Is It Possible That PG Signs A Shorter Term Deal?

pacerfan1984 · Post #1 » by **pacerfan1984** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 4:32 pm

This is a question I've posed to a few fans. If PG is really about winning then the Lakers as currently constructed are shouldn't even be an option. If winning is a priority why not sign a new 3 year deal with an opt out after year 2? That gives the Pacers ample time show PG they are building a winner. If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?

Pacers_Freak · Post #2 » by **Pacers_Freak** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 4:49 pm

I think this is a very likely scenario. Makes the most sense IMO. Plus gives him more time to get the designated player.

Wizop · Post #3 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 4:52 pm

an opt out after year one seems more likely

Kirito · Post #4 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 4:52 pm

pacerfan1984 wrote:This is a question I've posed to a few fans. If PG is really about winning then the Lakers as currently constructed are shouldn't even be an option. If winning is a priority why not sign a new 3 year deal with an opt out after year 2? That gives the Pacers ample time show PG they are building a winner. If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?

Ill ask you what can the Pacer do to beat Cavs or Warriors that they have not done the past 7 years?
If you remove PG from IND and add them to lets say the Lakers who would be a better team?
in 2 years the Lakers wouldnt have the CapSpace to sign PG so they would need to lose those same assets that your saying PG would wait for why not sign there now if he really wants to go there?

Wizop · Post #5 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:15 pm

Kirito wrote:if he really wants to go there?

I think if we hypnotized him and asked what he wants most, it would be to be the MVP and if that is the best player on the best team ... I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn he's lobbying some big name free agents to sign here with an opt out next summer.

Kirito · Post #6 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:21 pm

Wizop wrote:
Kirito wrote:if he really wants to go there?

I think if we hypnotized him and asked what he wants most, it would be to be the MVP and if that is the best player on the best team ... I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn he's lobbying some big name free agents to sign here with an opt out next summer.

Im not saying he wants to go there i am just responding to this *If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?* He is bringing up the Lakers maturing and just point out why that is a flawed premise for him doing a short term deal

Pacers_Freak · Post #7 » by **Pacers_Freak** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:25 pm

Kirito wrote:
pacerfan1984 wrote:This is a question I've posed to a few fans. If PG is really about winning then the Lakers as currently constructed are shouldn't even be an option. If winning is a priority why not sign a new 3 year deal with an opt out after year 2? That gives the Pacers ample time show PG they are building a winner. If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?

Ill ask you what can the Pacer do to beat Cavs or Warriors that they have not done the past 7 years?
If you remove PG from IND and add them to lets say the Lakers who would be a better team?
in 2 years the Lakers wouldnt have the CapSpace to sign PG so they would need to lose those same assets that your saying PG would wait for why not sign there now if he really wants to go there?

I understand what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree. I'm not really sure what PG wants. Sometimes I'm not sure if PG knows what he wants. The question of what can the Pacers do to beat the Cavs or the Warriors.... right now their answer is the same as the 28 other teams in the league. Those 2 are far superior in their conference than any other team in the league right now. IMO the Warriors are far superior to anyone. So what can anyone in the league do to catch these 2? Lakers included?

Kirito · Post #8 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:33 pm

Pacers_Freak wrote:I understand what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree. I'm not really sure what PG wants. Sometimes I'm not sure if PG knows what he wants. The question of what can the Pacers do to beat the Cavs or the Warriors.... right now their answer is the same as the 28 other teams in the league. Those 2 are far superior in their conference than any other team in the league right now. IMO the Warriors are far superior to anyone. So what can anyone in the league do to catch these 2? Lakers included?

I know this will offend people but PG has a better chance to win with the Lakers then they do with the Pacers for the simple fact Lakers are so young. That the hope is by the time everyone matures in around 3 years Clev is 100% Done and GSW will be on the decline so we can beat them then. But before 3 years no team can really beat them so no matter what if your not GSW CLE or SAS your just waiting for the right time to strike...

Pacers_Freak · Post #9 » by **Pacers_Freak** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:41 pm

Kirito wrote:
Pacers_Freak wrote:I understand what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree. I'm not really sure what PG wants. Sometimes I'm not sure if PG knows what he wants. The question of what can the Pacers do to beat the Cavs or the Warriors.... right now their answer is the same as the 28 other teams in the league. Those 2 are far superior in their conference than any other team in the league right now. IMO the Warriors are far superior to anyone. So what can anyone in the league do to catch these 2? Lakers included?

