# Al to Indiana very close to complete..



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

.. from several sources. 

The big question is, who we getting?

But, it looks like Al's going back home.


----------



## master8492 (Mar 4, 2005)

I guess it's good to know that JSmith/Marvin for AI rumor has subside a bit. The bad thing about this is that this will make Pacers stronger to contend for the playoffs spot (that hopefully Atlanta will be in it :biggrin .


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan (Mar 3, 2006)

I'm hoping we get Jeff foster and Anthony Johnson, these two veteren could make the chance of the hawks reaching the post season better. It's good we didn't have to give up Childress in the process.


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

Apparently all your getting back is a trade exception/exemption (I don't know what its called)


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

The Pacers only have a 7.5 Million TE. If that is all the Hawks get back, then Al didn't get a very big contract


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

vigilante said:


> Apparently all your getting back is a trade exception/exemption (I don't know what its called)



I highly doubt it...IMO it's Foster, and AJ which would make the most sense...Thanx for giving him back to us BTW.... :cheers:


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

1 rumor seems to be Atlanta is just getting an unprotected 1st, and the TE.


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan (Mar 3, 2006)

TheATLien said:


> 1 rumor seems to be Atlanta is just getting an unprotected 1st, and the TE.


better than letting him go for nothing, we still need a big man. Maybe we can use the trade exception to get David Anderson over here.

A rumor I've heard is Jamal Tinsley, and a first rounder, I've also heard Stephen Jackson name, but the one i'm hearing the most is the one ATLien said. I wouldn't be mad if we get an unprotected first rounder, with how deep next years draft is. We can get a player in the 15-20 range that would have been a top 10 pick in this years draft.


----------



## different_13 (Aug 30, 2005)

Who's David Anderson?

Foster would be good, but the TE/1st seems to be the most common trade (plus the fact that exceptions can't be packaged with other players in trades..)

(btw, anyone else think the whole issue about Indiana getting that TE is suspicious? Why would New Orleans give that up, when Peja was unrestricted?)


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

So Atlanta will be on the Jermaine O'Neal injury watch.

If he gets hurt again, you could get a lottery pick.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Getting this pick means that they will send this pick to Phoenix next season. I think it's a great trade for Atlanta. If they are at the top of the lottery they will keep their pick. I will give Billy Knight credit for this.


----------



## PaCeRhOLiC (May 22, 2005)

Something I found...



> _*Latest News Jul. 22, 2006 - 11:09 am et
> 
> 
> Slamonline.com is reporting that Al Harrington is still being linked to the Pacers, with the Warriors falling out of the race for the free agent.
> They're also reporting that the Pacers will only have to send draft picks and cash in a sign-and-trade deal. If this is true, and they don't have to give up any players or their trade exception, it could be quite a coup for the Pacers. *  _


Link


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

HKF said:


> Getting this pick means that they will send this pick to Phoenix next season. I think it's a great trade for Atlanta. If they are at the top of the lottery they will keep their pick. I will give Billy Knight credit for this.


Which is just about pointless, because Phoenix is going to sell it.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Coatesvillain said:


> Which is just about pointless, because Phoenix is going to sell it.


Not to Atlanta. What if it was a top 5 pick (the Hawks original selection)? Now Atlanta has two picks to choose from when it comes to giving it to Phoenix. Whichever one is the worst one, they give to the Suns. Makes sense to me. They already gave one pick to the Suns (which ended up being Rajon Rondo).


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

HKF said:


> Not to Atlanta. What if it was a top 5 pick (the Hawks original selection)? Now Atlanta has two picks to choose from when it comes to giving it to Phoenix. Whichever one is the worst one, they give to the Suns. Makes sense to me. They already gave one pick to the Suns (which ended up being Rajon Rondo).


I'm talking about Phoenix.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

PaCeRhOLiC said:


> Something I found...
> 
> 
> Link


That quote violates the salary cap rules. The Pacers can't just take on salary.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

What? No way. They cannot change the pick to something else (or change it to crap) the year after they agree to it. We get Atlanta's own pick top 3 protected this yr. Then the next it's not protected all.

http://nbadraft.net/draftnotes.asp#pho081905b



> Phoenix receive a first round pick from Atlanta (Joe Johnson trade) The Suns will receive Atlanta's own first round pick no later than the 2008 NBA Draft. Protected through No. 3 in 2007 and has no protection in 2008.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Coatesvillain said:


> Which is just about pointless, because Phoenix is going to sell it.



