# Harrington for Ward??



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

Before reading this article, you have to say to yourself, when is the last time the New York Post actually wrote the truth? They throw out a new Knick rumour like every other day, so i wouldn't take this too seriously, but since it is in the press, i figured we should talk about it.



> *KNICKS MIGHT SWAP WARD FOR HARRINGTON*
> 
> By MARC BERMAN
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...


Rest of Story 

Thoughts?


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

All I can say is that better be BS, Harrington for Ward? What a bad trade!


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

This is garbage. 

Harrington can and will command a lot more on the market because of his game. I believe I read that MANY teams have been trying to pry him away for the past 3 seasons but the Pacers have never felt they received a good deal.

Ward is a washed up, never really was. NY has been trying to dump him for like 3 seasons and no one is interested. They're eating that one.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

This better not be true, and besides Laydan isnt smart enough to make a deal like that.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Settle down it is just the _New York Post_.


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

Maybe Harrington for Spreewell, but Ward? What the hell is that?


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>The Lone Ranger</b>!
> Settle down it is just the _New York Post_.


:whoknows:


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

No one should believe anything they see in the New York Post. If we were shopping Harrington, which we're not, we would trade him and Croshere to the Wolves for Terrell Brandon's expiring contract. Minnesota would do that in a second and it would let us easily resign Brad and Reggie and still have a little room left over. Instead I'm supposed to believe we need a point guard so bad we'll take an overpaid 32-year-old who started 6 games last year. 

It says the Knicks want big men and we want guards so I think we should trade Primoz Brezec for Frank Williams. It works under the cap and then the Knicks could rename themselves the New York Stiffs with a starting lineup of
PG Othella Harrington
SG Primoz Brezec
SF Maciej Lampe
PF Travis Knight
C Slavko Vranes
That team would be unstoppable :laugh:


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> It says the Knicks want big men and we want guards so I think we should trade Primoz Brezec for Frank Williams. It works under the cap and then the Knicks could rename themselves the New York Stiffs with a starting lineup of
> ...


lol, that would be hilarious if that was their starting 5, I know we don't want Frank Williams though, I remember Donnie saying he doesn't want any more talent to develop, he just wants a vet PG.


----------



## jreywind (May 30, 2003)

Boy the Post is turning into the National I. of basketball. What a joke, kind of like that Jason Kidd stuff. Unless there are some draft picks and some way to get rid of a nasty contract this is one of the dumbest rumours I have ever heard. So the Pacers actually want to pick up salaries huh?


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

Good lord, how many times do I have to explain that the Pacers CANNOT AFFORD TO RE-SIGN BRAD MILLER this summer without exceeding the luxury tax threshold, the ONLY WAY they can afford to re-sign him is by dumping payroll, and fellas, let me tell you, NOBODY and I mean NOOOOOOOOBODY is going to bail you out on Austin Croshere here.

Ward's contract for 2003-04 has a buyout option. By trading for Ward, the Pacers would buy out Ward for $2 mil, which reduces their payroll by about $4 mil, which allows them to re-sign Brad Miller.

Something I have been explaining to you guys FOR A LOOOOOOOOOOOONG TIME is that it's either Al Harrington or Brad Miller. You can have one, but not both. The talks with Minnesota for Terrell Brandon's contract have been going on SO THE PACERS CAN AFFORD TO RE-SIGN BRAD MILLER. The Pacers need to act quickly if they don't want Brad to lose patience and accept a contract from either Utah or Denver, both of whom will presumably make him market value (a contract beginning in the $7-$8 mil neighborhood) contract offers.

My guess is that Minnesota has been insisting on Harrington and RON MERCER (expiring contract) for Brandon, while Indy has been insisting on Harrington and AUSTIN CROSHERE (four years remaining) for Brandon. Fellas, the two teams are light years apart there, obviously. Harrington is an interesting young player, but he's not interesting enough to trade away Brandon's luxury tax-friendly contract for the terrible and I do mean TERRIBLE contract of Croshere. Croshere's contract would banish the Timberwolves to luxury tax hell for the next SEVERAL years, obviously.

Again, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOBODY will trade for Croshere.

By moving Harrington very quickly for Ward, the Pacers can prevent Brad from slipping away. By continuing to haggle with teams over Croshere, Brad is going to sign elsewhere. So, again, who do you want, Brad or Al? You can have one but not both!


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

*You're right but...*

Who are you replying to? No one here even mentioned Brad Miller and I think most of us realize he will not be an Indiana Pacer next year. Next time you write condescending posts make sure people actually said what you are accusing them of saying.

