Page 1 of 3
Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:08 pm
by greenway84
Tinsley’s $10.7 million buyout will account for roughly $5.1 million of the Pacers’ salary cap next season and about $5.6 million in the 2010-11 season.
The Pacers still are having ongoing talks with the Boston Celtics about a sign-and-trade with Marquis Daniels. The Pacers have interest in Tony Allen and J.R. Giddens.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20090723/SPORTS04/90723068/1088/Tinsley+will+be+cap+hit+for+next+2+seasons
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:23 am
by Scoot McGroot
That basically pays for Earl Watson's one year deal, just in savings for this year.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:42 am
by DWCP2
Scoot McGroot wrote:That basically pays for Earl Watson's one year deal, just in savings for this year.
But doesn't it still leave Indy vulnerable to the luxury tax come 2010?
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:53 am
by Sparhawk
I don't understand why the Pacers would want anyone from Boston other than Bill Walker. Why take back salary when you can just sign Stephen Graham for less.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:37 am
by Scoot McGroot
Sparhawk wrote:I don't understand why the Pacers would want anyone from Boston other than Bill Walker. Why take back salary when you can just sign Stephen Graham for less.
And therein pretty much lies the issue with a possible S&T.
I would assume that Bird would probably investigate to see if he could get Kendrick Perkins, Glen Davis, or possibly Rajon Rondo for a low price using Daniels as the filler, and when he realizes that he can't, Boston will end up just signing Daniels for the BAE without needing Indy's help.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:44 am
by DWCP2
Sparhawk wrote:I don't understand why the Pacers would want anyone from Boston other than Bill Walker. Why take back salary when you can just sign Stephen Graham for less.
Giddens and Granger are good buddies. After his fallout from Kansas, Granger was the one who convinced him to come to New Mexico. My guess is that they haven't lost touch with each other since.
Oddly enough when Gidden's left, who became his successor....some guy named Brandon Rush!
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:11 am
by freeman
I really can't see why Indiana would like to pursue two more pure sg's in a Boston trade.
We don't need a couple more. What we need is someone who can play sf, as Danny's back-up, and a defensive center.
Does the media know something we don't know?
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:19 am
by Scoot McGroot
Bill Walker's the potential SF backup.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:25 am
by chatard5
So wait, some of the money comes off of the salary cap, or am I reading this wrong? I thought it could come off if he gets more than $1.2MM, but is it already lower? That be nice if it is lower and then he gets signed so we get a lot more cap relief. That'd be beyond nice, it'd be fantastic, I think.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:15 am
by DC2
I want JR Giddens much more than any of the young players they have. He is an athletic beast and would immediately be our best athlete.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:03 pm
by Wizop
chatard5 wrote:So wait, some of the money comes off of the salary cap, or am I reading this wrong?
Wells is reporting that it is a buy out and that it will count part this year and part next. perhaps it is being paid that way. there have been no official figures released and Bruno has not run a "the star has reported so and so" story which would give semi-official confirmation to Wells' numbers but they make sense. we've saved about what he could expect to get elsewhere and you wouldn't think the Pacers would have agreed if the money had all counted against the cap and tax in the first year.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:03 pm
by Dunthreevy
I'd be pretty happy about Giddens. I think even more so than Bill Walker, just because of the connection that Giddens and Granger have. Creating chemistry with young players isn't the easiest thing in the world, so bringing in a guy that already has good chemistry with our superstar would be a great thing. Plus Giddens definitely is a very talented young player.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:14 pm
by sully00
freeman wrote:I really can't see why Indiana would like to pursue two more pure sg's in a Boston trade.
We don't need a couple more. What we need is someone who can play sf, as Danny's back-up, and a defensive center.
Does the media know something we don't know?
The one thing I can tell you about Allen, and to some extent Giddens (at least what he supposed to be), he is a very good defender at either guard spot and even at the SF spot, he rebounds well and attacks the rim. While not 3 pt shooters they are very much OB's kind of players and something that IND lacks. If you guys go with Ford and Watson at the point you could have problems matching up defensively.
They may compliment guys like Dunleavy and Rush who have SF size but SG games well. But I suppose you could say the same about Dahntay Jones.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:56 pm
by mizzoupacers
Scoot McGroot wrote:Sparhawk wrote:I don't understand why the Pacers would want anyone from Boston other than Bill Walker. Why take back salary when you can just sign Stephen Graham for less.
