Shams: Pacers Moving toward Rebuild; Receptive to Trade Talks

[Pacers Forever]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

[Wizop]

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

Would you trade Sabonis for just picks with no player coming back? What about Turner? LeVert?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[Pacers Forever]

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

Would you trade Sabonis for just picks with no player coming back? What about Turner? LeVert?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn’t trade Sabonis. LeVert if I could get a top 10 pick plus a young upcoming player sure.

Turner a top 10 pick and an established player.

I’m pretty sure you can’t find another team who will only give draft picks as valuable as they are. I’m not high on second round picks unless draft is deep like last year.

[Scoot McGroot]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

Disagree. It recognizes that the team may not be enough, but simply says we’re not going to to deal guys for future far off picks. I think it’s ok to say you want pieces that might help in the next year or so rather than 3 or 4 years down the line.

[Scoot McGroot]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

Disagree. It recognizes that the team may not be enough, but simply says we’re not going to to deal guys for future far off picks. I think it’s ok to say you want pieces that might help in the next year or so rather than 3 or 4 years down the line.

But also, I’d be curious the info on this, because it really might be when Weiss visited the Pacers more than a month ago and wrote his piece on Turner not wanting to be just a role player.

[Wizop]

That reeks of nah we’re good and not trading anyone from our nice little team.

Would you trade Sabonis for just picks with no player coming back? What about Turner? LeVert?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

I wouldn’t trade Sabonis. LeVert if I could get a top 10 pick plus a young upcoming player sure.

Turner a top 10 pick and an established player.

I’m pretty sure you can’t find another team who will only give draft picks as valuable as they are. I’m not high on second round picks unless draft is deep like last year.

I see a big difference between not trading anyone and not settling for what we see as fair value consistent with our timeline. I'm also not a fan of trading to fit the coach instead of coaching to fit the players.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[Tom White]

.....not settling for what we see as fair value consistent with our timeline.

When did we get a "timeline"?

I've seen this term used in various places, but still can't figure out what it means. This is a team that hasn't sniffed a playoff round win in how long? Seven years or so? What kind of timeline are we on?

When you are in the position this team is in, and do things the way this team does, there is no timeline. There is perhaps a treadmill.

I'm also not a fan of trading to fit the coach instead of coaching to fit the players.

I agree with you. But someone needs to get this message to Carlisle. Make sure the memo gets out.

[Wizop]

.....not settling for what we see as fair value consistent with our timeline.

When did we get a "timeline"?

I'm also not a fan of trading to fit the coach instead of coaching to fit the players.

I agree with you. But someone needs to get this message to Carlisle. Make sure the memo gets out.

If Pritchard doesn't have a timeline, he won't be able to make good roster decisions. Now I'd say the timeline we thought we were on last summer needs major rethinking. Was the problem Bjorkgren? Injuries? Overoptimism? Some combination? Was Carlisle the solution or did he bring new problems? Does last year's good draft plus a lottery pick soon to come, eliminate the need to resign Warren?

I have questions, not answers.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[Wizop]

Was drafting 24 year old Duarte a mistake with hindsight because our timeline is longer than we thought it was then?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[boomershadow]

Was drafting 24 year old Duarte a mistake with hindsight because our timeline is longer than we thought it was then?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

Nah. Dude is one of the few exciting things going on with the team. He can play.

[Scoot McGroot]

Was drafting 24 year old Duarte a mistake with hindsight because our timeline is longer than we thought it was then?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

Nah. Dude is one of the few exciting things going on with the team. He can play.

Agreed. Plus, you can only realistically plan on having someone for 7-8 years nowadays (4 years of rookie, and 4 years of the restricted free agent contract). After that, you’ve got to start preparing they might get overpaid in unrestricted free agency, and maybe you deal them ahead of time, as we did Oladipo. At that point, Duarte is still in his prime at 31-32 years old. What more can you hope for?

[Wizop]

Was drafting 24 year old Duarte a mistake with hindsight because our timeline is longer than we thought it was then?

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

Nah. Dude is one of the few exciting things going on with the team. He can play.

Agreed. Plus, you can only realistically plan on having someone for 7-8 years nowadays (4 years of rookie, and 4 years of the restricted free agent contract). After that, you’ve got to start preparing they might get overpaid in unrestricted free agency, and maybe you deal them ahead of time, as we did Oladipo. At that point, Duarte is still in his prime at 31-32 years old. What more can you hope for?

Compare Jackson who'll be 27 after 8. I'd call that prime but regardless draft, no preseason trades, and Carlisle hire all assumed we were in the hunt for top 4.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[Scoot McGroot]

Nah. Dude is one of the few exciting things going on with the team. He can play.