Oh and by the way given the choice between Miller and Harrington I'll take Harrington any day of the week. Just watch, in three years Miller will have recurring foot problems and he will be seen as one of the most overpaid players in the NBA, while Harrington Bender Artest and O'Neal will be the core of the best team in the East.


----------



## jreywind (May 30, 2003)

I have no problem with the post roby, but I totally agree with artestfan that almost any Pacers fan would rather have Al Harrington than Brad Miller. We want Miller badly...just not that badly.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

Oh I don't have a problem with the post either, it's something that's true and it needs to be kept in mind, but it just seemed kinda mean the way it was written, that's all.

Can you post a link that says Charlie Ward's contract has a buyout? I have not heard that.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> 
> 
> Can you post a link that says Charlie Ward's contract has a buyout? I have not heard that.


My 100th post!!

back to the topic, i will agree with ArtestFan, even though it could back fire on us later in the future, i would also reather keep Al Harrington then Brad Miller. 

I do not have a link, but i can say i did also hear Charlie Ward has a buy out in his contract. I bielive it's $2 million, but i could be wrong. I heard it on espn radio today.


----------



## robyg1974 (Jul 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> Oh I don't have a problem with the post either, it's something that's true and it needs to be kept in mind, but it just seemed kinda mean the way it was written, that's all.
> 
> Can you post a link that says Charlie Ward's contract has a buyout? I have not heard that.


Sorry, guys, don't mean to sound condescending, but I SWEAR TO GOD I've been repeating myself over and over and over again about the situation that the Pacers would find themselves in this summer for TWELVE MONTHS, yet we repeatedly get posts about bringing back Brad Miller or not trading Al Harrington, and nobody (except me) acknowledges that the Pacers honest-to-god have to choose between Brad and Al, they can have one but not both, and that any Al trade (in which the Pacers appear to be getting ripped off) is ONLY BEING DISCUSSED because Pacers management understands that THE ONLY WAY they re-sign Brad is by trading Al.

Again, sorry to sound condescending, and I understand that the mainstream sports media refuses to discuss the luxury tax and refuses to explain why teams are ACTUALLY doing what they are doing (every single trade that happens in today's NBA makes perfect sense from a luxury tax-salary cap perspective, if not from a basketball perspective), and I know that I come up with some nutty ideas, but trust me, I know what I'm talking about when it comes to the luxury tax, and the Pacers CANNOT AFFORD to re-sign Brad to a market value deal (he'll get a contract starting at $7-$8 mil from Denver and/or Utah) without dumping payroll, and the only way you dump payroll is by trading for a luxury tax-friendly contract such as Terrell Brandon (Minnesota only willing to deal IF they can totally rip off their trading partner), Arvydas Sabonis (Portland apparently prefers to let Sabonis' contract disappear completely rather than to trade nothing for something), and Charlie Ward (Knicks determined to make the playoffs, whoever trades for Ward will immediately buy him out, and he will the re-sign with the Knicks for the veteran's exception or thereabouts).

MILLERTIME:

I could look around for a link, or you could. I know it's true, I don't need a link. Think about it: why ELSE would the Pacers even CONSIDER trading Al for Charlie? The ONLY REASON is because of their fear of losing Brad. The ONLY REASON you trade for Charlie is if you plan on IMMEDIATELY buying him out, you reduce your payroll by around $4 mil.

I'm thinking that Minnesota is asking for Al and Mercer (expiring contract) for Brandon, while Indy is insisting on Al and Croshere (terrible TERRIBLE contract) for Brandon. Not a lot of room for compromise there. Indy was talking trade with Minny for Brandon because THEY KNEW that they needed to dump payroll in order to re-sign Brad. Now, trade talks between Indy and Minny seem to have broken off--although my guess is that McHale told Walsh that the Al-and-Mercer-for-Brandon remains on the table--and Indy is moving on to New York.

The only way you dump payroll is by trading with a team with cap room (Spurs, Nuggets, Jazz, Clips, Heat, Wiz) or by trading with a team with a luxury tax-friendly contract (Wolves, Blazers, Knicks). So those are the only teams that Indy can really talk trade with IF they are serious about re-signing Brad.

