IND/DET/NOP - Turner-Grant-Bledsoe+

[youngcrev]

This is more idea than something that's fully fleshed out but...

Pacers
In: Jerami Grant
Out: Myles Turner

- Indy quits the 2 center thing and rolls with a more normal lineup. Grant's length and athleticism on the wing could be a major plus with Sabonis moving to the 5.

Pistons
In: Eric Bledsoe, draft/asset compensation via NOP
Out: Jerami Grant

- The Pistons continue the tank, selling off what turned out to be a quality signing at a premium. Grant's a nice player, but he's certainly not a centerpiece.

Pelicans
In: Myles Turner
Out: Eric Bledsoe, draft/asset compensation

- Turner feels like about as good of a fit at the 5 as anyone next to Zion. High end rim protector that simply gets out his way on offense. He's also only 25, so he could be a longterm solution here.


Now... Obviously I'm leaving a major hole here in terms of what that compensation would be, but it feels like there's something here, I'm just too lazy to come up with what I think is the fair amount and don't feel like dealing with widely varying opinions of what it should be

[Texas Chuck]

While you work on the compensation due Detroit, I think Indy is due some as well. I have Turner more valuable than Grant.

[Mavrelous]

That draft asset compensation better be big, all the picks NOP have are projected to be non-lottery, except the Lakers 25' pick which has good potential, but yeah, I like it a lot, NOP 2021, Lakers 22, and NOP highest 2 2nd rounders in 2021, would be fair, and the 2nd rounders should go to Indy.

[Godaddycurse]

I think Turner is worth a bit more than grant, but thats a personal preference. I'd ask for some additional compensation if i was IND

[Scoot McGroot]

For Indy, at least, a base of Turner for Grant would make some sense. It makes the team tighter financially, though, by paying that extra $2+m per year to Grant, but could probably be adjusted to work. Don’t know what the picks would be. Maybe New Orleans sends 10 and 34 to Indy, and Indy sends 13 to Detroit? Too much somewhere? Not enough somewhere? With NO and their flexibility of picks, seems like they could figure out value with their 2nds and future 1sts of differing projected values.

I’m kind of the belief that Indy would look to deal Turner for a combo forward (like Grant, Barnes, Bridges, Washington, etc) to play with Warren/Sabonis, and a pick. So this tracks to me.

[vege]

Compensation has to be insane for Detroit to eat Bledsoe and give up Grant. He is unwanted as a player (we need to develop Hayes and Saben Lee and he would get in the way) and the last thing we need is more dead cap in 22-23.

Honestly, I can't see it done.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

This just seems like another trade where the Pacers get worse for no reason.

Grant is inefficient and fits poorly next to Sabonis. The Pacers wouldn't even know what the word "defense" means after this trade.

[8305]

This is more idea than something that's fully fleshed out but...

Pacers
In: Jerami Grant
Out: Myles Turner

- Indy quits the 2 center thing and rolls with a more normal lineup. Grant's length and athleticism on the wing could be a major plus with Sabonis moving to the 5.

Pistons
In: Eric Bledsoe, draft/asset compensation via NOP
Out: Jerami Grant

- The Pistons continue the tank, selling off what turned out to be a quality signing at a premium. Grant's a nice player, but he's certainly not a centerpiece.

Pelicans
In: Myles Turner
Out: Eric Bledsoe, draft/asset compensation

- Turner feels like about as good of a fit at the 5 as anyone next to Zion. High end rim protector that simply gets out his way on offense. He's also only 25, so he could be a longterm solution here.


Now... Obviously I'm leaving a major hole here in terms of what that compensation would be, but it feels like there's something here, I'm just too lazy to come up with what I think is the fair amount and don't feel like dealing with widely varying opinions of what it should be

I think this concept makes all kinds of sense. I've been posting (much weaker) trades attempting to accomplish something like this with very little success. A lottery pick this year and all the small change of draft capital the Pelicans own should allow a unique opportunity to get this done. One point of note that I saw on an earlier trade thread, Bledsoe's contract is only a partial guarantee 3 mil for the 2022-23 season. So that contract isn't as onerous as it might seem.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

[8305]

This just seems like another trade where the Pacers get worse for no reason.

Grant is inefficient and fits poorly next to Sabonis. The Pacers wouldn't even know what the word "defense" means after this trade.

I know there is a split on the Pacer Board as to the Turner/Sabonis combination. I like both players and struggle determining which one should be moved. Which is more important offense of defense? I'd pretty much come to the idea that in the game as played today you need the offense guy. But, watching Utah I'm not as sure. In any evert, I've come to the conclusion Turner and Sabonis are arguably our two best players and they are both centers. The game is shifting away from center play making the use of two at a time an even less desirable strategy than in prior years. I'll also throw in the point the Bitadze is at a place where he needs minutes that will simply not be there if the Turner/Sabonis combination remains in play.

