Sabonis and Turner offers

[Adrian Street]

Spurs would win 50 games with Sabonis as their PF/C.... they have the system and role players (and co-star in Murray) to have a winning team.

I could see Sabonis being MVP with the Spurs. It would be hard for the Spurs to get Sabonis wihout Murray going in the trade. Maybe something like White, Johnson and Vassell for Sabonis and Craig.

[Mattatron]

Theres a few problems with pacers fans expectation and reality:

1) Pacers want a consolidation trade but they cant go above tax, so it makes it hard to bring in a star on max contract
2) brogdon cant be traded, McConnell and Warren are injured, LeVert is negative value so they lack good fillers.
3) turner/sabonis arent enough to bring back a young franchise corner stone/prized prospect. I think even combining them (via 3 way) wouldnt be able to do that.

Would indy fans be willing to attach pick(s) to try to land a marquee player) is it wise to do so? Just a really hard situation to be in.

1.Pacers need to go after a young rising player who is on the verge of stardom but not quite there yet.
2.LeVert has been playing at an all-star level recently and if he stays healthy and continues that level of play until the trade deadline he will be in very high demand.
3.Some combination of Sabonis or Turner with LeVert will be enough to bring in a franchise player under the right circumstances.

Would Indy be willing to attach picks? Yes, for the right players and we should if that's what it takes to get a player who can be that franchise superstar.

I thought indy intends to rebuild. And I don't think there's anyone out there trading a potential franchise player/superstar like you said for Sabonis or Turner or Levert lol

[Adrian Street]

Theres a few problems with pacers fans expectation and reality:

1) Pacers want a consolidation trade but they cant go above tax, so it makes it hard to bring in a star on max contract
2) brogdon cant be traded, McConnell and Warren are injured, LeVert is negative value so they lack good fillers.
3) turner/sabonis arent enough to bring back a young franchise corner stone/prized prospect. I think even combining them (via 3 way) wouldnt be able to do that.

Would indy fans be willing to attach pick(s) to try to land a marquee player) is it wise to do so? Just a really hard situation to be in.

1.Pacers need to go after a young rising player who is on the verge of stardom but not quite there yet.
2.LeVert has been playing at an all-star level recently and if he stays healthy and continues that level of play until the trade deadline he will be in very high demand.
3.Some combination of Sabonis or Turner with LeVert will be enough to bring in a franchise player under the right circumstances.

Would Indy be willing to attach picks? Yes, for the right players and we should if that's what it takes to get a player who can be that franchise superstar.

I thought indy intends to rebuild. And I don't think there's anyone out there trading a potential franchise player/superstar like you said for Sabonis or Turner or Levert lol

Are the raptors going to rebuild since they have the same number of wins as the Pacers? Maybe they could trade Siakam with his great contract for a franchise player/superstar? lol

[8305]

Pacers want a consolidation trade but they cant go above tax, so it makes it hard to bring in a star on max contract

I may be alone, but I do not want a consolidation trade. I do not want to trade two twenties for a forty. We may need to trade a twenty for a twenty with different skills though.

That said, I first want a better handle on what is of going wrong. Why do we score well in the first half and not the second? Depth? Scheme? Adjustments? Effort? I don't think we can fix the problem without first identifying it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

We have had three coaches in three years and it appears to be getting worse. Most would argue Carlisle brings the best coaching chops of the three. Are there any schemes and adjustments left? I think we lose the way and for the reason most bad teams lose. When the game is on the line better teams know they can turn things up and beat us. Earlier in the game most of our opponents play with less urgency allowing us to stay in or even control the game. Get to the end they turn it up and win.

I think we have better talent than our record would indicate. I think we agree on that point. I blame the result on a roster of mainline pieces Sabonis, Turner, Levert and Brogdan whose skills don’t compliment each other. Until that situation is addressed I see the organization wasting everyone’s time.

[Topofthekey]

Pacers want a consolidation trade but they cant go above tax, so it makes it hard to bring in a star on max contract

I may be alone, but I do not want a consolidation trade. I do not want to trade two twenties for a forty. We may need to trade a twenty for a twenty with different skills though.

That said, I first want a better handle on what is of going wrong. Why do we score well in the first half and not the second? Depth? Scheme? Adjustments? Effort? I don't think we can fix the problem without first identifying it.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

Why not though?

