# Anyone else notice our rotation last night?



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

PG - Watson
SG - Head
SF - Rush
PF - Granger
C- Murphy

With Price, Dahntay Jones, Dunleavy, and Hibbert off the bench. We played (and won) an entire game with two legit big men. Foster and Hansbrough have been hurt, but I see no reason why Josh McRoberts and/or Solomon Jones didn't log any minutes, unless we're really trying to play Nellie ball.

On a side note, I fully expect Murphy to be gone by the deadline. He seems to actually have value at this point, so it's best that we ditch him. Some teams supposedly really want Jeff, but I'd expect if he's going to be traded, he'd at least play a little as a showcase. I guess we'll see in the next few weeks, though.


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

There is no better time to trade Murphy then now. I said this about Dunleavy during his one good season with the Pacers and look what has happened to him since.


----------



## VCHighFly (May 7, 2004)

Knick_Killer31 said:


> There is no better time to trade Murphy then now.


I agree, but what can they get for him? Is just an expiring contract enough value when Murphy has only one more year on his contract anyway? I doubt Cleveland would be willing to throw in any young talent along with Big Z. I guess a Murphy/TJ Ford for Z/Bobbie/Moon trade works for Cleveland (given their current lack of depth at the point), but why would Indy want to take on more lengthy contracts?

Have you guys heard any plausible rumors?


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

VCHighFly said:


> I agree, but what can they get for him? Is just an expiring contract enough value when Murphy has only one more year on his contract anyway? I doubt Cleveland would be willing to throw in any young talent along with Big Z.


JJ Hickson and a first round pick. Bird supposedly wanted two picks and multiple young players along with Z, but Hickson and a first would suffice for me. JJ could be a nice backup to Hansbrough, we get some depth for the bench, and Z can help us a little for this year.




> I guess a Murphy/TJ Ford for Z/Bobbie/Moon trade works for Cleveland (given their current lack of depth at the point), but why would Indy want to take on more lengthy contracts?


According to every rumor I've read, TJ Ford's not tradable and we're going to treat him the same way we did Tinsley. Boobie Gibson seems like a solid O'Brien piece, but I doubt we have any interest in Moon.



> Have you guys heard any plausible rumors?


The most substantial rumors I've heard are Murphy to Cleveland for Z and young pieces, and then Foster to Denver. Apparently Denver loves Foster and I read that 'Melo really wants another big, but we want Ty Lawson and Denver's not going to budge. Plenty of teams want Murphy and I'm sure Foster would make an excellent backup on most playoff teams, so I'd be surprised if they're both here after the deadline. We owe it to Jeff to at least trade him to a team that has a chance at a title before his back/hip/shoulder completely give out.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I don't really see a workable Foster to Denver trade because of salary issues, unless Indy and Denver worked out a lopsided trade involving players making small money followed by Indy buying out Foster with the agreement that he'll then sign in Denver(see Alston to Miami). Otherwise Denver's forced to give up either a slew of bench guys or someone in their regular rotation to make the numbers work, either of which I doubt they'd do. I agree that Murphy, Dunleavy, and Foster all need to be moved for whatever prospects/picks that Indy can get for them though. Go into the summer of 2011 with massive cap space, the young core developed some, and two more drafts worth of players and then make their move.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> JJ Hickson and a first round pick. Bird supposedly wanted two picks and multiple young players along with Z, but Hickson and a first would suffice for me.


Alright, I have a couple issues here. JJ Hickson is 21 years old and currently has per 36 minute averages of 12 and 8 with low turnovers and a good shooting percentage (53.6%). Murphy would be a two year experiment in spreading the floor who averages 16 and 11 (per 36) on 48% shooting at 29 years old. They would basically be mortgaging their future to win now. Would Lebron really be in favor of getting rid of possibly Cleveland's only young asset other than himself? 

Also, what pick would they be throwing in? That first round pick would be insignificant if it was a 2010 pick because it will likely wind up being one of the bottom 3 picks in the first round. If it was a 2011 first rounder, however, it could wind up being a very high pick if Lebron signs elsewhere in free agency. I just don't see the Cavs doing this.



> According to every rumor I've read, TJ Ford's not tradable and we're going to treat him the same way we did Tinsley.


