Bruce Brown?

[Spates]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

[Wizop]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

see all the prior Siakim threads. no.

[Spates]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

see all the prior Siakim threads. no.

Good luck being Dallas of the East.

[Wizop]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

see all the prior Siakim threads. no.

Good luck being Dallas of the East.

may I assume that you've not read the prior threads where Pacer fans make clear that we think we're interested in pursuing Siakim next summer on the free agent market but not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now?

[Spates]

see all the prior Siakim threads. no.

Good luck being Dallas of the East.

may I assume that you've not read the prior threads where Pacer fans make clear that we think we're interested in pursuing Siakim next summer on the free agent market but not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now?

You may presume. It's a message board. Prerequisite reading sets the bar too high.

I can only assume that by "not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now", you mean that you're not at all open to trading with Toronto. Because you have a glut of young guards/wings, that if they develop according to expectations, will run into minute conflicts. Between Haliburton, Nembhard, Mathurin, Nesmith, Sheppard, and let's include Walker too, you don't have enough minutes or size.

If you think you have the chance of signing Siakam in the summer, sacrificing Ben Sheppard and a 1st round pick is a pittance when you gain his bird rights and the extra leverage it provides.

[Tom White]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

I'm gonna have to stock up on barf bags.

[Wizop]

I can only assume that by "not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now", you mean that you're not at all open to trading with Toronto.

emphasis on NOW. a sign and trade in the summer isn't off the table.

[Spates]

I can only assume that by "not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now", you mean that you're not at all open to trading with Toronto.

emphasis on NOW. a sign and trade in the summer isn't off the table.

Why is the off-season materially different for Indy?

[Spates]

Hey, I'm back with another vomit inducing trade idea. What do you think?

I'm gonna have to stock up on barf bags.

Better to invest in a vomitorium. More to come.

[Wizop]

I can only assume that by "not in trading the players Toronto would want back for what could be a rental now", you mean that you're not at all open to trading with Toronto.

emphasis on NOW. a sign and trade in the summer isn't off the table.

Why is the off-season materially different for Indy?

because we'd be assured of having him for a number of years. trading for him now carries a serious risk that he'd sign his next contract elsewhere.

[Spates]

emphasis on NOW. a sign and trade in the summer isn't off the table.

Why is the off-season materially different for Indy?

because we'd be assured of having him for a number of years. trading for him now carries a serious risk that he'd sign his next contract elsewhere.

We're operating under different assumptions. In the current NBA marketplace, these trades aren't completed unless there's unofficial confirmation that players are committed to their new team.

[Wizop]

We're operating under different assumptions. In the current NBA marketplace, these trades aren't completed unless there's unofficial confirmation that players are committed to their new team.

I'm operating under the assumption that the Pacers will comply with league rules. your statement assumes that they will not and will risk being penalized. there is no way that a wink-wink understanding can be enforced. if you'd read the prior threads as I suggested in the beginning, you'd know that Pacer fans believe the risk of losing him in the summer is too great to justify meeting Toronto's demands.

[Tom White]

We're operating under different assumptions. In the current NBA marketplace, these trades aren't completed unless there's unofficial confirmation that players are committed to their new team.

"Unofficial confirmations" are only as good as the paper they are (not) written on.

[Spates]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

[Wizop]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

we'll have to agree to disagree with this assertion.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

we'd start by offering players whose contracts we'd have to renounce to create the cap room to sign him.

[JMaster5K]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

I think you hit partially 'the nail on the head',... unintentionally. I honestly don't think the Pacers are interested in either a 4 month rental of Siakam, nor a 'this year +3 year' commitment to Siakam on a guaranteed, max contract. For a trade to happen now,... those, basically, are your options.

(To do something else, Siakam would have to back-track on things he's already said he's not going to accept. It is not in his best financial interest to help a trade now. The extend and trade rules would limit his value versus the contracts he should have available as an UFA.)

The Pacers probably would be very interested in a deal with Siakam as a 2+1 or 1+1 which, in the current circumstances, is really only likely during the FA period this summer. This is a rare case where his Bird rights don't actually mean much (at least to the Pacers). His max contract now,. or this summer is 30% of the cap, $42,600,000. No one can sign him to more than that. We will have the cap space to make him that offer this summer, with or without his Bird rights.

In a sense, we might actually be helping you move him. If someone, say the Warriors are interested. They know we are interested, and we have the cap space,.. their only option is to trade now and hope he resigns (which he said he isn't),... or do a sign an trade, under terms acceptable to both Siakam and the Raptors early in the FA period, or lose out.

[JMaster5K]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

Siakam isn't going to agree to anything with anyone until after the all star team selection, Feb 1st.

[Spates]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

I think you hit partially 'the nail on the head',... unintentionally. I honestly don't think the Pacers are interested in either a 4 month rental of Siakam, nor a 'this year +3 year' commitment to Siakam on a guaranteed, max contract. For a trade to happen now,... those, basically, are your options.

(To do something else, Siakam would have to back-track on things he's already said he's not going to accept. It is not in his best financial interest to help a trade now. The extend and trade rules would limit his value versus the contracts he should have available as an UFA.)

