Chad Ford on Pacers Trades

[cdash]

Mark, Orlando: Give me your take on the Pacers. Do they make a move before the deadline, continue to build with young players, or look to sign a big free agent in 2010?

Chad Ford: They are in a very good position. They have A LOT of assets. They have big expiring contracts like Rasho Nesterovic and Marquis Daniels. They have young players like Brandon Rush and Roy Hibbert. They have vets they would move like Mike Dunleavy, Jeff Foster and Jarrett Jack. They still have Jamaal Tinsley, a guard who, when healthy, is a legit starting point guard in the league. And they have a draft pick that looks like a Top 10 pick. Package those together in a number of ways and the Pacers could be big players at the trade deadline. Lots of interest around the league in Daniels and Foster. Lots of teams would love some cap relief. I think that a lot of the business in the league could pivot on what they do. Like I said they can facilitate just about any deal out there.

Interesting. I'm all for trading Marquis in the right deal, but I'm not sure how accurate the statement, "They have vets they would move like Mike Dunleavy, Jeff Foster, and Jarrett Jack" is. Either way, should be an interesting deadline.

[DWCP2]

Wouldn't suprise me any if they traded Daniels and/or Rasho in seperate deals, esp. if first round picks are returning in the deal.

It would take, IMO, too much for the Pacers to vanquish much of the team prior to 2010.

I think they are setting their eyes on 2011 anyway.

With 40 million in space come 2011, you can sign two significant vets to deals at that time. Vets like, oh say, Greg Oden and Mike Conley...perhaps?

[cdash]

I dont think teams, especially small-market teams, plan three years in the future. Its just too hard to do, too many unknown variables and other things can affect plans like that. The only reason you see so much talk of 2010 is because big market teams like New York are thinking they can pry stars away from their teams, which is reasonable. To think that Greg Oden would leave a small market team (who looks like they will be much, much better than us) to go to another small market team that happens to be his hometown team, is a little far fetched.

Honestly, I'm not convinced that Bird really has a long-term plan for this team. It's hard to attract free agents to Indianapolis, which basically means that if we want to be contenders, we have to do it one of two ways: Build through the draft or grossly overpay guys to come here. Obviously one option is more desireable than the other. I think Bird is evaluating what he has right now. I think Granger is untouchable, because lets face it, no one thought he would be as good as he has become. If you say you did, you are a liar. Sorry. I think Bird really likes Dunleavy, Jack, and Foster, so I think the chances of him trading them are a little steeper than Chad Ford makes it seem. I do wonder if he has a plan or a vision...or if he is simply making deals when he feels a player needs to go or a deal is presented to him.

With all that being said, I think Bird is very open to the idea of trading Daniels and Rasho, because cap space isnt going to help a team like the Pacers as much as it would a larger market team like New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, etc. He needs to use pieces like that to get draft picks or guys that normally he would have to sign at a premium to come here. I think he wouldnt be opposed to trading TJ Ford if the right deal came about. If it were me, I would get in touch with Memphis to see what they would want for Conley. He isnt in an ideal situation in Memphis with Mayo needing the ball so much.

[notque]

The Pacers aren't trading Rasho because they need the money, not cap space. The Pacers are not doing well in attendance, and it makes more sense to let him come off the books clean.

Daniels / Dunleavy / Jack are tradeable, Daniels because we don't need him, Dunleavy because his contract is high (no one will give us enough in return anyway), and Jack, but O'Brien seems to like Jack.

Then you have Tinsley, obviously a guy that needs to get off the books.

So If you can package someone to take Tinsley away and save money, you do it. You keep the young guys because they are cheap, and have value.

Really, with the financials getting weaker, and Indiana being a very badly hit market financially, I think that you keep as much talent as you have, get money off the books, and use the draft to try to continue to survive in Indianapolis.

You do not become a player in 2010, and you don't trade a guy expiring for a long term contract.

[Scoot McGroot]

I have a feeling Indy could be a major player in the deadline deals because, as Ford said, we do have a lot of random pieces that could work in many types of deals. However, we don't have the key value to make a major deadline move, but rather, to be the 3rd team brought into deals for an expiring contract that eats a 2-3 year deal and gets a draft pick as incentive.

Indy should be looking at the post 2010 market with the contracts we already have such as Murphy, Dunleavy, and Tinsley, and could probably get a bit of value in return for helping other teams trying to get into the mythical 2010 offseason, while not hurting our plans for rebuilding around 2011.