The difference is that making a point as an organization with a guy like Tinsley (who had no trade value) is easier than doing so with TJ Ford (who has some value). They would be dumb not to entertain offers at least.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

RollWithEm said:


> The difference is that making a point as an organization with a guy like Tinsley (who had no trade value) is easier than doing so with TJ Ford (who has some value). They would be dumb not to entertain offers at least.


They've been trying to trade Ford for a while now. No team in the league wants to take on his salary, so he's more or less untradable. If Indiana could get an expiring contract for him right now he'd already be gone.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Bogg said:


> They've been trying to trade Ford for a while now. No team in the league wants to take on his salary, so he's more or less untradable. If Indiana could get an expiring contract for him right now he'd already be gone.


I think the trade mentioned before about Bobbie and Moon might do the trick.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

RollWithEm said:


> I think the trade mentioned before about Bobbie and Moon might do the trick.


Cleveland has no interest in bringing in Ford because he can't shoot. Ford needs the ball in his hands to be effective, making him incompatible with Lebron in Cleveland's offense. It would allow teams to cheat off Ford to double Lebron when he drives, and Ford can't make other teams pay for it. Cleveland is better off just keeping Gibson.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

RollWithEm said:


> Alright, I have a couple issues here. JJ Hickson is 21 years old and currently has per 36 minute averages of 12 and 8 with low turnovers and a good shooting percentage (53.6%).


Hickson has low turnovers and good percentages because he's a finisher, not a creator. He scores off the offensive glass or from feeds from LeBron. I'll admit he's shown a bit more in the post this year, but he's still not that good of a piece. He'd be a backup PF to Hansbrough here.



> Murphy would be a two year experiment in spreading the floor who averages 16 and 11 (per 36) on 48% shooting at 29 years old.


I don't know about experiment. Besides a Stephen Jackson-like 2, a 4 to spread the floor is probably Cleveland's most needed asset.



> They would basically be mortgaging their future to win now.


Which...is a bad thing?



> Would Lebron really be in favor of getting rid of possibly Cleveland's only young asset other than himself?


For a championship? Yes.



> Also, what pick would they be throwing in? That first round pick would be insignificant if it was a 2010 pick because it will likely wind up being one of the bottom 3 picks in the first round.


So? That's still a solid piece.



> If it was a 2011 first rounder, however, it could wind up being a very high pick if Lebron signs elsewhere in free agency.


Do you really think LeBron is going to bolt? He's already on the best team in the league and Troy Murphy only makes them better.



> The difference is that making a point as an organization with a guy like Tinsley (who had no trade value) is easier than doing so with TJ Ford (who has some value). They would be dumb not to entertain offers at least.


We've been entertaining offers since Ford's first 20 games here. Ford has absolutely no value whatsoever.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Pacers Fan said:


> Hickson has low turnovers and good percentages because he's a finisher, not a creator. He scores off the offensive glass or from feeds from LeBron.


And you're saying that Troy Murphy is a creator?



> I'll admit he's shown a bit more in the post this year, but he's still not that good of a piece. He'd be a backup PF to Hansbrough here.


Hickson is a full three years younger than Hansbrough and has a ton more upside. These guys were thought of as similar caliber players coming out of high school (top 10 blue chip recruits). The difference is that Hickson didn't have the advantage of the NC pedigree that Tyler got, and that this Cavs coaching staff only started paying attention to this guy late last season. He never got sent down to the D-League last year to learn while he played. He's basically been sitting on the bench for a year, but he's shown the tools to be a solid rebounder and finisher at this level. Can Hansbrough say the same?



> I don't know about experiment. Besides a Stephen Jackson-like 2, a 4 to spread the floor is probably Cleveland's most needed asset.


The last two "spread the floor 4's" this Cleveland team tried (Joe Smith and Donyell Marshall) completely flamed out for them when it mattered most... in the playoffs. Murphy would be an experiment, for sure. It's not a sure thing that he would make them better.



> Which...is a bad thing?


Yes. Lebron is in his 6th season in the league. All this team has done up until this time is sacrifice its longterm future to give Lebron "veteran help." This living-in-the-now philosophy hasn't seemed to work that well for them so far. 



> For a championship? Yes.


And Troy Murphy guarantees them a championship, you think?



> So? That's still a solid piece.


