MIL-CHI-IND

Baddy Chuck · Post #1 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:26 am

Looking for some legit reasons why you guys wouldnt do it, theres gotta be some.

Milwaukee trades: Michael Redd, Charlie Villanueva

Milwaukee recieves: Andres Nocioni, Joe Smith, Chris Duhon, Chi 08 First, Ind 08 First

Indiana trades: Jermaine O'Neal, Troy Murphy, 08 First

Indiana recieves: Tyrus Thomas, Michael Redd, Ben Wallace

Chicago trades: Andres Nocioni, Joe Smith, Tyrus Thomas, Ben Wallace, Chris Duhon, 08 First

Chicago recieves: Jermaine O'Neal, Troy Murphy, Charlie Villanueva

Why for Milwaukee They recieve two potential lottery pick for Redd as well as a few solid players.

Why for Indiana Get pretty much "top dollar" for O'Neal and shave one year of of Murphys deal with Wallace.

Why for Chicago They recieve a legit low post player, get rid of an overpayed player who is not producing, and pickup a solid young 4.

Let me know what you think and what could be tweaked.

IndyPacers67 · Post #2 » by **IndyPacers67** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:30 am

So you post :crazy:

in my thread, and then post almost the same trade except worse for both Milwaukee and Indiana.

We have absolutely zero interest in Ben Wallace, and 3 teams in the same division would not make a trade like this with each other anyways.

Baddy Chuck · Post #3 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:31 am

IndyPacers67 wrote:So you post in my thread, and then post almost the same trade except worse for both Milwaukee and Indiana.

We have absolutely zero interest in Ben Wallace, and 3 teams in the same division would not make a trade like this with each other anyways.

1. I thought yours was WAY to good for the Bucks.
2. I didnt think IND wanted to give up Granger.
3. I thought you might want a shorter contract in Wallace compared to Murphy
4. I realise a 3 team division trade would be tough, but I thought this was decent.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #4 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:39 am

Don't listen to Pacer67, Bell. This trade is awesome for the Pacers. I would jump all over it. This is the best JO trade I've seen yet that remains realistic. Very well done.

IndyPacers67 · Post #5 » by **IndyPacers67** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:45 am

DGrangeRx33 wrote:Don't listen to Pacer67, Bell. This trade is awesome for the Pacers. I would jump all over it. This is the best JO trade I've seen yet that remains realistic. Very well done.

It isn't a good return for us at all. Ben Wallace would destroy all team chemistry we have and alienate the fanbase to the point that we would have to put the tarp over the upper bowl again. Tyrus Thomas is not nearly as good of a prospect as you seem to think either.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #6 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:51 am

IndyPacers67 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

It isn't a good return for us at all. Ben Wallace would destroy all team chemistry we have and alienate the fanbase to the point that we would have to put the tarp over the upper bowl again. Tyrus Thomas is not nearly as good of a prospect as you seem to think either.

We get Thomas and Redd without losing Granger/Williams/Diogu. That is a perfect trade for us. Thomas is a very nice prospect, especially for our style of play.

How does this alienate our fan base? We trade JO(one loved player) and get a great player back, a very nice prospect, and a veteran who is over-payed, but I could take him on getting Thomas and Redd.

Your trade has us trading JO AND Granger to get Redd and Farmar. We trade 2 loved players(Granger being the future of our team possibly) to get the same player, with another young player whos future isn't as bright as Thomas.

If anything your trade alienates our fan base. I'd be so pissed off if your trade went through. I love this one. We lose a player that doesn't fit into our system as well as we had hoped and get great return for him.

Baddy Chuck · Post #7 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:57 am

DGrangeRx33 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

We get Thomas and Redd without losing Granger/Williams/Diogu. That is a perfect trade for us. Thomas is a very nice prospect, especially for our style of play.

How does this alienate our fan base? We trade JO(one loved player) and get a great player back, a very nice prospect, and a veteran who is over-payed, but I could take him on getting Thomas and Redd.

Your trade has us trading JO AND Granger to get Redd and Farmar. We trade 2 loved players(Granger being the future of our team possibly) to get the same player, with another young player whos future isn't as bright as Thomas.

If anything your trade alienates our fan base. I'd be so pissed off if your trade went through. I love this one. We lose a player that doesn't fit into our system as well as we had hoped and get great return for him.

Really exactly what I was thinking. I was thinking Jermaine was nearing his end as a "fan favorite" and Murphy and his contract were wanted of the books ASAP.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #8 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 3:59 am

RingtheBell wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Really exactly what I was thinking. I was thinking Jermaine was nearing his end as a "fan favorite" and Murphy and his contract were wanted of the books ASAP.

JO is still a fan favorite. I think we are just realizing he is not built for our offense. He will always be a fan favorite in Indiana unless he pulls a Ron Artest.

IndyPacers67 · Post #9 » by **IndyPacers67** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:05 am

DGrangeRx33 wrote:How does this alienate our fan base? We trade JO(one loved player) and get a great player back, a very nice prospect, and a veteran who is over-payed, but I could take him on getting Thomas and Redd.