[mr_merriweather]

Whats the apparent aversion to trading Foster? If he does indeed have some value to other teams, and we could get a good deal, no reason to hold on to him. He's getting old, and his effectiveness is limited anyway. As a rebuilding team, if I could get value out of a 32 year old role player, I'd do it in a minute.

Cap space is totally worthless to us, except when it comes to resigning young talent. And I don't see any need to worry about the contract demands of Hibbert or Rush yet.

Granger, of course, is untouchable. The only players who have had breakout seasons like this at the SF position of late are Melo, McGrady, and Pierce. He is averaging more points, and has a higher PER than any Pacer of the NBA era (yes, that includes Miller). However, that means we need to stop acting like we need to blow the whole thing up and hope to hit a home run through the draft--Granger may well have been that home run. We can't be 100% sure that he is going to be that type of player, but it looks like he will be, and so we might now have more flexibility to get better through trades rather than constantly rolling the dice through the draft.

Dunleavy can go because he is one of our many defensive liabilities, and is probably the most tradeable. The problem with Murph and Dunleavy is that while they appear to be starter quality, and on their own they might be, having two crap defenders like that in your first five kills you. And yet it's hard to bench them because offensively (and on the boards in Murphy's case) they are much more valuable than your next option. It's a catch-22. So I really think trading Dunleavy for someone defensively competent, even if it's a slight downgrade in "overall value," is a good idea. Though that's assuming O'Brien will even allow the guy to play defense...

Anyway, I think we should be excited about our prospects for the trade deadline. Bird's proven to be smarter than I once thought he was and Ford's right in that we do have a ton of pieces to make deals work.

[Miller4ever]

Jeff Foster isn't just a role player. He's a shining example of work ethic and overall team effort. His veteran savvy, while maybe not always present in games, is at the very least very awesome in practice.

[cdash]

I love Foster, I think he is the type of role player you need to help you win, and I love his new mustache, but if the right deal came along, I wouldnt be toooo opposed to trading him.

[mr_merriweather]

Jeff Foster isn't just a role player. He's a shining example of work ethic and overall team effort. His veteran savvy, while maybe not always present in games, is at the very least very awesome in practice.

I don't know--I understand why you'd keep him around in the Tinsley-Jackson-Artest era, just as a counterbalance, but surely there are other good examples on this team? Regardless, this is the sort of thing we can really have little idea about, as we're not privy to the locker room dynamics. From what I see on the court and the way he interacts with the rest of the team, I can't really see Foster being one of the leaders of the locker room, though on the other hand, I see nothing tells me that he isn't. Obviously Bird knows whats up--so if they keep him I'll assume that's why.

But really, what you just described is the definition of a role player. Someone with not much overall value, but who fills a very specific and valuable niche. I agree that a leader like you describe is needed, and if Foster is that man than we should keep him, but since I don't really know that for sure, I can't really see any reason not to trade him if a decent offer comes around. But again, that's why these decisions are left up to the front office--they have that sort of knowledge.

[PR07]

Jeff Foster is one of the Pacers' fan favorites. I don't think the Pacers could risk the PR move at these current times. Wouldn't be surprised to see Daniels moved though.

[MillerTime101]

I agree, out of all the names mentioned I think Foster and possible Jack will be the most likely not to be traded. I believe Daniels will be moved for a 1st round pick and we will keep Rasho ( we need the cash this summer and he doesnt have 1st round pick trade value IMO). That being said a trade involving Dunleavy and/or Tinsley wouldnt shock me.

[Miller4ever]

I guess Jeff Foster could be categorized as a role player.

I hate that term, though, and I think it carries a negative connotation. "At best a role player".

[DC2]

I actually think Daniels has already been traded, they are just working on the details. Because, he hasn't played much in his 2 games returning from the injury and we wouldn't be playing him if he wasn't healthy enough. I bet we are working on details of a trade, and we are just playing him to show the other team that he can still play.

[notque]

Jeff Foster is a valuable asset. He plays defense, he rebounds above average. He can score.

He is a starting center value in this league. Yes. We've seen what he can do for a long time, but it's still valuable.

[Dunthreevy]

I actually think Daniels has already been traded, they are just working on the details. Because, he hasn't played much in his 2 games returning from the injury and we wouldn't be playing him if he wasn't healthy enough. I bet we are working on details of a trade, and we are just playing him to show the other team that he can still play.

