Image

Moving Forward

Moderators: pacers33granger, Grang33r, pacerfan, Jake0890, boomershadow

Tom White
Pro Prospect
Posts: 842
And1: 430
Joined: Aug 27, 2001
Location: Indiana

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#61 » by Tom White » Mon May 17, 2021 7:55 pm

8305 wrote:Less money going to guys 7 and 8 more money going to guys 1 and 2. Its what the elite teams do.


Well, if that is what the cool kids are doing then.................

On a serious note. Most of the teams that are set up that way have players who deserve the big paydays. Tell me who, among the Pacers players deserves that? None of the current ones do.

So how does the team acquire such players?

Trades? Which team (or teams) would be willing to trade a TRUE max player to us for our players? No, I can't think of one either.

Draft? Not likely with our usual drafting position. Also not likely any of our current players could fetch a pick that might become a max player.

This team is basically stuck until it is bad enough to earn a number one of two pick. As we have seen this year, we can't even get that right when we have a chance. :lol:

Hate to say it, but the best chance we have to be good, is to be REALLY bad for a couple of years.

And I doubt the Simons or the fanbase have the stomach for it.
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 11,787
And1: 2,045
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#62 » by Wizop » Mon May 17, 2021 9:00 pm

Tom White wrote:Hate to say it, but the best chance we have to be good, is to be REALLY bad for a couple of years.


there is an article out today listing the authors 25 best players in the league. he has Jocic firs - drafted pick 41 in 2nd round. now I'm not holding out for his ranking. my point is just that I think you are underestimating luck. not every max player was drafted out of our range. Jimmy Butler - 30. Draymond 35. Leonard and LeVert with our picks. PG with our pick. even if you tank and get some high picks and don't swing and miss, you still need to keep them when they reach their prime.

I should admit though that I'm just not a fan of hero ball. I'd rather watch TJ McConnell than Harden. I grew up with Knight's Hoosiers and Hinkle's Bulldogs. I never bought anyone's signature shoes or even wore a particular player's jersey.
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#63 » by 8305 » Mon May 17, 2021 9:01 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:
I would agree, but It seems like he’s a guy that needs certain vet leaders to reach that type of level consistently. He butted heads with Butler, but seemed to fall in line in GSW with a veteran coach, and clear vet leaders like Curry and Green to push him to play a certain role. New team and whatnot, is there a belief he’s locked into that attitude the rest of his career, or will he push to be the #1 guy again, like he was always doing in Minnesota, and give up on defense some to focus more on offense again? It’s a worry.




I like Siakam a lot, but I’m a little concerned of how his shooting fell of a cliff, essentially the last two seasons (or rather this season and the 2nd half of last season), and his cap numbers of $33m/$35m/$38m the next 3 years are huge, and would make team building quite difficult. I don’t know that we’ve build up the draft talent to have super cheap players around him going forward that we could afford to keep and maintain a tax-free team with talent. And, I’m not sure which player we would have going forward. The 55/37/79 shooter from 2 years ago? The 45/36/79 shooter of last year? Or the 45/30/83 shooter from this year?


Yeah I hear you on both the shooting and the future compensation. There's a little of the Carson Wentz application. If the shooting numbers hadn't fallen off you wouldn't be able to get him for either Turner or Sabonis. As to the future we are moving to a day where we are paying six or seven guys instead of the eight we are paying now. And, that bench will have to be more populated with cheap contracts. Less money going to guys 7 and 8 more money going to guys 1 and 2. Its what the elite teams do.


I don't love the Wentz acquisition either :lol:

But, I think prime Siakam is probably worth about prime Sabonis. You could still net him, value wise. You'd just feel more comfortable about it. Or rather, I would. :wink:

I get the "condensing" of salaries, but instead of being able to plan ahead for it, we'd have already had to plan ahead for it starting the last 2 years, as we'd be condensing the salaries now, know what I mean?