Agreed. Plus, you can only realistically plan on having someone for 7-8 years nowadays (4 years of rookie, and 4 years of the restricted free agent contract). After that, you’ve got to start preparing they might get overpaid in unrestricted free agency, and maybe you deal them ahead of time, as we did Oladipo. At that point, Duarte is still in his prime at 31-32 years old. What more can you hope for?

Compare Jackson who'll be 27 after 8. I'd call that prime but regardless draft, no preseason trades, and Carlisle hire all assumed we were in the hunt for top 4.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

And you can probably plan on Jackson either walking in free agency at 27, or becoming prohibitively expensive to keep. I don’t hunk you can plan on any player staying with the same team for 10+ years anymore.

[Topofthekey]

True. I also think that realistically teams who aren't big players in free agency can only expect to hold on to a player for about 8 years or less

It's depressing to think about, but that's the direction the league has headed in

Players recruiting each other and players teaming up in free agency is the norm these days. Teams who aren't FA destinstions can expect to lose their players once their rookie contract + extension comes to an end. They'll either demand a trade to a team of their choice, or they'll just enter free agency and go there together with their buddies

With this in mind, what is the best strategy for a team like the Pacers?

[Scoot McGroot]

True. I also think that realistically teams who aren't big players in free agency can only expect to hold on to a player for about 8 years or less

It's depressing to think about, but that's the direction the league has headed in

Players recruiting each other and players teaming up in free agency is the norm these days. Teams who aren't FA destinstions can expect to lose their players once their rookie contract + extension comes to an end. They'll either demand a trade to a team of their choice, or they'll just enter free agency and go there together with their buddies

With this in mind, what is the best strategy for a team like the Pacers?

I wouldn’t even say that like it’s a terrible thing. Much like the general workforce nowadays where you can only really maximize your earnings by jumping companies, the nba is the same. You can on,y really maximize earnings when you hit unrestricted free agency, and even then, generally by switching teams.

[pacers33granger]

There's some guys drafted after Duarte who have some serious potential. But we should be more than happy regardless of his age. I'd take a 30 year old rookie whose a rotation player out of the gate over what we've gotten from pretty much any first after Myles.

Sent from my SM-A716U using RealGM mobile app

[Wizop]

There's some guys drafted after Duarte who have some serious potential.

and that list includes Jackson. I think it is fair to say they considered taking the raw Jackson to balance taking the older Duarte.

[boomershadow]

It sounds like Sacramento and Philadelphia are more inclined to hang onto their franchise players at the moment.

[Wizop]

With this in mind, what is the best strategy for a team like the Pacers?

I've heard it called the Onion Theory of roster building. you develop younger players on the bench and gradually peel off the top layer of older starters to let the young guys step forward.

[Topofthekey]

True. I also think that realistically teams who aren't big players in free agency can only expect to hold on to a player for about 8 years or less

It's depressing to think about, but that's the direction the league has headed in

Players recruiting each other and players teaming up in free agency is the norm these days. Teams who aren't FA destinstions can expect to lose their players once their rookie contract + extension comes to an end. They'll either demand a trade to a team of their choice, or they'll just enter free agency and go there together with their buddies

With this in mind, what is the best strategy for a team like the Pacers?

I wouldn’t even say that like it’s a terrible thing. Much like the general workforce nowadays where you can only really maximize your earnings by jumping companies, the nba is the same. You can on,y really maximize earnings when you hit unrestricted free agency, and even then, generally by switching teams.

Sure, there are always multiple ways to look at something

Free agency definitely represents an opportunity for players to exert control over their career, so from the POV of a worker maximizing their earning potential, it is an opportunity. Of course, sometimes it doesn't work out, like in the case of Oladipo who turned down the $113m extension from Pacers

For the team's fanbase though, it's a little depressing knowing that because your team isn't usually a player in the FA market, you cannot count on your team's best players remaining with your team past 7 or 8 years. But that's just how the league is now. Players who play 10+ years for the team that drafted them are a rarity nowadays, especially for teams that don't attract free agents

For Pacers, if building a winner is the goal, does this mean that they should operate under a compressed timeline? Does this mean that they should be more aggressive in making moves, to maximize what they can do in the time they have with their players?

If we take Domas for example, he has 2.5 years remaining on his contract

So, should Pacers try to build a winner with him within 2.5 years? Or do they just stay the course and overpay him when the time comes?

Or, do they try to maximize his value by trading him before he becomes a free agent? But doesn't this approach just lead to a situation where the team is constantly trying to trade their best players away to recoup value because of impending free agency? This basically turns the team into a farm team, doesn't it