Pacers Odds and Ends

[Wizop]

Or would you only consider dealing Brogdon in a package for an “upgrade”?

I'm in no hurry to trade Brogdon or LeVert. I suppose I'd consider it though if the draft were to give us a guard which is certainly possible

[Scoot McGroot]

Would you be willing to move Brogdon for a Philly package that included Thybulle and Maxey, with expirings like George Hill/Tolliver? Though, I think Hill would have to be routed elsewhere (his salary would have to be guaranteed to match legally).

Or would you only consider dealing Brogdon in a package for an “upgrade”?

I think Maxey is going to be really good. Matter of fact, he already is quite good. I have to wonder why Philly would do that trade? Seems to me they would be getting the short end of the deal. Also, not interested in Hill at all.

I think Maxey is going to be good. He’s shown flashes this year. But Brogdon is simply much better right now, and his history of great shooting and secondary ball handling make him a great fit around Embiid/Harris/Curry.

[Scoot McGroot]

Or would you only consider dealing Brogdon in a package for an “upgrade”?

I'm in no hurry to trade Brogdon or LeVert. I suppose I'd consider it though if the draft were to give us a guard which is certainly possible

Suppose you were to consider dealing Brogdon, for this hypothetical. Would you only do it in a consolidation type trade for a star, or would you be willing to “split him up” for a couple other pieces?

[Wizop]

Suppose you were to consider dealing Brogdon, for this hypothetical. Would you only do it in a consolidation type trade for a star, or would you be willing to “split him up” for a couple other pieces?

we now have several 20mm players. are you asking if I'd rather trade two 20's for a 40 or one 20 for two 10's?

I'm not into star power. it's just not my kind of basketball so I'm not for chasing a 40. also in recent years we've twice had players ready for a max deal (George and Oladipo) and each time we were able to trade them advantageously. is there a reverse process where instead of tanking to get great draft picks, you just keep grinding and as you develop stars you split them into two younger players that you think will also become stars?

but the split them up trades we see so often on the T&T forum ignore our roster spots. I think we like our guys with maybe the exception of Aaron who has been outplayed by Sumner and Stanley who isn't more than a 2-way yet. I have Sampson gone and the 13 taking his spot. I'm happy with Brissett and Martin and I like what I see at 13 so I don't want to force them out - but a lot changes if we can't sign the McC's and have more roster spots.

the SuperTeam model sure hasn't worked this year. injuries have taken the Nets out. maybe the Lakers and Warriors too. is it safe though to generalize that a band of brothers has an advantage? Atlanta won last night with their star having an off night. but next man up may require more than one next man. we had three of the starting against the Wiz with Warren, Turner, and LeVert all out. four if you count Lamb.

*********************

do we have to start by asking how many 20's you can have without paying tax? last year we had 4. will we move a Turbonis and make room for Warren to be the next 20? I'm pretty sure you can't have 5 without paying tax. if we stay with two centers does another starter have to be replaced with a cheaper option next year? would that be Brogdon or would Sabonis bring more?

I think though I'm starting to talk myself into thinking Pritchard is wrong not to consider deals that include future firsts. does the onion theory of roster development (peeling off layers) require good rookies?

at this point, I'm just rambling. what do you guys think?

[Scoot McGroot]

Suppose you were to consider dealing Brogdon, for this hypothetical. Would you only do it in a consolidation type trade for a star, or would you be willing to “split him up” for a couple other pieces?

we now have several 20mm players. are you asking if I'd rather trade two 20's for a 40 or one 20 for two 10's?

Not a pure salary move type question. Plus, there’s only 20 guys total next year that will make more than $32m. Only 11 will make more than $36m, really.

I'm not into star power. it's just not my kind of basketball so I'm not for chasing a 40. also in recent years we've twice had players ready for a max deal (George and Oladipo) and each time we were able to trade them advantageously. is there a reverse process where instead of tanking to get great draft picks, you just keep grinding and as you develop stars you split them into two younger players that you think will also become stars?

but the split them up trades we see so often on the T&T forum ignore our roster spots. I think we like our guys with maybe the exception of Aaron who has been outplayed by Sumner and Stanley who isn't more than a 2-way yet. I have Sampson gone and the 13 taking his spot. I'm happy with Brissett and Martin and I like what I see at 13 so I don't want to force them out - but a lot changes if we can't sign the McC's and have more roster spots.

the SuperTeam model sure hasn't worked this year. injuries have taken the Nets out. maybe the Lakers and Warriors too. is it safe though to generalize that a band of brothers has an advantage? Atlanta won last night with their star having an off night. but next man up may require more than one next man. we had three of the starting against the Wiz with Warren, Turner, and LeVert all out. four if you count Lamb.

