(false rumor) Jamaal Tinsley traded for Hunter and Atkins

YouAreBeneathMe · Post #1 » by **YouAreBeneathMe** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 12:31 pm

according to the New York post.

Flix360 · Post #2 » by **Flix360** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 12:40 pm

Locked-out Pacers point Jamaal Tinsley was traded to the Nuggets for Chuckie Atkins and Stephen Hunter, The Post has learned.

The deal is contingent on Tinsley passing a physical. Chronically injured over the last four years (only once playing more than 42 games) and embroiled in violent encounters on three separate occasions (none of which he instigated), he spent all summer in Atlanta rehabbing his body and is said to be a great condition.

Denver assumes his $21M, 3-year debt. Atkins is due $3.24M and $3.48M while Hunter is guaranteed $3.86M and $3.69M. Less than half of their total salary remaining is guaranteed.

mvp_32 · Post #3 » by **mvp_32** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 12:53 pm

i don't understand what is happening with the nuggets......

djsunyc · Post #4 » by **djsunyc** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 1:50 pm

opens the door to trade iverson...

DaFan334 · Post #5 » by **DaFan334** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 2:12 pm

we finally have a real point guard... maybe. ESPN already sent me an alert text but now theres talks that its not true... I like the move but we have no depth at center now. When healthy, tinsley is a good player.

Kakish · Post #6 » by **Kakish** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 2:25 pm

Good pick up for the Nuggets.

They need to sign another Center though.

24K_Gold · Post #7 » by **24K_Gold** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 2:36 pm

according to the indy post neither team has confirmed any deal but there have been long talks between the two teams...

if the deal goes down i'm not sure how to take it.jt is a proven true point guard and has been the lead guard on some good pacers' teams that were close to making the finals on a few occasions.on the other hand his temperment as proven to be that of shakey at best and even flat out piss poor at times.which brings the question,is this really the mixture of players that you want to build a team on?

we are taking a huge chance but could be a huge reward in the end If jt does the job of the point guard.finding the man that's hot,getting the ball to two off the leagues best scorers(where they are most effective),keepin everyone else involved(nene,smith,klezia),and making his open shots that will be available.

lineup
tinsley...iverson...carter
iverson...smith....jones
melo...klezia...balkman...patterson?
kmart...balkman...howard...klezia
nene...birdman...howard

this team still needs some size!

Dinty Moore · Post #8 » by **Dinty Moore** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 3:00 pm

You're not taking that big of a chance with Tinsley. He can definitely play and would be great as a Nugget. The only real risk is the injury thing but some of that may have been due to him not wanting to be a Pacer anymore. Seriously he's nowhere near as bad as some people make him out to be. If this trade goes through you definitely won but it needed to happen.

SnakefromHell · Post #9 » by **SnakefromHell** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 3:18 pm

At this point I'll take Tinsley over Marbury any day... I think he needs to be in a winning situation... the Pacers games I watched, he played very well. Defensively, he needs work but he's pretty good team defender.

DaFan334 · Post #10 » by **DaFan334** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 3:44 pm

If this team starts to win early, I could see them actually using the Marcus Camby TE in order to bring in some more depth in the front court. I also kinda wonder if we are getting anything else back to take on Tinsleys contract? It definitely isn't as good looking as Hunter and Atkins financially, but he is the better player.

RocketsRule · Post #11 » by **RocketsRule** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 4:01 pm

sportscenter said that denver said it never happened

24K_Gold · Post #12 » by **24K_Gold** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 4:21 pm

I hope no one would take marbury over tinsley.

as for the trade exemption,it won't be used unless the nugets are showing real promise of being one player away.most likely not until after the season(draft time)will this chip come into play.I hope i'm wrong but as of now this front office is stuck in neutral.

IndieRuso420 · Post #13 » by **IndieRuso420** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 4:34 pm

Guys, listen this is going down. Bird never comments on trades until they happen. If anyone saw the situation with JO and the Pacers this past summer, you would know what I am saying. Its against league rules and someone could get charged with tampering. Everyone will pass their physical and this trade will be finalized by MON. Then you will hear both teams comment.

Post #14 » by **MHZ** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 4:58 pm

The move is pretty low-risk. Trade an oft-injured guy in Chucky Atkins and a guy in Stephen Hunter who will never see the floor with Karl coaching the team, for an oft-injured guy who can play point better than anybody on the team. I'm fine with it.

Kevlo_911 · Post #15 » by **Kevlo_911** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 5:06 pm

Wait, we can't afford to keep Camby, but we can afford to take on his contract? Cool..?

Well at least we got a real starting PG out of this.

Shady08 · Post #16 » by **Shady08** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 5:12 pm

If this deal is true, I would be quite happy, because we have not had a steady PG since we traded Miller for AI.

Post #17 » by **MHZ** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 5:15 pm

I'm not sure it was that we couldn't keep Camby. Obviously they wanted to dump his salary, this would just prove they are willing to spend, they just thought the money could be better spent on a point guard.

Chucky's up after this season, Hunter after next. Tinsley would be for the next three. Obviously, after next season, he'd become a trade asset as an expiring deal. I can live with that. Clearly they want to give it one last push as currently built, and if it doesn't work, the unloading of guys like AI might begin.

beemaster · Post #18 » by **beemaster** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 5:44 pm

Kevlo_911 wrote:Wait, we can't afford to keep Camby, but we can afford to take on his contract? Cool..?

Well at least we got a real starting PG out of this.

This really won't affect our team salary this year, since Atkins and Hunter make the same amount of cash. We add some salary down the road, but at least Tinsley's not paid egregiously and it is only signed for two years beyond this one. I'd imagine Indy may send some cash along to help offset this difference.

UNLVNugsFan · Post #19 » by **UNLVNugsFan** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 5:54 pm

I hate this trade, and appear to be in the minority. Tinsley is a consistently injured headcase, and is owed 12-13 million more over his contract then Atkins and Hunter combined. There is a reason why Indy has reportedly talked with nearly every team, and NO ONE is interested.

Thankfully, its a Peter Vecsey report, and those are 95% BS.

Nutty Nats Fan · Post #20 » by **Nutty Nats Fan** » Fri Oct 3, 2008 6:32 pm

UNLVNugsFan wrote:I hate this trade, and appear to be in the minority. Tinsley is a consistently injured headcase, and is owed 12-13 million more over his contract then Atkins and Hunter combined. There is a reason why Indy has reportedly talked with nearly every team, and NO ONE is interested.

Thankfully, its a Peter Vecsey report, and those are 95% BS.

Yeah, I don't like it either. Just look at Tinsley's numbers. He can't shoot. Nuggets don't need another PG other teams will be begging to jack it up. AC covers that, at a much cheaper price. Plus Tinsley looks to be really injury prone the last five seasons. And while Karl is too (Please Use More Appropriate Word) to play Hunter, if Nene is injured.. that doesn't leave much at center.