RealGM

The Indiana Pacers acquired Pascal Siakam from the Toronto Raptors this past January with both the player and team anticipating a probable long-term contract coming in the offseason. Siakam and the Raptors were unable to agree to an extension, which led to a trade for a package centered on Bruce Brown Jr. and three first round picks.

The Pacers are reportedly preparing a five-year max contract offer to Siakam.

"They understand it's a maximum level contract commitment you're going to have with Pascal Siakam," said Shams Charania. "That's what they're preparing to offer him this summer. He wants to be there. There's mutual interest in getting a deal done."

Charania expects the summer "to be a little quiet" for the Pacers with internal improvement more likely than significant roster change.

Via Shams Charania/The Athletic

Maybe they should prep it for Nembhard instead.
(don't take that literally, folks)

It was only two games, but I thought a player of his caliber should've stepped up a lot more w/Haliburton out.

Wingy wrote:Maybe they should prep it for Nembhard instead.
(don't take that literally, folks)

It was only two games, but I thought a player of his caliber should've stepped up a lot more w/Haliburton out.

23/8/5 on 55% shooting against some of the the NBA's best wing defenders? With Haliburton out, Paskal moved right to the top of BOS's white board... Yeah, he did fine.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Wingy wrote:Maybe they should prep it for Nembhard instead.
(don't take that literally, folks)

It was only two games, but I thought a player of his caliber should've stepped up a lot more w/Haliburton out.

23/8/5 on 55% shooting against some of the the NBA's best wing defenders? With Haliburton out, Paskal moved right to the top of BOS's white board... Yeah, he did fine.

Happy for Siakam and will forever be greatful for his contribution to the 2019 NBA Championship. In saying that I do not think his game will age well and the last couple of years of a 5 year max will most likely be rough.

dkb964 wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Wingy wrote:Maybe they should prep it for Nembhard instead.
(don't take that literally, folks)

It was only two games, but I thought a player of his caliber should've stepped up a lot more w/Haliburton out.

23/8/5 on 55% shooting against some of the the NBA's best wing defenders? With Haliburton out, Paskal moved right to the top of BOS's white board... Yeah, he did fine.

Happy for Siakam and will forever be greatful for his contribution to the 2019 NBA Championship. In saying that I do not think his game will age well and the last couple of years of a 5 year max will most likely be rough.

People say the same thing with Lowry and VanVleet.
To get out of those contract isn't hard neither.

He and Nemhard played well together. Nice little nucleus with the two of them and Hali.

Indeed wrote:

dkb964 wrote:

Pickled Prunes wrote:23/8/5 on 55% shooting against some of the the NBA's best wing defenders? With Haliburton out, Paskal moved right to the top of BOS's white board... Yeah, he did fine.

Happy for Siakam and will forever be greatful for his contribution to the 2019 NBA Championship. In saying that I do not think his game will age well and the last couple of years of a 5 year max will most likely be rough.

People say the same thing with Lowry and VanVleet.
To get out of those contract isn't hard neither.

Siakam is a more impactful player than either of those two. Siakam is worth a max deal. If IND let him walk, teams would line up to pay him.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Indeed wrote:

dkb964 wrote:
Happy for Siakam and will forever be greatful for his contribution to the 2019 NBA Championship. In saying that I do not think his game will age well and the last couple of years of a 5 year max will most likely be rough.

People say the same thing with Lowry and VanVleet.
To get out of those contract isn't hard neither.

Siakam is a more impactful player than either of those two. Siakam is worth a max deal. If IND let him walk, teams would line up to pay him.

What are you talking about? Lowry now is what Siakam is going to look like nearing the end of that max deal. Lowry was far more impactful for the Raptors then Siakam. If the Pacers truly want to contend they need a player better then Siakam and have Siakam as the 3rd best player.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

Indeed wrote:

dkb964 wrote:
Happy for Siakam and will forever be greatful for his contribution to the 2019 NBA Championship. In saying that I do not think his game will age well and the last couple of years of a 5 year max will most likely be rough.

People say the same thing with Lowry and VanVleet.
To get out of those contract isn't hard neither.

Siakam is a more impactful player than either of those two. Siakam is worth a max deal. If IND let him walk, teams would line up to pay him.

Lowry was WAY more of an impactful player during his time on the Raptors then Siakim ever was. Siakim is worth a max deal, in today's NBA, where even B Stars get max deals. Siakim isn't worth it though, and will die off before his contract ends... like the other guy said.

alienpick wrote:Lowry was WAY more of an impactful player during his time on the Raptors then Siakim ever was. Siakim is worth a max deal, in today's NBA, where even B Stars get max deals. Siakim isn't worth it though, and will die off before his contract ends... like the other guy said.

dkb964 wrote:What are you talking about? Lowry now is what Siakam is going to look like nearing the end of that max deal. Lowry was far more impactful for the Raptors then Siakam. If the Pacers truly want to contend they need a player better then Siakam and have Siakam as the 3rd best player.

