Morway " We WONT buyout Tinsley"

[greenway84]

RealGM: Pacers Won't Buyout Tinsley

Aug 05, 2008 10:46 AM EST
Indiana Pacers general manager David Morway said in a phone conversation with Andrew Perna of RealGM on Tuesday morning that the team will not buyout the contract of point guard Jamaal Tinsley.

"We won't buy Jamaal out. That's not even a consideration, we're not even looking at that," Morway said of the rumors.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archi ... t_tinsley/

Edited by PP: Please stop posting entire articles or columns. You can post an intro, or paraphrase while always providing the link, but it's against policy to copy an entire work.

[Grang33r]

I think it's a smoke screen. I think teams have alot of interest in Tinsley but nobody is making the first "big" step in the direction to get him, because well, the Pacers them selfs killed some of his value by keep saying he'll get traded or be cut. Teams i think realize they want him but could get him for much cheaper and just playing the wait game.... and i think Pacers really want one of the teams interested to make a step, knowing it's trade or nothing.

That being said, if he's not traded by pre-season or mid-season, he will get bought out. No question in my mind. I don't like playing the role of i know what they will do because in all honestly i don't, i'm just a fan, but in this situation, i can almost bet my house on it. They WON'T allow him to intervene with TJ Ford and Jarrett Jack and won't make Travis Diener sit behind Jamaal.

[Train7492]

I would have to say that I am not a fan of Tinsley but I don't see the real point in buying him out. Still going to be on the books for 3 more years, and he is not going to take a cheap buyout. So the way I look at it is if we can't make a trade then we would be better off letting him play a back-up role. He has to know that TJ is our starter so maybe he might work a little harder (don't really know about that), or maybe he will go get in trouble and get but in jail so we can terminate his contract ( ). But I really don't want to just buy him out, I would rather just send him home because then after his contract he would be done with basketball because he would be to out of shapes. I don't want to help him out in any way.

[cavsfan_osiris]

I highly doubt the Pacers will be able to move him and there's no reason for this guy to be around the team any longer, that equals buyout imo.

I hate buyouts because it ends up rewarding failure, but the alternative could be worse, which in my opinion it could be worse with Jamaal on the team in a role he doesn't want to play. I wish there was a way for a team to reach an agreement on a buyout and have that amount adjusted if the player signs with another NBA team.

The amount of NBA players who are failures and candidates to get bought out are an embarrassment to the NBA.

[basketballwacko2]

This buyout talk is what has been keeping a deal from happening, yes, JT has not got much value but the teams have the idea that we'll buy him out and then they can get him for cheap money and not have to move anything. I've been saying for a while now that as soon as teams accept that we are not buying him out then we can get something done. Look for a deal most likely Denver, or maybe Dallas they need a back up for kidd and an intermediate option for life after kidd.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Am I the only one who thinks that there is already a worst case scenario trade in place for Tinsley? Didn't Bird promise that Tinsley would not be on our roster for the start of the season? He did something similar when he hinted before the draft that we would have 2 new PG's. I have a feeling there is a deal in place that really isn't good for the Pacers, but one that they might make in a worst case scenario.

Who knows though, I may be wrong.

[count55]

Am I the only one who thinks that there is already a worst case scenario trade in place for Tinsley? Didn't Bird promise that Tinsley would not be on our roster for the start of the season? He did something similar when he hinted before the draft that we would have 2 new PG's. I have a feeling there is a deal in place that really isn't good for the Pacers, but one that they might make in a worst case scenario.

Who knows though, I may be wrong.

I've often considered that, and I suppose it's possible, but how do you keep something like that on the backburner? What if the situation changed for the other team, and it went away? I would think that if we had an offer in hand, we'd take it....but I may just be overly cautious. I just wouldn't want to risk the other team finding something else, leaving us holding the bag on Droopy.

[greenway84]

Any team that is willing to take Tinsley is offering up some stinky poo poo for him.. As they should be. Where as if they were to go and try and get another pg of his talents. They would have to actually pay well for that player. With Tinsleys issues a team can bet low and win big. Just for example. Banks does absolutly nothing for Maimi. He gets paid almost the same amount as Tinsley for the same length. Where they couldn't even move him for anything to another team. They could get an upgrade talent wise at the same price as what they pay for banks. So i could easily see that as the backup trade. We have no need for banks, and his contract sucks. But at least he wouldnt be booed if he played, and then we can always trade his exp contract where as we couldnt if we bought out Tinsley. Also I doubt he shoots anyone.