Max contracts are an important part of roster construction, I believe

It may feel overly expensive to invest $30-40m into one position, but you make up for it by being able to get away with $5-10m guys like PJ Tucker or Seth Curry or Royce O'Neal and etc in other positions

[Wizop]

I have heard that about Indy not taking on big contracts because of the tax line and it just never made sense to me. What am I missing?

In suggesting we trade Lamb and a starter for a contract equal to their combined salaries, what you are missing is the need to be sufficiently under the tax to be able to resign Warren. Lamb's expiring contract provides that room. Granted everything changes if Warren doesn't return healthy this year but we shouldn't paint ourselves into that corner now

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[Knickfan1982]

I can't imagine Indiana wanting to do this. Doesn't the NYK hold the Hornets #1 in 2022 with top 19 protections? Even if you added it this is another had full of change for a dollar bill.

As good as Turner is, he's no superstar. He's a complimentary piece. I think adding a stretch 5 who can still block shots is the kind of complimentary piece that can help balance things for the Knicks. But still, a complimentary piece all the same. Much beyond what I offered is going to be an overpay.

Fact is Turner is the NBA leader in shots blocked, he changes many more shots quantity unknown. He plays excellent defense in addition to his shot blocking. He is also a very good 3 pt shooter. 2 #1 picks and a 2nd and Toppin sounds like a good return but the Dallas pick could be a 2nd if not conveyed by 2025 the 22 Hornets 2nd is a very minor asset, only the knicks pick if it was unprotected it's the only somewhat attractive asset you are offering. Plumlee and Ish Smith are never playing for the Pacers unless there are multiple injuries.

So what you offer is a hand full of "Meh."

The Dallas pick belongs to the Knicks in 2023 as long as it is within the 11-30 range. So lets not pretend it has any real chance of becoming a 2nd. Its two first round picks, a second, Toppin and salary ballast. Not a bad first step in the retooling process.

[Knickfan1982]

Turner is leading the NBA in blocked shots, and he is a good 3pt shooter, he plays excellent defense in addition to the blocked shots. I'm gonna say even if you gave me the NYK 2022 #1 unprotected, the Dallas pick, and the hornets #1 with Toppin I'd still need more say RJ Barrett to get me close to saying yes, and this is not hyperbolic exaggerations on my part.

And at that point I would say you can keep Turner. Its clear you want a superstar return for a guy whose a complimentary piece. A great one that would fit on many rosters to be sure but a complimentary piece nonetheless.

Not what I said, I don't want to trade Turner. People keep calling and asking for the guy. Those 3 picks if a deal was offered would likely be 1 #1 from the knicks in 22 and 3 2nds in 25, 26, and 27 as the Dallas pick and the Hornets pick could easily become 2nds if they don't convey by 2025. Toppin is not exactly setting the world on fire and RJ is ok but not really what I want if I'm trading Turner or Sabonis. So in reality Toppin, RJ and those picks is not that great of a return, I don't see how that is equivalent to asking for a "superstar."

The Dallas pick is top 10 protected. Its going to be conveyed. Stop pretending that pick is anything less than a first round pick.

[Mattatron]

1.Pacers need to go after a young rising player who is on the verge of stardom but not quite there yet.
2.LeVert has been playing at an all-star level recently and if he stays healthy and continues that level of play until the trade deadline he will be in very high demand.
3.Some combination of Sabonis or Turner with LeVert will be enough to bring in a franchise player under the right circumstances.

Would Indy be willing to attach picks? Yes, for the right players and we should if that's what it takes to get a player who can be that franchise superstar.

I thought indy intends to rebuild. And I don't think there's anyone out there trading a potential franchise player/superstar like you said for Sabonis or Turner or Levert lol

Are the raptors going to rebuild since they have the same number of wins as the Pacers? Maybe they could trade Siakam with his great contract for a franchise player/superstar? lol

Probably we do a rebuild. And we can't trade Siakam for a superstar. I'm not that disenchanted like you. Role player and few picks would be enough to get a bit deeper on the bench. We're overcrowded with Anunoby, Barnes & Siakam.
OG and Scottie matches well with the age. Siakam is still young, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't match with our timeline anymore, and at this phase of his career it would be better to be a sidekick or the 3rd wheel on a contending team or some team that wants to take the next step and get a bit more experienced. For Siakam it would be perelfect to be surrounded by shooters - like Trae young in Atlanta, so he has enough space for his drive and have lesser attention besides an dominant scorer.

