NBA News and Notes

Just wanted to throw in my two cents about some recent NBA news:

- LeBron James admits smoking pot in new book:

Does anyone really care? Are people not allowed to make mistakes? Especially not in high school? I've never done it, but I very well may be in the minority of people in my generation.
He also goes on to talk about how he and a small posse ruled the school and took advantage of his celebrity. He also discusses how he was arrogant when he annointed himself "The Chosen One", and that he had problems dealing with the "ravenous" media.

I don't care that BronBron put this in his book, because I'm sure it's true, but are people surprised by any of this? Shouldn't it be expected a 17-year-old is affected by these things and has not been the most humble guy? What can one honestly expect?

This whole thing is just the media trying once again to make a story out of nothing. Nothing.

- Pacers completely changing their point guard heirarchy

First of all, the Pacers have finally decided to waive Mr. Jamaal "Paid to Stay Away" Tinsley. This is a huge development, one that needs its own discussion point (conveniently found later in this post!). All I will say right now is that I'm glad that the situation is over, although I really wish it would've happened earlier.

Also, there are some rumors going around, and they could be extremely unbased in truth, that Mr. Ford could be traded away. This is exciting on 2 fronts: (a) it means that the Pacers have finally realized that Ford doesn't get the offensive system Jim O'Brien runs, and (2) hopefully, it means the Pacers are trying to find a quality PG replacement for him, especially after losing restricted free agent Jarrett Jack to the Raptors.

Let's take a look at Ford - he is 5'10" (maybe) and has an extremely slight build. He is extremely quick, with a good handle but limited shooting ability. His problem with the Pacers is that he tends the pound the ball for 20 seconds, then drive the lane and get his S- swatted into the 4th row by guys a foot taller than him. This is especially troubling because the Pacers offensive sets on based on ball movement and kicking it to the open perimeter shooter. If Ford hasn't gotten it yet, when is he? He's 26 now, been in the league for like 5 years. I'm sure that he was always, always the PG on his college, high school, AAU, middle school, and even 1st-grade church league team - if he hasn't figured out that the point guard's 1st, 2nd and 3rd job is to pass to open teammates, he ain't figuring it out!

Secondly, it's possible this means that Larry Bird is shopping for a PG replacement. There are two guys that are still available in free agency, and could potentially arrive via sign-and-trades: Ramon Sessions and Andre Miller. Both guys bring different things to the table, but both have lots to offer the Pacers. Sessions is young (25ish), athletic and is willing to pass the ball, but can talk the ball to the cup if the play breaks down. Miller is older (32ish), but is tough (played all 82 games 5 years in a row - has to be some kind of NBA record!), knows how to run an offense, and is absolutely perfectly suited to run this particular offense. He's not quick, but he's doesn't need to be. He's not a great defender, but he's doesn't need to be. It's a great fit. Apparently, both of these guys can be had for the MLE ($5M or so). C'mon Simon brothers, let's pony up! Wait, I take that back - if they can get rid of Ford (on the books for $8M I wanna say), they can probably get Ramon or Andre for less. Deal!

Of course, if they do trade Ford, maybe they aren't trying to replace him, and instead are just giving about-to-be-acquired Earl Watson the reins. Oh yeah, the Thunder waived Watson and the Pacers will sign him to a one-year deal as soon as he clears waivers. I like this pick up - it probably wasn't very costly, and Watson isn't allergic to defense, and likes passing and is better equipped to produce in an up-tempo offense than the average PG.

All in all, good work by the Pacers in upgrading the PG position, with even more improvement possible. Can't complain about that!

- Tinsley waived

Okay, so the conclusion that actually put an end to this saga was probably always bound to happen eventually, but I really think the Pacers have a legitimate gripe in the case. Let's review:

- 2001 Draft: Pacers trade for and draft Tinsley 27th overall
- 2001 - 2005: Plays well first 4ish years
- Summer '05: They re-sign him through 2011 to a big contract
- 2005 - 07: 3 separate off-the-court incidents
- About this same time: Starts getting injured and missing lots of games every year
- March '08: Has a fight with coach O'Brien in the film session and misses the rest of year with "nagging" injuries
- July '08: With 3 years and $21M left on contract, Tinsley misses entire 08-09 season after team disavows all knowledge of him and makes him stay away from practices and games
- Feb '09: Tinsley files grievance over Pacers not allowing him to play, hearing scheduled July 30 - July 22, 2009: Pacers officially waive Tinsley after buying him out for $10.5M of $14.7M left on contract. *The amount of money he made by doing nothing is exactly why people hate professional sports

So, let's analyze this from the Pacers angle - they have a hearing, they're worried they are going to lose the hearing. Understandable. But - what is the worst the judge is gonna make them do? He's gonna say that they have to let him play.

Okay, that's fine, the ways of doing that are: Playing him on the Pacers - they aren't going to allow that, and they can't be forced to do that - they would just waive him, like they just did; or, Trade him - this would be difficult, especially with the current timing, but I don't think any thing changes between now and after the hearing. They tried that last year but every deal fell through.

Those two options - trade him or eventually waive him - were the only possible outcomes if the Pacers lost the hearing. But that's what the Pacers did without going to the hearing. So the issue then is the cost of the buyout. The reports are that it was for about 70% of the total amount of the contract. Even if they were forced to pay the remainder by the judge if they lost, what's another $4M, after the rest of that money, plus the $7M you paid him to sit in his ATL mansion all last season? To me, the Pacers did what they would've had to do if they lost, so why not try and win?

What argument do the Pacers have? They have the 3 separate incidents of misconduct in regular society, and, as terrible as those issues were, I think the fact that he had a "disagreement" (read: verbal warfare) with management and then refused to play is more important to the case. This is an obvious breach of contract, where the player is refusing to do exactly what the contract asks him to do: listen to his superiors, and obviously, play. He wasn't doing that. And here's the thing - the Pacers were still paying him! It's not like they weren't allowing him to make a living! He can't complain financially, so what else does he have? He was saying that the Pacers weren't allowing him to play, and thus not allowing him to pursue future earning potential. Hey, if you're so worried about not getting paid after the final 2 years are up, maybe you should try to negotiate a release and then go start playing. To me, Tinsley was not demonstrating every attempt to continue to play.

Honestly, the Pacers could have won the case. I'm not a lawyer, but my cousin is, and I'm sure if I had ever talked to him about this, he would agree. Regardless, I'm glad they don't have to think about it any more, but I'm sure that the owners, Herb and Mel Simon, are not happy. This is not a good situation for a small-market team that lost a lot of money last year, but hopefully this is the year the Blue and Gold return to the playoffs and have an opportunity to start earning money again.

Maybe I'll go help out the team and buy a Danny Granger throwback. Maybe