*********************

Hypothetically, what I’m asking, is would you do a theoretical Brogdon + Levert for Beal trade (consolidation), Or would you rather do a theoretical Brogdon for Bryant + Rui + pick type deal (break apart type deal)? Ignore the specifics as much as the idea.

do we have to start by asking how many 20's you can have without paying tax? last year we had 4. will we move a Turbonis and make room for Warren to be the next 20? I'm pretty sure you can't have 5 without paying tax. if we stay with two centers does another starter have to be replaced with a cheaper option next year? would that be Brogdon or would Sabonis bring more?

Depends. Tax next year is at $143m, the year after $147m-ish. In theory, 5 guys at $20m-ish would seem to be solidly do-able. Just depends on what you fill the roster out with. You could have a Justin Holiday or two ($15m combined?), some draft picks (say 4 years of 1sts on the books, combined around $15m). That’d leave up to 4 roster spots to fill with around $13m to $17m to fill them with. Each vet minimum would be a little under $2m, so you can kind of do the building there. But if one of those 5 starts is really $30m, that throws it off. Or if you have 2-3 years of full MLE type salaries, it also blows up there. Has to be disciplined and thoughtful, but def could be done.

I think though I'm starting to talk myself into thinking Pritchard is wrong not to consider deals that include future firsts. does the onion theory of roster development (peeling off layers) require good rookies?

at this point, I'm just rambling. what do you guys think?

I think you’ve absolutely got to get good, cheap talent, that’s locked up affordably long-term, if you’re dealing future picks, and only have Aaron and Goga on the roster on rookie deals. Guess you could add Oshae there, and maybe Stanley, depending on what you think.

[Topofthekey]

I'm OK with splitting Brogdon into two younger players, but only if I am quite confident that at least one of them will develop into a better player than Brogdon is right now

Maxey is interesting, but I'm not confident enough that he will be better than Brogdon

Alternatively, depending on the lottery results, maybe we can package him and other assets for a top 5 pick

This draft more or less have a consensus top 5 pick, Cade, Mobley, Suggs, Green, and Kuminga

They all look like they could be potential All Stars in the league

But the interesting thing to notice is, I don't think there has ever been a draft where all of the top 5 picks went on to become All Star or better

Most drafts only produce one or two stars in the top 5. I think at most there has been a few drafts that produced three stars in the top 5, but that's the ceiling

So even if we assume that this is going to be one of the better drafts, that still means it will likely only produce at most three stars among the top 5

The interesting question then becomes: which two do you think are going to be the busts?

Looks like I'm also rambling here

Back to Brogdon, if there is a chance to trade into the top 5 Pacers should obviously take it. Else, I lean towards trading him in a consolidation trade, where we trade him and another 20 for a 40. Or maybe him and a 10 for a 30. We have several players signed into cheap multi year deals, like Brissett, Sumner, and Stanley, and I want to see all of them get meaningful playing time. It's a waste of a good, cheap contract if they're just going to be stashed on the bench. As long as these cheap contracts guys prove serviceable, and I think they will, we can afford having some money tied down into a 30 or a 40 player

If we really have to look into the option of splitting Brogdon into two pieces and hoping one of them develops into a star, then I will take my chances with players like Avdija, Quickley, and DiVincenzo

Avdija has a very high ceiling, Quickley plays with the confidence of a star, and DiVincenzo can potentially develop into an elite defender while still being useful on offense

[Wizop]

Hypothetically, what I’m asking, is would you do a theoretical Brogdon + Levert for Beal trade (consolidation), Or would you rather do a theoretical Brogdon for Bryant + Rui + pick type deal (break apart type deal)? Ignore the specifics as much as the idea.

I think the injury risk argues for the break apart deals. looking at the specifics, Rui feels a need, you always need a third center, and we have replacements for Brogdon. we can start McConnell. and see who emerges behind him. he's the vocal leader we're said to need.

