Watson Official, Chat Wrap Today

SuperReggie31 · Post #1 » by **SuperReggie31** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:52 pm

The Pacers officially signed Earl Watson today at 4:30pm. Following the signing he had a chat wrap with the Pacer fan community. He has humor too!

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/watson_chat_090728.html

He will also be wearing #2.

Dunthreevy · Post #2 » by **Dunthreevy** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 8:58 pm

Earl does seem like a pretty humorous dude.

"If anyone sees Brandon, tell him to please call me."

DWCP2 · Post #3 » by **DWCP2** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:10 pm

Dunthreevy wrote:Earl does seem like a pretty humorous dude.

"If anyone sees Brandon, tell him to please call me."

Technically, Watson being the veteran has the right to request #25 if he wants to and can do it over Rush's head.

But I figure he doesn't want to break the good karma in Indiana.

greenway84 · Post #4 » by **greenway84** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:17 pm

^
I don't think that's true.

Anyways, I have read conflicting reports that Earl signed a one year deal, and others saying it's a multi-year deal. Which is it?

Post #5 » by **PR07** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:24 pm

Brandon's higher on the organization totem pole than Earl. He doesn't have to give up anything.

As for Earl and Brandon's past history, I never knew they were close:

No. 2. I've known Brandon Rush since he was about 5 years old. He wears my number 25. I don't know if he copied me and wanted to be like me or because I love him like a brother -- honestly, we're like family. I just decided to let him represent it to the fullest and I'm just going to take the two part of it. LOL.

Earl seems like a pretty laid back and funny guy. I'm glad we added him to the team, he should be a solid backup PG for us...if he practices that which he preaches.

DWCP2 · Post #6 » by **DWCP2** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:33 pm

Anybody else notice that the Pacers sign him "multi-year" deal? Not just one year as all the papers have described?

Dunthreevy · Post #7 » by **Dunthreevy** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:41 pm

Apparently Watson played AAU ball with all 3 Rush brothers (JaRon, Kareem & Brandon).

*yes Rose I did just steal your info and post it*

Dunthreevy · Post #8 » by **Dunthreevy** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:50 pm

I actually play pickup with Danny Granger all the time at UCLA so I see him a couple fimtes a week. It was pretty much a done deal so he didn't have to recruit me. And I talked to Brandon on the phone. He was excitted till I asked for my jersey number, then he hung up and I haven't heard from him since. LOL.

Thanks a lot for all the good questions and I look forward to more of these chat questions. I hope to hear from everyone soon. And if anyone sees Brandon, tell him to please call me.

Pretty funny dude.

Gmacc22 · Post #9 » by **Gmacc22** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:37 pm

I Really like that we signed Watson! I think that he should start and that we should trade t.j ford or diener. Still clueless on who will back up Danny Granger!?! DOES ANYONE HAVE AN IDEA

Starting Lineup:
E.Watson/T.J Ford/A.J Price/T.Diener
B.Rush/D.Jones/M.Dunleavy
D.Granger/?????/?????
T.Murphy/T.Hansbrough/S.Jones or J. McRoberts
R.Hibbert/J.Foster/????

Post #10 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:16 pm

Earl Watson is a terrific backup PG in this league. However, he's a well below average starter.

Travis Diener is a terrific 3rd/emergency PG in this league. However, he's a very low caliber starter.

TJ Ford is the only starting caliber PG we have, and is a pretty solid player. Let's let him play and see what happens.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for moving TJ if the value is very good and can improve the team long-term, but I just don't see that happening right now. The market is slim pickins' in return for TJ Ford.

As for Watson's "multi-year deal"; I assume it's a 2 year deal using the full Bi-Annual exception, which would be pretty consistent with the original $2 million or so number that we heard floating about. The BAE would be basically 2 years for $4-4.5 million or so. Pretty fair market value for the Pacers. That also keeps the Pacers cap open in 2011, like already planned.

fienX420 · Post #11 » by **fienX420** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:11 am

IndyStar says it's a one year, $3 million deal. I assume it'll be cleared up shortly, but either way, what the hell? That is a lot of money for a player who just got waived. Was there even a market for this guy? Or Dahntay Jones? Or Solomon Jones? Or Ryan Hollins? Are we bidding against ourselves? What are we spending all this money on? These are all underwhelming names - doesn't add up to 'Jack.'

grewich · Post #12 » by **grewich** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:29 am

Scoot McGroot wrote:Earl Watson is a terrific backup PG in this league. However, he's a well below average starter.

Travis Diener is a terrific 3rd/emergency PG in this league. However, he's a very low caliber starter.

TJ Ford is the only starting caliber PG we have, and is a pretty solid player. Let's let him play and see what happens.

