RealGM

From what I understand Bucks fans seem to rather resign sessions rather than Charlie V. Apparently their CAP restriction won't allow them to focus on both.

I know there have been a few of us who have been interested in him. I don't know what type of money he will be looking for. I think it would be worth looking into.

Assuming Rasho, Daniels, Baston, and Graham aren't coming back. I would think we could scrap up enough cash for him. I like Daniels, but not for what he's getting paid.

We could then open up our options at PG. We could trade Ford, Resign Jack and keep Deiner while using our pick for a PG.

Foster, Hibbert, Murphy, and Charlie would be a decent big man rotation.

Who would come off the bench though? I don't like the thought of starting V and Murph together because neither have a great post game and both are perimeter shooters. Neither would want to come off the bench either and neither deserve to have to be bench players. Not to mention, i'd like to keep Hibbert starting.

well hibbert is the only player with a post game but he is no starter as of right now. So i would be ok with charlie and murhy together. also he is much younger than murphy which would open us up to trade him.

First off Daniels has a player option at a very reasonable price so I cant see us not picking it up, wether he is a pacer next year is a different question.

I dont see the point in trading a pg so that we can draft a pg, why wouldnt we just use the pick for a position of need instead of creating one?

I dont mind Charlie V for the MLE but honestly his defense and shot selection worries me, I would rather use our bit of cap space to pick up a Brandon Bass ( he will be a UFA ) type player or go through the draft.

MillerTime101 wrote:First off Daniels has a player option at a very reasonable price so I cant see us not picking it up, wether he is a pacer next year is a different question.

I dont see the point in trading a pg so that we can draft a pg, why wouldnt we just use the pick for a position of need instead of creating one?

I dont mind Charlie V for the MLE but honestly his defense and shot selection worries me, I would rather use our bit of cap space to pick up a Brandon Bass ( he will be a UFA ) type player or go through the draft.

Daniels doesnt have a reasonable option, its over $7 million...thats why too much for him. But nevertheless, I wouldnt be surprised if the Pacers picked it up, only because they might be inclined to trade him right before the trade deadline in 2010 because a lot of teams are going to be trying to get rid of cap space to make room for the 2010 FA and we would probably get more for Quis next season than this.

Also, considering that Granger and Dunleavy are oft-injured, we might need Quis

Eh, i wouldn't really mind him. But it's tough, we'd lose a fair amount of future cap flexibility and it would raise the question "is the the answer".

I can see him getting a decent sized contract, perhaps the full MLE or slightly above, and i would think it would take at least 4 years more likely 5 to get it done. I think i might pass.

DannyGranger wrote:

MillerTime101 wrote:First off Daniels has a player option at a very reasonable price so I cant see us not picking it up, wether he is a pacer next year is a different question.

I dont see the point in trading a pg so that we can draft a pg, why wouldnt we just use the pick for a position of need instead of creating one?

I dont mind Charlie V for the MLE but honestly his defense and shot selection worries me, I would rather use our bit of cap space to pick up a Brandon Bass ( he will be a UFA ) type player or go through the draft.

Daniels doesnt have a reasonable option, its over $7 million...thats why too much for him. But nevertheless, I wouldnt be surprised if the Pacers picked it up, only because they might be inclined to trade him right before the trade deadline in 2010 because a lot of teams are going to be trying to get rid of cap space to make room for the 2010 FA and we would probably get more for Quis next season than this.

Also, considering that Granger and Dunleavy are oft-injured, we might need Quis

There is virtually no chance that we will pick up Daniel's option and keep him into the 2009-2010 season. His $7.4mm, plus the $2.5mm we'd likely owe our 1st round pick would leave us only about $1.0 to $1.5mm left under the tax threshold to sign the four players needed to fill out the roster.

Picking up Daniels would, in effect, make us pay the luxury tax, and the Pacers won't do that, and Daniels isn't worth paying the tax in any case.

EDIT: Oh, and Charlie Villanueva is a bad contract waiting to happen, and I can imagine worse front line pairings than Charlie V and Murph only because I once saw Stuart Gray and Greg Dreiling on the court at the same time.

DannyGranger wrote:

MillerTime101 wrote:First off Daniels has a player option at a very reasonable price so I cant see us not picking it up, wether he is a pacer next year is a different question.

I dont see the point in trading a pg so that we can draft a pg, why wouldnt we just use the pick for a position of need instead of creating one?

I dont mind Charlie V for the MLE but honestly his defense and shot selection worries me, I would rather use our bit of cap space to pick up a Brandon Bass ( he will be a UFA ) type player or go through the draft.

Daniels doesnt have a reasonable option, its over $7 million...thats why too much for him. But nevertheless, I wouldnt be surprised if the Pacers picked it up, only because they might be inclined to trade him right before the trade deadline in 2010 because a lot of teams are going to be trying to get rid of cap space to make room for the 2010 FA and we would probably get more for Quis next season than this.

Also, considering that Granger and Dunleavy are oft-injured, we might need Quis

Good point I don't know why nut I never thought about Daniels being an EXP contract again next year. I think he would be a valuable trading piece this summer or by the trade deadline.

MillerTime101 wrote: First off Daniels has a player option at a very reasonable price so I cant see us not picking it up, wether he is a pacer next year is a different question.

I dont see the point in trading a pg so that we can draft a pg, why wouldnt we just use the pick for a position of need instead of creating one?

I dont mind Charlie V for the MLE but honestly his defense and shot selection worries me, I would rather use our bit of cap space to pick up a Brandon Bass ( he will be a UFA ) type player or go through the draft.