[Wizop]

Siakam is still young, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't match with our timeline anymore, and at this phase of his career it would be better to be a sidekick or the 3rd wheel on a contending team or some team that wants to take the next step and get a bit more experienced. For Siakam it would be perfect to be surrounded by shooters ... so he has enough space for his drive and have lesser attention besides an dominant scorer.

that does not describe Indiana any more than it describes Toronto.

[Godaddycurse]

Are the raptors going to rebuild since they have the same number of wins as the Pacers? Maybe they could trade Siakam with his great contract for a franchise player/superstar? lol

We fortunately got one via tanking last year (Barnes). We have been upfront that this is a development year. We are playing rookies and min plays on bench on purpose. Re: Siakam we are seeing what we have with him first/give him time to rebuild or prove he can lead a team.

[Scoot McGroot]

Can’t get a player the age of Fox with his numbers last year as a first option to sign a deal for a lot less. If you like him, that’s the going rate.

We aren't saying his contract is above market value. We're saying it doesn't fit with our other contracts. Some would counter that we have to blow up everything because our roster needs to be reconstructed to accommodate max players. I hope not.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

We went after Hayward when he was a free agent with Boston and we are reported to be interested in Simmons. They both make more than Fox. Why would doing a trade of Sabonis and Lamb for Fox and Ramsey, for example, be a problem when the salaries match? Why would it not fit with our other players if we get back the same number of players making the same combined salary? I'm not trying to argue just trying to learn. I have heard that about Indy not taking on big contracts because of the tax line and it just never made sense to me. What am I missing?

You’re missing that Lamb is expiring. You’re looking at it from just matching salary to make a deal legal this year, but not what the actual salary added is this year (which might put us into the luxury tax), or what it might add to the future, making it difficult to re sign a Warren or use the MLE to replace him if he walks. It’s more about the sustainability of building a team that can be kept, rather than having to pay to dump some useful salary just to avoid the tax in a rebuild/rework of the roster. Add in that Sabonis is on a flat contract (no year,y raises), and guys like Simmons or Fox are on yearly maximum raises, and the gap becomes a bit worse.

As for Hayward, we still don’t know what Pritchard was willing to do, and what Hayward was willing to sign for. Reports were that Hayward was willing to take a hometown discount to come to Indy until Charlotte jumped in with a bigger offer. Was it a flat salary? If so, he might not have made more than Turner/McDermott last year, and Turner/Craig this year, hypothetically.

It’s all about the sustainability and not painting yourself in a corner where the value you need to grow (like picks) has to be used to dump contracts on useful players to duck under the tax.

[Adrian Street]

I thought indy intends to rebuild. And I don't think there's anyone out there trading a potential franchise player/superstar like you said for Sabonis or Turner or Levert lol

Are the raptors going to rebuild since they have the same number of wins as the Pacers? Maybe they could trade Siakam with his great contract for a franchise player/superstar? lol

Probably we do a rebuild. And we can't trade Siakam for a superstar. I'm not that disenchanted like you. Role player and few picks would be enough to get a bit deeper on the bench. We're overcrowded with Anunoby, Barnes & Siakam.
OG and Scottie matches well with the age. Siakam is still young, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't match with our timeline anymore, and at this phase of his career it would be better to be a sidekick or the 3rd wheel on a contending team or some team that wants to take the next step and get a bit more experienced. For Siakam it would be perelfect to be surrounded by shooters - like Trae young in Atlanta, so he has enough space for his drive and have lesser attention besides an dominant scorer.

What I said about getting a franchise player was with a combination of Sabonis, Turner and LeVert under the right circumstances. Those circumstances could be the way the Raptors got Kawhi or drafting the player with a pick aquired in a trade or trading for a young player with potential like a Wiseman. I wasn't trying to suggest that I expect any team to trade a current known superstar for anyone the Pacers have.. I have always liked Siakam and would like for the Pacers to trade for him if it wasn't for that contract. The Raptors have a very talented lineup other than at the center position. Barnes and Anunoby are the best young forward duo in the NBA. If the Raptors would trade Anunoby for Sabonis it would be a win for both teams Imo. Sabonis with Siakam, Barnes, Trent JR. and Van Vleet could challenge this year. The Pacers never rebuild just retool. If the Pacers make the right moves then I think they could be good in the second half of the season if Warren ever comes back healthy.