Do you see an upside to our two center combination that to this point has been untapped?

In Grant I see a combo forward who can shoot the 3 and defend multiple positions. Seems to me that's the definition of the type of players you would need surrounding Sabonis? My sense is that Grant's efficiency suffered this past season but that when cast in the role of a support player (the role he has historically played) he is more efficient?

[8305]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Did he want to be the man or did he simply want to know he'd be a starter and get paid like a starter? Can't blame any player for that aspiration.

I'm of the mind Levert would be better coming off the bench for the Pacers (see Clarkson and Ingals deferring to O'Neal at Utah). I'm wondering if Sumner can be our version of O'Neal. That would give us 4 solid defenders surrounding Sabonis in our starting unit. A necessity in my opinion.

[Wizop]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

if we are trading Turner or Sabonis it is because we have concluded that we need to swap a 5 for a 4. I'm not sure we should, but let's assume we should trade Turner for purposes of this thread because we've discussed that often enough elsewhere.

the Grant we saw a year ago for Denver was the kind of player I'd want. why he went to Detroit other than to get more money isn't something I know anything about. whether the value is fair isn't something I've given a lot of thought to either. I take it you don't think we win more games with Grant than with Turbonis.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

This just seems like another trade where the Pacers get worse for no reason.

Grant is inefficient and fits poorly next to Sabonis. The Pacers wouldn't even know what the word "defense" means after this trade.

I know there is a split on the Pacer Board as to the Turner/Sabonis combination. I like both players and struggle determining which one should be moved. Which is more important offense of defense? I'd pretty much come to the idea that in the game as played today you need the offense guy. But, watching Utah I'm not as sure. In any evert, I've come to the conclusion Turner and Sabonis are arguably our two best players and they are both centers. The game is shifting away from center play making the use of two at a time an even less desirable strategy than in prior years. I'll also throw in the point the Bitadze is at a place where he needs minutes that will simply not be there if the Turner/Sabonis combination remains in play.

Do you see an upside to our two center combination that to this point has been untapped?

In Grant I see a combo forward who can shoot the 3 and defend multiple positions. Seems to me that's the definition of the type of players you would need surrounding Sabonis? My sense is that Grant's efficiency suffered this past season but that when cast in the role of a support player (the role he has historically played) he is more efficient?

I'm of the belief that if we decide to move on from Turner or Domas, Domas is the one that needs to be moved. We have a lot of scorers already and not enough defenders, plus Turner's role on offense is typically underestimated as well and he is still useful on that side of the floor.

Grant was more efficient as a role player, the problem is he doesn't want to be a role player. He wants to be THE GUY, so what happens when you add him back to a team full of good scorers again? Is he going to be content settling back into a support player spot? The way the Pacers work, he'd still get plenty of opportunities, but he certainly wouldn't be THE GUY anymore. But again, the Pacers do not need his scoring anyway. Domas, Brogdon, Warren, and LeVert have all proven they can be roughly 20 PPG players. Grant is a fine enough defender, but he's not going to protect the rim, which is really what you need from Center, and obviously Domas won't be doing that, so once again, we'd just witness a layup line when the other team isn't shooting uncontested 3s. From a fit standpoint, Grant doesn't make sense at all to me....then again, not many players do next to Domas, except Turner, which is why I believe if we are trading one, we should trade Domas. Turner fits next to any PF in the game, Domas fits next to very few.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Did he want to be the man or did he simply want to know he'd be a starter and get paid like a starter? Can't blame any player for that aspiration.

I'm of the mind Levert would be better coming off the bench for the Pacers (see Clarkson and Ingals deferring to O'Neal at Utah). I'm wondering if Sumner can be our version of O'Neal. That would give us 4 solid defenders surrounding Sabonis in our starting unit. A necessity in my opinion.

Mind you, I haven't looked a ton into it, but he was on a team that believed they were competing for a Championship, I've read a few places over the last year that his goal was to be the guy on a team...now, that could just essentially mean he wanted a bigger role and more money and not necessarily be the main focal point, but thats kinda what I gathered from it.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I take it you don't think we win more games with Grant than with Turbonis.

Depending on health, we had all kinds of injuries this year, so assuming we are reasonably healthy next year, we'd probably win more games by default, but no, I do not believe we'd be a better team.

[Scoot McGroot]

In Grant I see a combo forward who can shoot the 3 and defend multiple positions. Seems to me that's the definition of the type of players you would need surrounding Sabonis? My sense is that Grant's efficiency suffered this past season but that when cast in the role of a support player (the role he has historically played) he is more efficient?

