EJ doesn't agree to extension...what it means for the Pacers
by LukeNukem on Jan 26, 2012 8:15 AM EST
Email
PrintFirst of all, GO PACERS! I was watching the game and creeping on Blogabull to watch those @ssholes cry about the refs and insult us all fourth quarter. The Pacers bounced back in a big way against the conference's best team (and most arrogant fan base), and I'm STOKED...for the moment (that Orlando home shellacking still smarts). Moving on...
At the Hive breaks down the news that Eric Gordon did NOT agree to a four year, $62 million extension late last night. The guy who writes their cerebral stats stuff over there is really good. For those worried about EJ's injuries, he makes a very good case for EJ as a max player, statistically, at least from the perspective of a really bad team without stars.
Here's basically a synopsis of what last night's news means for the Pacers:
* EJ and his agent believe he'll be healthy and effective enough between now, and the rest of the season, to prove that he is a max player, or near-max player, by the off-season. His injury is not considered long-term, and the injury he suffered last year was a freak one. So this makes sense. EJ's camp is making a gamble that he's in good shape health-wise, or else they would've taken the near-max deal on the table and been fine with it. That is good news for the future.
* EJ is open to exploring the market. Some players have no intention of ever testing their market value and extend early to gain immediate security with their current team. These players have leverage in that they are typically max players (like Kevin Love) who can dictate their value without fielding other offers, or they are players whose teams have already agreed to overpay (like Gallinari in Denver). EJ is unique in that he may be a max player to a bad team, but there are still plenty of questions about his health, so he doesn't feel overpaid with a four year $62 million deal, but he (and more importantly, his agent) must feel he can gain a significant amount of security by testing the market.
* That fifth year is probably very important to EJ. We cannot offer EJ a fifth year. We can make EJ a four year "max" offer, but by owning his Bird rights, the Hornets can not only match, they can offer a fifth year with more money and cut negotations at the root. This means that to financially compete with New Orleans, we will have to facilitate a sign and trade.
* There is very little chance that New Orleans fails to match, and very little chance Bird et. al agree to take on a big contract without shedding salary, in the event that Roy Hibbert's value will be inflated to the point that we speculate it will be. This again supports the idea for a sign-and-trade offer as the only viable solution.
* Conclusion: Nothing has changed, other than the Pacers are still in the running for Gordon. It will still take:
1. More money than he is currently worth
2. A sign-and-trade
3. EJ telling his team that he wants to play here (because why else would they agree to the sign-and-trade for their max player when they have plenty of money to overpay him?)
So first of all, I want to dispel any notion that I am some sort of crazy person for considering Gordon max or near-max. He will be this summer. Deal with it. It doesn't matter that he may not be worth it at the moment, the market will decide that he is, in fact, worth nearly the entire max, meaning that New Orleans will offer him the max (assuming he's healthy and effective once he comes back from this current injury). So he's a max player. The $12-13 mil you may think he's worth is nitpicking and insignificant, because he's not taking a pay cut. Max contracts are not nearly as debilitating as they used to be, and players like Gordon don't come around often (highly effective offensively, lockdown defensively, young, and as an added bonus, a local hero who will be invested in this community).
Secondly, I want to offer up the only possible way we get Gordon this summer, in my opinion, short of New Orleans simply losing their minds.
Trade Granger and a 2012 first rounder for Gordon (signed at a 5 year max deal) and Emeka Okafor. This is a common trade idea, and it essentially has us absorbing all of Gordon's $15ish million. The fallout, of course, will be us likely not having the money to extend George Hill (after signing Hibbert to his ridiculously-inflated contract) and we'll be at a risk of not being able to pay one or both of Hansbrough and Collison the following year, all for a chance at Collison/EJ/PG/West/Hibbert for a year.
