Pacers Begin Talks With Granger

[greenway84]

The Pacers have begun negotiations with forward Danny Granger on a contract extension, but a deal doesn't appear to be close, according to Indianapolis Star.

Full article here:
http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/54275/20080904/pacers_begin_talks_with_granger/

[APerna]

This disturbs me, not because a deal isn't close. But because Wells mentions the idea of waiting until next summer, as if it's not a huge priority, because he'll become a restricted free agent.

I don't think we can afford (literally) to have to match an offer from another club.

I'm going to write a piece on it later.

[Scoot McGroot]

Should be enough time to negotiate through a few setbacks and get this deal done.


Obviously, we've talked about this ad nauseam, but there really is a pretty concrete market set for Granger, and with Mark Bartelstein as his agent and not a Scott Boras, I think this should go relatively ok. I doubt Granger is going to be pushing his agent for a maximum deal and is probably himself looking for a long-term deal with maybe some incentive's laid out in the deal as well. I think he wants to earn his money.

[count55]

I would say if Wells is right:

- JT on the 9/29 roster
- No extension for Danny

I'd consider the Pacers to have squandered the gains they made in June.

I'd also go so far as to say that if Tinsley is on the roster when the season starts, then I'd consider it a strong likelihood that he will not only dress, but play at some point in time. There will be injuries and the strong temptation to prove ("showcase") that he's healthy to help trade him.

There is still plenty of time to avoid these results, but failure on both of these would seriously dampen the enthusiasm they generated in me with the early summer trades.

[Train7492]

I would say that the extension will not get done till next off season. The only thing with that is, that might end up costing us a couple million in the long run, just depending on Danny's production this year, which I think will be a little better than last year. He knows that he is the man with O'neal finally gone.

The Tinsley thing is a different story. As a fan I can't stand him, but as a GM I could see them trying to get some production out of him to maybe show people he is healthy. I'm not really up to date on all his legal stuff but I would have to say that he is walking a thin line or he could do some time. The only good thing about this is if for some reason he is on the roster and he is healthy, then he is going to make Ford stay on top of his game to keep the starting spot. A healthy Ford and a healthy Tinsley ( and out of trouble?) would be one of the if not the best PG combo. This is not like the last few years where we have depended on Tinsley and he has let us down, he knows it is time to play or go sit at home, and that I would say would end his career not being able to stay in shape. Worst case we by him out if he starts causing trouble.

[Gremz]

^^^
There is no chance that we buy Tinsley out....ever.

[count55]

^^^
There is no chance that we buy Tinsley out....ever.

I wouldn't say ever. In fact, if I were in the Pacers FO, I'd probably have a standing offer to Tinsley for a buyout this summer of around $16.5mm. (That figure roughly represents NPV of his current contract at a 14% cost-of-capital...a reasonable to moderate return rate.)

While it is an option that is not on the top of the list, it shouldn't be the last resort either. While buying Tinsley out would create "dead cap space", it is certainly arguable that it would be preferrable to prolonging the problems - in the lockerroom, in the community, and, longer term, on the payroll.

I believe we all pretty much agree that we cannot expect to get any real on-the-court value for Tinsley. It's also relatively unlikely that we'd find a taker that is willing to give us significant financial relief. Therefore, it seems that we're reduced to hoping that we can get an equally bad contract back in the form of a player who (a) may be able marginally contribute and (b) won't offend the fanbase by his mere presence. In other words, we'd simply be trying to keep that salary slot alive in the hopes that it could be used as filler in the short term or an expiring later.

However, the value of an expiring contract (or any salary slot) only exists if you're willing to extend that slot beyond it's expiration. In other words, we'd have to be willing to pay someone else the $7-8mm beyond the 2010-2011 season. While it's certainly possible that we could get somebody well worth the money (thereby turning lemons into lemonade), there's also a large risk that we could just be perpetuating the problem...ending up adding years to a salary slot that is not providing the commensurate production.

So, while buyout is far from the preferrable alternative, one at a price that we were comfortable with would bring final resolution to the issue and save us some amount of capspace over the next three years. (In the figure I quoted above, it would be about $5.1, which could be of some use.)

[greenway84]

NO BUYOUTS! Never reward bad behavior. We have been taught that our whole lives. Besides I dont think he would accept a buyout unless its close to what he's owed. Not worth it. If it were 10 to 12 million I would consider it but too pay a player to play for another team is making us look foolish.