He hasn't been able to move laterally. That's why he hasn't played much in the 2 games since he came back. O'Brien said last night that they're trying to work him back into the rotation but his injury isn't fully healed yet and he has very limited lateral movement, hence the short minutes.

[Grang33r]

Chad Ford last deadline day reported Jeff Foster was wanted by i believe Utah and they were offered their first round pick, but Pacers declined. You have to assume a similar deal has to be on the table right now for a team entering the playoffs.

Also, i read a story on Larry Bird maybe 2-3 weeks ago which he stated, that from now on, he's going to attend every road game. Apparently Bird doesn't do many away games because of his health problems. But he's decided from now on he will because he wants a first hand look at the roster. He wants to see how every preforms. He wants to see who he wants to keep and who to let go. To me, we are showcasing our entire roster. That's what it seemed like to see. Everyone except Danny, Rush, Roy and Ford. For me, it's a good sign. I honestly will back this organization on any moves they make. I believe in them. I have faith in them. I do think losing will benefit us more, esspicially if we are able to land a Greg Monroe or even somehow Ricky Rubio will put us into the right direction much quicker. I think they do have to trade some players away, who are good now, because when we are good in 2-3 years, they may be on the decline. Like a Jeff Foster.

[cdash]

Yeah I read that about Bird too. I dont know if its his health so much as it is him being mobbed by fans when he travels. I think Bird would be willing to talk about anyone on our roster not named Danny Granger, including Rush, Hibbert, and especially Ford. It might take more to pry some of those guys away, but I dont think if their names were brought up that Bird would hang up the phone. If Utah again offered a first rounder for Foster, I would take it. I'd make sure it has no protection, or maybe only top 10 protection. Utah is one of those teams in the West that may not make it to the playoffs, so that could potentially turn into a late lottery pick.

As for Greg Monroe or Ricky Rubio, its looking more and more like we would have to have a top 3 or 4 pick to get one of those guys, especially Rubio.

[Grang33r]

Yeah I read that about Bird too. I dont know if its his health so much as it is him being mobbed by fans when he travels. I think Bird would be willing to talk about anyone on our roster not named Danny Granger, including Rush, Hibbert, and especially Ford. It might take more to pry some of those guys away, but I dont think if their names were brought up that Bird would hang up the phone. If Utah again offered a first rounder for Foster, I would take it. I'd make sure it has no protection, or maybe only top 10 protection. Utah is one of those teams in the West that may not make it to the playoffs, so that could potentially turn into a late lottery pick.

As for Greg Monroe or Ricky Rubio, its looking more and more like we would have to have a top 3 or 4 pick to get one of those guys, especially Rubio.

1. Very good point, i totally forgot thats what the article said. I didn't search up for the article and assumed i read it was health but since you posted it, you're right, it was mainly due to him getting mobbed by crazy fans. lol

2. Obviously nobody is untouchable besides Granger. But, the kind of offer we would need to get for Rush or Hibbert would be similar to when the Celtics started to trade their youth for the likes of Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett. I don't think Pacers would make those kind of moves though, and those kinds of deals are not available in Feburary, but around Draft-time.

3. I didn't say we wouldn't need luck. Lose a few more games, hope teams right above us and just below us win a few more times and hope for the best in the lottery.

[sully00]

As a C's fan wondering what kind of direction the Pacers were looking at I am wondering why you don't think that IND won't look to clear cap space for this offseason? It should be a buyers market with teams preparing for a year from now as well as economic concerns.

Foster would be a perfect, if expensive fit for Boston, and while they don't have much they could send back limited money beyond this season, Tony Allen at 2.5 mil and some decent young guys in Powe and Giddens. That would get IND to the cap.

Then if can find a taker for a bigger contract say Dallas for Stackhouse, then you are in business.

[pacers33granger]

As a C's fan wondering what kind of direction the Pacers were looking at I am wondering why you don't think that IND won't look to clear cap space for this offseason? It should be a buyers market with teams preparing for a year from now as well as economic concerns.

Foster would be a perfect, if expensive fit for Boston, and while they don't have much they could send back limited money beyond this season, Tony Allen at 2.5 mil and some decent young guys in Powe and Giddens. That would get IND to the cap.

Then if can find a taker for a bigger contract say Dallas for Stackhouse, then you are in business.

cap space isnt as big a deal for us because not many players would prefer to play in such a small market. Plus if we could get a first rounder for Foster we would do that easily over allen, powe, or giddens imo.