RealGM

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-pacers-offered-celtics-myles-000014749.html

NBC news some hack by the name of Dan Feldman claims that:

J. Michael of the Indianapolis Star:

The Indiana Pacers offered the Boston Celtics Myles Turner, a first-round pick and a rotation player for Gordon Hayward last week, a source with knowledge of the negotiations told IndyStar.

This is just plain stupid. The article goes on to say the Celtics balked because we tried to put Doug in the deal! Well if there is any truth in this it's a matter of getting saved by the greed of Danny Ainge. Personally I'm not buying it.

basketballwacko2 wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-pacers-offered-celtics-myles-000014749.html

NBC news some hack by the name of Dan Feldman claims that:

J. Michael of the Indianapolis Star:

The Indiana Pacers offered the Boston Celtics Myles Turner, a first-round pick and a rotation player for Gordon Hayward last week, a source with knowledge of the negotiations told IndyStar.

This is just plain stupid. The article goes on to say the Celtics balked because we tried to put Doug in the deal! Well if there is any truth in this it's a matter of getting saved by the greed of Danny Ainge. Personally I'm not buying it.

The quote is actual reporting from J.Michael’s IndyStar article that we’re discussing in the Hayward thread here. I haven’t read the yahoo article, but those are generally aggregation re posts that look for the biggest click worthy interpretation and post that. Hoopshype, the Wiretap here, and a bunch of other places are the same.

Just read it. It doesn’t report anything new. It cites the IndyStar article of J.Michael that Indy went hard for Hayward, as Pritchard himself said in his press conference, and that Boston overplayed their hand.

At this point you kind of have to believe it given comments from everyone involved. And honestly, even though we dodged a huge bullet, it is troubling.

Either KP overvalues Hayward or Simon meddled because he wanted the hometown "star." Either are concerning to me, but at least it should be over with if it was Simon's directive. But I still have an issue if we were willing to pay the tax for a team built around so many vets with injury concerns whose reasonable ceiling isn't all that high. That team would not be a contender, but apparently Simon would be willing to pay the tax for a local kid. That's an issue imo.

The whole saga also concerns me as it relates to Vic. If he stays relatively healthy, I see no reason he doesn't get huge offers based on Hayward having 3 different teams offering him more than $100 mil in a down market.

pacers33granger wrote:That team would not be a contender, but apparently Simon would be willing to pay the tax for a local kid. That's an issue imo.

I would hope the reason was purely economic, i.e. the owner thinks the extra ticket sales from having a local guy could offset the tax.

TBH, I was pretty surprised that Pritchard acknowledged going after Hayward. I mean, he's a FA, so fair game, but the S&T meant that there would be current players going out. I wonder if the trade talks were far enough along that players had been informed.

pacers33granger wrote:The whole saga also concerns me as it relates to Vic. If he stays relatively healthy, I see no reason he doesn't get huge offers based on Hayward having 3 different teams offering him more than $100 mil in a down market.

Well, Hayward was possibly the top FA in the market, after AD (no one thinks he's changing teams) and Ingram (RFA). Next season, there will be a lot of dominoes at the top, with Giannis, Kawhi, PG, Jrue, Lowry, Gobert, DeRozan all potentially on the market. I mean, if Oladipo plays well enough to be considered among those guys, then fair play to him, but I'd consider that a nice problem to have.

winter_mute_13 wrote:
TBH, I was pretty surprised that Pritchard acknowledged going after Hayward. I mean, he's a FA, so fair game, but the S&T meant that there would be current players going out. I wonder if the trade talks were far enough along that players had been informed.

In his recent press conference, Pritch acknowledged the rumors, said that players had been informed about the talks but not specifically which ones. He has said since taking over the executive position if players are brought up seriously in trade talks, they would hear it from him first and not from the media, but in return for that transparency he expects them to still be fully committed to the team if the trade doesn't pan out. Hopefully that is the case.

winter_mute_13 wrote:

pacers33granger wrote:That team would not be a contender, but apparently Simon would be willing to pay the tax for a local kid. That's an issue imo.

