RealGM

Is there a rule that disallows us from re-signing Jamaal Tinsley? He's probably better than any PG on our roster and he's looking for a job. We already saved several million bucks when we bought him out. Now he'd only cost us the minimum salary. He'd probably be a lot easier to trade this time if it still didn't work out.

Even if we were allowed to, why would we want to?

Well, like I said, he is probably better than any of the PGs on our roster. Also, it would make a really good media story. Larry Bird and Jamaal Tinsley hugging on the cover of the Indianapolis Star would sell a lot of copies. I don't even see how anybody could argue with that. I would by 10 copies just by myself. And I would save the image from IndyStar.com and set it as my desktop background. Also, if we take Tinsley off the market, that means that no other team will be able to pick him up and use him against us. You have to believe that if he signs with another team, he is going to stick it to us at least a couple times during the season. Our margin for error isn't that big - we need every win we can get.

Fien , us resigning Tinsley is simply outlandish jibber. I do agree that Tinsley will throw his big ass around and abuse any one of our PGs. However, Ford would atleast break Tinsley down with his speed. Interesting match-up but I think Tinsley's size eventually wears on Ford.

disclaimer: If JT uses the first part of the regular season for conditioning, than all bets are off.

JT's return to Conseco will be dreadful for him.

Ticket sales would plummet and this would not help to keep the team in town. 3-4 more wins isn't as important as keeping the fans happy.

That would be the worst GM ever. Why buy out a player then turn around and give him more money. Not even if this was a good non felon player would we do this.

Not a good plan, JT is gone and never coming back...Thank God!

I miss Reggie wrote:Not a good plan, JT is gone and never coming back...Thank God!

this

and tj is much better

Quite possibly the most nonsensical idea I've ever read on this board.

Dunthreevy wrote:Quite possibly the most nonsensical idea I've ever read on this board.

Agreed. Very well put.

I think everybody is missing the point. Bird and Tinsley on the cover of the Indianapolis Star? Obviously, we would sell out a whole lot more as everybody wants to follow the reunion. Bird said Tinsley would be an All-Star and now, with all the rest, the timing is perfect. We just happen to really need an All-Star PG. Of course, we would probably have too many PGs again, but I guess we could just buy-out Earl Watson if we really have to. Even if Bird says he doesn't believe in buying out players, I think he'll make an exception.

Alas, I am pretty sure this is all a moot point. Surely there is a rule that disallows such a move. Otherwise, teams could always psych-out players by pretending they don't want them and buying them out and then being like "just joshin' ya" and sign them back to minimum contracts because their self-esteem is so low they're just happy to have a job now. The player's union would probably frown down upon such tactics.

You my friend must've drank some silly juice this morning. Bird and Tinsley on the cover of the Star is going to do nothing but piss off Pacers fans, and turn the half of us who actually have faith in Bird's moves, against him.

Not only that, we aren't saving any money by doing this like you say. We just bought Tinsley out and saved ourselves $4 million, but we're still paying him $10.5 (?) million over the next 2 years. How is giving him more money, on a new contract saving us money?

Nothing against you, but it's literally the dumbest idea I've ever seen anyone post on here.

I'll take a combo of TJ Ford and Earl Watson over Jamaal Tinsley every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

fienX420 wrote:Is there a rule that disallows us from re-signing Jamaal Tinsley? He's probably better than any PG on our roster and he's looking for a job. We already saved several million bucks when we bought him out. Now he'd only cost us the minimum salary. He'd probably be a lot easier to trade this time if it still didn't work out.

Are you talking about the same Jamal Tinsley who can't shoot, won't defend, and rarely finishes around the basket? I will give you that for abreviated stretches over the course of his career in Indiana he was a very good pg. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of time he was on the floor here he was at best very average. I don't see him as a clear upgrade over Watson or Ford. Not to mention all the other baggage.

I would much rather watch Tinsley waste his talents in another uniform. He is as talented, maybe more talented, than any PG on our roster, but he lacked the desire and smarts to be a team leader. Even if he were a high character, upstanding individual I wouldn't want him on my team.

Give me Watson over Tinsley ANY day of the week. He will hustle, defend and give 100% every minute on the floor.

I'd at least give him a job as a Dish Washer.

So you really are a joke account fien?


Should've seen it coming.

I generally lurk on this board the majority of the time. I don't usually post unless I have a question or something I feel strongly about. That being said..

I completely agree with what others have said above! I have nothing against the original poster in any way, but that is easily the MOST Ridiculous, Horrible, Laughable Idea I have ever heard regarding the Pacers. I'm tempted to believe its a joke, except that the idea is being defended. But rather than simply say its a dumb idea lets actually look at it for a moment. (and this is my less than expert opinion)

Lets go over the Cons first:

- We would DESTROY team chemistry
- We would alienate a HUGE portion of the fan base
- Larry Bird would lose nearly ALL credibility
- I have to think it would a very negative effect on future dealings with the players we DO have
- With the above points in mind, our record would almost certainly suffer a great deal

and those are just the ones I can come up with off the top of my head. And as for the Indianapolis star thing.... Do you remember the last time Larry Bird was on the Cover of another publication with a malcontent team destroyer?? I don't think we came out on the plus side of that little debacle.

Again, Nothing against the poster personally, but ... Come on?!??!?

Oh ya I forgot the Pros. They are listed below











-

Scoot McGroot wrote:So you really are a joke account fien?


Should've seen it coming.

I'd say the persona posting before was fien and the persona posting now is 420.

M4E, can you give him a warning or something? Just for lowering our collective faith in humanity a few notches.

I'm contemplating locking this thread just due to the sheer stupidity of the idea.