I like the Wentz acquisition. He's going to revert to his old self and we are going to win a Super Bowl. 8-)
Just like if we moved Turner for Siakum somehow, he'd revert to his old self and the combo of Siakum and Sabonis would dominate the East.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,558
And1: 5,975
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#64 » by Scoot McGroot » Mon May 17, 2021 10:10 pm

8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:
Yeah I hear you on both the shooting and the future compensation. There's a little of the Carson Wentz application. If the shooting numbers hadn't fallen off you wouldn't be able to get him for either Turner or Sabonis. As to the future we are moving to a day where we are paying six or seven guys instead of the eight we are paying now. And, that bench will have to be more populated with cheap contracts. Less money going to guys 7 and 8 more money going to guys 1 and 2. Its what the elite teams do.


I don't love the Wentz acquisition either :lol:

But, I think prime Siakam is probably worth about prime Sabonis. You could still net him, value wise. You'd just feel more comfortable about it. Or rather, I would. :wink:

I get the "condensing" of salaries, but instead of being able to plan ahead for it, we'd have already had to plan ahead for it starting the last 2 years, as we'd be condensing the salaries now, know what I mean?


I like the Wentz acquisition. He's going to revert to his old self and we are going to win a Super Bowl. 8-)
Just like if we moved Turner for Siakum somehow, he'd revert to his old self and the combo of Siakum and Sabonis would dominate the East.


What if this is the reversion to the mean for Siakam? What if he just had the one better year, but this is who he is? Could hypothetically be the same with Wentz, too? :dontknow:
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#65 » by 8305 » Tue May 18, 2021 1:37 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:
I don't love the Wentz acquisition either :lol:

But, I think prime Siakam is probably worth about prime Sabonis. You could still net him, value wise. You'd just feel more comfortable about it. Or rather, I would. :wink:

I get the "condensing" of salaries, but instead of being able to plan ahead for it, we'd have already had to plan ahead for it starting the last 2 years, as we'd be condensing the salaries now, know what I mean?


I like the Wentz acquisition. He's going to revert to his old self and we are going to win a Super Bowl. 8-)
Just like if we moved Turner for Siakum somehow, he'd revert to his old self and the combo of Siakum and Sabonis would dominate the East.


What if this is the reversion to the mean for Siakam? What if he just had the one better year, but this is who he is? Could hypothetically be the same with Wentz, too? :dontknow:


The mean for both of these guys is still pretty good. Colts could still win a Super Bowl. Average Siakum would still be a great compliment to Sabonis. Sabonis your offensive catalyst, Siakum the kind of long athlete that you need around Sabonis. So maybe Turner, Brogdan and our 2021 1st for Siakum and Toronto’s 1st?
C. Sabonis, Goga
PF. Siakum, Brisset
SF. Warren, Holiday
SG. Levert, Lamb
PG. Sumner, Holiday
Point guard is pretty shaky but Levert and Sabonis would have the ball most of the time anyway. How much upside would that group have if we scored on what would likely be pick 8 or 9?
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,558
And1: 5,975
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#66 » by Scoot McGroot » Tue May 18, 2021 2:56 am

8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:
I like the Wentz acquisition. He's going to revert to his old self and we are going to win a Super Bowl. 8-)
Just like if we moved Turner for Siakum somehow, he'd revert to his old self and the combo of Siakum and Sabonis would dominate the East.


What if this is the reversion to the mean for Siakam? What if he just had the one better year, but this is who he is? Could hypothetically be the same with Wentz, too? :dontknow:


The mean for both of these guys is still pretty good. Colts could still win a Super Bowl. Average Siakum would still be a great compliment to Sabonis. Sabonis your offensive catalyst, Siakum the kind of long athlete that you need around Sabonis. So maybe Turner, Brogdan and our 2021 1st for Siakum and Toronto’s 1st?
C. Sabonis, Goga
PF. Siakum, Brisset
SF. Warren, Holiday
SG. Levert, Lamb
PG. Sumner, Holiday
Point guard is pretty shaky but Levert and Sabonis would have the ball most of the time anyway. How much upside would that group have if we scored on what would likely be pick 8 or 9?


Boy, losing Brogdon would hurt that lineup a ton. Guy put up 21/5/6 on 45/39/86 shooting splits. I know, there’s some positional conflict, but that’s a pretty big downgrade to the roster in shooting and in overall defense (Turner to Siakam). Siakam is more of a PF, for sure, though. But I think you’d have to absolutely hit on pick 8 or 9, and it’d have to be an immediate production type of hit, to keep that team from staying in the play-in game, at best, category.

