Reply With Quote
I rather bring back Oberto or Theo Ratliff with our veteran minimum than trade for a guy that would play the same role and give up a 1st round pick.
I would not give up a 1st round pick for a guy who will see 10 minutes a game at most.
I rather bring back Oberto or Theo Ratliff with our veteran minimum than trade for a guy that would play the same role and give up a 1st round pick.
Hibbert will start and Jeff will back him up. They are not planning to trade him. His name is not mentioned because he is not in their long-term plans, but they and he would like him to retire a Pacer.
Either the Pacers just added one more piece that makes Jeff Foster redundant, or they're trying to corner the market on white PF/C's.
http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...gree_to_terms/
you think they will try to trade Hibbert?
Due to the great value on his rookie scale contract and many years still left on it, it is highly unlikely they will trade Hibbert. If anything they may trade him next year to possibly move up in the draft next year for a prospect they admire more.
If your asking a question regarding whether or not the Pacers would trade Hibbert to the Spurs, the answer is no. Spurs have nothing Pacers would want besides Tony Parker as they build for the future rather than the present.
If I were them, I wouldn't. I'd be looking to move Foster for expirings and a good young player. But then if I were them I wouldn't have drafted Tyler Hansbrough in the lottery or signed Josh McRoberts so who knows what the Pacers are thinking.
No way I'd trade Hibbert just yet.
Foster would have a lot of appeal to teams though. The Pacers should be able to get some package involving expiring contracts, picks, cash, young prospect though.
the question about a Hibbert trade was pure sarcasm, b/c Hibbert will be the only remaining non white player in their frontcourt.
(as an answer to your sarcastic remark that they might try to corner the market on white PF/C's.)
btw. if they ask for Fin+Bonner plus a young player, a player like James Gist would make a lot of sense for them. (if they see NBA potential in Gist of course)
Doh! I guess I need to get the help desk to check my sarcasm detector as it appears not to be working.
It seems the Celtics and Pacers might do a s/t involving Daniels instead of signing him outright for the LLE.
I post this here because Scalabrine and Tony Allen could be involved.
If that happens then I don't see them doing a Finley/Bonner trade for Foster.
I'd rather trade for a Nick Collison.
Collison would just be redundant to what McDyess and Blair give us. He's a good player, but there's no need for him.
I was thinking along the lines of the idea of trading for a big, and I thinking if want to trade for a big, there are better options than Jeff Foster. Collison was the first that popped up in my head.
Plus, I still have a hard time believing Blair's going to get 20 MPG as RC said he's "penciled in." And the jury is still out on Ian as to wheter he can contribute.
I think our best bet to improve as a team is to add Camby via trade close to the trade deadline. That's if Mahimni/ Blair/ Haislip don't live up to expectations. Trading for any other big mentioned Foster/Collison would be more of a sideways move. IMo
Turning Finley and Bonner into Jeff Foster would be an improvement.
Anyone against bring in Jeff for just Finley/Bonner seriously needs to watch Jeff play.
Foster would see Oberto like minutes (12-15) and put up Oberto like numbers at most . Numbers aren't everything and adding Foster would be adding a rugged interior defender/ rebounder, but we can find someone like that for cheaper given the minutes that are available for such an acquisition. (IE Rasho, Ratfliff,*possibly Foyle, *Jarron Collins.
Foster would be adding a physical presence upfront. But adding him wouldn't be improving the 3rd big man slot in the rotation. Which is one of the only real moves that would really improve our team (adding a better 3rd wing would be the other). Adding Foster would just be improving our 10th-12th man, which is kind of irrelevant especially in March going forward into the playoffs.
If Spurs were to make a trade ( Finley/ Bonner plus 1st round) or (Mason/ Bonner plus 1st rounder) a significant improvement would be bringing back somebody that could be an automatic improvement in a potential 7-8 man rotation or some big that could split time with McDyess at the 4/5 as the third big (clear cut 3rd big over Blair/Mahimni) or a better 3rd wing than Roger Mason. Those two moves are really the only two moves that would make a significant improvement.
Improving the 11th roster spot doesn't when it's all said and done.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-20-2009 at 05:44 AM.
I have watched Foster play many times benefactor. I never said I was against bringing him in. All i said was with the minutes available for what he is ( an addition to the lump of the 3rd-5th bigs off the bench) ( Not a clear cut 3rd big man) he wouldn't make enough of a significant impact with the minutes split with Blair/ Mahimni/ Haislip to actually put us over the hump.
He would be a slight improvement if that.
Last edited by MaNu4Tres; 07-20-2009 at 06:46 AM.
Slight improvement?
If you are saying he is not a clear cut 3rd big over Blair and Mahimni then you obviously have not watched much of him. He is a proven NBA big and has been one of the best offensive rebounders in the league over the past several seasons. Saying that he would struggle to find minutes over a rookie and and a project big is pretty silly. Haislip and Foster aren't really related, as Haislip is more of a shooting big like Bonner.
Furthermore, acquiring Foster is more of a look ahead. When we get to the playoffs the big man rotation will be shortened. I would feel much more confident having a big like Foster(two seasons of deep playoff runs with Indiana) shoring up our front line over two inexperienced rookies(Mahimni is basically a rookie).
most intriguing for me (to look ahead) would be his ability to guard Gasol and Dirk. (as well as KG and Sheed in a possible finals match up.) also his versatility to play 4 and 5 would fit nice, he could play alongside Tim and should also do well alongside Dice.
and he would be a helpful part of the Spurs offense. no, this is not a typo. the fact that he can't score to save his live doesn't mean that he wouldn't be a very nice part for our offense with Tim, Tony, Manu and JR on the floor. Foster can't score, but he moves very well, sets smart screens and is an underrated passer. he would make life much easier for all the other scoring options, especially on the pick and roll, and 4 great scorer on the floor should be good enough to compete with any offense in the league.
I'd still take Foster right now.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