Nope. we're not selling Atlanta's pick next yr. Those other 2 (our own and Cavs one) we have, maybe. At least one will be. But it won't be Atlanta's.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Dissonance19 said:


> What? No way. They cannot change the pick to something else (or change it to crap) the year after they agree to it. We get Atlanta's own pick top 3 protected this yr. Then the next it's not protected all.
> 
> http://nbadraft.net/draftnotes.asp#pho081905b


This is not how NBA rules work my friend. Unfortunately for the Suns if the Hawks make a trade and acquire another pick, then can send whichever pick they choose. Since they would have two picks that belong to them, they would give the lesser of the two selections.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

HKF said:


> This is not how NBA rules work my friend. Unfortunately for the Suns if the Hawks make a trade and acquire another pick, then can send whichever pick they choose. Since they would have two picks that belong to them, they would give the lesser of the two selections.


I don't buy it. They have to have had the pick already. They can't agree to trade their pick and then send another ****ty pick later on. Even so if there is a chance is it true, they know their jobs are in jeopardy, why help out the the next owner of the Hawks (who they will hate) when they probably won't be working there anymore? It will still be ours. But as I said I don't buy it.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Dissonance19 said:


> I don't buy it. They have to have had the pick already. They can't agree to trade their pick and then send another ****ty pick later on. Even so if there is a chance is it true, they know their jobs are in jeopardy, why help out the the next owner of the Hawks (who they will hate) when they probably won't be working there anymore? It will still be ours. But as I said I don't buy it.


Again this is not correct. The Hawks were owed a selection by the Celtics (in the Gary Payton trade), which came from the Lakers. The Celtics exercised the pick this season, which the Hawks then took from the Celtics, which they then gave to the Suns instead of the #5 pick.

You're going to be disappointed come 2007, when the pick from the Hawks is the Pacers selection, which it will 99% be the Pacers pick. The Suns don't have any say which pick they receive. Simply the Hawks need to have a pick, which would then go to the Suns. They will have two. If you think you're getting the higher of the two, you're just being a delusional fan right now.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

HKF said:


> Again this is not correct. The Hawks were owed a selection by the Celtics (in the Gary Payton trade), which came from the Lakers. The Celtics exercised the pick this season, which the Hawks then took from the Celtics, which they then gave to the Suns instead of the #5 pick.
> 
> You're going to be disappointed come 2007, when the pick from the Hawks is the Pacers selection, which it will 99% be the Pacers pick. The Suns don't have any say which pick they receive. Simply the Hawks need to have a pick, which would then go to the Suns. They will have two. If you think you're getting the higher of the two, you're just being a delusional fan right now.



No, that is not correct. They agreed to send the Cels/Lakers pick before along with their own pick next yr or the yr after. Top 3 protected or unprotected in 08. They weren't supposed to give us their pick this past yr. They didn't change afterwards. It was the Lakers/Celtics pick not theirs. 


And no, I am not the one being delusional here right now.

link 


> The Suns will receive Atlanta's own first round pick no later than the 2008 NBA Draft. That pick which is "lottery" protected (1-14) in 2006, has protection through No. 3 in 2007 and has no protection in 2008. *In addition the Suns will also receive a conditional first round pick via either the Los Angeles Lakers or Boston Celtics from an earlier trade between Boston and Atlanta*.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

You really don't get NBA rules. When a team acquires a pick, the pick belongs to them. They can give whichever pick they want. It's a top 3 protected pick, but they can choose to give the worst of the two selections. This is not new.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

HKF said:


> You really don't get NBA rules. When a team acquires a pick, the pick belongs to them. They can give whichever pick they want. It's a top 3 protected pick, but they can choose to give the worst of the two selections. This is not new.





> which the Hawks then took from the Celtics, *which they then gave to the Suns instead of the #5 pick*.


Then why did you say they changed the pick to the Celts/Lakers when they knew it was going to be top 5, when we *weren't eligible* to get Atlanta's 'till next yr? They didn't change anything. That is what it was supposed to be.


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan (Mar 3, 2006)

HKF said:


> Again this is not correct. The Hawks were owed a selection by the Celtics (in the Gary Payton trade), which came from the Lakers. The Celtics exercised the pick this season, which the Hawks then took from the Celtics, which they then gave to the Suns instead of the #5 pick.
> 
> You're going to be disappointed come 2007, when the pick from the Hawks is the Pacers selection, which it will 99% be the Pacers pick. The Suns don't have any say which pick they receive. Simply the Hawks need to have a pick, which would then go to the Suns. They will have two. If you think you're getting the higher of the two, you're just being a delusional fan right now.



If that's how nba rules are, then this trade looks really good for us.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Haha, that would be the first time I've ever heard of this. If this were true, then New York would have been able to send their late first round pick at #20 to Chicago instead of the #2 pick. Phoenix will get Atlanta's own pick, and Atlanta will have any other pick they traded for. When you trade a pick, you trade THAT pick unless there is a special condition. The only condition here was top 3 protection for 2007. I have no clue where you are getting your information.


