04-15-2023, 08:34 PM
(04-15-2023, 08:12 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: I’ve followed this line of thinking from its inception. I don’t see how it’s a win for the Pacers if they aren’t getting their asking price.
Maybe it was a deal to make him happy to stay and keep Ind’s payroll low so as to be able to use the money to go shopping? We have no clue, but ever since there have been nonstop trades proposed as if your scenario is true.
Turner and Haliburton look legit together, and Turner has the increased role he was asking for. Just so little evidence to say one way or another.
Cause the Pacers have no asking price as long as Turner does not sign that extension. Turner is a FA and can leave for NOTHING. Pacers used the unique situation of being so far under the salary floor that they could basically pay Turner a "signing" bonus.
We don´t know the underlying conditions of the extension. Obviously the Pacers and Turner will not come out and admit they have this pre-arranged trade agreement, which is at best a grey area in the CBA or highly illegal. Only the Mavs would be that stupid.
One argument to be made for such an virtual S&T agreement is that Turner got a $17M bonus, that otherwise would have been equally distributed between the whole roster. So basically Turner "stole" $1.1M from every player on the roster with his extension. At least a little awkward situation going into next season, unless you are not there anymore.
I agree with you that only under these circumstances, you get him for a 1st + Bertans.
Overall trade proposal are always driven by fan bias. Nothing to see there.