I'm not talking about Siakam vs. Lowry in 2019, when it was Siakam's first season as a true starter. That's Lowry in his prime vs. a kid on his rookie deal. (I still think it was close.) Both players were important to that title. But they have a title because 1) They were in the lEast. 2) Kawhi was healthy and in top form. 3) The GSW were hobbled.

I'm also not talking about Siakam vs. Lowry on TOR post-Kawhi, when the team has been garbage.

I am talking about these players in the abstract, as if they were on the same timeline: a 6-8 wing vs. a 6-foot nothing PG. There is a reason Siakam has made all-NBA teams and Lowry has not. If they were going into the draft this summer, all 30 GM's would draft Siakam over Lowry. 6-foot nothing PG's are a dime a dozen.

The biggest reason Lowry can't play anymore is his size. At 6-foot nothing, quickness is your only friend. Siakam will be fine on this next contract and he won't turn 35 until the final two-weeks of the fifth year.

I agree that Siakam should be IND's third best player, and maybe he will be. But he won't be their anything if they don't offer him a max. 29 other teams will line up to sign a 6-8, all-NBA wing to a max deal.

With the way the salary cap will escalate over the next few years based on the new media rights deal, the contract won’t even look that big in the last few years.

Is he worth a max contract? In today's environment, and with the increasing salary cap, yeah.
Do I want to be paying him a max contract at 34, 35? As the Raptors, no. As the Pacers with limited ability to sign FAs or improve their team? Yeah.
Are the Pacers winning a chip with a Hali/Siakam 1-2 combo? Highly unlikely.

Pickled Prunes wrote:

alienpick wrote:Lowry was WAY more of an impactful player during his time on the Raptors then Siakim ever was. Siakim is worth a max deal, in today's NBA, where even B Stars get max deals. Siakim isn't worth it though, and will die off before his contract ends... like the other guy said.

dkb964 wrote:What are you talking about? Lowry now is what Siakam is going to look like nearing the end of that max deal. Lowry was far more impactful for the Raptors then Siakam. If the Pacers truly want to contend they need a player better then Siakam and have Siakam as the 3rd best player.

I'm not talking about Siakam vs. Lowry in 2019, when it was Siakam's first season as a true starter. That's Lowry in his prime vs. a kid on his rookie deal. (I still think it was close.) Both players were important to that title. But they have a title because 1) They were in the lEast. 2) Kawhi was healthy and in top form. 3) The GSW were hobbled.

I'm also not talking about Siakam vs. Lowry on TOR post-Kawhi, when the team has been garbage.

I am talking about these players in the abstract, as if they were on the same timeline: a 6-8 wing vs. a 6-foot nothing PG. There is a reason Siakam has made all-NBA teams and Lowry has not. If they were going into the draft this summer, all 30 GM's would draft Siakam over Lowry. 6-foot nothing PG's are a dime a dozen.

The biggest reason Lowry can't play anymore is his size. At 6-foot nothing, quickness is your only friend. Siakam will be fine on this next contract and he won't turn 35 until the final two-weeks of the fifth year.

I agree that Siakam should be IND's third best player, and maybe he will be. But he won't be their anything if they don't offer him a max. 29 other teams will line up to sign a 6-8, all-NBA wing to a max deal.

Siakam will never sniff an All-NBA team ever again and probably not even an All-Star team. The Bucks and 76ers were as good as if not better in 2019 then teams out West. Siakam is already past his peak. I would know because I have watched his entire career. I really wish I knew how tall Lowry is though. Can you help me with that? Nobody even wanted to trade for Siakam at the deadline as well. That is why the Raptors got nothing for him.

ontnut wrote:Is he worth a max contract? In today's environment, and with the increasing salary cap, yeah.
Do I want to be paying him a max contract at 34, 35? As the Raptors, no. As the Pacers with limited ability to sign FAs or improve their team? Yeah.
Are the Pacers winning a chip with a Hali/Siakam 1-2 combo? Highly unlikely.

It has nothing to do with limited ability to sign FA, particularly, we were in that same category (if not worse).
As for end of contract, there are many ways, they can front load, trade away the contract (eg. Lowry was traded).

As for the Pacers, Hali / Siakam / Turner is pretty close to a contender level. They have a few young players and tradable contracts, so you never know. To beat the Celtics, they just have to get over the tax like every team at the top does.

As they should. He is arguably their 2nd most impactive player. Assuming they want to be in the mix. They traded for Him with every intention of maxing him.

Indeed wrote:

ontnut wrote:Is he worth a max contract? In today's environment, and with the increasing salary cap, yeah.
Do I want to be paying him a max contract at 34, 35? As the Raptors, no. As the Pacers with limited ability to sign FAs or improve their team? Yeah.
Are the Pacers winning a chip with a Hali/Siakam 1-2 combo? Highly unlikely.