^^^
yes yes & yes

i seems to me that TJ is undervalued by some. Hes the only starting we have and we cant get anything better at the moment. Let him play, let them play their way into the 7th or 8th seed and we'll grow from there.

Post #13 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:38 am

fienX420 wrote:IndyStar says it's a one year, $3 million deal. I assume it'll be cleared up shortly, but either way, what the hell? That is a lot of money for a player who just got waived. Was there even a market for this guy? Or Dahntay Jones? Or Solomon Jones? Or Ryan Hollins? Are we bidding against ourselves? What are we spending all this money on? These are all underwhelming names - doesn't add up to 'Jack.'

Solomon Jones got the league minimum, and we haven't, and won't, sign Ryan Hollins now that we've signed Solomon.

Dahntay Jones had a bit of a market for him. There were a lot of local newspapers around the country that mentioned him as a likely target for their respective cities' teams.

However, it was never about this year's salary for Jarrett Jack. The issue lies with his overall salary he's owed and the fact it's for 4 years. Overall, it was too much for a likely backup, and hopefully bodes well about the financial future of the Pacers. Hopefully gone are the days where we overpay to keep our own players on long-term deals (i.e. Bender, Croshere, Tinsley, etc).

fienX420 · Post #14 » by **fienX420** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:27 am

I don't get why we would be averse to a 4 year contract, but dandy with 2 year contracts. It doesn't make any sense. Next year is the year we need to be saving money. After that, we have cap room. But it hardly matters because look at the free agents we get. I'm just of the opinion that keeping Jack was the best move, and the fact that we are going out and spending the money we could have spent on Jack is ticking me off. If they were all one year deals, it would be one thing. But we're not even budgeting great and are probably going to be over the luxury tax next year. French lick arithmetic?

Post #15 » by **Miller4ever** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:34 am

Gmacc22 wrote:I Really like that we signed Watson! I think that he should start and that we should trade t.j ford or diener. Still clueless on who will back up Danny Granger!?! DOES ANYONE HAVE AN IDEA

Starting Lineup:
E.Watson/T.J Ford/A.J Price/T.Diener
B.Rush/D.Jones/M.Dunleavy
D.Granger/?????/?????
T.Murphy/T.Hansbrough/S.Jones or J. McRoberts
R.Hibbert/J.Foster/????

Rush will get SF minutes, probably. It does mean that Dahntay will get a significant amount of minutes until Dunleavy comes back.

Watson410 · Post #16 » by **Watson410** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:34 am

I don't think pacer fans should be real excited about Earl signing a multi-year contract. You guys will probably be wishing you didn't come January, keep in mind this is coming from a Thunder fan.. I got to see him first hand last season, unfortunately. He's going to frustrate you to no end!!

PacersDG · Post #17 » by **PacersDG** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:41 am

You made your username after him, he must be baller.

Post #18 » by **Miller4ever** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:44 am

^^I'd rather contradictory statements (as puzzling as they are) than fanboy statements.

fienX420 · Post #19 » by **fienX420** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:52 am

THEME... Watson isn't a great defender but is being touted as one all over the place (see Jones, Dahntay).

Everybody look in the mirror and say, "We are good on defense, we are good on defense, we are good on defense."

I guess it could work?

Post #20 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:53 am

fienX420 wrote:I don't get why we would be averse to a 4 year contract, but dandy with 2 year contracts. It doesn't make any sense. Next year is the year we need to be saving money. After that, we have cap room. But it hardly matters because look at the free agents we get. I'm just of the opinion that keeping Jack was the best move, and the fact that we are going out and spending the money we could have spent on Jack is ticking me off. If they were all one year deals, it would be one thing. But we're not even budgeting great and are probably going to be over the luxury tax next year. French lick arithmetic?

Because if we sign all 4 year deals, then we won't have cap space in 2 years... :dontknow:

Does it help that the 2nd year of McRoberts and Jones aren't guaranteed?

Either way, it doesn't matter what we did, we're most likely over the luxury tax no matter what. Unless we somehow could trade 2 of Ford, Murphy, and Dunleavy for expirings this year, when everyone is stockpiling their expirings for the fabled summer of 2010 shopping spree, then there's no way we can avoid a precipitous drop in the luxury tax level that is so steep a drop, that something like 3/4 of all teams will be over the tax level.

Basically, instead of signing JJ for 4 years, we just filled out the entire bottom half of our roster for about a third of the total cost of JJ's new contract overall, and about the same amount this year. Watson, Dahntay, and Solomon all cost only a scoshe more than what JJ would have cost us this season. That's a backup PG, backup SG/SF, and an emergency big man all for the cost of what would have likely been our backup PG.