A lot of teams are interested in Foster and Murphy

[Scoot McGroot]

Listen, if we can get the Cav's to S&T Wally and take on Ford's last year of his deal, they DO NOT, nor should they, have to include ANYTHING else of value. Dumping the last year of Ford IS the value. Even then, that's a lot to ask for.

[basketballwacko2]

Listen, if we can get the Cav's to S&T Wally and take on Ford's last year of his deal, they DO NOT, nor should they, have to include ANYTHING else of value. Dumping the last year of Ford IS the value. Even then, that's a lot to ask for.

I'd be ok with that!

Scoot, if some like that was to happen let's say hypothetically because I'd call it very unlikely, and Wally signs for $6.5 million for 2009-10 then is traded to the Pacers. Who pays the $6.5 million? Do the Pacers pay all of it or is it pro rated based on the number of games played or remaining? How does it impact the cap would the $6.5 mill count on our final cap or only the part that we actually pay? I don't know the rule on that.

[chatard5]

I want more than just expirings for Murphy and Foster, I want some young talent or picks. But I'm not paying the near 20-million bucks, so that's pretty easy to say. I think Murphy has some pretty good value right now, though. Meaning we should be able to get some young talent and I definitely prefer a PG as well.

We need to trade with the Jazz and snag that Knicks pick! Ha!

John Wall and Derrick Favors! And somehow Evan Turner. Ouch, at the Purdue game tonight.... Nooooo good, got killed by him in the 2nd half.

[Miller4ever]

Right now teams that have better offers are holding out. Close to the trade deadline, Pacers are going to make a move, I'm pretty sure.

[Scoot McGroot]

Listen, if we can get the Cav's to S&T Wally and take on Ford's last year of his deal, they DO NOT, nor should they, have to include ANYTHING else of value. Dumping the last year of Ford IS the value. Even then, that's a lot to ask for.

I'd be ok with that!

Scoot, if some like that was to happen let's say hypothetically because I'd call it very unlikely, and Wally signs for $6.5 million for 2009-10 then is traded to the Pacers. Who pays the $6.5 million? Do the Pacers pay all of it or is it pro rated based on the number of games played or remaining? How does it impact the cap would the $6.5 mill count on our final cap or only the part that we actually pay? I don't know the rule on that.

Pretty sure the $6.5 million would be what counts against the cap, but we'd only actually pay him cash out of that pro-rated on how much of the season is left (I think, all the guys over at the CBA forum would be able to spell it out for sure).

[granger05]

From Chad Ford's latest article: Trade Buzz: Players coming and going, insider only I think.

Impact players most likely to be moved

(Ranked from most likely to least likely to be traded)

2. Troy Murphy, F, Pacers
The Pacers look as though they're moving toward a youth movement as they continue to build around Danny Granger. With a number of contending teams interested in Murphy, the Pacers seem to be in the right place to make a deal. While Murphy may be overpaid, there are few bigs in the league that can rebound and spread the floor the way he can. With just one more year left on his contract, Murphy could be the missing piece for a team trying to compete for a title.

The Cavs seem to have the most interest, though several other teams have also told me they'll make a run at him. At the very least, the Pacers should be able to deal Murphy for expiring contracts and one asset (either a draft pick or a young prospect).

6. Jeff Foster, C, Pacers
The Pacers appear to be committed to developing Roy Hibbert and Tyler Hansbrough, leaving little room for Foster -- a mobile, high-energy big man who can defend 4s and 5s.

If you are a Western Conference team trying to stop Pau Gasol, Foster would be a great get. The Nuggets have shown considerable interest in Foster, but they aren't alone. The Blazers, Jazz, Spurs and Suns would all like to get him, too.

I'm not sure what we could actually get for these guys. I have a wait and see approach. It's always fun (especially when the team isn't great) to see your players in the rumors and feel like you might get some exciting young guy back. However, more and more I wonder if we wouldn't be better off holding onto all of our 2011 guys and trying to trade them next year as expirings. We need to get another All Star to pair with Danny, and we just don't have the draw to sign a big name player even when we have the money. Also, in that situation teams usually end up overpaying for lesser players out of some pathological need to use up their cap space. I think we may be better off packaging our 33 million in expiring contracts next season for a big name or even just two up and comers. With the salary cap going down and the collective bargaining agreement set to expire...who knows what teams will do?

I haven't seen any names associated with Murph or Foster that I'm really excited about and I don't believe we have luxury tax issues as we currently stand, so if the team holds off on a deal this season then I think I'm sold on it. If they make a deal then I hope we at least get a young piece or pick out of it otherwise I'd have rather seen us wait.

[granger05]

As examples of the trading expirings for an impact guy I'm thinking of the Lakers getting Gasol, Celts getting Garnett, Heat getting Shaq, and the Pistons getting Rasheed. In all those cases teams basically used expirings and a young prospect (wait and see if we have these or not) to land a guy that pushed them over the top. Then look at what a team like the Pistons did this summer with all their cap room...bleh. Do we really want to be a big player in the 2011 free agent pool? I'd rather see us trade for a guy than get in a bidding war with ourselves as teams have done with cap space lately.

[Starkiller]

The thing that worrys me is this, We will have all this cap room and space, but who is there to sign? I've heard Durant and Melo, but could we really land one of them? And would it be worth it if we've already got Danny and have to have one of the three play a position they aren't comfortable w/. I've heard Tony Parker as well, but I don't think he's the type of PG we need, also think he'll require way more money than he'll be worth.

So what good is all that space if there isn't anyone there to get? This offseason is where all the names are. Is there anyway we can do like granger05 said and get one of this offseasons FA's in a sign and trade or something?