And therein pretty much lies the issue with a possible S&T.
I would assume that Bird would probably investigate to see if he could get Kendrick Perkins, Glen Davis, or possibly Rajon Rondo for a low price using Daniels as the filler, and when he realizes that he can't, Boston will end up just signing Daniels for the BAE without needing Indy's help.
As I see it, the advantages are that Boston quite possibly picks up the tab for the incoming players (by including cash in the deal), and that Allen/Giddens are better players than the likes of Stephen Graham.
There's no big stakes involved, as really it's just about the Pacers filling out the end of the bench, but I think there are reasons why a Daniels sign-n-trade might make sense for the Pacers.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:52 pm
by 8305
As I see it, the advantages are that Boston quite possibly picks up the tab for the incoming players (by including cash in the deal), and that Allen/Giddens are better players than the likes of Stephen Graham.
There's no big stakes involved, as really it's just about the Pacers filling out the end of the bench, but I think there are reasons why a Daniels sign-n-trade might make sense for the Pacers.[/quote]
Basically agree, but there will be minutes for a 4th wing prior to Dunleavy's return. Walker is probably the best fit based on his size and ability to back up Granger. Allen is less a project than the other two and you most likely will only need this player for 1/2 season. If Granger wants Giddens that probably trumps all other considerations. If you can't tell I don't have a strong feeling here.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:26 pm
by Wizop
Sparhawk wrote:I don't understand why the Pacers would want anyone from Boston other than Bill Walker. Why take back salary when you can just sign Stephen Graham for less.
I don't think they see Stephen as an option. that's not to say that I like anyone from Boston other than maybe Walker either.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:46 pm
by DC2
Look at Giddens' hops. He's the one in the headband, by the way. I'd love to bring him in to see if he could do anything with that athleticism. It's at least worth a try.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huVvyyq3L0A
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:26 pm
by Bill Lumbergh
Dunleavy17 wrote:Look at Giddens' hops. He's the one in the headband, by the way. I'd love to bring him in to see if he could do anything with that athleticism. It's at least worth a try.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huVvyyq3L0A
If you liked that one, check out this Giddens slam. It's way better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD58bsFo ... re=relatedI think Giddens has a better all around game than Walker, although a lot of Celtics fans prefer Walker. I'm a Celtics fan, btw, and I hope we do not give up Giddens. However it ends up going down, it sure is taking a long time, since it was announced a whole week ago that Daniels would be a Celtic, either by trade or the LLE.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2009 3:13 am
by Orlock78
Ok, I hate admitting to ignorance in front of my peers, but I'm not very good at understanding the whole sign and trade vs. outright signing thing. Could one of our gurus explain it to me? Why would Boston want to trade us anybody when they can sign him outright? The only thing I can see that it might do (if I understand correctly) is provide more money for Daniels than they can sign him for without our help. But then I don't understand why Boston would want to do that, wouldn't it be simpler for them to say "we don't want to give up any of our young talent" just so they wouldn't have to trade for him, and therefore pay him less money?? or is it about roster spots? I just don't understand the motive for Boston to do a trade is what I'm asking I guess.
Thanks again for your help in advance.
Re: Mike Wells on Tinsley CAP, and Boston Trade
Posted: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:36 am
by mizzoupacers
^ Boston is already over the luxury tax threshold. So if they use their exception to sign Daniels outright--the exception is for $1.9 million--then they would also have to pay an additional $1.9 million in tax. So Daniels costs them $3.8 million.
But let's say Boston makes it a sign-n-trade, and ships out a guy or two like Allen whose minutes Daniels would be taking anyway. The salaries would have to nearly match, since both Boston and Indiana are over the salary cap. So in a sign-n-trade, Boston's payroll basically stays the same, rather than increasing by $3.8 million--they are sending out about as much salary as they are bringing in, and they are not saddling themselves with any additional luxury tax.
Of course, I'd hope a good part of that savings would be passed on to the Pacers in cash as part of the trade. Boston would still come out ahead financially, plus they'd upgrade their roster. And Indiana would have the incentive they need to take on a salary like Tony Allen's, rather than just add a minimum wage guy like Stephen Graham--if you're Indiana, why not take the better player that is being paid for by your trading partner?
That's why a Daniels sign-n-trade has the potential to be a win-win trade.