* Verdict: I say he's not worth it. I'm a huge Gordon apologist, and I'm fully on board with the concept of bringing him here for ALL reasons (he's special, he's young, he's local, he'd be more significant than any player we've had since Reggie Miller). But, in today's NBA climate, there are too many sacrifices to make for max players. You need a stable of bigs in order to compete in this league, and as we saw last night, we CAN compete. As heartbreaking as it will be to see EJ long-term with another team, staying the course is more fiscally responsible in the long-run, and the dream of bringing him here is too clouded, and has too many hurdles (starting with the fact that we'll probably need him to ask his team to facilitate a sign and trade) for us to still consider it a possibility.
What do you think?
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
No EJ.
He’s too injury-prone and too expensive, to boot. Bird will never put the Pacers in such financial hot water for one player.
Gordon may get a max contract as you say, but he’s not worth it. Hibbert is a much safer and more important investment.
I know you will say we can have both, but EJ is injured for significant portions of every single season. Is it really worth giving up max money, our best player, and taking on the contract of another player that will prevent us from improving in the future, not to mention the possible loss of Hill and Collinson in order to have him?
Why will I say we can have both? Did you read the post?
We “can” have both, but I agree with you entirely on why we shouldn’t.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Sorry to single you out, there.
Probably should have said, “I know somebody will say…”
by Manfred James on Jan 26, 2012 1:58 PM EST up reply actions
I will agree.
Though I will say that if all we lose in return for signing EJ is Collison and Hill, then that’s an acceptable loss. I think that would be a win really, presuming Gordon can stay healthy. I don’t think Collison and Hill are irreplaceable. The 2012 draft has a lot of strong guard prospects (it’s strong overall really) and I would argue that some would be better than both DC/Hill. Plus, Stephenson could potentially be better in a year.
Anyways, I’m just trying to get the idea across that EJ > DC/Hill.
"A champion is someone who gets up when he can't."
- Jack Dempsey
by infinityzero.systemerror on Jan 26, 2012 9:48 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but
You’d be talking about a max guy (EJ) and two near max guys (Hibbert and either Okafor in a trade or Granger). That soaks up roughly 85% of the cap. It wouldn’t just be DC/Hill, it would mean paying luxury tax to keep Paul George and still field a roster if George blossoms into a star. I don’t think anyone would argue that EJ > DC/Hill though.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I've not looked at the salary numbers nor much followed proposed trades, but
as you lay it out, I would definitely say no. However, has there been any talk of Ariza and Gordon instead of Okafur and how much difference would that make cap wise?
Nonetheless, as you’ve written it I wouldn’t do it and would rather make a play for another two guard who may not be as good, but wouldn’t be as cap killing. Nick Young is the name that comes to mind here. DeRozen has also been playing terribly this year (PER = 10.11) so there’s the chance he would become available for the right pieces. Finally, OKC will have to make a hard decision with Ibaka and Harden if they are to remain under the cap (similar situation to us in some ways), so there’s always the chance a deal could be made there. Also, don’t forget a play for K-Mart out of Houston.
From what I’ve read there is a dearth of 2 guards in league and they are going to start commanding higher salaries and I know that Gordon will certainly make us more in terms of ticket sales, but a max is too much for him.
FYI on the PER of each guy mentioned above:
DeRozan = 10.11
Young = 14.50
Harden = 23.84
K-Martin = 18.19
Ibaka = 15.92
Keep in mind that a PER of 15 (while not the say all) is considered average. With that in mind, the Pacers future backup power forward Andray Blatche has a PER of 12.18
Very well put.
I love EG’s game and love his potential, but I don’t think he’s worth a max contract, which could potentially tear our nucleus apart (while at the same time certainly adding to it in EG).
That comment you made analyzing the Pacers salary cap situations and potential moves awhile back was excellent. Definitely hold on to that for future use, as we near the off-season this year.
I personally think Hansbrough can be replaced, while his pedigree and Tebowesque will to win are undeniable. I like Collison, and really like the strides he has made so far this year, but I’m still not 100% sold on him as our point guard of the future (even though he most likely will be).
Not going for EG will be a tough decision, but one we will probably have to make.
Working to become the best - Roy Hibbert
before we sign gordon,
i’d like to sign hibbert and hill first. Not sure why hibbert was not even offered an extension in the first place. maybe bird is concerned with roy’s nose injury.
at any rate, i’m afraid gordon will ask for a max contract in which case, we might not be able to sign both hibbert and hill anymore and for that price, i’ll say no to gordon.