I would hope the reason was purely economic, i.e. the owner thinks the extra ticket sales from having a local guy could offset the tax.

TBH, I was pretty surprised that Pritchard acknowledged going after Hayward. I mean, he's a FA, so fair game, but the S&T meant that there would be current players going out. I wonder if the trade talks were far enough along that players had been informed.

pacers33granger wrote:The whole saga also concerns me as it relates to Vic. If he stays relatively healthy, I see no reason he doesn't get huge offers based on Hayward having 3 different teams offering him more than $100 mil in a down market.

Well, Hayward was possibly the top FA in the market, after AD (no one thinks he's changing teams) and Ingram (RFA). Next season, there will be a lot of dominoes at the top, with Giannis, Kawhi, PG, Jrue, Lowry, Gobert, DeRozan all potentially on the market. I mean, if Oladipo plays well enough to be considered among those guys, then fair play to him, but I'd consider that a nice problem to have.

He'd have to sell a ton of tickets to make up for the extra payments and loss of distribution. Maybe it taps into a market that otherwise doesn't care about Pacers basketball, but at the end of the day it's still handing a longterm deal to an aging guy with injury concerns that's about $10 mil over what he should be getting.

With Vic my concern is that someone will overpay as someone did with Hayward. His season was good stats-wise, but not encouraging health-wise. So if Vic looks ok and puts up decent stats, I worry someone (including us) will overpay. There will certainly be more and better free agents next summer, but more space too.

I'd also add that this is the second offseason that Simon has been likely involved with a move that ends up costing us more than it should.

We handed the Bucks picks for no real reason other than being gentlemanly. It was commendable in a moral sense, but made no sense valuewise and I doubt it gets us anything in the future. This year we almost locked in an expensive player because of his hometown roots and gave up a young starter, a rotation player, and a pick for the privilege of doing so.

I'm glad Simon wants to win and is potentially willing to pay to do so. But this isn't the way to go about it imo.

pacers33granger wrote:I'd also add that this is the second offseason that Simon has been likely involved with a move that ends up costing us more than it should.

We handed the Bucks picks for no real reason other than being gentlemanly. It was commendable in a moral sense, but made no sense valuewise and I doubt it gets us anything in the future. This year we almost locked in an expensive player because of his hometown roots and gave up a young starter, a rotation player, and a pick for the privilege of doing so.

I'm glad Simon wants to win and is potentially willing to pay to do so. But this isn't the way to go about it imo.

Maybe Simon enjoyed the role he played in landing Brogdon so much that he is starting to develop a taste for being more involved in the team

I imagine Simon instructing KP to go get Hayward, and KP tried to dissuade Simon by pointing out that getting Hayward will most likely mean the team will have to pay the tax

But then Simon was probably like "So we'll pay the tax", and if you're KP and your boss is willing to burn a hole in his own pocket in order to get what he wants, then you go get your boss what he wants

pacers33granger wrote:I'd also add that this is the second offseason that Simon has been likely involved with a move that ends up costing us more than it should.

We handed the Bucks picks for no real reason other than being gentlemanly. It was commendable in a moral sense, but made no sense valuewise and I doubt it gets us anything in the future. This year we almost locked in an expensive player because of his hometown roots and gave up a young starter, a rotation player, and a pick for the privilege of doing so.

I'm glad Simon wants to win and is potentially willing to pay to do so. But this isn't the way to go about it imo.

I'm with you on this one there was no reason at all to give the bucks anything when we signed Brogdon. If they'd matched they would have been in cap hell.

But the notion that we should give Turner and another #1 to Boston for an aging injury prone Hayward is comical when Hayward has opted out and doesn't want to be there.

If Ainge actually thought he had enough leverage in a S&T scenario to turn down this offer, he is a moron.

However, J Michael generally seems to be pretty in the know and I believe the report. Celtics probably wanted us to include Warren or another starter in the deal instead of Doug.

