If WCS is off the board at #11...

Ror1997 · Post #1 » by **Ror1997** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 6:57 pm

Would you guys do #11 for Plumlee + #29 ?
Plumlee is from Indiana and he has an offensive game similar to WCS and he's just 3 years older with 2 years of playoff experience. Paul George and Plumlee played together on Team USA too.

Boneman2 · Post #2 » by **Boneman2** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:56 pm

Never. Why would we give up the 11th for the type of player that could be had in free agency (role player)?

Post #3 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:20 pm

Ror1997 wrote:Would you guys do #11 for Plumlee + #29 ?
Plumlee is from Indiana and he has an offensive game similar to WCS and he's just 3 years older with 2 years of playoff experience. Paul George and Plumlee played together on Team USA too.

No. That's a huge drop to add Plumlee, especially when his value isn't near that high right now.

Also, we cannot absorb Plumlee's salary in a deal, so we'd have to send someone back to make it work.

DunkinDutchman · Post #4 » by **DunkinDutchman** » Thu Jun 18, 2015 8:24 pm

Agreed. Plumlee < #11 with almost certainty

basketballwacko2 · Post #5 » by **basketballwacko2** » Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:13 pm

Ror1997 wrote:Would you guys do #11 for Plumlee + #29 ?
Plumlee is from Indiana and he has an offensive game similar to WCS and he's just 3 years older with 2 years of playoff experience. Paul George and Plumlee played together on Team USA too.

Plumlee doesn't move you up that far. He might get you to 20 but that's it. If WCS is off the board we won't cry there's a bunch of guys we like.

pacerfan1984 · Post #6 » by **pacerfan1984** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 4:48 pm

Its looking more and more like WCS could possibly be available at #11

I think he would be the ideal pick for us if hes there

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/238286/Willie-Cauley-Stein-Could-Slip-Due-To-Medical-Background-History

Post #7 » by **pacers33granger** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 5:30 pm

I think our only real chance is if Mudiay slips to the Kings. Otherwise, I'd expect them to take him since Cousins apparently wants him.

Wizop · Post #8 » by **Wizop** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 6:14 pm

I'm inclined to stay put for Lyles or Kaminsky as I don't think we can trade down unless we want Grant.

Moooose · Post #9 » by **Moooose** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 6:28 pm

These recent reports of WCS' injury is kind of making me think twice about wanting him for our team. He had a stress fracture in his ankle, and with his style of play, I think it possesses a major threat. He relies purely on his athleticism and any aggravation of the injury could change his play a lot. Now there is an issue if his injury has healed properly, with the right pin insertion, etc.

I am just thinking, Cameron Payne's injury isn't too serious and I think I'd want us to grab him over WCS if both of them are available at 11. I am not a fan of Lyles, but with this scare, I'd take him over WCS.

Also, from what I've been seeing lately - articles and fan opinions, Kaminsky could crack into the top 10, purging Booker out.

DunkinDutchman · Post #10 » by **DunkinDutchman** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 8:44 pm

If the WCS injury gets more press and shows that there could be a bigger underlying issue, I think if he falls to 11 we have to take him. His defensive versatility alone is worth it. As we saw in this years finals, being able to keep a rim protector on the floor is huge, but not if the primary offense is a pick and roll. With WCS he can hedge a screen hard enough to allow time for the guard getting screened to recover. Hibbert just stands in the lane...

Wizop · Post #11 » by **Wizop** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 9:21 pm

Granger fell to us due to an injury scare. if WCS does the same and our doctors are satisfied, I grab him. he can not only recover from hedges, he can switch off on guards and keep in front of them.

was on Lyles and Grant in the beginning though and would still be happy with either. I'd also take Boston's two picks and hope to get Grant first and Martin later.

MNPacersfan · Post #12 » by **MNPacersfan** » Mon Jun 22, 2015 10:34 pm

If he's off the board trade with BOS so that they can grab Turner. Send them 11 and (is it) 42 for their 1st round picks.

basketballwacko2 · Post #13 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 12:09 am

MNPacersfan wrote:If he's off the board trade with BOS so that they can grab Turner. Send them 11 and (is it) 42 for their 1st round picks.

No need to add our 2nd which is 43. They should do 16, 28 and 33 for the 11, if Turner is the guy they want and he's there when we pick we make the call to them demand those picks or we take him. If they go for it we pick Portis at 16, then I'd take the 2 2nds 33 and 43 and try to get a late 1st from SA or Mem maybe even Dallas to get RJ Hunter and with the 28 pick draft best player available.

Clutch31 · Post #14 » by **Clutch31** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 11:20 am

basketballwacko2 wrote:
MNPacersfan wrote:If he's off the board trade with BOS so that they can grab Turner. Send them 11 and (is it) 42 for their 1st round picks.

No need to add our 2nd which is 43. They should do 16, 28 and 33 for the 11, if Turner is the guy they want and he's there when we pick we make the call to them demand those picks or we take him. If they go for it we pick Portis at 16, then I'd take the 2 2nds 33 and 43 and try to get a late 1st from SA or Mem maybe even Dallas to get RJ Hunter and with the 28 pick draft best player available.