It has nothing to do with limited ability to sign FA, particularly, we were in that same category (if not worse).
As for end of contract, there are many ways, they can front load, trade away the contract (eg. Lowry was traded).

As for the Pacers, Hali / Siakam / Turner is pretty close to a contender level. They have a few young players and tradable contracts, so you never know. To beat the Celtics, they just have to get over the tax like every team at the top does.

You can't front load a max contract. If he gets a max contract that means he is getting 30% of the cap with 8% increases every year. Of course they can negotiate a cheaper deal with decreases but that would mean he is getting less than the max. Shams is reliable so that doesn't sound like it will be the case.

Any contract can be traded. Whether you have to attach assets with the contract will depend if the contract is viewed as bad. Lowry wasn't traded until he had months left on his deal with a 1st attached. And the Heat took on a lot of money for the next 2 years in Rozier.

BTW I am not saying Siakam will ever be a bad contract. You never know when a player will decline. He may be good for his entire contract. There is always some level of risk signing a 30 year old to a long term max contract. Obviously if you are the Pacers you have to take that risk. If you want good players you have to pay them.

Apparently the raps were willing to give pascal 2/3 year max but when he wanted 5 they told him not to let the door hit him in the ass on the way out. I can’t blame the raptors for that. Paying pascal max until he’s 35 doesn’t make good business sense.
Only thing is they should have moved him earlier. The kings wouldn’t give up Keegan Murray (understandable) but offered table scraps for him. Atlanta backed out cause they wouldn’t trade Kobe bufkin lol.
Raps would have more in return if they traded him a year earlier.

But just cause I think it didn’t make sense for Toronto doesn’t mean I think this is bad for the pacers. They gave up Jack **** to get him.

goinrogue wrote:Apparently the raps were willing to give pascal 2/3 year max but when he wanted 5 they told him not to let the door hit him in the ass on the way out. I can’t blame the raptors for that. Paying pascal max until he’s 35 doesn’t make good business sense.
Only thing is they should have moved him earlier. The kings wouldn’t give up Keegan Murray (understandable) but offered table scraps for him. Atlanta backed out cause they wouldn’t trade Kobe bufkin lol.
Raps would have more in return if they traded him a year earlier.

But just cause I think it didn’t make sense for Toronto doesn’t mean I think this is bad for the pacers. They gave up Jack **** to get him.

The deals fell through because he wouldn’t even lie and say he’d re-sign with those teams.

Raptors didnt get much back for him because Masai played it awfully the last few years. Now I do think Pascal is worth the max in theory, especially given the Pacers (or Raptors) inability to sign FA. The Raptors have an awful team so it was never going to work there when he was the #1.

eureca20 wrote:

Indeed wrote:

ontnut wrote:Is he worth a max contract? In today's environment, and with the increasing salary cap, yeah.
Do I want to be paying him a max contract at 34, 35? As the Raptors, no. As the Pacers with limited ability to sign FAs or improve their team? Yeah.
Are the Pacers winning a chip with a Hali/Siakam 1-2 combo? Highly unlikely.

It has nothing to do with limited ability to sign FA, particularly, we were in that same category (if not worse).
As for end of contract, there are many ways, they can front load, trade away the contract (eg. Lowry was traded).

As for the Pacers, Hali / Siakam / Turner is pretty close to a contender level. They have a few young players and tradable contracts, so you never know. To beat the Celtics, they just have to get over the tax like every team at the top does.

You can't front load a max contract. If he gets a max contract that means he is getting 30% of the cap with 8% increases every year. Of course they can negotiate a cheaper deal with decreases but that would mean he is getting less than the max. Shams is reliable so that doesn't sound like it will be the case.

Any contract can be traded. Whether you have to attach assets with the contract will depend if the contract is viewed as bad. Lowry wasn't traded until he had months left on his deal with a 1st attached. And the Heat took on a lot of money for the next 2 years in Rozier.

BTW I am not saying Siakam will ever be a bad contract. You never know when a player will decline. He may be good for his entire contract. There is always some level of risk signing a 30 year old to a long term max contract. Obviously if you are the Pacers you have to take that risk. If you want good players you have to pay them.

^ What he said in regards to contracts.

And Indeed, what do you mean it has nothing to do with them being a D tier free agent destination? Nobody's taking a discount to play in Indiana. There's a better chance someone takes a discount to play in Toronto than Indiana imo.

"Pretty close to contender level", I don't know about that. Getting swept by BOS without KP doesn't make me think "oh, they are just a bit of tax money spending away from beating them". Again, like it or not, they made it to the ECF on the back of beating 2 of the most injured teams in recent playoff history. I can't put that much stock in their run until I see it against real competition.

I do think they have some contracts that can be traded, including Turner. As I've said in another thread, it might behoove them to do so sooner rather than later, as I don't think Siakam's max deal (and Hali's max, and whatever their young guys are going to be making in 2-3 years) is going to make it any easier to do so, moving forward.