Well, the only thing that we can be certain of is that KP mentioned that he tried to go after Hayward hard, and that he felt he was probably overpaying for Hayward

We don't actually know what KP offered for Hayward, and what he considers to be an overpay

The only other thing we know is that salaries have to match

Other than that, the details of the trade negotiations was mostly leaked by the Celtics side, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's Celtics/Ainge pushing their revisionist agenda trying to influence the narrative behind the failed negotiations

Jake0890 wrote:If Ainge actually thought he had enough leverage in a S&T scenario to turn down this offer, he is a moron.

However, J Michael generally seems to be pretty in the know and I believe the report. Celtics probably wanted us to include Warren or another starter in the deal instead of Doug.

Well it's obvious if this story is true and I still have my doubts, that Ainge when dealing with the Pacers FO think's he's dealing with small time, Bush league rubes who can be taken for a ride. He did the same thing in the Paul George negotiation he was unwilling to trade any of their so called "Premium" assets like the Kings pick or the Griz pick and look what they got out of that? KP said ok and went to OKC we got Sabonis and Vic.

Now as for Victor I expect him to be much better physically. But looking at this teams payroll going forward from 2021, I think he's getting traded at the trade deadline. It will be interesting to see what they get, I'm guessing a lesser expiring contract like Randle from NYK and a pick or 2 depending on how good Vic is playing. If he's playing great and we're in the hunt for the best record in the East, which I don't expect to happen. They might keep him and let him walk or try a S&T in the off season, but with so many teams with space next summer I don't expect to get much in an S&T.

NYK might want him if they get bird rights and he's playing great so they have an edge in FA or they could extend him right off the bat. IDK for sure the rules on that and I'm too tired to look it up.

basketballwacko2 wrote:NYK might want him if they get bird rights and he's playing great so they have an edge in FA or they could extend him right off the bat. IDK for sure the rules on that and I'm too tired to look it up.

He wants more money than the maximum available as an extension but he'll have to earn it. He's betting on himself so expect him to play this contract out and become a free agent after the season.

Sent from my phone.

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:NYK might want him if they get bird rights and he's playing great so they have an edge in FA or they could extend him right off the bat. IDK for sure the rules on that and I'm too tired to look it up.

He wants more money than the maximum available as an extension but he'll have to earn it. He's betting on himself so expect him to play this contract out and become a free agent after the season.

Sent from my phone.

Yeah I don't expect him to extend if he's playing really well. My one question is if he's is traded say to NYK do they get his bird rights and can they give him a 5th year?

basketballwacko2 wrote:My one question is if he's is traded say to NYK do they get his bird rights and can they give him a 5th year?

Wikipedia says yes. But I think the rules no longer allow the extra money in a sign and trade. So there is something of benefit in an in season deal.

Sent from my phone.

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:My one question is if he's is traded say to NYK do they get his bird rights and can they give him a 5th year?

Wikipedia says yes. But I think the rules no longer allow the extra money in a sign and trade. So there is something of benefit in an in season deal.

Sent from my phone.

If he's walking for nothing in the summer simply due to the fact that signing him to $30 million a year would require the team to either trade off a player like Turner to free up the space to avoid the tax then a deadline deal would make sense to the Pacers. A 5th year might be something another team would like to be able to offer him. If it's NYK they would like to send us Randle and probably some 2nds. But you never know they might give up a protected #1 or even more, or some team that we don't expect might figure a way to make something happen.

If he walks for nothing I'll be ok with that rather than trading him for some over priced player who will put us in the tax anyhow.

basketballwacko2 wrote:

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:NYK might want him if they get bird rights and he's playing great so they have an edge in FA or they could extend him right off the bat. IDK for sure the rules on that and I'm too tired to look it up.

He wants more money than the maximum available as an extension but he'll have to earn it. He's betting on himself so expect him to play this contract out and become a free agent after the season.

Sent from my phone.

Yeah I don't expect him to extend if he's playing really well. My one question is if he's is traded say to NYK do they get his bird rights and can they give him a 5th year?

If they deal for him mid-season and he goes into free agency, they would have both full Bird Rights and a 5th year option, along with 7.5% raises. They would not be able to give him a 5th year and would be limited to 5% raises if they receive him via sign and trade in the offseason.