His agent closed the door on an early extension like a week ago
No point in offering, unless they were sure they were going to offer him a max deal. Chances are they won’t, but it’ll be close.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
It Means
not giving Hill an extension may not have been such a bad idea after all..
Too high
Bird seems to be going for the old “greater than the sum of its parts” build to try and field a championship team. It worked for Philly after all. Gordon requires giving up too much and would rip that apart.
I voted yes
If we are drafting in the mid to high 20’s for the next few years (that is a good thing) then we are not going to be able to get a SG as good as Gordon unless we get incredibly lucky. In a couple years, we would probably have to move Danny just to protect our cap, and it will be time for PG to start playing SF. Eventually his quickness will taper off and he will not be able to play SG like he can now. If we don’t do this then 2 years from now, We are not going to have a SG to replace Paul George with when he goes to the 3.
Hill and Hansbrough are much more replaceable commodities in the draft if we are picking that low.
Not being able to afford Collison would sting, but I don’t think he will be that expensive to retain. He is not a top 10 player at his position. I think we all want to hold onto DC because of the nightmare situation we had for a few years at the point guard spot. DC is replaceable if the market goes crazy for him.
Okafor would actually help quite a bit in the depth department at the 5 spot. We are a different team when Hibbert is not on he floor. He would be a nice short term backup player.
I am not an IU fan or a big Gordon fan, but the reasons to bring him here are overwhelming.
See
Priority one would be Hibbert, but after that I tend to agree with you. But looking even farther into the future, we’re going to have to make room for Paul George if he somehow turns into a max. player. I hate to think like that, but if he continues to trend upward in year three, losing him after his rookie contract because we committed $28-30 combined yearly dollars to an injury prone two (a position PG can play, as you said, at the moment) and Hibbert, that’s going to suck.
As for DC, I’m working on the assumption that he’s going to be worth an extension in the Kyle Lowry neighborhood, based on how he’s playing this year (Lowry is the antithesis of the old “quit once you’re paid” NBA paradigm, btw, as he’s playing lights out). But if he improves drastically, that’s another one we’re going to want to keep, as above average PGs who can lead teams to wins are almost as hard to come by as legit 7 footers with high ceilings and developable basketball skills.
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
I think Hibbert should be our priority...
And maybe you weren’t speaking chronologically in so much that signing him must get done first. I asked in another thread if the rule for the CBA was still the same in that unsigned RFA coming off a rookie scale only count at 200% of the last year of their rookie contract until they are signed? Anyone know if that’s still the rule?
peac.e
a couple of notes from ESPNs recent 5 on 5
3. Which eligible player that didn’t get extended should have?
Chad Ford, ESPN.com: Eric Gordon. The Hornets traded away a franchise player to get him. It’s well known that he’d love to return to Indiana next summer and the Pacers have the money to pay him. Yes, the Hornets still have his restricted free agent rights and can match any offer. But I thought the Hornets would have and should have sealed the deal.
4. Which player that didn’t extend is most likely to leave this summer?
J.M. Poulard, Warriors World: Eric Gordon’s name keeps popping up in rumors involving the Indiana Pacers and it almost makes too much sense. Indiana will have the required cap room to overpay for the services of the former Hoosier and bring him home to play with an up-and-coming team in serious need of some scoring.
and this
Karan (indy)
Any chance the Pacers are able to keep George Hill and Roy Hibbert AND sign Eric Gordon to a monster contract?
John Hollinger (12:19 PM)
They’d pretty much have to trade Granger for an expiring contract to pull that off. Getting Gordon will be easier said than done because it will require a huge offer sheet; I imagine if Gordon signed they would let Hill walk.
I really think it'll take a Granger salary dump
That would totally suck, because he’s still hella useful. Also, I don’t see why NOR would let EJ walk, even if it took a max extension. “Easier said than done” is right…
"You're hitting the wrong person. Don't you know you're hitting Ron Artest?"