----------



## Greg Ostertag! (May 1, 2003)

But Atlanta agreed to give up *their* 1st rounder, did they not. I'm pretty sure trades specifically outline which 1st rounders are being given up, whether they be the team's own based on record or ones which they have acquired. In this case, I'm pretty positive that Phoenix get Atlanta's *own* pick in 2007, unless it is top 3, which cannot be changed.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Greg Ostertag! said:


> But Atlanta agreed to give up *their* 1st rounder, did they not. I'm pretty sure trades specifically outline which 1st rounders are being given up, whether they be the team's own based on record or ones which they have acquired. In this case, I'm pretty positive that Phoenix get Atlanta's *own* pick in 2007, unless it is top 3, which cannot be changed.



Exactly. He thinks Atlanta also changed from their pick to Celts pick. No, they did not. We weren't eligible for the Hawks pick this yr. Next yr, we are, which is top 3 protected and not the yr after. We agreed for the Celts/Lakers pick and Atlanta's OWN pick which they set the restriction to next yr as I said. They can't change that to someone else's pick that they get in another trade. It also doesn't become their own pick, it's Atlanta via Indiana. It shouldn't be that hard to follow. I am not just some delusional Suns fan and I will not be disappointed.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Indeed. It makes zero sense to trade a pick and then be able to acquire say a 30th pick and hand over that one instead. So, as it appears, Dissonance19 isn't the one that "really don't get NBA rules". EDIT: Nor is he "being delusional".


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

I think what Coatesvillan is getting at, is that Phoenix will receive Atlanta's pick. But then go on to trade it for cash.

Either that, or they will use the pick to find Shawn Marion's replacement.


----------



## BootyKing (Apr 7, 2005)

It doesn't make sense for them to be able to give the Suns a pick that was not in the equation when the agreement was made. If teams could change the pick they send, this would of happend many times. Iv never heard of it and it just doesnt make sense. It would make tradeing for draft picks pointless in a way because a team could make a trade to a team high in the draft to acquire their pick just so they don't have to trade their lower pick.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

TheATLien said:


> I think what Coatesvillan is getting at, is that Phoenix will receive Atlanta's pick. But then go on to trade it for cash.
> 
> Either that, or they will use the pick to find Shawn Marion's replacement.


Yeah, I think we understood that part. It's HKF's posts that we're scrambling to understand.


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan (Mar 3, 2006)

Anybody has any imformation on the trade, I know one thing Anthony Johnson won't be a Hawk because he's been traded to Dallas.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

bump


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

If I remember correctly, trades now have to be within 125% of each other, so the trade exception for Al could work. Al's contract would have to start at a little under 9.5 for the first year, at the maximum, and that's without the increases in his contract. If it's 6 years, 57 million, that averages out to 9.5/season, which could probably start at around 8 million, and maybe end at 12-13.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Pacers Fan said:


> If I remember correctly, trades now have to be within 125% of each other, so the trade exception for Al could work. Al's contract would have to start at a little under 9.5 for the first year, at the maximum, and that's without the increases in his contract. If it's 6 years, 57 million, that averages out to 9.5/season, which could probably start at around 8 million, and maybe end at 12-13.


The 125% rule doesn't apply to trade exceptions. Instead, they only allow you to exceed the exact dollar amount of the trade exception by $100,000. So, the most Al Harrington could make if he is signed and traded to Indiana is a deal starting out at $7.6 million and increasing by 10% every year after. That equals around a 6 year $59 million deal. The last two years of the deal $11.1 and $12.2, so you were right on at the end there.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> The 125% rule doesn't apply to trade exceptions. Instead, they only allow you to exceed the exact dollar amount of the trade exception by $100,000.


I kind of expected that.



> So, the most Al Harrington could make if he is signed and traded to Indiana is a deal starting out at $7.6 million and increasing by 10% every year after. That equals around a 6 year $59 million deal. The last two years of the deal $11.1 and $12.2, so you were right on at the end there.


Good to see my math estimating skills weren't far off at all. Anyway, thanks for clarifying that. At least he won't be making so much so soon.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

Al Harrington at $7.6 million is a bargain in my opinion. The knock on him is sort of like Rasheed Wallace, he shouldn't be the main guy. I'd still think he's going to want more money than that. But he's great as a second or even third option. He had his best year last year, and he's only 26 years old.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

ShuHanGuanYu said:


> Haha, that would be the first time I've ever heard of this. If this were true, then New York would have been able to send their late first round pick at #20 to Chicago instead of the #2 pick. Phoenix will get Atlanta's own pick, and Atlanta will have any other pick they traded for. When you trade a pick, you trade THAT pick unless there is a special condition. The only condition here was top 3 protection for 2007. I have no clue where you are getting your information.


Bump. Anyone else here of the thought that Atlanta will be able to send whichever pick they want (and thus Dissonance19 not knowing NBA rules)?


----------

