Phx-Suns.Net

Losing Myles Turner is a big blow for Indy. I wonder if they will call Ayton? They wanted him before.

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:39 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:21 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:15 pm

Lol, of course it’s Jason Quick. He’s hated him since he got there.

I don’t even need to read past the first sentence to know he’s not serious: “See, the Blazers could live with Ayton missing shots or his man scoring on him.”

He scored 14.4 ppg on 56.6FG% last season. Meanwhile, Jerami Grant scored 14.4 ppg on 37.3FG%. I know who I would rather pay.

Please keep reading and respond to him showing up late, skipping rehab, and throwing tantrums. Portland would rather pay the guy that doesn’t do that crap. He’s never changed, same guy who failed a drug test and missed the start of an nba game because he forgot to take his Covid test…just an unserious basketball player. Mind boggling how you can’t see that…but I guess it’s because you stop reading at the first sentence.

Like I said, Quick has always been biased against him. Who knows how much of that is exaggerated. In the old days of real journalism, “a team source” was not enough to report something, unless a second source could confirm it.

If he’s biased against Ayton are you biased towards him? You always have an excuse for him, it’s kind of weird.

"Quick has always been biased against him"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:43 am

"Quick has always been biased against him"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

It’s not an ad hominem—it’s saying he can’t be trusted as a journalist period. Check my Reddit link—he’s literally been writing hit pieces against players he doesn’t like or has a personal vendetta against for over 20 years.

iLLmatic wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:36 am

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:39 pm

Split T wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:21 pm

JeremyG wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 30, 2025 9:15 pm

Lol, of course it’s Jason Quick. He’s hated him since he got there.

I don’t even need to read past the first sentence to know he’s not serious: “See, the Blazers could live with Ayton missing shots or his man scoring on him.”

He scored 14.4 ppg on 56.6FG% last season. Meanwhile, Jerami Grant scored 14.4 ppg on 37.3FG%. I know who I would rather pay.

Please keep reading and respond to him showing up late, skipping rehab, and throwing tantrums. Portland would rather pay the guy that doesn’t do that crap. He’s never changed, same guy who failed a drug test and missed the start of an nba game because he forgot to take his Covid test…just an unserious basketball player. Mind boggling how you can’t see that…but I guess it’s because you stop reading at the first sentence.

Like I said, Quick has always been biased against him. Who knows how much of that is exaggerated. In the old days of real journalism, “a team source” was not enough to report something, unless a second source could confirm it.

If he’s biased against Ayton are you biased towards him?

Yes. 100%. Duh. It’s called being a fan of a player. I am not a journalist. If I were a journalist I would disclose that.

It’s unethical journalism to be biased for or against a player, not disclose your bias, let it permeate your articles, and pretend you are being objectively factual. But that describes much of what passes for “journalism” nowadays in general.

TOO wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:13 am

I expect the Pacers to get in on Ayton now that Turner left. They've always liked him can probably get him on a fair deal.

Could happen. I saw the Pacers refused to offer Turner more than $20M.

So are we signing Lillard then?

What a downfall for Indiana…win game 6 of the finals to force game 7, then lose your star player to an Achilles tear…then lose your starting C to the team you beat 2 years in a row, and now you might sign Deandre Ayton?

Hard to imagine a worse chain of events

Yo Pacers, Nick Richards right there for the taking, couple 2nds should do it.

Richards to Indy does make a lot of sense now.

Honestly, Pacers got their pick back, they should just suck and get a decent pick. Maybe sell Siakim to highest bidder if he ain’t down. Just do a reset.

Ya they probably should throw the season like the Celtics are. Richards wouldn’t hurt that plan

Yea the Pacers aren't trying to win. They might as well tank next season, get a top pick and then get Hali back.

Gotta find a team trying to compete that thinks Richards can really help them. If the Lakers get spurned by DA, they'd be desperate but then we'd be helping the Lakers. The Hawks have Okongwu and got KP but might need a big body.

I don't think the Pacers are in "tanking" territory. I really think fans are too quick to decide that a team should tank just because they probably aren't a title favorite. They're missing Haliburton, but they have one of the best guard rotations to handle such an absence. They can run the point through Nembhard and McConnell and should be mostly okay. And they're bringing back all of their top-10 guys so far other than Turner, who they can now prioritize finding a replacement for. I don't think they can win a title next year, but they can certainly make the playoffs and be a frisky team nobody wants to play in the 1st round. That would be much better for them than giving up just because Hali is going to be hurt.

I’m suggesting a 1 year tank. They don’t need to give up…just focus on development this year for Mathurin, Walker, etc. Don’t make moves to try and secure a playoff spot. Just be fine if you fall outside. Get a late lotto/mid 1st and then make your moves next summer when Hali is healthy.

I just don't see why you tank when your team can still be a top-5 or top-6 seed in the East easily. I get that they could get a better draft pick, but I just don't think you want to take the hit that tanking gives to the morale and competitiveness of the players unless they were already going to be bad.

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:59 pm

I just don't see why you tank when your team can still be a top-5 or top-6 seed in the East easily. I get that they could get a better draft pick, but I just don't think you want to take the hit that tanking gives to the morale and competitiveness of the players unless they were already going to be bad.

It works for the Spurs.

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:59 pm

I just don't see why you tank when your team can still be a top-5 or top-6 seed in the East easily. I get that they could get a better draft pick, but I just don't think you want to take the hit that tanking gives to the morale and competitiveness of the players unless they were already going to be bad.

I don't know...Cleveland, NY, Orlando, and Detroit seem solid. ATL and Milwaukee should be in the mix. Philly's a wildcard with their health. The Pacers could be a scrappy "star-less" team under Carlisle but it's an uphill battle without Hali and Turner.

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 01, 2025 12:59 pm

I just don't see why you tank when your team can still be a top-5 or top-6 seed in the East easily. I get that they could get a better draft pick, but I just don't think you want to take the hit that tanking gives to the morale and competitiveness of the players unless they were already going to be bad.

I guess I disagree they could easily be a top 5-6 seed. They lost two of their top 3 guys.

That roster is Nembhard/Mathurin/Nesmith/Siakam/Toppin?

They don’t have a Center. It’s decent, but that’s a play-in team. And again, I’m not saying you lose on purpose…just don’t make moves to try and secure a 1st round exit. Just pick up a stop gap 5. Play the young guys. Don’t stress if you finish 9th.

Almost all the biggest FA signings seemed to be in the West.