Question fron an OKC fan on Foster & Marquis

[KD_Stan]

Hello dear Hoosiers, I won't bore you by stating the obvious, which is that you're the best fans in the NBA so I'll just get straight to the point....


I believe both Foster and Daniels will be free agents this summer and they both fit a need for the Thunder. So if our GM goes after them and gets them, what would these two bring to the table?

What are their strengths and weaknesses?

Also, how badly do you guys want them re-signed? Or are you willing to part with them? Will you be disappointed if you dont retain them?

[Miller4ever]

We will part more easily with Foster than with Daniels. Foster is a veteran presence and his effort and locker room stability are always great. His hustle is always great, and he's always giving it his all. However, he is aging, and a tweaked back tends to keep him out of games. He has little to no offense, and his passing has been suspect of late, but I don't think it's his fault, the opponents we've been playing have been covering our players like a blanket.

I imagine Marquis being better for you guys than for us. Marquis has no three-point shot, but wants to shoot it anyway. He does have a great inside game, and cuts well, and he has the length and athleticism to guard multiple positions.

[KD_Stan]

Thanks for your comprehensive and well thoughtout reply.

[Scoot McGroot]

Foster signed an extension around the beginning of the season. He is not a free agent. Daniels should be, however.

[cjacobs2007]

I've never been a big fan of either, and I don't mind if we let them both walk. If you need a veteran leader than Foster is your guy, but he's not that great of a player in my opinion. Marquis has his nights, but some nights he is just terrible. If he would stop relying on his jump shot and would start driving to the basket more often, I think he would be a lot more consistent.

[jrandis04]

Foster signed an extention through 2010/2011 and Marquis has a team option for next year

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Like the others have said, Foster signed an extension and apparently we turned down a 1st round pick to keep him, so I wouldn't count on that.

Daniels could go either way, I think most of us expect him to sign elsewhere, but I wouldn't mind keeping him for the right price. Our front office has a lot of confidence in Brandon Rush, so I think Daniels will probably be gone.

[MillerTime101]

Daniels will likely have his option picked up and be traded or if no deal can be had he may just become an UFA. If your GM really wants Daniels I am sure he can be had for fairly cheap, Foster will fetch a much higher price.

[cdash]

We aren't going to pick up Daniels' option.

[MillerTime101]

Haha we had this debate in another thread cdash I respect your views on this board but I must say this: wouldnt you agree that a player putting up the numbers Daniels is at 7 million on an expiring contract has some sort of value? This thread should be one of the big signs that screams "YES".

Now that we have established that, what is the logic behind getting nothing for an asset that clearly has value around the NBA? Again I am not saying paying 7 million for a SG with our current roster is a good move but not using a valuable asset makes much less sense.

I would be utterly shocked if we let him walk for nothing, it makes no sense. If that happens I will sincerely apologize to you cdash but I just cannot see it happening.

[basketballwacko2]

I think it's pretty unlikely that the Pacers pick up the option on Daniels, yeah he's a reasonable value at $7 million if he stays healthy but, he always seems to be hurt and have nagging injuries. I think if a team comes along with a trade deal and we need to pick up Daniels to make the deal work then I could see us doing that but the problem is we have to take back salary. Let's say some team is offering a guy making $13 million and a draft pick for JT and Daniels. We could let Daniels expire and save $7 million or trade him with jamaal and get rid of JT and have to pay some guy $13 million. He'd have to be a difference maker and it would have to be a good pick, and considering our finances we might have to move either Murph or foster to save money.

[cdash]

A couple of things on Daniels:

His numbers really aren't that great.

His contract is essentially expiring this year, and it really didn't seem to hold a great deal of value, so I can't imagine why much would change next year.

Is he really an asset? He is a little overpaid for what he does. Sure, expirings are nice, but what could we realistically get for him? What were the offers like this year for him?

He is kind of injury prone.

Shooting guards who can't really shoot aren't in high demand.

Today's NBA is different than it has been in the past few years. Teams are losing a lot of money, the Pacers included. I doubt the Simons view letting Daniels walk as "losing him for nothing". Shedding a $7 million contract is nice for owners, especially when the player in question is looking at losing a good deal of minutes next year.

You are entitled to your opinion, but I would be equally as shocked to see us pick up his option.

[chatard5]

I say what cdash said for the most part, except he said it a lot better than I would have. The only thing I would add is that his numbers may not be great, but I don't think he is a bad player. Especially with Granger out, Marquis has stepped up. But if you have Durant (pretty much Granger but a whole lot worse, right Pacer fans? ). But seriously he is like Granger but younger with bigger upside, so I don't see Marquis going well with your team. Marquis either needs to be on a team that isn't very talented (the current Pacers) or weak at SG, or a team like the Spurs minus Manu and come off the bench, be productive, but far cheaper (and less talented) than Manu. Ehh?

Foster is also the perfect guy coming off the bench for a contender, in my opinion. He's like Robert Horry, except instead of being very clutch, he hustles a lot. And instead of shooting deep shots often, Foster doesn't. And the color of their skin is different. And Horry has won a bunch of championships. They really aren't like at all, I just haven't heard much about Horry lately, and, as usual, I take the topic and write something completely irrelevant.

OK, I think I've got it now. He's a poor man's Dennis Rodman, except they have opposite attitudes. That one is serious. Sorry for wasting a minute of your life you will never get back. If it helps, I wasted 3 minutes typing it I will never get back, plus this, which makes it about 4 minutes. I am going to stop there so this doesn't keep accumulating (4 1/2 minutes).

[cdash]

I don't think Marquis is a bad player at all. I'd love him if I were a contender and he were the second or third guy off the bench for me. You really need to pair him with a point guard and small forward who can shoot, so he can slash more effectively. Yep, a contender where he is a bench guy making about $3 million per year would be great. For this team with a $7 million price tag? Not so much.

[chatard5]

I concur.