I agree with you guys, I think they'll let Brad walk and hold onto Al. Is that the right thing to do? Well, again, I AGREE that Brad is a walking timebomb as far as injuries go, and that Al has a lot of upside (although probably not as much as optimistic Pacers fans think), so I AGREE that letting Brad walk and holding onto Al is the way to go. If only Walsh had let Croshere walk that summer, he'd be able to re-sign Brad easily this summer. Yet ANOTHER example of how overpaying for talent ALWAYS comes back to haunt you in the end. It WILL come back to haunt the Spurs (they TOTALLY overpaid for Nesterovic), you watch. People seem to forget that the Spurs played ANY NUMBER OF GAMES without David Robinson this past season, and they still managed to finish with the best record in the NBA and they won a championship. Although the only way the Spurs beat L.A. is by having a big, capable body to throw at Shaq, because you don't want Duncan guarding Shaq, so, from that perspective, overpaying for Nesterovic wasn't the worst idea in the world, but my guess is that it'll prevent them from re-signing Ginobili next summer (watch it happen, fellas, I don't know if you heard it here first or not, but WATCH IT HAPPEN).

So yeah, I agree, the Pacers are better off letting Brad walk, but the short-term impact will be that Indy takes a temporary step back in the East, although they're still probably good enough to finish fifth or sixth in the conference. You guys need to really shoot for Al and Jonathan Bender making a lot of progress next season, and for ONE (if not both) of them to develop into stars or semi-stars over the next couple of years. Jermaine O'Neal is a good ballplayer, but he's going to need some help, obviously.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Okay so let me get this straight. We wouldn't trade Al for Gary Payton but we would be willing to trade him for Charlie Ward? :whofarted

Walsh and the Simons have stated that they are willing to go over the luxury tax if it means retaining our players or getting better.


Also re: to RobyG. You think we will finish *fifth or sixth*? It took basically a total collapse for us to finish third. Before and up to the all star break we were in the Mavericks and Kings neighborhood. Unfortunately we had some off the court (Jermaine's step dad trying to commit suicide and Tinsley's mother dying) and some on the court (Ron Artest) problems that basically shot our season to hell. If we have no problems and our coaches has somewhat of a consistent rotation then we should *at the least* go the finals. I think we could make it a series. There are very few teams in the league that have talent that can match us in the front court. No one in the East comes close. If we get consistency from Tinsley and veteran leadership from Reggie we could challenge for a title.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

Robyg: Awesome post, I agree with 99 percent of it. I especially agree that overpaying for talent ALWAYS comes back to haunt you. That's why the reason I don't think we should re-sign Brad is not that it will put us into luxury tax territory, though it will, but simply because IMO he is not worth 8 million a year. If we sign him we will not be players in the free-agent market for years.

The only thing I disagree with is your prediction of where we will finish next season. I think our collapse after the all-star break was due to 4 factors including the two you mentioned.

1. Off-court problems hurting the play of Tinsley and O'Neal
2. On-court problems of players like Artest
3. Brad Miller's injuries made him not contribute very much.
4. Isiah Thomas being an idiot and not giving enough playing time to Bender and Harrington. Then with Brad ineffective in the playoffs, these guys didn't have the experience to step up when we needed them.

Let's say we lose Brad, then all these problems except for the third one can and will be solved so we will be much better than we were in the second half of the season. However we won't have Brad who was a big part of us starting out 37-15, so we won't dominate the East either.

Next year I see the Nets and Pistons fighting for first seed, us and the Magic fighting for third seed, and a huge dropoff after that because the Sixers and Hornets both got worse. We will make the second round, and maybe the conference finals if we are lucky to play the Pistons and not the Nets in the second round. We won't be fifth or sixth seed but I really don't think we have better than an outside shot to go to the Finals this year. In 2004-05 though we will be one of the favorites to win the title, bank on it.


----------



## Tactics (Mar 6, 2003)

I personally think it will be better if Brad walks now, I'm so worried about overpaying him and he injuries coming back to haunt us. I just think if he leaves it may open up more oppurtunities for our team and although he was an All-Star I don't think it will hurt us incredibly bad. I think we will do alot better then a 5th or 6th seed, probably a 1 or a 2, with Jermaine's new found determination and with Bird in office we a re in a good position to make the finals and I know JO will be angry if we make another first round exit.


----------



## TLR (May 28, 2003)

Rather we resign Brad or not we would still have the same amount of money to spend in FA. Remember we have Jermaine, Bender, Artest, Harrington, Foster, and Croshere tied up in long term deals. so all we would have is the MLE for the next few years anyway rather we sign Brad to 7.5 or 8 mill a year. I am in favor of signing him because he makes Jermaine more effective and he is a decent center which is something that no one else in the east (besides Jersey if Mourning is healthy) Name a center not named Shaq that is better than Brad. I can't think of any.