[granger05]

I'm not suggesting we can get one of these 2010 guys. I guess there could be sign and trade possibilities with our expirings, but with so many teams under the cap why would a top free agent want to force a SAT to us unless they really want to play with Danny? I'm thinking more along the lines of targeting a guy that needs a scenery change or a team that has money issues during the 2010/2011 season. New Orleans is always talked about as a struggling franchise and how they may have to part with a big name for economic reasons. How many teams would be positioned to capitalize on that? Maybe we could dream big and next season swing a deal for Chris Paul and take back a ton of their dead money in exchange for our expirings? I'm completely speculating here, but that's the sort of thing I'm thinking of as a quicker move toward competitiveness than having a bunch of cap space.

[Miller4ever]

Parker is someone we can target, and I actually think he would do very well next to Granger. His penetration and speed and increasing savvy serves him well.

[Starkiller]

Parker is someone we can target, and I actually think he would do very well next to Granger. His penetration and speed and increasing savvy serves him well.

IDK, I've never been high on him.

Pacers need a star, an athletic all-star to pair w/ Granger. A top ten player in the league, IMO.

[Scoot McGroot]

Parker is someone we can target, and I actually think he would do very well next to Granger. His penetration and speed and increasing savvy serves him well.

IDK, I've never been high on him.

Pacers need a star, an athletic all-star to pair w/ Granger. A top ten player in the league, IMO.

Well, sure!

Now, how do you actually get one? What value do we have that we can move? Would we have to gut our team for a top 10 player who has an expiring contract and then see him walk elsewhere and set us back 5 years?

[Miller4ever]

Yeah, seriously, we need someone who's all-star caliber to make it a 1-2 punch and with great youth like Hibbert and Hansbrough and hopefully Rush and Price, we draft well in 2011, and then we sign someone big. We get to keep all of those players. We don't need a superstar.

We have been competitive with an inferior all-round player than Granger as our #1 (Reggie Miller) and a good supporting cast (Smits, and all the other guys who have rotated in and out including the Davises, Mark Jackson, Schrempf, Mullin, etc.). We have some similarities, with Hibbert like Smits with more defense, Hansbrough like the Davises with an offensive game, and Granger as our leader. Against Phoenix he was matching two-time MVP Steve Nash in points in the final stretch. He was draining shots and finishing the game. We have all the capabilities, we just need a good coach and another good talent at PG/SG and we're on our way. This is the NBA, where talent differentials between teams aren't actually that huge, unless you're star-studded like Lakers and Celtics. Looking at the Nets on paper, they have a great young frontcourt of CDR (a nice surprise for everyone), Yi Jianlian (finally delivering with a 15-7-1.8 season), and Brook Lopez (19-9 player in his second year). Piloted by Devin Harris, and they have a crap record for reasons other than talent. Talent is only so much, you also need good chemistry and construction. Having Hibbert and Hansbrough offsetting each other and Granger doing everything, things are looking pretty nice right now, we're not just amassing talent, but we're also setting up our future lineup.

And I'd take a solid starting 1-5 any day to two all-stars, and 3 wins on the year.

[Grang33r]

From Chad Ford's latest chat on ESPN, I put the interesting part in BOLD:

Bill (Indy)


Why don't the Cav's trade Z and Hickson to Indy for Murphy and then pick Z back up after the Pacers buy him out?
Chad Ford
(1:27 PM)


Cavs can do that if Pacers waive. But there's a waiting period. I think Pacers will probably want more (and can command more) for Murphy that just Z and Hickson.

I highly doubt that.

I like Murphy, but cap space and a prospect is about it. Granted, I'd prefer a PG type prospect, but eh.

I'm at the point where I'd just take Z essentially, and really appreciate if I could swing a pick/prospect/or couple 2nds out of Murphy.

I don't think Larry Bird will trade Murphy because he's making horrible trade offers. It's like he's insulting other teams. According to Brian Windhorst, a Cavs beat writer, the Pacers offer for Murphy was cap relief, prospects and multiple picks. Windhorst said the offer was "laughable".

I understand the Pacers need to negotiate for the best deal possible, but they are not in any spot of leverage. They need to get rid of salaries and got to get anything they get in return. They can't get picky. Teams will find others sellers, but we may not find other buyers.

[granger05]

This is from the ESPN rumors page, but I also just saw the realgm headline on it too so no link provided:

The Cavaliers would like to acquire Troy Murphy from the Pacers, but the asking price is too high.

The Indianapolis Star reports the Pacers wanted the Cavaliers to give up J.J. Hickson, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and a couple draft picks for Murphy.

The Cavaliers, as expected, turned down that offer.

If Murphy's price tag is too high, the Cavs may instead get another stretch-4 in Antawn Jamison. Andre Iguodala is also still in play for the team as the trade deadline approaches.

[granger05]

I love that we're asking for "a couple" of draft picks. Hopefully, this is just how we take a strong negotiating position.

[granger05]

We're under the cap already for this season and next season right? I don't really see a need for any kind of fire-sale since it's not like we'd see a huge savings over the guy's contract (like you do if you then don't have to pay the tax and also get your share from the tax paying teams). I'm fine with the team driving a hard bargain even if that means nothing comes of it. Jamison and Iggy are also being linked to the Cavs and I doubt the offers the see from the Wiz or Sixers are more enticing. If they could get one of those guys for Z's expiring then they already would have right? It's not like waiting to get a guy helps you when you're trying to get him acclimated in time for a playoff run.

If it were me, I'd trade Murphy for the expiring and a single future unprotected first in 2011. That's my final offer, and that's my "if LeBron bolts" lottery ticket.