I think you’ve absolutely got to get good, cheap talent, that’s locked up affordably long-term, if you’re dealing future picks, and only have Aaron and Goga on the roster on rookie deals. Guess you could add Oshae there, and maybe Stanley, depending on what you think.

I argued for acquiring future picks, not dealing them. extra firsts provide a stream of affordable contracts.

[when I said 20mm, I maybe should have just said "starters money." as the cap goes up, that number goes up with it. one should probably use percentages of the cap instead of fixed numbers to create a roster building plan.]

[Scoot McGroot]

I'm OK with splitting Brogdon into two younger players, but only if I am quite confident that at least one of them will develop into a better player than Brogdon is right now

Maxey is interesting, but I'm not confident enough that he will be better than Brogdon

Alternatively, depending on the lottery results, maybe we can package him and other assets for a top 5 pick

This draft more or less have a consensus top 5 pick, Cade, Mobley, Suggs, Green, and Kuminga

They all look like they could be potential All Stars in the league

But the interesting thing to notice is, I don't think there has ever been a draft where all of the top 5 picks went on to become All Star or better

Most drafts only produce one or two stars in the top 5. I think at most there has been a few drafts that produced three stars in the top 5, but that's the ceiling

So even if we assume that this is going to be one of the better drafts, that still means it will likely only produce at most three stars among the top 5

The interesting question then becomes: which two do you think are going to be the busts?

Looks like I'm also rambling here

Back to Brogdon, if there is a chance to trade into the top 5 Pacers should obviously take it. Else, I lean towards trading him in a consolidation trade, where we trade him and another 20 for a 40. Or maybe him and a 10 for a 30. We have several players signed into cheap multi year deals, like Brissett, Sumner, and Stanley, and I want to see all of them get meaningful playing time. It's a waste of a good, cheap contract if they're just going to be stashed on the bench. As long as these cheap contracts guys prove serviceable, and I think they will, we can afford having some money tied down into a 30 or a 40 player

If we really have to look into the option of splitting Brogdon into two pieces and hoping one of them develops into a star, then I will take my chances with players like Avdija, Quickley, and DiVincenzo

Avdija has a very high ceiling, Quickley plays with the confidence of a star, and DiVincenzo can potentially develop into an elite defender while still being useful on offense

Sumner is only signed for next year and Stanley is a free agent.

[Scoot McGroot]

Hypothetically, what I’m asking, is would you do a theoretical Brogdon + Levert for Beal trade (consolidation), Or would you rather do a theoretical Brogdon for Bryant + Rui + pick type deal (break apart type deal)? Ignore the specifics as much as the idea.

I think the injury risk argues for the break apart deals. looking at the specifics, Rui feels a need, you always need a third center, and we have replacements for Brogdon. we can start McConnell. and see who emerges behind him. he's the vocal leader we're said to need.

I think you’ve absolutely got to get good, cheap talent, that’s locked up affordably long-term, if you’re dealing future picks, and only have Aaron and Goga on the roster on rookie deals. Guess you could add Oshae there, and maybe Stanley, depending on what you think.

I argued for acquiring future picks, not dealing them. extra firsts provide a stream of affordable contracts.

[when I said 20mm, I maybe should have just said "starters money." as the cap goes up, that number goes up with it. one should probably use percentages of the cap instead of fixed numbers to create a roster building plan.]

I’m sorry. I misread it as Dealing future picks.

[Wizop]

I’m sorry. I misread it as Dealing future picks.

dealing picks is what we have a history of doing. Pritchard has spoken of the difficulty of evaluating players that have not played in the NBA. I am starting to question whether that is counterproductive when you need a stream of low dollar contracts.

[Wizop]

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/263062/RealGM-Radio-Caitlin-Cooper-On-The-Pacers

[Topofthekey]

Sumner is only signed for next year and Stanley is a free agent.

Just re-sign them. I don't think there is much market for their services

Almost every team has their own young players on cheap contracts who they're willing to give some backup minutes to. Sumner and Stanley are it for us. I don't think anyone is in any hurry to poach them

Also it seems like the G league is a good source for these cheap, serviceable players. Up until Brissett, the team has not been tapping into this source it seems. I suppose that's another thing we can credit Bjorkgren with, the signing of Brissett

There was also Mitrou-Long last year, who looked like he is a serviceable backup, but unfortunately with how many guards already on the roster the team had no room or need for someone like him

[Scoot McGroot]

Sumner is only signed for next year and Stanley is a free agent.