I know, I’m not offering any other upgrades or anything, and I don’t mean to be burning down your ideas here. Maybe I’m just more of a pessimistic Pete lately. I’m just not sold on Siakam being an automatic upgrade, and there are some major questions there.
User avatar
Wizop
RealGM
Posts: 11,787
And1: 2,045
Joined: Jun 15, 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Contact:
   

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#67 » by Wizop » Tue May 18, 2021 1:36 pm

I don't think we can predict the big trade, if any, without knowing the coaching situation, and I'm not talking about style. I'm wondering who the players are who do not want Bjorkgren to come back. say Turner is unhappy. if so, would you make him happy by firing the coach but then trade him or would you trade him and keep the coach?
Topofthekey
Veteran
Posts: 2,681
And1: 1,003
Joined: Nov 18, 2017

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#68 » by Topofthekey » Tue May 18, 2021 2:00 pm

Wizop wrote:I don't think we can predict the big trade, if any, without knowing the coaching situation, and I'm not talking about style. I'm wondering who the players are who do not want Bjorkgren to come back. say Turner is unhappy. if so, would you make him happy by firing the coach but then trade him or would you trade him and keep the coach?

Maybe both, honestly

Myles doesn't strike me as the ego type, so if he's unhappy about his coach, I think that's an indication that there is something wrong with the coach, and I would look into whether a coaching change is needed. Not necessarily to appease Myles, but more to do the due diligence

At the same time, even though Myles is one of my favourite Pacer right now, if there is a trade available that markedly improves the team, you have to do it. It is of course my preference to trade other players before Myles
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#69 » by 8305 » Wed May 19, 2021 2:36 pm

Tom White wrote:
8305 wrote:Less money going to guys 7 and 8 more money going to guys 1 and 2. Its what the elite teams do.


Well, if that is what the cool kids are doing then.................

On a serious note. Most of the teams that are set up that way have players who deserve the big paydays. Tell me who, among the Pacers players deserves that? None of the current ones do.

So how does the team acquire such players?

Trades? Which team (or teams) would be willing to trade a TRUE max player to us for our players? No, I can't think of one either.

Draft? Not likely with our usual drafting position. Also not likely any of our current players could fetch a pick that might become a max player.

This team is basically stuck until it is bad enough to earn a number one of two pick. As we have seen this year, we can't even get that right when we have a chance. :lol:

Hate to say it, but the best chance we have to be good, is to be REALLY bad for a couple of years.

And I doubt the Simons or the fanbase have the stomach for it.


Maybe a more accurate way of saying it. We should have less money going to bench players making more money available to pay difference makers. What happens if TJ Warren comes back next year and tears it up?
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,558
And1: 5,975
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#70 » by Scoot McGroot » Wed May 19, 2021 2:40 pm

8305 wrote:
Tom White wrote:
8305 wrote:Less money going to guys 7 and 8 more money going to guys 1 and 2. Its what the elite teams do.


Well, if that is what the cool kids are doing then.................

On a serious note. Most of the teams that are set up that way have players who deserve the big paydays. Tell me who, among the Pacers players deserves that? None of the current ones do.

So how does the team acquire such players?

Trades? Which team (or teams) would be willing to trade a TRUE max player to us for our players? No, I can't think of one either.

Draft? Not likely with our usual drafting position. Also not likely any of our current players could fetch a pick that might become a max player.

This team is basically stuck until it is bad enough to earn a number one of two pick. As we have seen this year, we can't even get that right when we have a chance. :lol:

Hate to say it, but the best chance we have to be good, is to be REALLY bad for a couple of years.

And I doubt the Simons or the fanbase have the stomach for it.


Maybe a more accurate way of saying it. We should have less money going to bench players making more money available to pay difference makers. What happens if TJ Warren comes back next year and tears it up?