The Pacers probably would be very interested in a deal with Siakam as a 2+1 or 1+1 which, in the current circumstances, is really only likely during the FA period this summer. This is a rare case where his Bird rights don't actually mean much (at least to the Pacers). His max contract now,. or this summer is 30% of the cap, $42,600,000. No one can sign him to more than that. We will have the cap space to make him that offer this summer, with or without his Bird rights.

In a sense, we might actually be helping you move him. If someone, say the Warriors are interested. They know we are interested, and we have the cap space,.. their only option is to trade now and hope he resigns (which he said he isn't),... or do a sign an trade, under terms acceptable to both Siakam and the Raptors early in the FA period, or lose out.

That's quite informative and well articulated, thanks.

Very similar to VanVleet's circumstances. Difference being Siakam's market will have other high bidders. I'm looking at Detroit. Seems like they'd throw a max his way, for a full 4. They're are bad, but they have enough young talent to possibly persuade Pascal of the roster viability. There's also Philly. If they were to offer the same 2+1 contract as Indy, many would presume Pascal to take the Philly deal.

Seems like if he's of any interest to the Pacers, the only real option is to trade. It's their only means of leverage in a market with competition. But again, this hinges on the assumption that Pascal would make a commitment to Indiana prior to the trade.

I think reluctance to give up assets for Pascal will backfire. I think Ben Sheppard and a 1st rounder are worth the leverage advantage. And a steal if he commits longer term. I'll add that Pascal has been terrific offensively of late. He likely won't make all-nba or all-star but it's his most effective season since 2019. He's really dialed into his areas of strength and he's cut much of the fluff that made him a volume scorer on pedestrian efficiency.

I really appreciate your reply btw.

[JMaster5K]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

I think you hit partially 'the nail on the head',... unintentionally. I honestly don't think the Pacers are interested in either a 4 month rental of Siakam, nor a 'this year +3 year' commitment to Siakam on a guaranteed, max contract. For a trade to happen now,... those, basically, are your options.

(To do something else, Siakam would have to back-track on things he's already said he's not going to accept. It is not in his best financial interest to help a trade now. The extend and trade rules would limit his value versus the contracts he should have available as an UFA.)

The Pacers probably would be very interested in a deal with Siakam as a 2+1 or 1+1 which, in the current circumstances, is really only likely during the FA period this summer. This is a rare case where his Bird rights don't actually mean much (at least to the Pacers). His max contract now,. or this summer is 30% of the cap, $42,600,000. No one can sign him to more than that. We will have the cap space to make him that offer this summer, with or without his Bird rights.

In a sense, we might actually be helping you move him. If someone, say the Warriors are interested. They know we are interested, and we have the cap space,.. their only option is to trade now and hope he resigns (which he said he isn't),... or do a sign an trade, under terms acceptable to both Siakam and the Raptors early in the FA period, or lose out.

That's quite informative and well articulated, thanks.

Very similar to VanVleet's circumstances. Difference being Siakam's market will have other high bidders. I'm looking at Detroit. Seems like they'd throw a max his way, for a full 4. They're are bad, but they have enough young talent to possibly persuade Pascal of the roster viability. There's also Philly. If they were to offer the same 2+1 contract as Indy, many would presume Pascal to take the Philly deal.

Seems like if he's of any interest to the Pacers, the only real option is to trade. It's their only means of leverage in a market with competition. But again, this hinges on the assumption that Pascal would make a commitment to Indiana prior to the trade.

I think reluctance to give up assets for Pascal will backfire. I think Ben Sheppard and a 1st rounder are worth the leverage advantage. And a steal if he commits longer term. I'll add that Pascal has been terrific offensively of late. He likely won't make all-nba or all-star but it's his most effective season since 2019. He's really dialed into his areas of strength and he's cut much of the fluff that made him a volume scorer on pedestrian efficiency.

I really appreciate your reply btw.

I appreciate your enthusiasm and thoughtfulness. =]

Pascal has essentially said he isn't signing for anything except a full max extension or contract,... right now,.. he is at 30% of the cap. Any extension would lock him into at least 2 extra years with his first year at his max,.. and his second with either 8% or 5% increase.

If he makes the all star team (not impossible), He can extend at 35% with either 8% or 5% raises for up to 5 or 6 years.

If he doesn't make the all star team, I think he is looking at a 1 + 1? He will finish this season with 8 years experience. To get to the 35% cap number, he needs 9 or more. If he signs a 1+1,.. he can only do that in UFA,... He gets his max contract next year (30%). Can then opt out,.. and sign a new contract at 35%, as soon as he is eligible without having to make an all star team, while he is still in his prime on the court. If something happens,.. he has a 'second chance' year to re-establish himself before once again hitting the market.

As for the Pacers,.. we have more options than making a trade,.. we can compete in free agency. =} If he goes some other place,... we've lost nothing. If he signs with us,.. then we got something. LOL =] There really isn't any leverage advantage for the Pacers in making a trade now. The same holds true for most of the cap space teams that are interested in Siakam. I think you are right,.. the 76ers's do make a lot of sense. If he signs there,. he signs there,... and we still have Sheppard, and our 1st. =]

[basketballwacko2]

I get the hesitation, I'm a Raptors fan, not a fan of the Lakers or Knicks. The league simply operates off of handshake deals nowadays.

In a sign and trade, what would you be willing to offer Toronto for 4 years of Siakam? Consider this a situation where Pascal would be open to trades elsewhere because of the financial incentive of bird rights.

BS!!