Moderators: bisme37, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts
Froob wrote:Why was Fultz on such a bad team anyways? Was he an out of nowhere guy? Why didn't he play for a good school?
Smitty731 wrote:greenroom31 wrote:Another thing -- the last two days have to improve our chances with Hayward. If we can sign him without giving up any assets, then why go for Butler or PG in the first place? I'd rather look to trade Crowder and one of our guards to get another big from someone than give up Fultz for more SFs.
The big thing to watch for Hayward is tomorrow. If he doesn't make an All-NBA team, the chances of him leaving as a FA are much higher. Much higher.
Tommy Heinsohn wrote:The game is not over until they look you in the face and start crying.
24istheLAW wrote:But can Fultz actually shoot?
He shot 64.9% from the free throw line in his one season at Washington. That's bad.
Yeah, he shot 41% from 3. He also took a ton of pull-up 3s. In the NBA he's going to have to shoot off the catch. His form doesn't look great. How do we know he isn't a 33-35% shooter from deep in the NBA? What did he shoot in HS?
People keep talking about how Ball and Fultz are these incredible prospects and I just can't see it. Anthony Davis was an incredible
prospect. Joel Embiid was an incredible prospect. Can someone talk me into this kid?
Parasite wrote:Philly offers the #3 and the Lakers pick(assuming it's unprotected) next year for the #1. What do you do?
We would quite probably have 2 top 5-7 picks next year along with our own. And we would have our choice of Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Monk, Isaac this year. Is this a tough call or no?
Tommy Heinsohn wrote:The game is not over until they look you in the face and start crying.
Parasite wrote:Philly offers the #3 and the Lakers pick(assuming it's unprotected) next year for the #1. What do you do?
We would quite probably have 2 top 5-7 picks next year along with our own. And we would have our choice of Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Monk, Isaac this year. Is this a tough call or no?
Froob wrote:Smitty731 wrote:greenroom31 wrote:Another thing -- the last two days have to improve our chances with Hayward. If we can sign him without giving up any assets, then why go for Butler or PG in the first place? I'd rather look to trade Crowder and one of our guards to get another big from someone than give up Fultz for more SFs.
The big thing to watch for Hayward is tomorrow. If he doesn't make an All-NBA team, the chances of him leaving as a FA are much higher. Much higher.
Is it basically a lock he stays if he does make it?
He would be in line for a Designated Player Extension, a new clause in the newly ratified Collective Bargaining Agreement. If he qualifies, the Pacers could offer him $75 million-plus more guaranteed than any other team, including an additional season. Only with the Pacers could he sign a five-year deal in the ballpark of $210 million.
If he does not qualify, the Pacers could extend his contract for another five years averaging around $35 million per year. If he decides to play the year out and then go elsewhere, he would leave $45 million on the table if he signs elsewhere for more than $130 million over four years.
Smitty731 wrote:greenroom31 wrote:Another thing -- the last two days have to improve our chances with Hayward. If we can sign him without giving up any assets, then why go for Butler or PG in the first place? I'd rather look to trade Crowder and one of our guards to get another big from someone than give up Fultz for more SFs.
The big thing to watch for Hayward is tomorrow. If he doesn't make an All-NBA team, the chances of him leaving as a FA are much higher. Much higher.
greenroom31 wrote:Froob wrote:Smitty731 wrote:
The big thing to watch for Hayward is tomorrow. If he doesn't make an All-NBA team, the chances of him leaving as a FA are much higher. Much higher.
Is it basically a lock he stays if he does make it?
They'd be able to pay him the super-max so we're talking about a major difference in $$... here are some details (written about Paul George) but the same info should apply to Hayward:He would be in line for a Designated Player Extension, a new clause in the newly ratified Collective Bargaining Agreement. If he qualifies, the Pacers could offer him $75 million-plus more guaranteed than any other team, including an additional season. Only with the Pacers could he sign a five-year deal in the ballpark of $210 million.
If he does not qualify, the Pacers could extend his contract for another five years averaging around $35 million per year. If he decides to play the year out and then go elsewhere, he would leave $45 million on the table if he signs elsewhere for more than $130 million over four years.
Tommy Heinsohn wrote:The game is not over until they look you in the face and start crying.
Shamrock wrote:Froob wrote:Why was Fultz on such a bad team anyways? Was he an out of nowhere guy? Why didn't he play for a good school?
Been mentioned before but he was under 6 feet when he committed to Washington. He grew to his current height and his game took off and out loyalty he didn't back out of agreement with Washington. They showed his family a lot of respect and he liked Romar
Parasite wrote:So I'm assuming that Philly trade offer is a hard pass then lol.
Parasite wrote:Philly offers the #3 and the Lakers pick(assuming it's unprotected) next year for the #1. What do you do?
We would quite probably have 2 top 5-7 picks next year along with our own. And we would have our choice of Jackson, Fox, Tatum, Monk, Isaac this year. Is this a tough call or no?
Shamrock wrote:Parasite wrote:So I'm assuming that Philly trade offer is a hard pass then lol.
Bro, you do not trade a #1 pick for quantity. It's quality over quantity in the NBA
Parasite wrote:And if Ainge has Jackson or another prospect rated closely to Fultz? What then?
Jingles wrote:I understand the sentiment but it's kind of funny to me to see people constantly talking about how we can't keep all these assets and need to consolidate into more studs, and then immediately after we land the 1st pick through highly improbably circumstances and the rights to draft one such stud, the board is inundated with ways we can avoid actually doing it. Don't be afraid, just draft the stud!
Jingles wrote:I understand the sentiment but it's kind of funny to me to see people constantly talking about how we can't keep all these assets and need to consolidate into more studs, and then immediately after we land the 1st pick through highly improbable circumstances and the rights to draft one such stud, the board is inundated with ways we can avoid actually doing it. Don't be afraid, just draft the stud!