Right now, we’re on pace to spend about 20-25% of the salary cap on our bench. That seems pretty small. I think, maybe, we’d all agree that Jeremy Lamb’s $10m salary is one that could go? Maybe just 1 year deals for Doug/McConnell, if they’d take them? After that, still a ton of flexibility to pay TJ Warren the year after. :dontknow:
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#71 » by 8305 » Wed May 19, 2021 2:54 pm

The thing I was most interested to see in the Charlotte game was how Brisset would look against Washington and Bridges and how Sumner would look against Rozier and Ball. Bridges has his moments in last night's game but Ball, Washington and Rozier were no where to be found. I'd like to think Brisset and Sumner had a lot to do with that.

So I'll ask which starting line up do you like better?

Team 1 Team 2
C Sabonis Sabonis
PF Brisset Turner
SF Warren Or Warren
SG Brogdan Brogdan
PG Sumner Levert

Is Turner a good enough defender to make up for Sabonis inability to guard quicker players away from the basket and Levert's overall poor to average defense? vs Sabonis at the 5 on defense having the benefit of Brisset who appears capable of stepping out on the floor and keeping guys in front of him and Sumner who might just be an elite defender?
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,558
And1: 5,975
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#72 » by Scoot McGroot » Wed May 19, 2021 3:23 pm

8305 wrote:The thing I was most interested to see in the Charlotte game was how Brisset would look against Washington and Bridges and how Sumner would look against Rozier and Ball. Bridges has his moments in last night's game but Ball, Washington and Rozier were no where to be found. I'd like to think Brisset and Sumner had a lot to do with that.

So I'll ask which starting line up do you like better?

Team 1 Team 2
C Sabonis Sabonis
PF Brisset Turner
SF Warren Or Warren
SG Brogdan Brogdan
PG Sumner Levert

Is Turner a good enough defender to make up for Sabonis inability to guard quicker players away from the basket and Levert's overall poor to average defense? vs Sabonis at the 5 on defense having the benefit of Brisset who appears capable of stepping out on the floor and keeping guys in front of him and Sumner who might just be an elite defender?


I think Team 1 is more consistent, and more consistently a 6-10 seed type of team. I think Team 2 is more hit or miss, but has the upside to possibly compete for an ECF.

But also, team 2 has the flexibility to bring in Brissett/Sumner from my he bench. Team 1 doesn’t have the flexibility to do the same with Turner/Levert.
User avatar
Scoot McGroot
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 32,558
And1: 5,975
Joined: Feb 16, 2005
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#73 » by Scoot McGroot » Wed May 19, 2021 3:29 pm

Mostly, I’m stil interested to see Turner and Sabonis play together on court where Dom isn’t required to guard tight to half court, or in junk defenses, or fight over every screen. The rest of the team looks better defensively since the Woj/Fischer reports came out and we’ve eliminated the junk defenses and played more man defense in a smart, reasonable way. We’ve seen them coexist better offensively this year. I bet they’d coexist better offensively, too.
davidfr94
Junior
Posts: 439
And1: 391
Joined: Sep 09, 2012

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#74 » by davidfr94 » Wed May 19, 2021 4:26 pm

8305 wrote:The thing I was most interested to see in the Charlotte game was how Brisset would look against Washington and Bridges and how Sumner would look against Rozier and Ball. Bridges has his moments in last night's game but Ball, Washington and Rozier were no where to be found. I'd like to think Brisset and Sumner had a lot to do with that.

So I'll ask which starting line up do you like better?

Team 1 Team 2
C Sabonis Sabonis
PF Brisset Turner
SF Warren Or Warren
SG Brogdan Brogdan
PG Sumner Levert

Is Turner a good enough defender to make up for Sabonis inability to guard quicker players away from the basket and Levert's overall poor to average defense? vs Sabonis at the 5 on defense having the benefit of Brisset who appears capable of stepping out on the floor and keeping guys in front of him and Sumner who might just be an elite defender?
I would try Turner, Sabonis, Warren, sumner and brogdon with levert coming off the bench Imo.

