Steph is my favorite player but he is not untouchable. Steph for Artest and Tinsley is a no brainer, you'd have to do it. It wouldn't be an offer though, but if it was...come on.

I would say it makes more sense to get Artest to play with Steph. It makes us better and able to win now. I have always said, it makes most sense to me to keep Curry, Frye and Steph, and everyone else can go. We can be a hell of a team with them as our core plus whoever we acquire.

we have a lot of holes. fixing one hole--SF but eliminating another--PF isnt the way to go. i dont knoiw what frye will be, but hes better than i originally thought and im not trading him. hes not a KG type but what he is is a superior 6-11 offensive player and there are only a few of those.

I agree, I like Frye too. But, making a trade is give and take. Nobody has been able to explain why the Pacers would want to trade one of the best players in the league for guys who aren't even the best players on a bad team!

I don't think the Pacers will trade him for contracts, because they are thinking championship NOW. They are going to want a very good, proven player.

excellent point briggs, and I agree. Why does every lanky big man must be KG or Duncan, why can't frye just be frye? he will make a name for himself, that is most important to me..

I certainly did not say anything like that. The point is, let's not treat a guy like he is the franchise when that isn't the case. In trades, you have to give to get. To think we would get Artest for a role player like Ariza (Even though I think he has a bright future.), or Lee, who cannot get off the bench on a bad team, etc. is just unrealistic. In fact the Pacers already have better role players than the ones we can give up!

Steph is my favorite player but he is not untouchable. Steph for Artest and Tinsley is a no brainer, you'd have to do it. It wouldn't be an offer though, but if it was...come on.

Why wouldn't it be an offer? I don't know what the salaries are, but look at it from the Pacer's point of view: They get a better PG and proven scorer to complement O'neal. Look at it from our viewpoint, we get the forward we need and we get a servicable point guard. It's a trade chock full of head cases. Everybody wins!

I would say it makes more sense to get Artest to play with Steph. It makes us better and able to win now. I have always said, it makes most sense to me to keep Curry, Frye and Steph, and everyone else can go. We can be a hell of a team with them as our core plus whoever we acquire.

But why would the Pacers take our refuse for one of the best players in the league? They are trying to win now!

oohah




[Edited by - oohah on 12-13-2005 01:27 AM]

We take a bad contract and give them space, young players, and the spurs pick. Thats why.

I don't see how that helps them win. Winning is the goal not cap room. They are not rebuilding. Here are some reasons why we would have to trade one of our best players in order to get one of the best players in the league:

• The Spurs' pick will be among the lowest in the draft.


• Space is nice, but it doesn't guarantee them a high-caliber player. Space does not win games.


• They already have young players and not so young players who are better than our role players.


• It leaves them short handed this year.


• Other teams will be willing to give up better players, for example Peja Stojakovic.

Walsh declined to discuss specifics, but when asked if he likely would demand some or all of the Knicks' three first-round rookies as part of any deal, Walsh said, "I'm not in the market for veterans. It has to make sense either for our future or financial sense or both."

This quote you added shows that we would have to be talking Frye or at least Curry (Curry I would part with without a second thought.) to pry away Artest, though I still think Marbury would have them considering a trade.

oohah



[Edited by - oohah on 12-13-2005 01:38 AM]

Artest is certifiably insane and is a big risk to any buyer. You don't throw players like Channing Frye or Eddie Curry into deals for guys like that, no matter how good they are when lucid.

I did not say we should trade Frye. I would trade Curry, who has his own risks going on, and is completely inconsistent.

My only point is: The Knicks aren't getting Artest for a bag of basketballs. The Pacers will want comparable talent.

oohah

I don't think we have a match with Indy. We can't trade make 5 and 4 weak to fix 3.

You are probably right about us not being able to get a match. I don't find Curry to be so good as to not think of trading him.

Though the Pacers will not get comparable talent for Artest a) because he is forcing a trade and b) because he's fricking nuts. He'll probably end up in Sac for Peja.

You are right that Artest making a stink puts the Pacers in a a bad position if they want equal value. If the Pacers get Peja, that is a pretty good trade talent-wise for Indiana. He would step right into Miller's spot, and he would have a low-post presence in O'Neal that makes a shooter's life a lot easier.

On the Sacramento Side, they get a star player, and Artest gets to be the featured player. Everybody wins...except the Knicks.

oohah

Only truly untouchables are Curry and Frye, everyone else can be had in the right package, IMO...I think our offer should be Ariza, Q, Lee or Nate, and the Spurs pick for Artest and Anthony Johnson

there is no way Sac is trading Peja for Artest. While the west coast is no doubt the best fit for RonRon Sac can simply do better in Feb.

Maybe Bonzi Wells

Bender's retiring and Isiah has already traded the 2nd rounders for Mo Taylor

http://www.nbadraft.net/

Posted by McK1:

Bender's retiring and Isiah has already traded the 2nd rounders for Mo Taylor

http://www.nbadraft.net/

Once Bender retires does that relieve Indiana of his salary obligations? If so then swap him with Scot Pollard. Ok, so we don't have a 2nd rd'r next year.. cool give up the other first! Next years draft isn't one of the stronger ones.. If we continue to lose, our highest pick will likely go to Chi-Town, we are not likely to pick up someone in the lower 1st rd that is as good as Ron Artest.


We gotta do whats right for Artest here... LB said on Sportsdesk that Ron Ron said he wanted "Freedom".. Lets get em, set em free! lol

You are right Jay, they still have to pay him (see us with Larry Johnson's contract, Luc Longley's contract.........)

Posted by fishmike:

there is no way Sac is trading Peja for Artest.

Agreed!