IND/DET/NOP - Turner-Grant-Bledsoe+

[youngcrev]

While you work on the compensation due Detroit, I think Indy is due some as well. I have Turner more valuable than Grant.

Maybe?

Honestly, I'm not a particularly big believer in either player, yet recognize that both have value due to scarcity of skill set.

I'm guessing there's some that would say big, switchable wings are more in demand, and therefore Grant should carry more value... But to me it's basically a toss up, and this is simply a case where one makes more sense in one spot, and the other in another.

[Texas Chuck]

Maybe?

Honestly, I'm not a particularly big believer in either player, yet recognize that both have value due to scarcity of skill set.

I'm guessing there's some that would say big, switchable wings are more in demand, and therefore Grant should carry more value... But to me it's basically a toss up, and this is simply a case where one makes more sense in one spot, and the other in another.

Yeah on these specific guys I'm a bigger believer in Turner than Grant, but certainly that Grant archetype is valuable. Even with the addition of Gordon, Denver certainly misses him. I'm also of the theory that when guys sign top of market free agency deals they don't have a lot of excess value unless they outperform the deal. And I'm not sold on him as a primary offensive option as played out over the season where his effectiveness really petered out. Part of that is Rose getting traded and part of it is just 2nd half tanking so maybe that's unfair?

Ugh lots of word salad to say I can't really disagree with you, just my personal feelings on these specific players.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I'm not opposed to trading Domas depending on what the return would be. I'm oppose to trading Turner unless we get a deal that I can't imagine anyone reasonably offering.

I tend to agree with this. I think it will be easier to find a 4 that can replace Sabonis's offense than one that can replace Turner's defense. the one caveat is that Sabonis's passing will be harder to replace than his scoring.

I think you can only run it back so many times before you realize the team has no future....of course, I don't believe the Pacers care about the future, so long as they make the playoffs, they'll be happy.

I think that's a bit too pessimistic. I don't think they'd be happy finishing 6-10. I think they want 50 win seasons at a minimum. if they get there and need to pay a LITTLE tax to take the next step,

Domas' passing is nice and all, but I think sometimes our offense runs a bit smoother when we aren't running everything through him. I love Domas, he's a great player, but feel like its easier to replace what he does than it is to replace Turner's defense...which again, scoring isn't even that big of a problem for us, even without Domas we have guys who can score.


The Pacers haven't won a playoff game since the 17/18 season, yet we watch them continue to try to fit a square peg into a round hole. We've shuffled a few deck chairs, and Oladipo forced us to trade him otherwise he'd probably still be here as well. Getting Brogdon was nice, but we gave a 1st away for funsies when we could have just signed him while keeping our pick.

Just saying, how long does this have to continue before management realizes it isn't working?

To be fair though, I get it. I didn't used to, but I do now. With the way the NBA is currently constructed, small market teams don't have much of a chance...certainly not a team as conservative as the Pacers. Since its near impossible for a team like the Pacers to win a Championship, the next best thing is just making the playoffs and trying to put up somewhat of a fight there...but we haven't even been able to do that lately.

[youngcrev]

Maybe?

Honestly, I'm not a particularly big believer in either player, yet recognize that both have value due to scarcity of skill set.

I'm guessing there's some that would say big, switchable wings are more in demand, and therefore Grant should carry more value... But to me it's basically a toss up, and this is simply a case where one makes more sense in one spot, and the other in another.

Yeah on these specific guys I'm a bigger believer in Turner than Grant, but certainly that Grant archetype is valuable. Even with the addition of Gordon, Denver certainly misses him. I'm also of the theory that when guys sign top of market free agency deals they don't have a lot of excess value unless they outperform the deal. And I'm not sold on him as a primary offensive option as played out over the season where his effectiveness really petered out. Part of that is Rose getting traded and part of it is just 2nd half tanking so maybe that's unfair?

Ugh lots of word salad to say I can't really disagree with you, just my personal feelings on these specific players.

Oh, I'm absolutely not sold Grant being a primary offensive option. And honestly, in his ideal role, he's probably not scoring much more than Turner is currently, though I would say this year shows that he's capable of more in a pinch. The salary certainly isn't great, but hey, there's a premium on those types right now.

