad if the Pacers try to offer less than the absolute max to Hibbert to begin with, given they just super maxed an arguably inferior player.

Just to clarify, I don't think Granger or Lance are especially big difference makers, I'm just talking about the perception to Hibbert. Either way, someone will gamble on Granger/Lance to the tune of $5 mill a year next year, or more, over 3+ years (more in Lance's case probably), and this is a franchise which has proven it needs to be very careful with how much it spends. The last figures we have for the Pacers show that they made only a $10 mill profit in 2012 despite spending a mere $48 mill in salary. And that was a year where the team was at least as successful as this year. In the previous 6 seasons when the salary was much higher, they lost money in each season. Even an extra $5 mill or so would put you guys at $67+ mill next season in salary easy. And you'd be on the hook for about the same the season after you keep one of them. Maybe more. It's not a trivial thing for ownership to consider.

Honestly, you raise valid concerns in some ways, but also minimize them. Lance is a smaller piece, and shouldn't impact the Pacers much, but he's a must keep to keep Roy? Eh. They're set up to be ok and avoid the luxury tax. And if a 5th piece is enough to push Roy out, then nothing could keep him anyway.

We can afford this group. If we lose BOTH Danny and Lance, we can afford to go out and sign a full MLE SG to replace them. Scola is also only partially guaranteed for next year, and we could possibly shorten Ian's deal in a swap somewhere to save some more money. There's options, safety valves, and backup options for us to be ok. Most importantly, we've got locked up long-term our game changing interior player in Roy, a top notch 2 way player in Paul, and our defensive dynamo at PG in Hill, in addition to the heart and soul veteran leader in West. We also don't have a complete anchor on the books like a Kendrick Perkins. We look to get cost effective production from each spot for the most part. Sure, it'd be nice to save $2m a year on Paul, but it's not worth dickering with his agent and him, and forcing him to play a selfish game this year to try and get his max. Let him focus on winning and let it all fall into place.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

of course it is worth dickering. it's real money. but lets not get too deep in a discussion over whether giving him the full 30% max is too much before we even know we did that. they could well be trying to reach a number in between 25% and 30%. they have said they are trying to find a number that works for both the team and Paul.

Done deal

http://www.indystar.com/article/2013092 ... dyStar.com

It looks like he'll get the 30%, if he qualifies.

there is a press conference this morning (Sep 25, 2013). Pacers.com will stream it. don't know if NBATV will show it live or not.

update: I watched it. no details. lots of happiness.

Mark Montieth tweeted that PG told him he got "the max, but less the ultimate he could get." That would imply that it's somewhere between 25-30% max numbers.

count55 wrote:Mark Montieth tweeted that PG told him he got "the max, but less the ultimate he could get." That would imply that it's somewhere between 25-30% max numbers.

Anything under 30% seems a win for the Pacers and balances out the whole 7.5% raises vs matching another teams 30% offer with only 4.5% raises a bit.

Plus, the 5th year appears to be a player option.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app

I didn't want Paul George to go anywhere but I think he's just a little over paid yes he will probly continue to get better but if he doesn't we just wasted a pretty good chunk of our cap space.

I'm just glad that it's done. Now it'll be a wonderful while before we have to look at something like "George turns down contract extension, eyes Miami and Los Angeles" or some garbage.

Don't worry, the focus will just shift to Hibbert's 2015 free agency.

Durins Baynes wrote:Don't worry, the focus will just shift to Hibbert's 2015 free agency.

That's fine.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums mobile app