BGleas

Yes, I know he is still on the team, but how is a young, developing player going to to react to coming off the bench, after starting 80 games last season, because the team went out and splurged on a veteran on the backside of his career who's numbers are about the same? Especially when the signing was basically to appease Kyrie and Durant.

I would be all-in on the Celtics being better, its just the Horford loss is tough to ignore. I'm not sure if Kanter and the french guy they signed can make up for the loss? I do think Kemba is an upgrade over Kyrie and with Kyrie's loss we'll see Tatum and Brown back on track. I also think Hayward will be back closer to his old form, but the Celtics are for now thin on the inside and really young. I don't think Tako makes the squad, but I could be wrong.

Add to it that, Russell played in 81 games last season, Kyrie hasn't played in 75 (actually his career high) since the '14-15 season.

Too high: Bucks, Rockets, Celtics, Raptors, Nets, Heat Too low: Clippers, Jazz, GS (assuming Klay comes back ready to go midseason), Pacers If Durant is out the entire year I'm not sure the Nets are better than they were last season? Is DeAndre Jordan an upgrade over Jarrett Allen at this point? I almost think they downgraded at that position, and then they lost several other glue guys like Dudley. I think they lost 7-8 guys from last seasons surprising team.

Good find, and what that article reiterates is that even at that time Harden was thought of as a max, star player. Everyone knew he was way more than a 17 PPG sixth man, he was sacrificing for the good of the team. Teams were lined up to give him the max if he had hit restricted free agency with OKC, and teams don't line up to give max contracts to guys that come off the bench. While people probably weren't expecting him to be a future MVP, most everyone knew he was a great player at the time. From Simmons column right after the trade to Houston: In the Thunder’s case, we only knew that they had three of the 20 best guys in the league, all under 25, all of whom loved playing together.

I’m saying without hindsight. If Harden, Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka were the same age now as they were in 2012, but you dumped them into this ‘Super Team’ era, I think maybe the decision would be different. You’d maybe look longer at trying to move Ibaka to save money and give Harden the max to build a three-headed monster.

We're not really in much disagreement, though I don't agree that what people are saying is all hindsight. People didn't think Harden was going to be a future MVP, I said that exact thing in my post, but he was projected at that time as a potential future all-star. It was commonly held belief even at that time that Harden was going to be a star and that the system (coming off the bench to play behind Durant and Westbrook) was holding him back. The view on Harden at the time was that almost anywhere else he'd be a featured player, not just a solid 17 ppg player Sixth Man. That's why he was commanding the max as a bench player, and while OKC did offer him $52M, other teams were already lining up to offer him the max. OKC basically had to pick three of Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden, and they chose the first three. Again, maybe not the wrong move given that Durant, Westbrook and Harden all need the ball and there's only so much to go around, but I do wonder if the Thunder were in the same situation today (in the super team era) if they maybe choose to try and move Ibaka and another contract and just roll the dice with the three stars.

By the way, pretty impressive 3 year draft run for Seattle/OKC: 2007: Durant at #2 2008: Westbrook at #8, Ibaka at #24 2009: Harden at #3

You're not completely wrong here by any means, but I gotta go with Rico and dgambill on this one. Nobody thought Harden was going to be an MVP level player, but even at that time many thought he had a chance to be an all-star caliber player, and OKC did too. The only real reason his scoring was under 17 PPG was because he wasn't getting the time/touches behind Durant and Westbrook, and they didn't really try to play them all together very much. OKC went with bringing Harden off the bench so he could 'run' the second team, but everyone knew at the time that Harden was a stud. OKC was hamstrung by the Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka contracts, and they chose balance (Ibaka being a forward) and trade market (Harden fetching more on the market compared to Ibaka) over keeping the three best players and just figuring the rest out later. I'm not sure it was a terrible move though. While the super team thing is hot right now, there hasn't been a ton of success with that model when you have three extremely ball dominant guys (Durant, Westbrook and Harden) together. I don't really see how those three could have coexisted long term. You could argue they should have traded Westbrook maybe.

Trading for Westbrook would be such a Knick's things to do. Let's trade for a star player that most other stars don't want to play with, tie up our cap space and win 44 games the next 3 years and lose in the first round every year. It would be like Carmelo deal part II.

This...

Yes, though McConnell doesn't provide much in terms of offense, but at least it's another hard working bulldog that knows his role and isn't going to play outside of what he's asked to do. Sometimes that's all you can ask for. Better that than somebody coming in trying to make a name and thinking he has to replace VO's production.

Like that pickup. Not the most talented, but nobody outworks him. Lots of hardworking, character guys the Pacers have added between Warren, Brogdon and McConnell.

They might have. I'm not sold Joseph would have definitely gotten you anything, but I'm sure Collison would have. I agree though, KP is one of the better GM's in the NBA. Doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes. I love Ainge, but he's certainly made a few.

I'll always take more picks for a player that is going to walk and we're not in contention.