Come visit The Fantasy Ninjas. We'd love to hear from you.
Midseason Trade
Granger, first round pick, and Lance for Eric (sign and trade)? Would that work? I know its a deep draft, but with the way we are playing, our pick will probably be in the 20s anyways. Eric is a top 5 SG in the league, and I only worry about his health. But if he can get him, slide Paul to the 3, and keep Hill & Hibbert, I think we would be a contender in the East.
i really hope we don't try going for gordon
i want to see gordon put together 2 fully healthy seasons before i think of trading for him. i know other people have said this, but we really don’t want another JO situation on our hands where we use up a huge chunk of our cap on a guy who’s always hurt.
Harper's on Miller, McKey, gets in to Miller for the win and...
CHIEF
Jermaine O'neal
This is what happens when you give max money to a player and he is constantly injured.
I will take Granger and his contract over Gordon and his bigger contract and injury issues.
Signing Gordon will SINK us when he gets hurt. Dude is constantly hurt, even in college, when he is young. What is going to happen when he gets more wear and tear.
www.themindofshadow.blogspot.com/
I just don't get it.
What has he done to prove he’s worth that kind of a risk? You guys are the same ones that pointed out how terrible of a GM Pritchard was for drafting guys like Oden and Roy who had injury histories…I’m no doctor, but I understand that those Blazers might have had more predictably risky futures/long term issues, but at least they were only offering rookie scale (and risking a high draft pick).
Gordon has missed significant time in all but his rookie season as a pro and even missed some games at IU and never got back to 100% that season. He put up pretty strong numbers on a really bad team (and early on for an average team last season). I don’t think he’s more than an average defender, at best, and he’s undersized. I’d be happy to give him $8-9mil. sure. I’d even be ok with $11-12mil. with a player option in the 3rd year or something. But, 4 or 5 years guaranteed max…and you’re throwing around terms like “inflated” regarding Hibbert. And we’d have to give up a 1st rounder when we would need the cheap depth that pick would provide? NO WAY!!!!!
We aren’t on the same page here. I can’t believe that New Orleans even offered him a max deal. Not only do I consider that a bad idea…I don’t think the league should be throwing around money like that for such a risky, unproven player. It would take some pretty creative stuff for me to think signing him would be a good idea. One of those things would be us offering and him signing a low ball deal (like I mentioned above) just b/c he wants to be home. That’d be sweet. Otherwise, good luck elsewhere EJ.
peac.e
by trucutter on Jan 26, 2012 8:49 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I don't want to give Gordon the max, but I could begrudingly go along with it, maybe.
if it means taking on Okafor’s remaining 2/~28 mil to come off the bench, along with giving up Danny, no way in hell. I think Gordon’ll get a 4 year max offer from someone and the Hornets’ll match. He goes on to not miss a game over that 4 years, happy (genuinely) for the Hornets. But the chances of him not missing significant chunks of time again appear to be slim, and I just don’t want to put that kind of money on the line. If he were an AC Green ironman that never missed time I’d still be weary of a max deal.
"He's like Darth Vader." - Frank Vogel on Larry Bird
Effing iphone...
Time for your posts to be on the front page, Luke. Always appreciate your level headed analysis.
by BenD on Jan 27, 2012 11:54 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think EJ wants a max contract, which is not happening. He has a injury history. It would not be worth it to jeopardize the team that is going in a good direction.
Just to instigate
Since I don’t see you reply that much, and I am like crack addicted to talking to the Pacer fans on this site.
Structure me a contract that you would offer in good faith to a Restricted Eric Gordon.
Please?
peac.e
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Indy Cornrows
Related FanShots on Indy Cornrows
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Jrue Holiday needs to shoot more for Sixers to win, according to Doug Collins
- Create-a-Caption: Jeff Pendergraph scares his Pacers teammates
- James Harden is a cake now
- Mike Miller loses shoe, plays two possessions without it, Pacers don’t score (VIDEO)
- Larry Bird calls his Indiana Pacers ‘soft’ following the team’s physical Game 5 loss to Miami