----------



## jreywind (May 30, 2003)

The real issue in all of this is whether or not the Pacers will cross the luxury tax threshold. If not I don't think the Pacers will sign Brad. To be honest I think it is ridiculous to think the Pacers would finish any lower than 3rd in the conference even without Brad. There is just too much talent there and no one in the East has a good center anyway. With Brad we can play with the West, but without him the Pacers can still match up with anyone in the East.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

As I just said in another post, you can not take an all-star center for granite these days in the NBA. Great centers are very scarce in the NBA now, we are lucky to have Brad. So why not spent a little money on him?


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

Some of you make very good points about dealing Harrington for Ward, but here's a quote from Larry Bird in today's paper Indy Star.

"I guarantee you that won't happen," he said, about the NYP rumor.

I'll take his word for it.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

From hoopsworld.com...

_NOT GONNA HAPPEN: The New York Post ran a rumor suggesting the Indiana Pacers were consider a trade to send Al Harrington to the Knicks in a package deal including Charlie Ward. The Post covered many ideas in the article, but Larry Bird the head of basketball operations for the Pacers clarified for media "I guarantee you that won't happen,"_


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MillerTime</b>!
> Some of you make very good points about dealing Harrington for Ward, but here's a quote from Larry Bird in today's paper Indy Star.
> 
> "I guarantee you that won't happen," he said, about the NYP rumor.
> ...


wow, I cant believe we had the same idea to post that lol.


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Xavier8</b>!
> 
> 
> wow, I cant believe we had the same idea to post that lol.


lol

Great minds think alike


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

> I personally think it will be better if Brad walks now, I'm so worried about overpaying him and he injuries coming back to haunt us. I just think if he leaves it may open up more oppurtunities for our team and although he was an All-Star I don't think it will hurt us incredibly bad. I think we will do alot better then a 5th or 6th seed, probably a 1 or a 2, with Jermaine's new found determination and with Bird in office we a re in a good position to make the finals and I know JO will be angry if we make another first round exit.


But if we let Brad walk, then Foster is starting (there goes any offense at the center position) and Brezec is the back up. Do I need to repeat, BREZEC! Then if one of them gets hurt, Jermaine will have to play center, where he is less efective. I think we'd be better off, however, trading Brad for Sabonis because Sabonis would do great in the east and make a great duo with O'neal. Sabonis would be a Smits replacement.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> 
> 
> But if we let Brad walk, then Foster is starting (there goes any offense at the center position) and Brezec is the back up. Do I need to repeat, BREZEC! Then if one of them gets hurt, Jermaine will have to play center, where he is less efective. I think we'd be better off, however, trading Brad for Sabonis because Sabonis would do great in the east and make a great duo with O'neal. Sabonis would be a Smits replacement.


From what I have heard lately I am now convinced we absolutly need Brad to make it to make it past the first round next year. With Foster starting and Brezec being a backup that means every decent center in the east will dominate us.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

If Brad leaves I think Primoz Brezec will get more minutes during garbage time, but that's about it. Instead of Brezec playing backup center we would rotate JO to center when Foster sits down, and one of Harrington, Bender, or Croshere would play the 4 spot. Yeah it's not the best but it's better than giving quality minutes to the most worthless player in the NBA.


----------



## RP McMurphy (Jul 17, 2003)

One more thing, losing Brad doesn't mean we lose in the first round. The only teams in the East with good centers are the Pistons, the Cavs, the Bulls, and maybe the Nets if Mourning is healthy. We'll be too good to face the Nets and Pistons in the first round and even if we face the Cavs or the Bulls we're so much better than them at the other positions that a mismatch in the middle won't kill us. I think if we keep Brad and don't trade anyone for cap room we go to the finals, but Walsh doesn't want to pay the luxury tax so we won't do that. Without Brad we lose to the Nets, probably beat the Pistons and Magic, and destroy the rest of the East. If we can do that while finally developing our young talent I'll be happy with our season.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ArtestFan</b>!
> If Brad leaves I think Primoz Brezec will get more minutes during garbage time, but that's about it. Instead of Brezec playing backup center we would rotate JO to center when Foster sits down, and one of Harrington, Bender, or Croshere would play the 4 spot. Yeah it's not the best but it's better than giving quality minutes to the most worthless player in the NBA.


The only problem I have with that is JO playing center. If Foster or O'Neal was to get injured our front court would be horrid


----------



## PacersguyUSA (Sep 1, 2002)

Not to mention that Jermaine is less effective at the C.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PacersguyUSA</b>!
> Not to mention that Jermaine is less effective at the C.


Also not to mention all Foster can do is rebound.


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Let's just hope that B.Miller stays with Pacers.


----------



## Xavier8 (Jun 13, 2003)

lol love the new avatar Unbreakable


----------



## DaUnbreakableKinG (Jun 28, 2003)

Thank you Xavier8


----------