Just re-sign them. I don't think there is much market for their services

I mentioned in that you said they were signed long term. And if there’s not much market for their services, in theory, how great of young talent are they? The next time Sumner hits free agency, he’ll be unrestricted. I think he’ll have some interest after the season he just had.

Almost every team has their own young players on cheap contracts who they're willing to give some backup minutes to. Sumner and Stanley are it for us. I don't think anyone is in any hurry to poach them

Also it seems like the G league is a good source for these cheap, serviceable players. Up until Brissett, the team has not been tapping into this source it seems. I suppose that's another thing we can credit Bjorkgren with, the signing of Brissett

There was also Mitrou-Long last year, who looked like he is a serviceable backup, but unfortunately with how many guards already on the roster the team had no room or need for someone like him

Chad Buchanan was the one to spearhead the moving on from Alize and signing Oshae to the G-League team. Nate didn’t hurt with that. This year, we brought up Brissett and Brimah from the G-League. In the past we’ve converted Alex Poythress, and signed Stephen Hicks to a 10 day (kind of the Oshae plan, but it didn’t work out as well, obviously). We’ve probably been relatively middle of the pack in terms of using the G-League for player development. Guys like San Antonio, Toronto, and Miami have done VERY well with it. The fact we’ve gotten even a player or two is pretty good.

[Wizop]

Also it seems like the G league is a good source for these cheap, serviceable players.

There's a Locked on Pacers podcast (currently scroll down to 17) with the Mad Ants coach that has some good information on Stanley.

https://cms.megaphone.fm/channel/lockedonpacers?selected=LKN5367969041

[Tom White]

Chad Buchanan was the one to spearhead the moving on from Alize and signing Oshae to the G-League team.

How do we know this? Not doubting you, I just must have missed it.

[Scoot McGroot]

Chad Buchanan was the one to spearhead the moving on from Alize and signing Oshae to the G-League team.

How do we know this? Not doubting you, I just must have missed it.

Tony East and a few other guys on different Pacers podcasts talked about it. When Oshae signed and had his first big game, his postgame interview he specifically gave the biggest thanks to Chad. Oddly, he didn’t mention Pritchard at all.

[Tom White]

Chad Buchanan was the one to spearhead the moving on from Alize and signing Oshae to the G-League team.

How do we know this? Not doubting you, I just must have missed it.

Tony East and a few other guys on different Pacers podcasts talked about it. When Oshae signed and had his first big game, his postgame interview he specifically gave the biggest thanks to Chad. Oddly, he didn’t mention Pritchard at all.

Thanks. I don't do much in the way of trying to keep up with all the different podcasts and such.

[Scoot McGroot]

How do we know this? Not doubting you, I just must have missed it.

Tony East and a few other guys on different Pacers podcasts talked about it. When Oshae signed and had his first big game, his postgame interview he specifically gave the biggest thanks to Chad. Oddly, he didn’t mention Pritchard at all.

Thanks. I don't do much in the way of trying to keep up with all the different podcasts and such.

There are too many nowadays

I try and prioritize Caitlin Cooper for her basketball knowledge and Tony East for his reporting and look at the team. Even then, I can’t find enough time for the daily Tony East “Locked on Pacers” podcasts. Otherwise, I only listen to ones that have something new and important, like Kevin Pritchard interviews or the like.

[Tom White]

There are too many nowadays

I try and prioritize Caitlin Cooper for her basketball knowledge and Tony East for his reporting and look at the team. Even then, I can’t find enough time for the daily Tony East “Locked on Pacers” podcasts. Otherwise, I only listen to ones that have something new and important, like Kevin Pritchard interviews or the like.

Yeah, I'm retired, so I just don't have the time anymore. There should be a Yogi Berra type quote somewhere in that, but I can't think of one.

[Scoot McGroot]

There are too many nowadays

I try and prioritize Caitlin Cooper for her basketball knowledge and Tony East for his reporting and look at the team. Even then, I can’t find enough time for the daily Tony East “Locked on Pacers” podcasts. Otherwise, I only listen to ones that have something new and important, like Kevin Pritchard interviews or the like.

Yeah, I'm retired, so I just don't have the time anymore. There should be a Yogi Berra type quote somewhere in that, but I can't think of one.

I’ve basically given up on radio, so I tend to download and Listen on drives or when mowing the lawn, folding laundry, etc.