I know this will offend people but PG has a better chance to win with the Lakers then they do with the Pacers for the simple fact Lakers are so young. That the hope is by the time everyone matures in around 3 years Clev is 100% Done and GSW will be on the decline so we can beat them then. But before 3 years no team can really beat them so no matter what if your not GSW CLE or SAS your just waiting for the right time to strike...

I do not disagree with your logic on when the window will be in the East. The West (if the Warriors stay together) may be a bit longer than 3 years. I will say that you are higher on the young talent in LA than I. I don't see them in 3 years plus PG being ready to contend with the Dubs. A playoff team yes, contenders no in my opinion. Certainly does not mean I am right.

basketballwacko2 · Post #10 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 8:49 pm

Wizop wrote:an opt out after year one seems more likely

Well that's what he has now why should we give him a $10 million raise if he's giving us 2 yrs plus one? With a 2 plus 1 he gets 2 more shots at All NBA and gives the team a chance to improve around him and compete again. If he signs a 1 plus 1 it's no better for the team than it is now, just paying him more.

basketballwacko2 · Post #11 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 8:51 pm

Kirito wrote:
pacerfan1984 wrote:This is a question I've posed to a few fans. If PG is really about winning then the Lakers as currently constructed are shouldn't even be an option. If winning is a priority why not sign a new 3 year deal with an opt out after year 2? That gives the Pacers ample time show PG they are building a winner. If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?

Ill ask you what can the Pacer do to beat Cavs or Warriors that they have not done the past 7 years?
If you remove PG from IND and add them to lets say the Lakers who would be a better team?
in 2 years the Lakers wouldnt have the CapSpace to sign PG so they would need to lose those same assets that your saying PG would wait for why not sign there now if he really wants to go there?

Why would he want to go to a team that's 5 yrs away from making the playoffs in the west? Don't kid yourself the Lakers are not close to winning or competing with Clev, or GSW.

basketballwacko2 · Post #12 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 8:54 pm

Kirito wrote:
Pacers_Freak wrote:I understand what you are saying and don't necessarily disagree. I'm not really sure what PG wants. Sometimes I'm not sure if PG knows what he wants. The question of what can the Pacers do to beat the Cavs or the Warriors.... right now their answer is the same as the 28 other teams in the league. Those 2 are far superior in their conference than any other team in the league right now. IMO the Warriors are far superior to anyone. So what can anyone in the league do to catch these 2? Lakers included?

I know this will offend people but PG has a better chance to win with the Lakers then they do with the Pacers for the simple fact Lakers are so young. That the hope is by the time everyone matures in around 3 years Clev is 100% Done and GSW will be on the decline so we can beat them then. But before 3 years no team can really beat them so no matter what if your not GSW CLE or SAS your just waiting for the right time to strike...

He'll be 32 yrs old before the lakers get past the 6th seed in the west.

Wizop · Post #13 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 9:00 pm

basketballwacko2 wrote:
Wizop wrote:an opt out after year one seems more likely

Well that's what he has now why should we give him a $10 million raise if he's giving us 2 yrs plus one? With a 2 plus 1 he gets 2 more shots at All NBA and gives the team a chance to improve around him and compete again. If he signs a 1 plus 1 it's no better for the team than it is now, just paying him more.

are you thinking about what we might do this summer or next summer? I was thinking we'd do nothing this year and try and get one and one in 2018.

basketballwacko2 · Post #14 » by **basketballwacko2** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 9:10 pm

Wizop wrote:
basketballwacko2 wrote:
Wizop wrote:an opt out after year one seems more likely

Well that's what he has now why should we give him a $10 million raise if he's giving us 2 yrs plus one? With a 2 plus 1 he gets 2 more shots at All NBA and gives the team a chance to improve around him and compete again. If he signs a 1 plus 1 it's no better for the team than it is now, just paying him more.

are you thinking about what we might do this summer or next summer? I was thinking we'd do nothing this year and try and get one and one in 2018.

I was talking about this year signing him to a 2+1 deal. But I guess you were talking about 2018 when his deal has expired.

