Regrading the Pascal Trade

[Rapsalot]

I’m not sure OP has right value on the trade?

PS + 2031 second = BI + OA + J’KW As we stand today knowing there were some temp parts like KO / BB for 1/2 year. Grade B-

Next 3 years will tell more does PS start to slow? How much do OA, J’KW develop? Biggest is BI health if he can play 60 games a year plus all Playoff games as he has this trade could move up to A- or higher based on OA and J’KW.

PS has played almost all games for Indy so that is a factor going forward.

If BI gives you 2 1/2 seasons and 1 playoff run in 3 years that trade could move to C- even D+
For now FO did a very good job asset managing a difficult situation with move on from PS

[Indeed]

I’m not sure OP has right value on the trade?

PS + 2031 second = BI + OA + J’KW As we stand today knowing there were some temp parts like KO / BB for 1/2 year. Grade B-

Next 3 years will tell more does PS start to slow? How much do OA, J’KW develop? Biggest is BI health if he can play 60 games a year plus all Playoff games as he has this trade could move up to A- or higher based on OA and J’KW.

PS has played almost all games for Indy so that is a factor going forward.

If BI gives you 2 1/2 seasons and 1 playoff run in 3 years that trade could move to C- even D+
For now FO did a very good job asset managing a difficult situation with move on from PS

Again, if he have Siakam, we would have our own pick, so Walker or someone better would remain.

As for 3 years, Siakam is shooting 40% from 3s, so how would that slow down? There is just lack of evidence to make that claim.

And why we cant hav Agbaji with Siakam? Cap space can be have for trading someone else.

[Dennis 37]

This is what's wild to me, so many people that are in favour of the BI trade, are still also talking about how important the pick is to the future, while also **** talking the concept of tanking for a good pick. Like what?

This team is reliant on that pick, with or without BI. The difference is now, that if BI runs into any injury issues next season, we just end up with like a 30ish win team. Which is basically the worst possible outcome. Next season/this draft will basically need to be damn near perfect for this to turn out well.

I am 100% on board throwing away a season like 20/21 when everything was going against us through the first half of the year or "ethical tanking" like this season when we've been missing key players almost every game and have a crapload of young players that need minutes too. I would have also been on board the late season tank in 22/23 if it made sense, but we were so far ahead of the bottom of the league (10+ games ahead of the Hornets, Spurs, Pistons and Rockets) while we were right in the thick of the playoff/play-in race (4 games behind Miami in 6th) despite a lot of injuries and setbacks that it made sense to finally give the Siakam/FVV/OG core a legit C for the first time since 19/20. What I (and I'm sure many others) don't care for is selling off everyone over the age of 23 then enduring 3-5 years of winning 15-20 games per season for the – at best – 14% chance each year of drafting a player that may never even be as successful in the NBA as guys like Ingram, Barrett and Quickley. There is a big difference between what the FO has been doing the past ~18 months versus what a lot of people (like myself) dislike about the tanking route. I'd love to see us win another Championship in my lifetime, but I also wouldn't care to see us become the Craptors for nearly a decade again. This is entertainment after all, and it becomes increasingly harder to be entertained when you go into ever viewing of a game thinking "we're probably going to lose, but maybe it will be close" for more than a year or two at a time.

The ultimate goal in tanking is to get as much young talent as possible and set your team up for future success. We have essentially expedited the process by acquiring the majority of our core players via trade while also adding a lot of ancillary young pieces (through the draft as well as via trade) that look to be the makings of another bench mob in the future. The upcoming 2025 1st is important, but it's not near as make or break as you're making it seem. This current core with a competent bench is likely a ~45-ish win team next season if we're relatively healthy. And outside of Ingram, our core players have generally been healthy (85% of GP for Barrett, 84% of GP for Scottie, 82% of GP for Quickley and 82% of GP for Poeltl since his sophomore season with a good chunk of everyone's missed games coming over the past 12 months as we're tanking and being more cautious) while it's not unreasonable to expect some kind of improvement from nearly every player on the roster.

Except no, we haven't. We traded for guys that had 4/5 years of NBA experience, and now BI who has 9 years and will be 28 the next time he likely plays. That's not expediting it, that's skipping it entirely. You build a team that already has much of their development complete, meaning what you see is largely what you get. So at that point you just hope that you hit perfectly on fit for all the players, otherwise you are stuck trying to find trades for potentially bad contracts.

Our bench is pretty anemic aside from Gradey/Ochai, and to a lesser degree Shead. The rest of the guys, while they might have some promise, they are otherwise non factors. As for a 45 win team, eh maybe if the entire team stays healthy, which is extremely unlikely with BI.

Not everything boils down to a fire sale and praying for the first pick, you guys really need to get over that strawman already.

I don't agree that Jamison Battle is a non factor.

[Dennis 37]

This is why Pascal had to be traded.

While there was no way Fred would tolerate playing off ball,I thought there was a chance Pascal would adjust to second fiddle.

Siakam has been adjusted to second fiddle with the Pacers, not just chance, he did 40% from 3s.

Indeed he has, but it wasn't obvious he would here, even though I thought he might.