[Kuq_e_Zi91]

It's good to hear that they won't buy him out because like some other posters have said, this means other teams will realize they can't just wait for him to be bought out. If they want him, they need to get him through a trade. A team that comes to mind is Phoenix. They were looking for a veteran point guard to give Nash some rest and nights off. They have been rumored to be trying to trade Diaw or Barbosa so maybe we could work something out.

[greenway84]

I would do Tinsley, Shawne, McRoberts, 2nd for Diaw, 1st. His contract is just soooo huge.

[Kuq_e_Zi91]

Yeah his contract is $9 mil (from hoopshype) but I think he fits what Larry was talking about when he said he wanted a PF that could score down low. He can also hit that outside shot, and run which fits our offensive style. Man, I'd love to get Barbosa but we have too many guards.

[23artest23]

I like Diaw as well but if we were to work a deal for him, I think others from both teams would have to be involved to make it worthwhile from our perspective.

[basketballwacko2]

First of all I'll say the backburner trade is something that could be we might be waiting on a trade restriction to expire who knows? As for Banks he is paid considerably less than Jamaal Tinsley at $6,750,000. Banks makes $4,260,000, that's about $2.5 million less so it's not almost the same, and that doesn't work on the 125% rule on the miami side. Now if we were waiting for Rasho's trade restriction to expire and do Rasho and JT for Banks and Blount that would work within the 125% rule. We'd be saving about $2.4 million this year and taking an extra year with Blount over Rasho. No question Banks is not as talented as jt but he seems to be less injury prone, Rasho and Blount is a wash. What this would do is allow us to look at sending Daniels to the Suns for Diaw which would save the Suns some $$ as well and get them under the Luxury tax

[cdash]

I would really not like a Rasho/Tinsley for Blount/Banks deal.

[DWCP2]

I'm curious as to who the 3 teams are that Mornay described in brief.

[Gremz]

^^I'd guess that they may be Miami, The Clippers and Hornets

[APerna]

I doubt it'll be the Clippers, but the Hornets are definitely a possibilty with Pargo likely out the door.

[mizzoupacers]

Now if we were waiting for Rasho's trade restriction to expire and do Rasho and JT for Banks and Blount that would work within the 125% rule. We'd be saving about $2.4 million this year and taking an extra year with Blount over Rasho. No question Banks is not as talented as jt but he seems to be less injury prone, Rasho and Blount is a wash. What this would do is allow us to look at sending Daniels to the Suns for Diaw which would save the Suns some $$ as well and get them under the Luxury tax

I could hold my nose and give my blessing to Tinsley/Rasho for Banks/Blount. I don't really want Banks or Blount on the Pacers, but we have to be realistic about just how hard it is going to be to get rid of Tinsley...and just how bad it would be to do a buyout that counts against our cap space for THREE YEARS.

But good Lord, why on earth would we then trade Daniels for Diaw? No, no. no. Keep Daniels for one more year and then take him off the books. That's MUCH better than Diaw's albatross contract for the next four years. The Pacers could squeeze some use out of Diaw, but basically he is comparable talentwise to Daniels--with a bigger contract that lasts three years longer. NO!!!

Tin Man/Williams for Diaw...that I could do. But only because of how badly we need to get rid of Tinsley, and how little we are realistically going to get in return for him.

[DWCP2]

I wouldn't cast Denver out of the picture yet. I googled Tinsley rumors middle of last week and caught a rumor mill out of a Celtics blog page.

Anyway, the rumor is that Denver is very willing to part with Iverson, K-Mart, and Nene for ANYTHING provided it helps them get under the luxury tax threshold.

They are currently still 2 million over.

[floppymoose]

There is little point to buying out Tinsley.

Rarely do buyouts make sense. You can't trade a bought out player, and yet the buyout amount still counts against the cap for the same number of years as having the player. Players rarely have an incentive to settle for anything less than 80-90% of their contract.

The only case I can think of where buying out makes sense is if that extra tiny savings gets you under the lux tax. I haven't closely examined the Pacers salary situation, but I imagine with JO gone that the team is not over the lux tax right now.

Just let him sit at home. If nothing else he'll be an expiring contract in two more seasons, and have trade value. If you buy him out you won't even have that.