Memphis Shopping Package of #4 pick + Parsons

[SmashMouthRod]

I would do this and not think twice. Just in case Porter is there at 4. But in the event that he isnt you still get a chance at a franchise talent to go with our core. Pretty much a max salary level player on a rookie deal. And you only have to keep Parsons until the end of the following season. Who knows what happens. You have Oladipo, Turner, Sabonis and Possibly Porter/Bagley/Doncic with a max salary expiring contract for trade bait in year two. Indiana never gets to pick this high. I would rather make this deal than overpay to acquire Aaron Gordon, Smart or any of the mid tier level guys. This would position Indy to compete with Boston and Philly for Eastern conference supremacy for the next 10. Additionally imagine if Parsons can be serviceable as a backup sf. He can possibly come off the bench and space the floor with Lance, Domas and GR3.

[8305]

I think the best offer we could make would be Collison, Bogdonovich, pick 23 and Leaf for Parsons and pick 4. Trouble is the best player available at pick 4 is most likely a 4 or 5. Maybe make a follow up trade with Philly, pick 4 for Fultz and pick 10?

[Wizop]

I think I'd rather talk to Denver.

Sent from my phone.

[Indy4Life]

I'd be all over the #4 pick...

[Tom White]

If having the #4 pick and Parson's contract is that great a thing, why doesn't Memphis keep both?
Why do people think Memphis is sooooo eager to get rid of that pick if it is such a valuable asset?

Please ask yourselves why Memphis would be willing to do this.

Folks, sooner than you think, the Pacers will need to be spending the money on our own (more productive than Parsons) players.
If you do this trade, and have this mindset, you know what you have? Memphis contract hell part 2.

[Scoot McGroot]

If having the #4 pick and Parson's contract is that great a thing, why doesn't Memphis keep both?
Why do people think Memphis is sooooo eager to get rid of that pick if it is such a valuable asset?

Please ask yourselves why Memphis would be willing to do this.

Folks, sooner than you think, the Pacers will need to be spending the money on our own (more productive than Parsons) players.
If you do this trade, and have this mindset, you know what you have? Memphis contract hell part 2.

The original reporter source was a bit unreliable, but in reality, the ownership change in Memphis from their former tri-owner setup to Robert Pera having used up most all of the liquidity he has to buy them out, and Pera's coinciding "distance" from the franchise make people wonder if he'll pull some fiscal shenanigans in order to make his ownership more profitable. In essence, it's not that the #4 pick in a solid draft like this year's is less valuable, it's that Pera's priorities may be different, and he may value cutting costs more than most other owners would. The #4 pick isn't "not valuable". It's Parson's contract that is horrible. The question has simply been asked if Pera would pay a premium price (the #4 pick) to get out of $50m that he may not have in cash.

And not a single person here has argued that Parson's contract is a great thing. It's horrible. However, we're in a position that it may not be as horrible for us, and we could stomach it.

Oh, and Parson's has 2 years left. In that time frame, we'll only have Turner, and possibly Lance, Joseph, and Poythress to re-up. Collison and Bogdanovic too, if you consider them young enough to re-up (I don't). So, Parson's would have almost NO theoretical impact on our cap, nor keeping any of our young guys.

[Tom White]

The original reporter source was a bit unreliable, but in reality, the ownership change in Memphis from their former tri-owner setup to Robert Pera having used up most all of the liquidity he has to buy them out, and Pera's coinciding "distance" from the franchise make people wonder if he'll pull some fiscal shenanigans in order to make his ownership more profitable. In essence, it's not that the #4 pick in a solid draft like this year's is less valuable, it's that Pera's priorities may be different, and he may value cutting costs more than most other owners would.

That sounds like the ownership problems Atlanta went through some years back. Also sounds like the situation Cleveland had decades ago. What was that guy's name...Septien or something like that?

....we'll only have Turner, and possibly Lance, Joseph, and Poythress to re-up. Collison and Bogdanovic too, if you consider them young enough to re-up (I don't). So, Parson's would have almost NO theoretical impact on our cap, nor keeping any of our young guys.

Just shows how differently we all look at things. You see "only" those players, while I look at your list and see two starters and two important bench players.

Well, in any case, we will all find out soon enough what the thoughts of the team are. At the least it all gives us something to talk about this off-season.

[pizza guy]

If having the #4 pick and Parson's contract is that great a thing, why doesn't Memphis keep both?
Why do people think Memphis is sooooo eager to get rid of that pick if it is such a valuable asset?

Please ask yourselves why Memphis would be willing to do this.

Folks, sooner than you think, the Pacers will need to be spending the money on our own (more productive than Parsons) players.
If you do this trade, and have this mindset, you know what you have? Memphis contract hell part 2.

The original reporter source was a bit unreliable, but in reality, the ownership change in Memphis from their former tri-owner setup to Robert Pera having used up most all of the liquidity he has to buy them out, and Pera's coinciding "distance" from the franchise make people wonder if he'll pull some fiscal shenanigans in order to make his ownership more profitable. In essence, it's not that the #4 pick in a solid draft like this year's is less valuable, it's that Pera's priorities may be different, and he may value cutting costs more than most other owners would. The #4 pick isn't "not valuable". It's Parson's contract that is horrible. The question has simply been asked if Pera would pay a premium price (the #4 pick) to get out of $50m that he may not have in cash.

And not a single person here has argued that Parson's contract is a great thing. It's horrible. However, we're in a position that it may not be as horrible for us, and we could stomach it.

Oh, and Parson's has 2 years left. In that time frame, we'll only have Turner, and possibly Lance, Joseph, and Poythress to re-up. Collison and Bogdanovic too, if you consider them young enough to re-up (I don't). So, Parson's would have almost NO theoretical impact on our cap, nor keeping any of our young guys.

Memphis is currently $5mil over next seasons cap, with a team that missed the playoffs and a guy making $24mil that's played in 70 total games over the last two seasons. They think if Conley comes back healthy that they can compete and at least make the playoffs. Imagine how anxious they must be to add another $15mil player to the Conley and Gasol duo!

In my opinion, they'd be dumb to give up the #4 pick to dump Parsons. But if they did it and we were able to add the #4 overall pick to our core of Oladipo, Domas, and Myles, I think we absolutely have the flexibility to do it and it would pay off over the next 7-10 years. So being concerned over 2 years of Parsons' bad contract is a little short-sighted, the way I see it. Nearly the whole roster comes off the books next summer, so we won't have any trouble re-signing Myles. And Parsons would come off the summer after that, so we wouldn't have any trouble re-signing Domas either.

[MUpacersSIC]

It's crazy that Memphis' owner thinks they are a 50 win team when healthy next season, imo. They have rebuild written all over them, and trading the #4 pick seems like a terrible decision. However, if they do, they are going to be looking at a win now piece. They aren't giving that pick up for nothing in return. They'd want a Turner type player, which I easily wouldn't do.