I think Grant excelled early in the season when he was a bit of a surprise, and was the lead ball handler/offensive creator, but not the dominant or sole creator. His first 20 games were statistically quite impressive, and his usage was below 27%. As the season went on, they had him dominate it more and more, and his usage climbed up above 31% and his efficiently plummeted. I think he’d be an effective combo forward to pair with TJ Warren and allow the team to play a speedier defensive system. It also seems a classic Indiana move, in the sense of sacrificing some value for a more immediate impact player. I think Grant can guard multiple positions, and with Warren, can at least help provide some better perimeter defense to lessen the weight on Sabonis. And it’s the kind of move where you have a lineup of 5 guys that can all get a bucket if you need them to, which Pritchard talked about.

Would I prefer a super high draft pick or young hot prospect instead for the most long-term impact? Yeah, personally, sure. But I don’t think Herb Simon would. So this kind of seems up the alley, depending on what other value comes along with Grant to make it worth our while to move a defensive impact player like Myles Turner. It just seems like Indy is set on moving Turner at some point this offseason (though maybe Sabonis? Maybe neither? Who knows?). This would at least hedge their bets a bit, either way.

[Scoot McGroot]

I'm a bit shocked other Pacer fans seem to like this.

Grant is super inefficient and left the Nuggets because he wanted to be "The Man" on a team. How is he going to fit into a unit with other scorers like Domas, LeVert, Warren, and Brogdon....and why do we even need his scoring more than we need Turner's defense? Not to mention him being 2 years older and costing more(though, not much.) I just can't find a single reason for the Pacers to consider this.

What are ya'lls thoughts on why you believe this would be good for the Pacers?

Did he want to be the man or did he simply want to know he'd be a starter and get paid like a starter? Can't blame any player for that aspiration.

I'm of the mind Levert would be better coming off the bench for the Pacers (see Clarkson and Ingals deferring to O'Neal at Utah). I'm wondering if Sumner can be our version of O'Neal. That would give us 4 solid defenders surrounding Sabonis in our starting unit. A necessity in my opinion.

Mind you, I haven't looked a ton into it, but he was on a team that believed they were competing for a Championship, I've read a few places over the last year that his goal was to be the guy on a team...now, that could just essentially mean he wanted a bigger role and more money and not necessarily be the main focal point, but thats kinda what I gathered from it.

As far as I remember, Grant wanted a chance to prove himself worthy of a bigger role, more so than playing in OKC and Denver ever allowed him to be. It wasn’t just to be “the man”, but to have a chance to be more than just a defensive specialist who wasn’t allowed to really handle the ball at all.

[Wizop]

I take it you don't think we win more games with Grant than with Turbonis.

Depending on health, we had all kinds of injuries this year, so assuming we are reasonably healthy next year, we'd probably win more games by default, but no, I do not believe we'd be a better team.

so you don't want to trade Turner or Sabonis - period. I'm fine with that. I do wonder if we'll make the next coach commit to giving the current starting five a try or if we'll let him make the decision. my default position is the front office sets the roster and the coach adapts the playbook to fit it and not the other way around.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

I take it you don't think we win more games with Grant than with Turbonis.

Depending on health, we had all kinds of injuries this year, so assuming we are reasonably healthy next year, we'd probably win more games by default, but no, I do not believe we'd be a better team.

so you don't want to trade Turner or Sabonis - period. I'm fine with that. I do wonder if we'll make the next coach commit to giving the current starting five a try or if we'll let him make the decision. my default position is the front office sets the roster and the coach adapts the playbook to fit it and not the other way around.

I'm not oppose to trading Domas depending on what the return would be. I'm oppose to trading Turner unless we get a deal that I can't imagine anyone reasonably offering.

I think you can only run it back so many times before you realize the team has no future....of course, I don't believe the Pacers care about the future, so long as they make the playoffs, they'll be happy.

[Wizop]

I'm not opposed to trading Domas depending on what the return would be. I'm oppose to trading Turner unless we get a deal that I can't imagine anyone reasonably offering.

I tend to agree with this. I think it will be easier to find a 4 that can replace Sabonis's offense than one that can replace Turner's defense. the one caveat is that Sabonis's passing will be harder to replace than his scoring.

I think you can only run it back so many times before you realize the team has no future....of course, I don't believe the Pacers care about the future, so long as they make the playoffs, they'll be happy.

I think that's a bit too pessimistic. I don't think they'd be happy finishing 6-10. I think they want 50 win seasons at a minimum. if they get there and need to pay a LITTLE tax to take the next step,