Hinrich for the 10th pick?

I Hate Names · Post #1 » by **I Hate Names** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:24 pm

Would you consider a Jeff Foster + 10th pick for Kirk Hinrich trade? The salaries don't exactly match but would you consider it?

Starkiller · Post #2 » by **Starkiller** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 8:46 pm

Honestly probably not.

pacersrule08 · Post #3 » by **pacersrule08** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:03 pm

absolutely..........................not

MUpacersSIC · Post #4 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:05 pm

Uh No. Hinrich it is not even close in my opinion.

Boneman2 · Post #5 » by **Boneman2** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:40 pm

Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

Starkiller · Post #6 » by **Starkiller** » Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:25 pm

Boneman2 wrote:Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

Sign me up for this in a hurry.

blueandgold · Post #7 » by **blueandgold** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:59 am

Just and idea. Let's pretend that there was going to be an NBA draft; however, they were not picking ROOKIES or any player has never played in the league. What happens is that the entire NBA players association is available to be drafted (yeah, like on the school yard for a pick up game).
What would the first round look like if we used the current Draft Order?????? Who is first...Kobe, Lebron, Wade......
From this perspective, would Hinrich be picked at # 5, or even compared to a top five player????

Think not.

It would be an interesting two rounds.

Post #8 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 1:17 am

I'm sorry, but this is just ridiculous.

Kirk has regressed for over 3 seasons now. Over 200 games. At this point, his value is dropping. I'd think almost any expiring in the league is worth more than him. But as said before, Indy's only taking him on for a deal of something like Ford/Dahntay for Kirk/James Johnson or Ford/#57 for Kirk/#17.

Your pick. Either way, you guys are paying to dump his salary onto a team that is appearing to overly value 2011 cap space. Have fun.

laydo · Post #9 » by **laydo** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 2:15 pm

Boneman2 wrote:Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

Hinrich and #17 for Ford wouldn't be bad, either.

Post #10 » by **kyphi** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 2:21 pm

laydo wrote:
Boneman2 wrote:Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

Hinrich and #17 for Ford wouldn't be bad, either.

I'd do that

Wizop · Post #11 » by **Wizop** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:25 pm

I'd do Hinrich and the 17 for Murphy and the 10. I'd also be willing to substitute TJ and Solo for Murphy. Foster doesn't make enough. I want to keep Dunleavy at least until the trading deadline because his value will not be lower and could be much higher if he returns to pre-injury form.

Boneman2 · Post #12 » by **Boneman2** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:32 pm

^^^^ If we take on Hinrich we aren't trading any picks, with exception to 57 if they want it.

MUpacersSIC · Post #13 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:25 pm

Wizop wrote:I'd do Hinrich and the 17 for Murphy and the 10. I'd also be willing to substitute TJ and Solo for Murphy. Foster doesn't make enough. I want to keep Dunleavy at least until the trading deadline because his value will not be lower and could be much higher if he returns to pre-injury form.

You're kidding right? Why would the Pacers do that man? Hinrich is a nice player, but greatly overpaid AND we give up the #10. No way IMO.

Wizop · Post #14 » by **Wizop** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:58 pm

not kidding. I guess I'm alone on this but I think Kirk would fit well in O'Brien's system and would carry us over until someone we'd draft at 17 would be ready to be a starter.

Dunthreevy · Post #15 » by **Dunthreevy** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 6:09 pm

Wizop wrote:I'd do Hinrich and the 17 for Murphy and the 10. I'd also be willing to substitute TJ and Solo for Murphy. Foster doesn't make enough. I want to keep Dunleavy at least until the trading deadline because his value will not be lower and could be much higher if he returns to pre-injury form.

So you would give away our only expiring player that actually has value based on his play as well, PLUS our lottery pick, for a PG who is VERY overpaid and has gotten worse every year since 2007 and the #17 pick?

Might be the worst trade idea I've seen so far this summer.

basketballwacko2 · Post #16 » by **basketballwacko2** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:23 pm

I Hate Names wrote:Would you consider a Jeff Foster + 10th pick for Kirk Hinrich trade? The salaries don't exactly match but would you consider it?

Nope! Pacers take salary and give you a top ten pick?

How about Foster for Hinrich and #17 pick?

basketballwacko2 · Post #17 » by **basketballwacko2** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:26 pm

Boneman2 wrote:Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

That is a lot closer to reality!

Starkiller · Post #18 » by **Starkiller** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:27 pm

basketballwacko2 wrote:
I Hate Names wrote:Would you consider a Jeff Foster + 10th pick for Kirk Hinrich trade? The salaries don't exactly match but would you consider it?

Nope! Pacers take salary and give you a top ten pick?

How about Foster for Hinrich and #17 pick?

I like that trade, we can get Udoh/Patterson at 10 and Bledsoe at 17. Have a starting PG in Hinrich while Bledsoe can come of the bench and be brought in slowly. Or they can both play at the same time, we'd be very versitle and possibly could be a playoff team.

basketballwacko2 · Post #19 » by **basketballwacko2** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:04 pm

Only problem with Foster for Hinrich and #17 is that we take some salary this season. About $2.2 million. That's an issue better to do Dunleavy for Hinrich and #17.

Chi Dynasty12 · Post #20 » by **Chi Dynasty12** » Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:33 pm

laydo wrote:
Boneman2 wrote:Hinrich and 17 for Dunleavy.

If you want relief you have to pay for it, not us.

Hinrich and #17 for Ford wouldn't be bad, either.

Bulls would never do that so...