've talked to a couple people - one from the Pacers camp and another from the Nuggets camp - this morning and both sides say point guard Jamaal Tinsley has not been traded to Denver for point guard Chucky Atkins and center Steven Hunter as reported by the New York Post.
"We're not going to comment on any trade rumors involving our players," Bird said through a team spokesperson this morning.
If there's no deal at the moment, it doesn't mean things can't change between the two teams later today, tomorrow or some time next week. Remember the Jermaine to Toronto deal?
The deal, if true, would have pushed the Pacers roster up to 17 players.
The Pacers have talked to the Nuggets, along with just about every other team in the NBA, about Tinsley, but they've yet to be able to come up with a deal.
Oh man having Tinsley start at the point for us would be AMAZING, but I highly doubt the nuggets would want to take on that contract of his.
taking tinsley could only be done if it moves iverson- nugs shouldnt want a 2 little guys backcourt- either iverson as the one little guy or trade for a pg, not both or you take away the advantage the nugs have w athletes at the 2-4 (jr,ruben,kleiza,carmelo,kmart,balkman)- always having 3 of those 6 would make it hard for any team to match up w- to me it seems like when you play iverson w another little gaurd it give one of the opposing players a night off
to me the only way we end up w tinsley (whos three year contract shouldnt bother us w kenyon & jr also expiring that year) is tinsley & troy murphy for iverson- (i think it would be really great to get dunleavy for atkins& hunter added to make it 3 for 3)
im all for this sqaud i just dont think karl will use it
iverson
jr
carmelo
kmart
nene
smush/ac
ruben
kleiza- 6
balkman
hunter
that team is physically imposing at the 2&3 and athletic (& shallow) at the 4&5- i think smush could be an effective pg running w the second unit of kleiza as the other bench scorer- ruben,balkan, & maybe hunter bring the d?? not a badly put together second unit
nobody else is trying to score 140 a game- why not take the opportuntity to be that team and just start steamrolling people- the key to it imo is not pairing a pg w iverson- let iverson, jr, melo, & smush fill the role- dont give iverson a defensive bodygaurd and use ac as more than a 10 min a game type defensive gaurd
Camby is one of the best, if not the best, running bigs in the nba so while his shot isn't that great, he gets down the court with the best of them which leads to offense.
But regardless, I'll take a pure defense team over a pure offense team 10 times out of 10. Offense wins games, defense wins championships. Last years finals is a perfect example of that.
8.4 assists per game, 11.9 points last year. He would be perfect point guard.
Losing Atkins aint big deal. The guy spends most of his time injured.Altho Tinsley doesnt seem much better when it comes to injuries. he had many half seasons(3 out of last 4)
Only T-mac, kOBE, Lebron, Wade are as good or better then AI & Melo. WE Have two of them, and JR.Smith & Kleiza on the bench(INSANE). Tinsley running the point guard. ITS All too good. Just makes me wonder,if Tinsley comes will we see Melo as Power forward many times(One of Nene, K-mart injured)???
How about this line-up?
Melo'll have a tough time guarding 4's though its not like he's undersized
Tinsley
Iverson
Smith
Melo
Nene
carmelo playing the 4 is a terrible idea- it would encourage him to take bigger defenders out to the perimeter instead of smaller ones to the basket- probobly good on the video games but not real basketball- that is one of the things i am worried about w having 3 sf's as your backup pf's (kleiza,melo,balkman)??
tinsley should be sixth man if the ai & smith backcourt works- lets remember tinsley is a big upgrade of talent over ac not jr
Paguy's post Here summarizes the financial situation. WE almost lose nthg out if that deal happens. I hope we give it a go.
maybe Tinsley would come back healthy and play good. I doubt will ever see Atkins injury-free as well.
Holding Tinsley Deal Over Dollars Doesn't Make Sense
Indycornrowssmall_tiny by Cornrows on Oct 7, 2008 12:00 PM EDT in News
According to Peter Vecsey and Mike Wells, the Jamaal Tinsley-to-Denver trade is hung up over the Denver Nuggets' desire for additional cash considerations from the Indiana Pacers in order to offset some of the remaining salary left on Tinsley's 3-year contract. This can't possibly be the only issues remaining, can it? From Vecsey's Tuesday column:
Jamaal Tinsley trade is on hold while the Pacers and Nuggets argue over money. Denver demands $3 million to defray one-seventh of the locked-out point guard's 3-year obligation.
I have a hard time believing the Simons are holding this deal up over $3 million dollars. I'm not just diminishing the cash in someone else's bank account, either. Over the long term, the Pacers would still save money with this deal even if they kept Chucky Atkins and his remaining salary next year. If they don't keep Atkins there's even more savings available. Plus, Atkins and Steven Hunter are added to several other bargaining chips that are easier to deal with should the Pacers want to make more moves down the road.
If the Simons' reluctance to part with the $3 million is truly the only problem, it's time to put Slick Leonard to work. In the spirit of the turn-back-the-clock ABA-style game tomorrow night, it's time to relive the summer of 1977 and have Slick host another telethon to come up with enough money to help out the Simons. How much would you pay to help the Pacers move Jamaal?
Tinsley to Nuggets