If you don't know how us acquiring Ben Wallace alienates our fan base, I really don't know what else to say to you. If you haven't noticed we have a bit of an attendance issue. Acquiring one of the most hated players in this franchises history isn't exactly going to fix that.

DGrangeRx33 wrote:Your trade has us trading JO AND Granger to get Redd and Farmar. We trade 2 loved players(Granger being the future of our team possibly) to get the same player, with another young player whos future isn't as bright as Thomas.

I'll take Villauneva over Tyrus Thomas easily. That's a guy who is coming off surgery and outproducing the wildly overrated Tyrus Thomas. Tyrus didn't get minutes under Skiles for a reason, and he isn't getting minutes under Jim Boylan either. Guess what, he isn't better then Ike Diogu or Shawne Williams and he wouldn't get minutes here either.

DGrangeRx33 wrote:If anything your trade alienates our fan base. I'd be so pissed off if your trade went through. I love this one. We lose a player that doesn't fit into our system as well as we had hoped and get great return for him.

The trade I made brings us the same center piece (Redd), a better player/not as bad of a contract (Simmons over Wallace) and 2 prospects at positions of need for us that fit O'Brien's system well. We have to realize that in order to get the type of return we want for Jermaine O'Neal, Granger might have to be packaged with him. When you consider the fact that we are getting a great perimiter player in my deal and we already have Dunleavy and Shawne Williams, losing Granger is not as big of a hit.

Da Houndawg #55 · Post #10 » by **Da Houndawg #55** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:20 am

That trade just sees the Bulls raping the Pacers...

Milwaukee gets rid of Redd for another SF option to have a crack at, plus Duhon who would be a nice enough fit to stop the guards killing the offense when Bogut should be seeing more ball to create for the Bucks. Plus they get Indiana's first round pick (which will be high, since this trade would pretty much make that a certain thing...)

Indiana gets boned for years to come with the two worst contracts in the deal, whilst the Bulls make off with the spoils. Tyrus Thomas is a nice enough gain but how are they going to do anything when hamstrung with Ben Wallace and Michael Redd tying up all the money for years to come.

The Bulls pinch the prime players, offload one of the worst contracts in the NBA, get JO, offload Nocioni who's been overrated, free up more time for Ben Gordon by sending Duhon out. Their biggest losses are Tyrus Thomas and the draft pick.

xxSnEaKyPxx · Post #11 » by **xxSnEaKyPxx** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:52 am

Ben Wallace wouldn't alienate our fans. I don't like him, no Pacer fan does. But if taking him nets us Redd and Thomas I would do it.

Ya'll forget Thomas was drafted knowing it would take time for him to produce. He wasn't expected to put up 20 ppg right away. If everyone gave up on someone that early there would be no JO. Its not like Thomas is sitting behind scrub players either. The Bulls have a lot of talented wing players and Joe Smith is playing very well at PF for them.

Redd isn't a bad contract considering the numbers he puts up a game. Ben Wallace wouldn't fit the team, but to get Redd and Thomas, I'd jump all over it.

ahartleyvu · Post #12 » by **ahartleyvu** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:59 am

Wonder what kind of lineup we would run?

Tinsley
Redd
Dunleavy
Granger
Foster

Or make Dunleavy/Granger a game changing 6th man?

Oomph · Post #13 » by **Oomph** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:57 am

I would do the original trade but only if Duhon goes to Indiana and Tinsley is shipped to one of the other teams.

With Redd as the starting SG the Pacers need some defense from the PG spot, something Duhon can provide.

What if Tinsley is shipped to Cleveland (why not include another division rival?) for Snow who goes to the Bucks to backup Mo Williams?

fdefore · Post #14 » by **fdefore** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:57 pm

is there anyway to get detroit involved too? lets make it a central division fiesta!!!!

Baddy Chuck · Post #15 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:42 pm

Anyone else?

hermes · Post #16 » by **hermes** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:54 pm

fdefore wrote:is there anyway to get detroit involved too? lets make it a central division fiesta!!!!

1377 · Post #17 » by **1377** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:05 pm

RingtheBell wrote:Anyone else?

Bucks would probably love it. I think A Noc is someone who would really fit well with our team if we didn't have Red. I like the Back court rotation of Duhon, Mo, Ivey, and CBell (now that he can play again).

skones · Post #18 » by **skones** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:16 pm

EDIT: Wrong Thread

Friend_Of_Haley · Post #19 » by **Friend_Of_Haley** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:24 pm

I don't like this as a Bulls fan. Murphy's contract is worse than Wallaces. Yes he's better, but we have nice big men, they just aren't getting the minutes because of Wallace. I'd rather stand pat and just cut Wallace.

Not to mention it brings on all kind of cap issues for Chicago.

Baddy Chuck · Post #20 » by **Baddy Chuck** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:26 pm

Friend_Of_Haley wrote:I don't like this as a Bulls fan. Murphy's contract is worse than Wallaces. Yes he's better, but we have nice big men, they just aren't getting the minutes because of Wallace. I'd rather stand pat and just cut Wallace.

Not to mention it brings on all kind of cap issues for Chicago.

Im pretty sure the Murphy/Wallace part could be cut out of the deal by itself, how would each team like it without that?