[Scase]

I am 100% on board throwing away a season like 20/21 when everything was going against us through the first half of the year or "ethical tanking" like this season when we've been missing key players almost every game and have a crapload of young players that need minutes too. I would have also been on board the late season tank in 22/23 if it made sense, but we were so far ahead of the bottom of the league (10+ games ahead of the Hornets, Spurs, Pistons and Rockets) while we were right in the thick of the playoff/play-in race (4 games behind Miami in 6th) despite a lot of injuries and setbacks that it made sense to finally give the Siakam/FVV/OG core a legit C for the first time since 19/20. What I (and I'm sure many others) don't care for is selling off everyone over the age of 23 then enduring 3-5 years of winning 15-20 games per season for the – at best – 14% chance each year of drafting a player that may never even be as successful in the NBA as guys like Ingram, Barrett and Quickley. There is a big difference between what the FO has been doing the past ~18 months versus what a lot of people (like myself) dislike about the tanking route. I'd love to see us win another Championship in my lifetime, but I also wouldn't care to see us become the Craptors for nearly a decade again. This is entertainment after all, and it becomes increasingly harder to be entertained when you go into ever viewing of a game thinking "we're probably going to lose, but maybe it will be close" for more than a year or two at a time.

The ultimate goal in tanking is to get as much young talent as possible and set your team up for future success. We have essentially expedited the process by acquiring the majority of our core players via trade while also adding a lot of ancillary young pieces (through the draft as well as via trade) that look to be the makings of another bench mob in the future. The upcoming 2025 1st is important, but it's not near as make or break as you're making it seem. This current core with a competent bench is likely a ~45-ish win team next season if we're relatively healthy. And outside of Ingram, our core players have generally been healthy (85% of GP for Barrett, 84% of GP for Scottie, 82% of GP for Quickley and 82% of GP for Poeltl since his sophomore season with a good chunk of everyone's missed games coming over the past 12 months as we're tanking and being more cautious) while it's not unreasonable to expect some kind of improvement from nearly every player on the roster.

Except no, we haven't. We traded for guys that had 4/5 years of NBA experience, and now BI who has 9 years and will be 28 the next time he likely plays. That's not expediting it, that's skipping it entirely. You build a team that already has much of their development complete, meaning what you see is largely what you get. So at that point you just hope that you hit perfectly on fit for all the players, otherwise you are stuck trying to find trades for potentially bad contracts.

Our bench is pretty anemic aside from Gradey/Ochai, and to a lesser degree Shead. The rest of the guys, while they might have some promise, they are otherwise non factors. As for a 45 win team, eh maybe if the entire team stays healthy, which is extremely unlikely with BI.

Not everything boils down to a fire sale and praying for the first pick, you guys really need to get over that strawman already.

I don't agree that Jamison Battle is a non factor.

If you consider the 9th guy off the bench a major factor, we have different definitions. I'm not complaining about having him, but he's not a difference maker, he's a guy that might buy starters a few minutes a game, and that's fine, but those guys are not in short supply in the league.

[Dennis 37]

Except no, we haven't. We traded for guys that had 4/5 years of NBA experience, and now BI who has 9 years and will be 28 the next time he likely plays. That's not expediting it, that's skipping it entirely. You build a team that already has much of their development complete, meaning what you see is largely what you get. So at that point you just hope that you hit perfectly on fit for all the players, otherwise you are stuck trying to find trades for potentially bad contracts.

Our bench is pretty anemic aside from Gradey/Ochai, and to a lesser degree Shead. The rest of the guys, while they might have some promise, they are otherwise non factors. As for a 45 win team, eh maybe if the entire team stays healthy, which is extremely unlikely with BI.

Not everything boils down to a fire sale and praying for the first pick, you guys really need to get over that strawman already.

I don't agree that Jamison Battle is a non factor.

If you consider the 9th guy off the bench a major factor, we have different definitions. I'm not complaining about having him, but he's not a difference maker, he's a guy that might buy starters a few minutes a game, and that's fine, but those guys are not in short supply in the league.

We have not had a guy who can shoot 3s like him in minimal minutes for a long time.

The topic wasn't major factor. The descriptor was non-factor. Disagreeing that someone is a non-factor is not saying one is a major factor. Starters are major factors.

[Johnny Bball]

Except no, we haven't. We traded for guys that had 4/5 years of NBA experience, and now BI who has 9 years and will be 28 the next time he likely plays. That's not expediting it, that's skipping it entirely. You build a team that already has much of their development complete, meaning what you see is largely what you get. So at that point you just hope that you hit perfectly on fit for all the players, otherwise you are stuck trying to find trades for potentially bad contracts.

Our bench is pretty anemic aside from Gradey/Ochai, and to a lesser degree Shead. The rest of the guys, while they might have some promise, they are otherwise non factors. As for a 45 win team, eh maybe if the entire team stays healthy, which is extremely unlikely with BI.

Not everything boils down to a fire sale and praying for the first pick, you guys really need to get over that strawman already.

I don't agree that Jamison Battle is a non factor.

If you consider the 9th guy off the bench a major factor, we have different definitions. I'm not complaining about having him, but he's not a difference maker, he's a guy that might buy starters a few minutes a game, and that's fine, but those guys are not in short supply in the league.

This post is just so short on honesty and full ahead on stupid.

[Indeed]

I don't agree that Jamison Battle is a non factor.

If you consider the 9th guy off the bench a major factor, we have different definitions. I'm not complaining about having him, but he's not a difference maker, he's a guy that might buy starters a few minutes a game, and that's fine, but those guys are not in short supply in the league.

We have not had a guy who can shoot 3s like him in minimal minutes for a long time.

The topic wasn't major factor. The descriptor was non-factor. Disagreeing that someone is a non-factor is not saying one is a major factor. Starters are major factors.

Is Battle a non-factor? No
Is the 9th guy off the bench a major factor? No

That concludes Battle is not the 9th guy. If not because of development, I might have him over Dick.
Same thing for Boucher, he doesn't deserve to play 0 minute, clearly he would be 7th/8th man on a good team.