Daniels has a team option not a 'player' option it's up to the team to decide if he comes back. If he's 15pts 4 rbs 4asts his salary is somewhat reasonable but not to the Pacers considering the players we have at SF/SG. If we pick up the option it would be to move him and get something we need. Example if we were to pick up the option on MD that would make him an exp at the end of 2010. If we could use his deal to move out of JT then I could see it but that means we'd be taking a guy back with a big contract like Jefferson from the Bucks who we don't need either, or as some kinda sign and trade move like for a Charlie V.

Would we be able to work out a deal to S&T Charlie V and take someone like Charlie Bell for JT and Daniels (Extended)? That's about the only way i can see either happening.

I'd also be looking for PF with our pick which now look to be a top ten.

Daniels will not be brought back. He might be worth that money on a one year flyer, but Dunleavy's coming back, and Brandon Rush needs more consistent playing time, so those minutes are going to have to come from somewhere.

PacersRule07 wrote:Daniels will not be brought back. He might be worth that money on a one year flyer, but Dunleavy's coming back, and Brandon Rush needs more consistent playing time, so those minutes are going to have to come from somewhere.

Unless we pick up another sg/sf (doubtful) then how can you say he wont be needed next year if its the same situation as this year?

Regardless a guy averaging 14-5-2 at 7million for one year is a bargin and will be picked by any GM on any team. It would make no sense not too as he holds value and could be a great trade chip.

MillerTime101 wrote:

PacersRule07 wrote:Daniels will not be brought back. He might be worth that money on a one year flyer, but Dunleavy's coming back, and Brandon Rush needs more consistent playing time, so those minutes are going to have to come from somewhere.

Unless we pick up another sg/sf (doubtful) then how can you say he wont be needed next year if its the same situation as this year?

Regardless a guy averaging 14-5-2 at 7million for one year is a bargin and will be picked by any GM on any team. It would make no sense not too as he holds value and could be a great trade chip.

...but he wouldn't be a guy averaging 14-5-2 next year. He would be a guy getting maybe 15 minutes per game with a $7 million price tag. I can tell you right now that there are very few teams in the league who would pick up that option on Marquis. If we trade him before June 30 (when that option has to be picked up or declined), the receiving team will almost certainly decline the option.

so we can still trade him without picking up the option. i did not kow this. this is great news.

greenway84 wrote:so we can still trade him without picking up the option. i did not kow this. this is great news.

No, we can't. You can't trade a guy with an outstanding option that has not been decided yet, nor a guy that is eligible for free agency.


Marquis Daniels is either going to walk as a free agent (likely considering his diminishing role here and increasingly large salary requirement for next year on that option), or have his option picked up (which would be insanity by the Pacers).

Scoot McGroot wrote:

greenway84 wrote:so we can still trade him without picking up the option. i did not kow this. this is great news.

No, we can't. You can't trade a guy with an outstanding option that has not been decided yet, nor a guy that is eligible for free agency.


Marquis Daniels is either going to walk as a free agent (likely considering his diminishing role here and increasingly large salary requirement for next year on that option), or have his option picked up (which would be insanity by the Pacers).

Actually, yes we can. Courtesy of Chad Ford:

11. INDIANA PACERS

Positive Spin: In less than a year, Pacers honchos Larry Bird and David Morway have cleaned house. The team they field now isn't great, but the Pacers are fun to watch and they compete every night. They are positioned to only get better in the future. Marquis Daniels (because he has a team option) is still a tradable expiring contract in May or June. As we get closer to the draft, he could be a very hot commodity for a team that needs to shed salary immediately.

I don't want Charlie Villanueva. Period.

Don't discount the fact that Marquis is also in a contract year (hence, maybe more effort) and that he's also fairly injury prone. That's just icing on the cake though.

PacersRule07 wrote:Don't discount the fact that Marquis is also in a contract year (hence, maybe more effort) and that he's also fairly injury prone. That's just icing on the cake though.

Yeah that thought crossed my mind. If that Chad Ford quote is correct we might be making some deal with someone but that means we have to take salary from who ever we deal with. It's a good bet the Pacers would have to be getting paid to do that.

I could see us maybe taking back an exception and a draft pick, or maybe a combination of exception, draft pick, player w/rookie contract, or veteran with cheap buyout, but there's no way I can see us taking back 7 million that goes directly on payroll.

cdash wrote:

Scoot McGroot wrote:

greenway84 wrote:so we can still trade him without picking up the option. i did not kow this. this is great news.

No, we can't. You can't trade a guy with an outstanding option that has not been decided yet, nor a guy that is eligible for free agency.


Marquis Daniels is either going to walk as a free agent (likely considering his diminishing role here and increasingly large salary requirement for next year on that option), or have his option picked up (which would be insanity by the Pacers).

Actually, yes we can. Courtesy of Chad Ford:

11. INDIANA PACERS

Positive Spin: In less than a year, Pacers honchos Larry Bird and David Morway have cleaned house. The team they field now isn't great, but the Pacers are fun to watch and they compete every night. They are positioned to only get better in the future. Marquis Daniels (because he has a team option) is still a tradable expiring contract in May or June. As we get closer to the draft, he could be a very hot commodity for a team that needs to shed salary immediately.

Yeah, no...that's not right. Chad is a real lightweight when it comes to the CBA.

Larry Coon is the definitive source:

Larry Coon wrote:When the trading deadline has passed. Teams are free to make trades again once their season has ended, but cannot trade players whose contracts are ending or could end due to an option or ETO.

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q85

If you think about it, it makes sense. If players could be traded after the season, but before their options are picked up, it could be a huge way to circumvent the cap.