That would give us a lot of young cheap talent. Then offload West and Hibbert for whatever you can get and tank for a year.
That gives the team a real high draft pick combined with a lot of young talent and PG13, George Hill, Solomon Hill and cap space to sign another good player. The team could be loaded with talent in a year.

DunkinDutchman · Post #15 » by **DunkinDutchman** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 12:44 pm

Except that we won't ever tank. I would say Larry has made that very clear.

Post #16 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 12:54 pm

DunkinDutchman wrote:Except that we won't ever tank. I would say Larry has made that very clear.

I think if Paul George and George Hill are healthy, there is no tanking. Add in the lesser playing time of Hibbert, and dealing him isn't at all an issue.

DunkinDutchman · Post #17 » by **DunkinDutchman** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 2:18 pm

Just to make it clear I am all for not tanking. I just wanted to get the point across that if we didn't even tank last year, we never will, and I am very okay with that.

basketballwacko2 · Post #18 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Clutch31 wrote:
basketballwacko2 wrote:
MNPacersfan wrote:If he's off the board trade with BOS so that they can grab Turner. Send them 11 and (is it) 42 for their 1st round picks.

No need to add our 2nd which is 43. They should do 16, 28 and 33 for the 11, if Turner is the guy they want and he's there when we pick we make the call to them demand those picks or we take him. If they go for it we pick Portis at 16, then I'd take the 2 2nds 33 and 43 and try to get a late 1st from SA or Mem maybe even Dallas to get RJ Hunter and with the 28 pick draft best player available.

That would give us a lot of young cheap talent. Then offload West and Hibbert for whatever you can get and tank for a year.
That gives the team a real high draft pick combined with a lot of young talent and PG13, George Hill, Solomon Hill and cap space to sign another good player. The team could be loaded with talent in a year.

The Pacers are not gonna tank. Tanking sets up a culture of losing, who has tanked for a year and come back to be really good? I see the teams that have done still stinking it up 3-4 yrs later. Hibbert may be traded but West will not be, this talk of tanking needs to stop.

Boneman2 · Post #19 » by **Boneman2** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 6:50 pm

basketballwacko2 wrote:
Clutch31 wrote:
basketballwacko2 wrote:
No need to add our 2nd which is 43. They should do 16, 28 and 33 for the 11, if Turner is the guy they want and he's there when we pick we make the call to them demand those picks or we take him. If they go for it we pick Portis at 16, then I'd take the 2 2nds 33 and 43 and try to get a late 1st from SA or Mem maybe even Dallas to get RJ Hunter and with the 28 pick draft best player available.

That would give us a lot of young cheap talent. Then offload West and Hibbert for whatever you can get and tank for a year.
That gives the team a real high draft pick combined with a lot of young talent and PG13, George Hill, Solomon Hill and cap space to sign another good player. The team could be loaded with talent in a year.

The Pacers are not gonna tank. Tanking sets up a culture of losing, who has tanked for a year and come back to be really good? I see the teams that have done still stinking it up 3-4 yrs later. Hibbert may be traded but West will not be, this talk of tanking needs to stop.

The Spurs, Colts, Cavs, etc...

The only possible way to acquire a top-3 pick is if we are just that bad or we trade up. But you are right, outright tanking does breed a culture of losing, which is evident in more than a few franchises. I am glad Larry believes in competing no matter the situation.

basketballwacko2 · Post #20 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:40 pm

Boneman2 wrote:
basketballwacko2 wrote:
Clutch31 wrote:

That would give us a lot of young cheap talent. Then offload West and Hibbert for whatever you can get and tank for a year.
That gives the team a real high draft pick combined with a lot of young talent and PG13, George Hill, Solomon Hill and cap space to sign another good player. The team could be loaded with talent in a year.

The Pacers are not gonna tank. Tanking sets up a culture of losing, who has tanked for a year and come back to be really good? I see the teams that have done still stinking it up 3-4 yrs later. Hibbert may be traded but West will not be, this talk of tanking needs to stop.

The Spurs, Colts, Cavs, etc...

The only possible way to acquire a top-3 pick is if we are just that bad or we trade up. But you are right, outright tanking does breed a culture of losing, which is evident in more than a few franchises. I am glad Larry believes in competing no matter the situation.

I disagree with the premise of tanking where those teams are involved. The Spurs went down one year due to injuries, got Duncan and snapped back, same for the Colts terrible season after Peyton's inury, and the Cavs were horrible for 4-5 yrs after Lebron walked. None of these teams deliberately gutted their teams so they could get a high pick. The Cavs only came back now because they resigned LBJ and made a few trades, what happens to them after next season Love leaves for LA, Lebron disgruntled again when GSW beats them again and he takes a hike? Where will they be?

Look at the teams that have been good or Ok and then blown it up. Denver after dealing Carmello, Orlando after the trade of Howard, the current Philly team. Boston dumped KG and Pierce for a package and picks but they aren't winning any titles any time soon. They will be lucky to make the playoffs again in 2015-16.