hugepatsfan wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:Wizop wrote:
What would the Pels gain by waiting?
He's implying that Haliburton is going to suffer a far more serious injury because it once happened to this other guy and so the Pels should hold the 26 pick because the Pacers will play a season without Hali.
Stretchhhhhhhhhhhh
Awkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkward
Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Moderators: Andre Roberstan, MoneyTalks41890, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, BullyKing, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
-
gswhoops
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 34,836
- And1: 6,549
- Joined: Apr 27, 2005
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- eminence
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,228
- And1: 12,008
- Joined: Mar 07, 2015
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Yep, some variant of that was the danger.
I bought a boat.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Wizop
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,549
- And1: 5,194
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
- Contact:
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
As Bill Polian used to say quoting Marv Levy - if whatever you did didn't work, you should've done the other thing.
Please edit long quotes to only show what puts your new message into context.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
-
meridian
- Ballboy
- Posts: 20
- And1: 18
- Joined: Jun 20, 2022
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
esvl wrote:esvl wrote:Was Ind 1st 26 protected? If not, the Pels FO made a strange move
Exactly what happened. NOLA should fire their stupid GM effective inmidiately.
I do find it odd that NO was willing to do this trade at the time they did it even sitting aside the potential of Haliburton tearing his achilles. Pick 23 is low enough where I expect teams only want it for a specific player and you wouldn't trade for it until that pick is on the clock. From that standpoint I don't understand it.
From the perspective that they just lost out on a lottery pick in 2026 I don't think that will be the case. While the Pacers cannot contend without Haliburton they should still finish in the top 8 of the east if they keep most of the current group intact. The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank. Prior to the Pacers picking Bennedict Mathurin #6 in 2022 they had not had a pick inside the top 10 since 1988 when they pick Rik Smits #2. Plus, the city was really behind this current group with the run they just had. I think they will at least try to make the best of a bad situation in 2025-2026 and the chances of them having a significantly worse pick than 23 are not that good, IMO.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
-
gswhoops
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 34,836
- And1: 6,549
- Joined: Apr 27, 2005
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
meridian wrote:esvl wrote:esvl wrote:Was Ind 1st 26 protected? If not, the Pels FO made a strange move
Exactly what happened. NOLA should fire their stupid GM effective inmidiately.
I do find it odd that NO was willing to do this trade at the time they did it even sitting aside the potential of Haliburton tearing his achilles. Pick 23 is low enough where I expect teams only want it for a specific player and you wouldn't trade for it until that pick is on the clock. From that standpoint I don't understand it.
From the perspective that they just lost out on a lottery pick in 2026 I don't think that will be the case. While the Pacers cannot contend without Haliburton they should still finish in the top 8 of the east if they keep most of the current group intact. The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank. Prior to the Pacers picking Bennedict Mathurin #6 in 2022 they had not had a pick inside the top 10 since 1988 when they pick Rik Smits #2. Plus, the city was really behind this current group with the run they just had. I think they will at least try to make the best of a bad situation in 2025-2026 and the chances of them having a significantly worse pick than 23 are not that good, IMO.
Top 8 is generally less relevant these days, if they're not in the top 6 I think it's still fair to call it a potential lottery pick.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Wizop
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,549
- And1: 5,194
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
- Contact:
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
meridian wrote:The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank.
I wonder if Indy and OKC are similar in this regard. big markets like NYC and LA sell lots of tickets to businesses who buy them to give to customers and their purchase decision doesn't depend upon how good the team is. here in Indy most of the ticket buyers are regular fans. that's why the fieldhouse was so loud and I'm guessing it is why it is equally loud in OKC. the Pacer owner lost a lot of money in the years after the brawl when people got turned off and didn't renew their seats. (no boo hoos necessary as the worth of the franchise has skyrocketed). we had a winning home record for almost 30 years in a row. trying to win is necessary to sell tickets.
Please edit long quotes to only show what puts your new message into context.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 45,093
- And1: 14,382
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Wizop wrote:meridian wrote:The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank.
I wonder if Indy and OKC are similar in this regard. big markets like NYC and LA sell lots of tickets to businesses who buy them to give to customers and their purchase decision doesn't depend upon how good the team is. here in Indy most of the ticket buyers are regular fans. that's why the fieldhouse was so loud and I'm guessing it is why it is equally loud in OKC. the Pacer owner lost a lot of money in the years after the brawl when people got turned off and didn't renew their seats. (no boo hoos necessary as the worth of the franchise has skyrocketed). we had a winning home record for almost 30 years in a row. trying to win is necessary to sell tickets.