The 30th overall pick in the draft is not always a solid piece. Here are the last 10 end of the first round picks:
2009: Christian Eyenga
2008: J.R. Giddens
2007: Petteri Koponen
2006: Joel Freeland
2005: David Lee
2004: David Harrison
2003: Maciej Lampe
2002: Dan Dickau
2001: Tony Parker
2000: Mark Madsen

So out of every 10 guys picked at that spot, you might get a guy of David Lee's or Tony Parker's caliber 20 percent of the time (given optimal conditions for their development). For every David Lee, though, there's a Joel Freeland, Maciej Lampe, Mark Madsen, and David Harrison.



> Do you really think LeBron is going to bolt? He's already on the best team in the league and Troy Murphy only makes them better.


I personally think that if they lose to the Lakers in the Finals with JJ Hickson on the roster, he might still stick around. If they lost in the Finals with Murphy on the roster instead, he's more likely to leave. Lebron's not stupid.


----------



## VCHighFly (May 7, 2004)

Maybe i'm in the minority, but i'm not sure Murphy makes the Cavs a lot better either. This board is a little gased up on its players.


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

RollWithEm said:


> And you're saying that Troy Murphy is a creator?


Yes. He actually does have more game than just the top of the key trailer 3. He can score some in the post and take guys off the dribble. He's no Chris Bosh, but he's solid.




> Hickson is a full three years younger than Hansbrough and has a ton more upside. These guys were thought of as similar caliber players coming out of high school (top 10 blue chip recruits). The difference is that Hickson didn't have the advantage of the NC pedigree that Tyler got, and that this Cavs coaching staff only started paying attention to this guy late last season. He never got sent down to the D-League last year to learn while he played. He's basically been sitting on the bench for a year, but he's shown the tools to be a solid rebounder and finisher at this level. Can Hansbrough say the same?


Yes. Hansbrough's had a very solid rookie season and has proven to work extremely hard on the glass. He's more athletic than anyone realizes, and is developing go-to post moves. What's been most surprising for me is that he's actually drawing a lot of fouls.




> The last two "spread the floor 4's" this Cleveland team tried (Joe Smith and Donyell Marshall) completely flamed out for them when it mattered most... in the playoffs. Murphy would be an experiment, for sure. It's not a sure thing that he would make them better.


Those two are strictly jump shooters. Murphy's a much better offensive option and rebounder than either of them.




> Yes. Lebron is in his 6th season in the league. All this team has done up until this time is sacrifice its longterm future to give Lebron "veteran help." This living-in-the-now philosophy hasn't seemed to work that well for them so far.


Well, Shaq and Z don't have much longer and no one else on the team besides Mo Williams is a good scorer. Delonte West is a great piece, but the Cavs don't exactly have anyone young worth relying on in the future. So what would your plan be? Keep going at the pace they're at and hope that when Shaq and Z retire, Cleveland will still be the best team in the East?

Cleveland's lost in the semifinals in 7 games twice, been to the conference finals once, and the finals once. That's a pretty good track record. To me it looks like they need to be just a bit better to win a title, and Murphy might give them that push.



> And Troy Murphy guarantees them a championship, you think?


No, nothing's ever a guarantee, but he gives them a better chance.




> The 30th overall pick in the draft is not always a solid piece. Here are the last 10 end of the first round picks:
> 2009: Christian Eyenga
> 2008: J.R. Giddens
> 2007: Petteri Koponen
> ...


I would certainly take those odds as a throw-in piece.




> I personally think that if they lose to the Lakers in the Finals with JJ Hickson on the roster, he might still stick around. If they lost in the Finals with Murphy on the roster instead, he's more likely to leave. Lebron's not stupid.


Why would he be more likely to leave with a better Power Forward on the team?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I understand the whole "don't mortgage the future" argument you're making for the Cavs, RollWithEm, but Murphy's actually a productive player that fits in well with Lebron, and it's unclear exactly how good Hickson will actually be. Murphy's rebounding and shooting ability allows them to play a lineup of Williams-West-James-Murphy-Varejao, which is actually a dynamite fast break team with three good rebounders to keep from getting beat on the glass. The Cavs have made a number of panic moves over the years, but picking up Murphy for an unspectacular prospect makes sense in all the ways the Shaq trade didn't.


----------