I would rather let the ball in brogdon's hands and let levert be the focal point of the bench offense

Sent from my Redmi Note 8T using RealGM mobile app
Pacers Forever
Sophomore
Posts: 171
And1: 27
Joined: Nov 21, 2020
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#75 » by Pacers Forever » Wed May 19, 2021 9:18 pm

I agree with Sumner starting with his quickness.
Sumner
Brogdon
Warren
Domas
Turner
That gives us on the second unit quickness with TJ McConnell.
McConnell
LeVert
McDermott/ J Holiday
Brissett
Goga
End of bench Stanley and Martin. Of course this is if they can dump Lamb and A Holiday doesn’t come back or is traded.
Topofthekey
Veteran
Posts: 2,681
And1: 1,003
Joined: Nov 18, 2017

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#76 » by Topofthekey » Wed May 19, 2021 11:53 pm

I tried building a roster based around Domas in the other thread, so I'll try to do one for Myles over here

When I try to imagine what an optimal Pacer squad built around Myles is going to look like, I think what we currently have is actually not that far what's ideal

As has been discussed before, a team build around Domas has a higher ceiling, but is more difficult to assemble, while a team built around Myles has a higher floor and is much easier to cobble together

I think in order to build an ideal Pacers roster with Myles as the sole big, the only thing we really need is just some talent upgrade, especially on the offensive end

We'd basically need someone who can carry the scoring load for the team, an elite scorer who can create his own shot. We have LeVert currently, but I think we need an upgrade. Maybe swap LeVert out for someone like Zach Lavine

The other thing to look for is a 4 who pairs well with Myles. Here, I don't think we need to look for something too specific. We just need someone who's a natural 4 and is good at what he does. Maybe someone like Pascal Siakam

End result:

Myles
Siakam
Warren
Lavine
Brogdon

We'll have good scorers in Lavine, Brogdon, and Warren. I think Siakam is at best a 3rd scoring option type on offense, so I'd rather he just focus on defense. Especially since the worry here is on the defensive end, with Lavine being a minus and Brogdon having issues with quick guards. The hope is that Myles and Siakam will be good enough defensively to help cover for them

So overall we're basically looking to trade Domas + LeVert + Lamb + #15 for Lavine and Siakam

Maybe we can start by trading Domas + Lamb for Siakam + #7

Not sure whether Raptors will bite, but if it's true that Siakam is butting heads with their coach, maybe they will

Then we try to send LeVert + #7 + #15 for Lavine

Not sure what's going on over there in the Bulls organization, but I think this is decent value for Lavine. Maybe the value is too good even, in which case we can send #15 to Raptors instead

One thing to note here is if we're building around Myles and trading Domas, I think there is no longer a need to re-sign Doug, since he's really only super efficient with Domas around. Raptors can sign him with their own MLE if they want him. Or we can facilitate and sign him with Bird rights and do a S&T, if Raptors have someone else they are targeting with their MLE

We'll still have a pretty stacked bench with Goga, Brissett, Martin, the Holidays, Sumner, and TJ
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#77 » by 8305 » Thu May 20, 2021 2:37 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:Mostly, I’m stil interested to see Turner and Sabonis play together on court where Dom isn’t required to guard tight to half court, or in junk defenses, or fight over every screen. The rest of the team looks better defensively since the Woj/Fischer reports came out and we’ve eliminated the junk defenses and played more man defense in a smart, reasonable way. We’ve seen them coexist better offensively this year. I bet they’d coexist better offensively, too.


I see myself as an eternal optimist. But somehow tweaking defensive scheme and that’s going to allow us to defend the perimeter with a big? I’m skeptical.
8305
Analyst
Posts: 3,449
And1: 299
Joined: Jun 11, 2009
     

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#78 » by 8305 » Thu May 20, 2021 2:58 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:The thing I was most interested to see in the Charlotte game was how Brisset would look against Washington and Bridges and how Sumner would look against Rozier and Ball. Bridges has his moments in last night's game but Ball, Washington and Rozier were no where to be found. I'd like to think Brisset and Sumner had a lot to do with that.

So I'll ask which starting line up do you like better?

Team 1 Team 2
C Sabonis Sabonis
PF Brisset Turner
SF Warren Or Warren
SG Brogdan Brogdan
PG Sumner Levert

Is Turner a good enough defender to make up for Sabonis inability to guard quicker players away from the basket and Levert's overall poor to average defense? vs Sabonis at the 5 on defense having the benefit of Brisset who appears capable of stepping out on the floor and keeping guys in front of him and Sumner who might just be an elite defender?


