Foster to Denver?

[Scoot McGroot]

The 3rd would require Renaldo Balkman and his 4 year deal, and at least 3 of the following 6 players for financial filler reasons: Ty Lawson, Malik Allen, Aaron Afflalo, Anthony Carter, Johan Petro, and Joey Graham. This means that we would have to cut 3 guys off our roster before we're able to actually complete the deal. Which 3 guys would you cut? Diener? And....McRoberts? Head? Solo Jones? Who?

Not necessarily. Balk/Carter/Allen/Graham for Foster works straight up. And then Denver could take back a few of those guys from Indy in separate deals using their 3.7 mill TPE. I'd say that would definitely be more ideal for you guys, simply to save the extra money as opposed to just cutting them and leaving them on your cap. Diener/Solo works, and would save an additional 4.9 mill or so. Could add Price in there too, but he's been playing well lately. Or McRoberts and Head instead of one of the others, just so that no one would have to be cut. A lot of different possibilities.

Once again, the problem is we'd have to give up guys we like in McRoberts, Solo Jones, Luther Head, etc (remember, we're currently at 15 contracts and have to cut/trade 3 guys to make it work) an take on 4 guys we really want nothing of in Balkman, Carter, Allen, and Graham.

This doesn't even mention at all that we'd be stuck with Renaldo Balkman for 4 years. This is DOA. There is NO offer here.

[ahartleyvu]

Too bad we can't throw in some cash and some 2nd Rd picks along w/ Foster to land Lawson. I'd almost give up Rush + Foster for filler + Lawson

[writerman]

he's the kind of guy who would make any team he played for better. So we should be happy just to "get out from his contract?" Sorry--IMO, that's nonsense.

The problem is, he HAS NOT been playing, so he isn't making us better.

Though he's had minor back problems for years, that hasn't really limited his effectiveness much--he's been pretty durable, averaging about 70 or a little more games a year, 74 and 77 the last two years. Now it's foolish to hold on to a guy when he's obviously finished, but I'm not one of those "what have you done for us lately" types when a player has been a solid performer throughout his career and looks to still be able to contribute, as I think Foster still can and could for a contender.

The NBA is a business, true--but it's also a game. the two have to be balanced, and in this case I think in balance Foster is still considerably more of an asset than a liablity. Evidently Denver and a number of other teams agree with my assessement.

I'll also be honest and say I have little use for people who say that loyalty--and maybe even a little sentiment--has no place in professional sports--and if it ever gets to the point that that is the case, then IMO they're not worth a damn.

[Boneman2]

Like Scoot said, 'we don't need to give up Head, Solo, etc...' After 2011 we're going to need these guys to be productive rotational players. Although I would like to get Lawson somehow.

Foster is what he is, a very good b/u to the 4&5 spots. We cannot expect him to be a starter because he isn't, it became apparent when Jim and Larry gave him a shot.

[Kuq_e_Zi91]

If Denver believes they have a real shot at a championship now, and would sacrifice part of their future by giving us Lawson, then obviously, I'm all for it.

However, without Lawson, there's little chance of this happening and I'm perfectly fine with that. Foster isn't a contract we're looking to get rid of. He's spent his entire career here, rarely do you see that, and we're thankful for it. There's no need to ship him off in a deal for fillers like Balkman or Anthony Carter. I'm sure Bird realizes that, as well.

Basically, Lawson or "No, thank you".

[Nutty Nats Fan]

If Denver believes they have a real shot at a championship now, and would sacrifice part of their future by giving us Lawson, then obviously, I'm all for it.

That's the problem though. If Lawson was a project, it could certainly be more possible. He isn't though. He isn't just the future, he is now. He could be the best (or one of the best) backup PG's in the league. He will be needed to beat the Lakers. They can't guard quick guards like him.

[chatard5]

Lawson for Foster. I will throw in TJ for free!

That is like saying we can get Billups, though....

[J Smitty]

The 3rd would require Renaldo Balkman and his 4 year deal, and at least 3 of the following 6 players for financial filler reasons: Ty Lawson, Malik Allen, Aaron Afflalo, Anthony Carter, Johan Petro, and Joey Graham. This means that we would have to cut 3 guys off our roster before we're able to actually complete the deal. Which 3 guys would you cut? Diener? And....McRoberts? Head? Solo Jones? Who?

Not necessarily. Balk/Carter/Allen/Graham for Foster works straight up. And then Denver could take back a few of those guys from Indy in separate deals using their 3.7 mill TPE. I'd say that would definitely be more ideal for you guys, simply to save the extra money as opposed to just cutting them and leaving them on your cap. Diener/Solo works, and would save an additional 4.9 mill or so. Could add Price in there too, but he's been playing well lately. Or McRoberts and Head instead of one of the others, just so that no one would have to be cut. A lot of different possibilities.

Once again, the problem is we'd have to give up guys we like in McRoberts, Solo Jones, Luther Head, etc (remember, we're currently at 15 contracts and have to cut/trade 3 guys to make it work) an take on 4 guys we really want nothing of in Balkman, Carter, Allen, and Graham.

This doesn't even mention at all that we'd be stuck with Renaldo Balkman for 4 years. This is DOA. There is NO offer here.

