RealGM

Found it this morning

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02192008/sp ... htm?page=2

Meanwhile, the NetsNew Jersey Nets will continue to wheel until Thursday's 3 p.m. deadline. Sources throughout the league say Kiki Vandeweghe is generating a heated rush of discussions involving Jermaine O'Neal, Jamaal Tinsley, Mike Miller and Nene.

U beat me to the punch my friend.

I hope we trade Oneal Tinsley Murphy daniels

get : Mike Miller, Nene, JR Smith

Well, it's Vecsey, but it's always heartening to hear that we're shopping Droopy.

http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/Ka ... the_Pacers

sad bu true

Am I the last fan left that wants to keep JO?

Nope, not the last fan left. I want to keep JO and trade Diogu and Daniels for Mike Miller.

notque wrote:Nope, not the last fan left. I want to keep JO and trade Diogu and Daniels for Mike Miller.

If we get Miller, trade Jeff for late first, and use draft picks wisely, then we got a good team when JO comes back healthy.

DGrangeRx33 wrote:Am I the last fan left that wants to keep JO?

Not exactly. If we could move Murph & Tinsley for almost anything first, then I am not so quick to move JO. But, if I'm TPTB & am aware that JO wants to be moved (& his absence is extended by his outlook), then YES - I move him ASAP.

If I thought JO could be the player he was the first half of last year, then I'd want to keep him. However, at this point, I don't see it.

With the notable exception of Reggie, I've never put a player on the same level as the team. I'm more concerned about the success of the team, and Reggie was the only guy I ever thought was inseparable from that focus.

For JO, if it works out that staying here is the best way for the Pacers to get good again...Terrific! However, it just looks more likely that moving him will be a necessary piece of the turnaround. I'm not turning handsprings about it. I just feel that's the most realistic view at this point.

I am certainly not against keeping O'neal, I mean look at my name; but the fact that teams are interested in both Tinsley and O'neal is pretty exciting...I only want to see this team improve, and who ever has to be moved for the to be accomplished is alright to me, except for Granger

Whats TPTB stand for? I'm sure I'll feel dumb when someone tells me, but I can't figure it out.

The Powers that be.


It became popularized when we started discussing who really ran the team and everyone was a little tired of debating Walsh vs. Bird in every post. Or, it's just a good general idea.

Scoot McGroot wrote:The Powers that be.


It became popularized when we started discussing who really ran the team and everyone was a little tired of debating Walsh vs. Bird in every post. Or, it's just a good general idea.

Haha, makes sense.

I like JO as a person and a player on the court when he's healthy. However, the fact is, is that he has not been healthy for the past couple of seasons...and we, as a small market team, cannot afford to pay such a huge percentage of our payroll to a player that rarely is fully healthy. It would be one thing if this team was built to win now...but we aren't. I think it's in the best interests of both parties to part ways so that the Pacers can get some value for the future, and JO can go to a team hopefully, where he's not required to be "the man" and won't have to carry the brunt force of the workload which I think has taken it's toll a bit in recent seasons on him. I don't think this team is that far off either. We've lost a lot of games in the fourth quarter, and maybe if we had another healthy big gun, we would've won some of those games. That being said, we need young players with upside, expiring contracts, draft picks, or maybe a star for JO. We have to get good value back.

I'm all for trading Tinsley if we don't take back a bad contract back in the process. Love the Mike Miller for Quis and Diogu trade rumor that has been floating around.

The fact we all love the Mike Miller trade means it's very unlikely. How often are we all in agreement on something?

notque wrote:The fact we all love the Mike Miller trade means it's very unlikely. How often are we all in agreement on something?

i couldn't disagree more





(does that count enough so that we can make this thing happen??)

DGrangeRx33 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Haha, makes sense.

well somepeople say the powers that be

but tptb is really
the pacers top brass

fdefore wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



i couldn't disagree more





(does that count enough so that we can make this thing happen??)

+1

Count me in as legitimately AGAINST the Mike Miller trade. The last thing this team needs is more vets. I could care less about unloading Diogu and Marquis, but Mike Miller would play essentially the same role as Dunleavy and he would take time from Williams. This team needs to rebuild and get young players and expiring contracts, not vets like Mike Miller.

I am also very negative on the Vince Carter trade. Vince for 4 years? Yuck. Lets see if we can sign him to a 5 year extension after that so we can ensure we will be bad for years to come! I wish the Pacers would call a spade a spade and attempt to rebuild.

nene? why do you want his injury prone body?
you want JO part 2? JR smith would be nice but mike miller is a sg aswell...