I think Team 1 is more consistent, and more consistently a 6-10 seed type of team. I think Team 2 is more hit or miss, but has the upside to possibly compete for an ECF.

But also, team 2 has the flexibility to bring in Brissett/Sumner from my he bench. Team 1 doesn’t have the flexibility to do the same with Turner/Levert.


I think team 2 will struggle mightily to control dribble penetration which will lead to our trademark poor rebounding. The offense would likely work fine. The defense? I’m not seeing it.
Pacers_Freak
Veteran
Posts: 2,833
And1: 2,662
Joined: Oct 06, 2016
   

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#79 » by Pacers_Freak » Thu May 20, 2021 4:02 pm

Topofthekey wrote:I tried building a roster based around Domas in the other thread, so I'll try to do one for Myles over here

When I try to imagine what an optimal Pacer squad built around Myles is going to look like, I think what we currently have is actually not that far what's ideal

As has been discussed before, a team build around Domas has a higher ceiling, but is more difficult to assemble, while a team built around Myles has a higher floor and is much easier to cobble together

I think in order to build an ideal Pacers roster with Myles as the sole big, the only thing we really need is just some talent upgrade, especially on the offensive end

We'd basically need someone who can carry the scoring load for the team, an elite scorer who can create his own shot. We have LeVert currently, but I think we need an upgrade. Maybe swap LeVert out for someone like Zach Lavine

The other thing to look for is a 4 who pairs well with Myles. Here, I don't think we need to look for something too specific. We just need someone who's a natural 4 and is good at what he does. Maybe someone like Pascal Siakam

End result:

Myles
Siakam
Warren
Lavine
Brogdon

We'll have good scorers in Lavine, Brogdon, and Warren. I think Siakam is at best a 3rd scoring option type on offense, so I'd rather he just focus on defense. Especially since the worry here is on the defensive end, with Lavine being a minus and Brogdon having issues with quick guards. The hope is that Myles and Siakam will be good enough defensively to help cover for them

So overall we're basically looking to trade Domas + LeVert + Lamb + #15 for Lavine and Siakam

Maybe we can start by trading Domas + Lamb for Siakam + #7

Not sure whether Raptors will bite, but if it's true that Siakam is butting heads with their coach, maybe they will

Then we try to send LeVert + #7 + #15 for Lavine

Not sure what's going on over there in the Bulls organization, but I think this is decent value for Lavine. Maybe the value is too good even, in which case we can send #15 to Raptors instead

One thing to note here is if we're building around Myles and trading Domas, I think there is no longer a need to re-sign Doug, since he's really only super efficient with Domas around. Raptors can sign him with their own MLE if they want him. Or we can facilitate and sign him with Bird rights and do a S&T, if Raptors have someone else they are targeting with their MLE

We'll still have a pretty stacked bench with Goga, Brissett, Martin, the Holidays, Sumner, and TJ


Maybe I'm off. But I'm not sure Toronto is going to agree with that value. Lamb really isn't that much of a positive so they are going Domas for Siakam and have to give up 7. Guessing the phone lines in Canada (or Tampa) would start cutting out at about that point.
Topofthekey
Veteran
Posts: 2,681
And1: 1,003
Joined: Nov 18, 2017

Re: Moving Forward 

Post#80 » by Topofthekey » Thu May 20, 2021 4:36 pm

Pacers_Freak wrote:Maybe I'm off. But I'm not sure Toronto is going to agree with that value. Lamb really isn't that much of a positive so they are going Domas for Siakam and have to give up 7. Guessing the phone lines in Canada (or Tampa) would start cutting out at about that point.

Yes, maybe they hang up on us. Or maybe it's not that far fetched

I guess it depends on how much stock you put in the altercation between Siakam and Nick Nurse a while back

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2938043-report-pascal-siakam-got-personal-with-nick-nurse-during-heated-altercation.amp.html

It could be nothing, or it could fester into something irreparable. I don't follow the Raptors close enough to have an accurate enough picture of what's going on there

Either way, Domas is younger and has a much smaller contract than Siakam, so that automatically puts Domas way ahead of Siakam in terms of value, to me at least

Whether the gap between the two is #7 or not depends on how optimistic/pessimistic the Raptors are with his future with them

Return to Indiana Pacers