Flip side, Turner's a great rim protector and capable of stretching the floor, he not exactly a good shooter. I also think that while the things that he can do make him rare, the things that he can't make me question just how valuable he'd be in a playoff series.

[pacers33granger]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Grant was good next to Jokic, so maybe it could work next to Domas decently well at least? In any event, he's likely a better fit than Myles, though Myles is probably more valuable to us when you take the entire roster into account. Grant may be fine with a "demotion" now that he got to show what he's capable of and would clearly be coming in as a higher option than he was when he left Denver, even if it's not first option.

I'd be ok with it and it's a better return on value and fit than most Myles trades on here. But I definitely see where you're coming from and would have some serious reservations for those same reasons.

I will say I'd prefer to trade for an inefficient first option to become an efficient third or fourth option over doing the opposite like we did with Brogdon.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Grant was good next to Jokic, so maybe it could work next to Domas decently well at least? In any event, he's likely a better fit than Myles, though Myles is probably more valuable to us when you take the entire roster into account. Grant may be fine with a "demotion" now that he got to show what he's capable of and would clearly be coming in as a higher option than he was when he left Denver, even if it's not first option.

I'd be ok with it and it's a better return on value and fit than most Myles trades on here. But I definitely see where you're coming from and would have some serious reservations for those same reasons.

I will say I'd prefer to trade for an inefficient first option to become an efficient third or fourth option over doing the opposite like we did with Brogdon.

Watching the Pacers just completely give up playing defense would be deflating for me.

[pacers33granger]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Grant was good next to Jokic, so maybe it could work next to Domas decently well at least? In any event, he's likely a better fit than Myles, though Myles is probably more valuable to us when you take the entire roster into account. Grant may be fine with a "demotion" now that he got to show what he's capable of and would clearly be coming in as a higher option than he was when he left Denver, even if it's not first option.

I'd be ok with it and it's a better return on value and fit than most Myles trades on here. But I definitely see where you're coming from and would have some serious reservations for those same reasons.

I will say I'd prefer to trade for an inefficient first option to become an efficient third or fourth option over doing the opposite like we did with Brogdon.

Watching the Pacers just completely give up playing defense would be deflating for me.

We all lived through the Murphleavy years, but yeah that resulting roster would be pretty rough on that end.

People may not realize how brutal it was after Myles went down. We still won some games, but most teams got wherever they wanted and it was super deflating to know it would take a full game of near perfect offense to even have a chance.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Grant was good next to Jokic, so maybe it could work next to Domas decently well at least? In any event, he's likely a better fit than Myles, though Myles is probably more valuable to us when you take the entire roster into account. Grant may be fine with a "demotion" now that he got to show what he's capable of and would clearly be coming in as a higher option than he was when he left Denver, even if it's not first option.

I'd be ok with it and it's a better return on value and fit than most Myles trades on here. But I definitely see where you're coming from and would have some serious reservations for those same reasons.

I will say I'd prefer to trade for an inefficient first option to become an efficient third or fourth option over doing the opposite like we did with Brogdon.

Watching the Pacers just completely give up playing defense would be deflating for me.

We all lived through the Murphleavy years, but yeah that resulting roster would be pretty rough on that end.

People may not realize how brutal it was after Myles went down. We still won some games, but most teams got wherever they wanted and it was super deflating to know it would take a full game of near perfect offense to even have a chance.

Exactly. Turner was the Pacers best player last season and the absolute last player I would trade. Everyone else can be reasonably replaced to some degree, finding a replacement for what Turner does would be very, very difficult.

[Pharaoh]

Considering Grant signed with the Pistons for the same money Denver offered due to us having a African American GM & coach it would be a bad look to trade him after 1 single season.

Especially if all we get back is Bledsoe and picks.

IF this was going to happen we likely cut the Pelicans out and keep Turner for ourselves

Turner and Stewart at the 4/5 is interesting but I just don't see the Pistons looking to move Grant atm

Sent from my SM-G781B using RealGM mobile app