[amcoolio]

Sabonis and Turner aren't getting mega offers, most of the league doesn't need them. Centers aren't in high demand anymore unless you are Embiid/Jokic level

[Wizop]

If the Pacers make the right moves then I think they could be good in the second half of the season if Warren ever comes back healthy.

if Warren and Brogdon come back healthy and LeVert continues to learn that the team needs him to be a passer, they could be good in the second half of the season whether or not they make a move. it wouidn't hurt if Carlisle would figure out that this team needs to play through Sabonis more.

[Helsbyte]

This board is hilarious when describing Sabonis. In this thread alone he has been described from everything to a potential MVP caliber talent via San Antonio to nothing more than a defensive liability role player. SMH........let me help.....He is a tier 2 player, ranked somewhere between the 30-40th best player in the NBA. He is an offensive initiator and distributor. You can run the offense thru him. He is a strong rebounder and a GOOD team defender. He is not a rim protector or elite defender. His offensive talents outweighs any defensive shortcomings you may think he has. last year the entire world watched him carry the Indiana Pacers to the play in game with a bunch of G-League talent while putting up some insane counting stats including multiple triple double games( Don't believe me use google). This last sentence is important because there are very few players in the NBA that can put their team on their back.
I am an Indy fan and I know he isn't a #1 option on a championship team but probably a 2nd or 3rd option(depending on team build).

Hope this helps!

[Topofthekey]

Sabonis and Turner aren't getting mega offers, most of the league doesn't need them. Centers aren't in high demand anymore unless you are Embiid/Jokic level

See Nikola Vucevic

[Texas Chuck]

Sabonis and Turner aren't getting mega offers, most of the league doesn't need them. Centers aren't in high demand anymore unless you are Embiid/Jokic level

itt I learned that 28 teams have decided they don't want a center at all despite a guy like Rudy Gobert having been the best player on one of the best teams in the league for years now. Or Bam playing a key role on a Finals team. Brook Lopez playing an important role on our reigning champ, not to mention all the other centers currently entrenched in rotations.

Nope its either have an MVP candidate or we don't need ya, we don't want ya.

[Wizop]

Sabonis is on a very short list of players with a 25 rebound triple double. the list is even shorter if the third double is assists and not blocks.

[basketballwacko2]

We went after Hayward when he was a free agent with Boston and we are reported to be interested in Simmons. They both make more than Fox. Why would doing a trade of Sabonis and Lamb for Fox and Ramsey, for example, be a problem when the salaries match? Why would it not fit with our other players if we get back the same number of players making the same combined salary? I'm not trying to argue just trying to learn. I have heard that about Indy not taking on big contracts because of the tax line and it just never made sense to me. What am I missing?

Notice that we didn't trade for sign Hayward, and we didn't trade for Simmons. Do the math Fox is $30 million next year, Brogdan is $22.6m, Turner $18 million and needs to be extended, and LeVert $18 million, that's $88 million for 4 guys, and you still need to sign Warren or someone to play SF, there's Holiday, McConnell, Craig and the rookie deals, and you need a 14 man roster at least. How do you do that and stay out of the tax? And is that team gonna win more than 40 games?

I did notice that we didn't do a sign and trade for Hayward but only because Charlotte came in and offered more money while Ainge was holding out to get more in return for him. The fact that we didn't do a sign and trade had nothing to do with the size of his contract. Lets do the math, if we trade a player making 20 million and a player making 18 million that's 38 million we are trading away. If we are trading for a player that makes 30 million and another player that makes 5 million then that's 35 million. we are trading 2 players making 38 mil combined for 2 players making 35 mil combined, so we save 3 million. Maybe this will help

Paccers trade away
20 mil + 18 mil = 38 mil

Pacers receive
30 mil + 5 mil= 35 mil

38 mil - 35 mil = 3 mil more traded away than bringing back. It's not complicated

It's not that simple. When you have a $30 million guy who is getting 8% raises he's taking up the cap space of 2 guys, and when it's a guy who is just not worth $30 million like Hayward or CJ it hinders your ability to get better. I don't want a b-list player who is paid like an A-list player. Simmons is an example he's a flawed player and a headcase why do we want him for $33 million? I'd rather find a G-Leaguer and pay him league min.