No offense, but if guys like Soloman Jones, Josh McRoberts, Luther Head, Travis Diener, etc are considered building blocks for the future, then the future is looking pretty bleak IMO.

[writerman]

This doesn't even mention at all that we'd be stuck with Renaldo Balkman for 4 years. This is DOA. There is NO offer here.[/quote]


No offense, but if guys like Soloman Jones, Josh McRoberts, Luther Head, Travis Diener, etc are considered building blocks for the future, then the future is looking pretty bleak IMO.[/quote]

Three of the four guys you mentioned are young, and have shown flashes. Are any of them going to be stars? Likely not---but put them and a draft pick or two, and maybe Erazem Lorbeck who has played well in Europe since the Pacers picked him, with the core of the team--Granger, Hibbert, Hansborough, Rush, along with Dunleavy as the savvy veteran every team needs--I think at least one maybe two of them have enough potential to develop into contributors on a team that can contend in 2-3 years.

[Scoot McGroot]

No offense, but if guys like Soloman Jones, Josh McRoberts, Luther Head, Travis Diener, etc are considered building blocks for the future, then the future is looking pretty bleak IMO.

Definitely not building blocks for the future, but useful players, and guys we like a lot. Why should we have to cut those guys just to give away Jeff Foster for a crappy long-term deal in Balkman and a whole bunch of crap? We LIKE our crap. We hate your crap. That's the difference. We place value on Luther Head, Solo Jones, Josh McRoberts (not so much on Diener, he could be included), and ESPECIALLY AJ Price.

To us, including those young guys on dirt-cheap contracts and having to take on absolute duds from Denver would be a huge negative, and these offers already are huge negatives. Seriously, Balkman is no starting point. It would really take Ty Lawson to get a deal worked out. There's just nothing else of value there in Denver right now that's actually movable.

[basketballwacko2]

You never know with those 3 or 4 guys at the end of your bench who never play, what they might become when they get some playing time. I'd say that any of those guys on the Pacers could be real solid role players, McBob, Solo, Head and AJ who looks to have a lot more than role player in him. The only one I could just dump would be Diener and that's because we have so many PGs.

[eathy]

If Denver believes they have a real shot at a championship now, and would sacrifice part of their future by giving us Lawson, then obviously, I'm all for it.

However, without Lawson, there's little chance of this happening and I'm perfectly fine with that. Foster isn't a contract we're looking to get rid of. He's spent his entire career here, rarely do you see that, and we're thankful for it. There's no need to ship him off in a deal for fillers like Balkman or Anthony Carter. I'm sure Bird realizes that, as well.

Basically, Lawson or "No, thank you".

Except for the fact that Lawson **** over Foster in terms of which player you would want in a championship team.

Nuggets trade Lawson for Foster, they do not get out of the first round. Guaranteed.

[Scoot McGroot]

If Denver believes they have a real shot at a championship now, and would sacrifice part of their future by giving us Lawson, then obviously, I'm all for it.

However, without Lawson, there's little chance of this happening and I'm perfectly fine with that. Foster isn't a contract we're looking to get rid of. He's spent his entire career here, rarely do you see that, and we're thankful for it. There's no need to ship him off in a deal for fillers like Balkman or Anthony Carter. I'm sure Bird realizes that, as well.

Basically, Lawson or "No, thank you".

Except for the fact that Lawson **** over Foster in terms of which player you would want in a championship team.

Nuggets trade Lawson for Foster, they do not get out of the first round. Guaranteed.

I think it's actually the opposite. If you want a championship team in 2 or 3 years or later, you hold onto Lawson.

If you want a championship team NOW, you go for a guy like Foster. Somebody who can neutralize a stud PF/C player like a Tim Duncan or Pau Gasol.

Don't you think that Billups, Smith, and Anthony are going to be playing almost 40 minutes a night in the playoffs? Meaning Lawson might get about 16 minutes a night or so, if he or Billups slides over to the SG every now and again?


I'm not saying that Denver should trade Lawson for Foster. I'm just saying that your reason appears to be incorrect. However, for Indy, there's just absolutely no offer you can make right now that we'd take for Foster, unless they included Lawson. Balkman plus 3 or 4 guys as filler is a horrible offer for Indy and a huge negative. Lawson is the ONLY positive that you could possibly trade that would get a deal done.

[Grang33r]

Yahoo sports Marc Spears (which by the way i think is one of their best additions, he's one of the best basketball journalists out there) confirms Denver and Indiana have talked about Jeff Foster. Although, Spears says don't be surprised if the Nuggets don't make a move at all. Also, he says Ty Lawson is off-limits.

While the Nuggets have made a run at Indiana Pacers center Jeff Foster(notes) and Chicago Bulls center Aaron Gray(notes), sources say no deal is imminent and it wouldn’t be a surprise if the team doesn’t make a move prior to the trade deadline. Teams have called asking for rookie point guard Ty Lawson(notes), but the Nuggets have declared him off limits.

Link- http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns

[Scoot McGroot]

Yeah, there's absolutely NO other deal out there unless we could include Billups and Ford in there as well, but there's no way Denver can afford to do that.