8305 · Post #15 » by **8305** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 9:16 pm

I don't see PG signing an extension this summer. Everyone likes control of their destiny and for most people the sooner the better. Add the fact that for the past couple of seasons Pacers efforts in retooling a contender have been mixed and that's being pretty generous. Now there are some interesting possibilities for next season. Myles Turner and Lance Stephenson provide a really interesting upside. Resign Teague, hit on a really interesting young player in the draft and I'd dare say we might have something to sell next summer.

Who knows how the rest of the league will shake out in the next year and what possibilities may or may not be available to Paul then. If I'm PG there's no way I'm extending right now there are too many unknowns with the Pacers and I want the power to control my destiny sooner rather than later.

Wizop · Post #16 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 9:30 pm

2 + 1 now and 1 + 1 next year are similar for team but maybe not for Paul who probably wants to keep his options open. I'd love to lock him up some now but I'd also like to bring in a veteran stretch four and we probably can't do both.

Sent from my 831C using RealGM mobile app

Kirito · Post #17 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 10:04 pm

basketballwacko2 wrote:Why would he want to go to a team that's 5 yrs away from making the playoffs in the west? Don't kid yourself the Lakers are not close to winning or competing with Clev, or GSW.

Ok we will start with this

Im not saying he wants to go there i am just responding to this *If the Pacers fail to win then the Lakers should be far enough into their development that PG being there makes way more sense. Thoughts?* He is bringing up the Lakers maturing and just point out why that is a flawed premise for him doing a short term deal

This has already been addressed maybe you jumped the gun and you can retract your statement because you posted that before you read more down the thread we have all done that its why we should not post without reading to date so we dont get caught posting without any context.

Kirito · Post #18 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 10:15 pm

basketballwacko2 wrote:I know this will offend people but PG has a better chance to win with the Lakers then they do with the Pacers for the simple fact Lakers are so young. That the hope is by the time everyone matures in around 3 years Clev is 100% Done and GSW will be on the decline so we can beat them then. But before 3 years no team can really beat them so no matter what if your not GSW CLE or SAS your just waiting for the right time to strike...

He'll be 32 yrs old before the lakers get past the 6th seed in the west.[/quote]
If you really think PG with the Lakers it will take 5 years to get past the 6th Seed in the west that more of a condemnation of PG and not the Lakers. If you really think he is that bad of a player then why even bother giving him the Max. In the NBA 1 player makes a huge difference and changes the game a lot.

You do know my whole point is that PG has a better chance to win with a team like the Lakers over the pacers is because they are young so they have more upside. Plus because they have more update they have a better chance to move up the ranks when GSW SAS CLE are on the way down. Teams are going to have to wait tell those teams go down over taking them outside of there decline does not look like it will happen. Unless your going to tell me your team has more upside and more potential in your younger players then the Lakers your arguing with feels over realz.

Btw If he wants to win he has 2 options A Join one of CLE SAS and GSW or B Join a team with a lot of young players with a lot of upside that will can catch them on there way down. Any other team well they are going to be like BOS today just making it to the CF then becoming Fodder.

pacerfan1984 · Post #19 » by **pacerfan1984** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 10:22 pm

At the end of the day PG giving the Pacers two more guaranteed years to build a contender is fair IMO...it gives him time to get the DPE and gives Indy time to put better pieces around him. People tend to forget just a few years this team was the biggest threat to LBJ and the Heat. Now if the Pacers fail build around him and the Lakers or any other team for that matter makes more sense then by all means jump ship. He will still be 29 or 30 and very much in his prime. I feel the Pacers took a huge chance on him at #10 in the draft so maybe he should consider returning the favor and letting this new front office try to work their magic.

Kirito · Post #20 » by **Kirito** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 10:34 pm

pacerfan1984 wrote:At the end of the day PG giving the Pacers two more guaranteed years to build a contender is fair IMO...it gives him time to get the DPE and gives Indy time to put better pieces around him. People tend to forget just a few years this team was the biggest threat to LBJ and the Heat. Now if the Pacers fail build around him and the Lakers or any other team for that matter makes more sense then by all means jump ship. He will still be 29 or 30 and very much in his prime. I feel the Pacers took a huge chance on him at #10 in the draft so maybe he should consider returning the favor and letting this new front office try to work their magic.

There is another Tibet about signing what people say he should it's the whole fact that at that point no matter what team he is on her can get a supermax for being a 10 year vet more reasons not to do a 2+1