Also, at this point, Herb Simon is 90 years old. Can’t imagine he wants to do anything other than keep trying to get close, and certainly not make trades that sets you for “3 years out at the earliest”. He may not have 3 years.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Wizop
- RealGM
- Posts: 18,549
- And1: 5,194
- Joined: Jun 15, 2003
- Location: Indianapolis, IN
- Contact:
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Scoot McGroot wrote:Also, at this point, Herb Simon is 90 years old. Can’t imagine he wants to do anything other than keep trying to get close, and certainly not make trades that sets you for “3 years out at the earliest”. He may not have 3 years.
but his son does and he's moving into the chair
Please edit long quotes to only show what puts your new message into context.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Laimbeer
- RealGM
- Posts: 43,181
- And1: 15,188
- Joined: Aug 12, 2009
- Location: Cabin Creek
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
With Hali out this seems wise for the Pacers.
Comments to rationalize bad contracts -
1) It's less than the MLE
2) He can be traded later
3) It's only __% of the cap
4) The cap is going up
5) It's only __ years
6) He's a good mentor/locker room guy
1) It's less than the MLE
2) He can be traded later
3) It's only __% of the cap
4) The cap is going up
5) It's only __ years
6) He's a good mentor/locker room guy
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- MasterIchiro
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,388
- And1: 6,845
- Joined: Jan 18, 2013
- Location: The Dirty Water
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
gswhoops wrote:hugepatsfan wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:
He's implying that Haliburton is going to suffer a far more serious injury because it once happened to this other guy and so the Pels should hold the 26 pick because the Pacers will play a season without Hali.
Stretchhhhhhhhhhhh
Awkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkward
Class dismissed.
It has been written...
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- Scoot McGroot
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 45,093
- And1: 14,382
- Joined: Feb 16, 2005
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
Wizop wrote:Scoot McGroot wrote:Also, at this point, Herb Simon is 90 years old. Can’t imagine he wants to do anything other than keep trying to get close, and certainly not make trades that sets you for “3 years out at the earliest”. He may not have 3 years.
but his son does and he's moving into the chair
But Herb probably wants to see them win one before he dies.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
-
esvl
- Starter
- Posts: 2,361
- And1: 712
- Joined: Jun 02, 2022
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
This draft is weak, so what was the point for NO to give up all the chances to get the 5-22 pick in the next strong draft? Somebody fd up.meridian wrote:esvl wrote:esvl wrote:Was Ind 1st 26 protected? If not, the Pels FO made a strange move
Exactly what happened. NOLA should fire their stupid GM effective inmidiately.
I do find it odd that NO was willing to do this trade at the time they did it even sitting aside the potential of Haliburton tearing his achilles. Pick 23 is low enough where I expect teams only want it for a specific player and you wouldn't trade for it until that pick is on the clock. From that standpoint I don't understand it.
From the perspective that they just lost out on a lottery pick in 2026 I don't think that will be the case. While the Pacers cannot contend without Haliburton they should still finish in the top 8 of the east if they keep most of the current group intact. The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank. Prior to the Pacers picking Bennedict Mathurin #6 in 2022 they had not had a pick inside the top 10 since 1988 when they pick Rik Smits #2. Plus, the city was really behind this current group with the run they just had. I think they will at least try to make the best of a bad situation in 2025-2026 and the chances of them having a significantly worse pick than 23 are not that good, IMO.
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
- MasterIchiro
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,388
- And1: 6,845
- Joined: Jan 18, 2013
- Location: The Dirty Water
-
Re: Official [Shams] Pacers trade #23 to New Orleans
esvl wrote:This draft is weak, so what was the point for NO to give up all the chances to get the 5-22 pick in the next strong draft? Somebody fd up.meridian wrote:esvl wrote:Exactly what happened. NOLA should fire their stupid GM effective inmidiately.
I do find it odd that NO was willing to do this trade at the time they did it even sitting aside the potential of Haliburton tearing his achilles. Pick 23 is low enough where I expect teams only want it for a specific player and you wouldn't trade for it until that pick is on the clock. From that standpoint I don't understand it.
From the perspective that they just lost out on a lottery pick in 2026 I don't think that will be the case. While the Pacers cannot contend without Haliburton they should still finish in the top 8 of the east if they keep most of the current group intact. The Pacers owner has never been willing to tank. Prior to the Pacers picking Bennedict Mathurin #6 in 2022 they had not had a pick inside the top 10 since 1988 when they pick Rik Smits #2. Plus, the city was really behind this current group with the run they just had. I think they will at least try to make the best of a bad situation in 2025-2026 and the chances of them having a significantly worse pick than 23 are not that good, IMO.
That would be Joe Dumars. His phone must be blowing up with trade proposals.
It has been written...
Return to Trades and Transactions