You're not getting it though. You don't have to acquire lottery picks to get done what I'm talking about, and you have no clue if either of those guys would have fetched a second round pick. Darren Collison would have absolutely gotten the Pacers a second round pick, maybe even a late first. It's not always about moving up into the lottery. Just having a bevy of future 1st round picks is worth is, regardless of where they're positioned. There are always teams looking to move out of the lottery or out of the first round all together for salary cap reasons. When you're the team with all the picks to move in those deals, you then have leverage and flexibility. Like Btown said, then you can throw a 1st round pick into the Brogdon deal while still maintaining your own pick. Or, you can stockpile picks to pair with your young guys for a trade for a star down the line. Most teams attempt to do this.

And it was a great move. So why not keep flexibility for future moves like that?

It's not really about what they lost, it's about what they didn't gain. Like I said, I have no idea what the market was like for those guys, but I do know that Collison is a solid player and Joseph, while not the best backup pg in the world, has plenty of playoff experience. It would have been worth it to flip them even if just for second round picks. I'm assuming there might have been a market for them, maybe not. I'd guess someone would have taken Collison. The Sixers could have certainly used him last year. I don't know their picks situation, but I'm guess Brand would have given up a 2nd rounder for him.

It's just funny, you're the one always complaining about being a small market team and not being able to get a star. Well outside of getting lucky in the lottery or being in LA/NY, the way you get a star is by developing young players (Sabonis and Holiday) and stockpiling assets such as first round picks. Whether you want to believe it or not, first round picks are like gold in these big deals for stars and are constantly used as sweeteners in deals when you need to move a bad contract, etc. If the Pacers had acquired a second first round pick, even if it was #23 or something, they could have flipped 18 & 23 for something in the lottery potentially or they could have essentially sold off either 18 or 23 for a future first (tradeable asset). It's a game of acquiring assets and flexibility.

So you'd rather get swept in the first round of a lost season with Collison and Joseph gobbling up minutes from a rookie point guard with promise, before they walk out the door, as opposed to acquiring assets for those players and getting experience for Holiday? I know you like to downplay assets, but two second round picks can absolutely be leveraged into more/better assets down the line. As I noted earlier, you can package second round picks to move back into the first round. Now you have two first round picks and you can potentially move up into the lottery, or flip one of those first for a future first to use as an asset at a later time. You've been advocating for trading either Turner or Sabonis, well if you want to get some legit players or a star for them you'll need first round picks to help facilitate, and unless you want to be left with no picks it's good to acquire additional firsts to help. Again, potentially all that could have been had for flipping Collison and Joseph in a lost season.

But the chances of remaining 3rd weren't great without VO. Even if so, again the Celtics were a mess and they swept the Pacers. I don't think it would have been a guarantee that they would have beaten the Nets without VO.

It doesn't matter. Without VO the Pacers weren't doing anything in the playoffs, evidenced by getting swept by a highly dysfunctional Celtics teams. You do a little mini retool that season to set yourself up for a better future once VO is back and healthy. Instead they lost those guys for nothing.

I don't follow the Pacers like everyone else here, so don't know the in's and out's the rest of you, but this is where I'm at too. I could be way off. But, once Vic went down the Pacers season was essentially over. There was no chance of a playoff run, best hope was win a game or two in the first round most likely. So you have a rookie pg that everyone here and the Pacers seems really high on. So IMO you take a couple veterans on expiring deals (Collison and Joseph) and look to flip them to playoff teams. Even if you just get second round picks, there's value there. I don't know if there was any market for those guys, maybe the Pacers tried and there were no takers, but even if you trade both for a second round pick each, now you have 3 second round picks. There's always teams in the mid-to-back of the first round looking to trade out. So you trade 2 second rounders for another first. Now you have 2 first round picks and you can potentially package them to move up in the 2019 draft or maybe flip one to a team looking to get back into the first for a future first. Then you'd have more picks down the line when you might look to flip Sabonis or Turner, etc. Unless you're championship or bust, it's a game of acquiring assets and flexibility while you build. Maybe I'm completely wrong here, I think the philosophy is right but like I said I don't follow the Pacers like you guys so high chance I'm missing something or misreading the roster, etc.

Yeah, there's no way they're trading him anytime soon, but as his rookie extension approaches about 2 years left Minnesota will be in the same situation New Orleans was with Davis, unless they can build a competitive team around him. As Scott said, Towns is just an example, maybe not the best one, but the bigger point is that if Sabonis and Holiday develop and the Pacers can make some moves to stash picks, they'll be well position over the next 18-24 months to be in the trade market for a star to pair with VO.

The timing doesn't work out right now for Towns, but if the Pacers can acquire some draft picks, I honestly don't know what their pick situation is, and if Holiday is a stud as you say, then the Pacers would have the assets to be competitive for the next star that becomes available on the trade market. Again if Holiday shows signs of development a package of Sabonis, Holiday, contract filler and picks would be competitive in the trade market for a star.