http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1837655 Ex-Hawk brings shooting, experience ESPN.com Stephen Jackson has agreed to a six-year, $39 million contract with the Indiana Pacers, a source close to Jackson told ESPN Insider's Chad Ford. The Pacers will use their entire mid-level exception to sign Jackson. Indiana has been looking for some athleticism and perimeter shooting in their backcourt and Jackson, who has championship experience with the Spurs, can provide both. Jackson averaged 18.1 points, 4.6 rebounds and 3.1 assists per game last season in his only campaign as a Hawk. That followed his breakout season in San Antonio, where he averaged 11.8 points per game for the 2002-03 NBA champions. Jackson's forthcoming signing may trigger another deal for the Pacers. The team has been trying for weeks to move Al Harrington in an effort to clear enough money under the luxury tax threshold to sign a free agent. With Jackson agreeing to terms, Harrington likely will be moved to a team with enough cap room to swallow his deal. ### So Jackson gets the FULL MLE from the Pacers. Great deal for the Pacers. One of their BIG problems last year was outside shooting and here they get a good outside shooter to spread the court. Now more than ever this deal means that they are going to move some of their small forwards. Al Harrington, Bender, Artest, Croshere, and now Jackson. They are loaded. I actually think that the FULL MLE for Jackson is a good deal "value wise". I really thought he was going to get MORE than the FULL MLE. That last sentence of the article is interesting. Do the Pacers really just want to dump Harrington? Would the Rockets be interested in bringing him in with their T.E.?
That would be awesome! Does anyone else have a TE? If not sounds like a no brainer. Maybe they could package Harrington and Tinsley together for the TE.
I am not sure anyone else has a T.E. as large as ours. Harrington's salary comes in at 6.2M. However, any team UNDER the cap can also be in play including Atlanta, Denver, Charlotte etc. I would be happy just to get Harrington. We dont need to get greedy with Tinsley. Harrington falling into our lap would be a huge coup!
Wasn't Pacers trying to move Artest? I am more interested in Artest. However, Harrington can play both F position which is a plus.
I'm shocked at how gung ho GM's have become on handing out 6 year deals. They have to know something that the fans don't know. There must be some change coming to the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Is it possible they'll be eliminating guarenteed contracts soon?
0n ESPN bottom line, it said that "ESPN's Ric Bucher reports that Stephen Jackson resigns with Hawks and then will be traded to Pacers for Al Harrington."
http://www.indystar.com/articles/3/161604-1583-036.html Sign and trade: Jackson on way Pacers deal Harrington to Hawks The Indiana Pacers are close to a sign-and-trade agreement with Atlanta that would send Al Harrington to the Hawks for Stephen Jackson. The deal cannot become official until Wednesday, but Jackson and other league sources confirmed Saturday it is in the works. "We're close and hopefully it will be done soon," Jackson told The Star on Saturday from his home in Port Arthur, Texas. "I'm definitely hoping it works out." Jackson reportedly will sign a six-year contract worth $44 million with Atlanta and then be traded to the Pacers for Harrington, who has two years and $13.3 million left on his contract. For the Pacers, the trade would alleviate an overcrowded situation at forward and add perimeter scoring and versatility. Jackson, 26, averaged 18.1 points for the Hawks last season, his fourth in the NBA. He was a starting shooting guard on San Antonio's championship team two years ago, and averaged 12.8 points in the playoffs. Harrington, 24, averaged 13.3 points in the regular season and 9.5 in the playoffs for the Pacers last season. He was runner-up to Dallas' Antawn Jamison for Sixth Man of the Year, but his desire to start led him to ask for a trade. Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh declined to comment on the trade until it becomes official. "We've had discussions," Walsh said. "I'm not going to confirm or deny a deal." Harrington was unavailable for comment, as were his agent, Andy Miller, and Jackson's agent, Dan Fegan. Jackson, however, is already envisioning how he'll fit in with the Pacers next season. "I see myself coming in with a championship under my belt and bringing some attitude and passion for the game," he said. The acquisition of Jackson will fuel speculation that he will replace Reggie Miller at starting shooting guard. Jackson said he is willing to play as a reserve. "I'll leave it up to the coaches," he said. "I'm coming in wanting to learn from Reggie. I have nothing but respect for Reggie. If I come in off the bench behind Reggie I'll be happy." The 6-8 Jackson listed the Pacers, San Antonio and Atlanta as his preferences after negotiations for free agents opened July 1. San Antonio, however, took itself out of the running by agreeing to terms with Manu Ginobili and Brent Barry. Jackson met with Pacers officials in September when he was a free agent, but they did not want to risk paying the luxury tax at the time. He was paid $1 million by the Hawks last season. The Pacers' chances of working a deal for Jackson were enhanced last week when the Hawks hired Mike Woodson as their coach instead of Pacers associate head coach Mike Brown. Brown worked with Jackson for two seasons in San Antonio, and the two have remained close. "I learned more about basketball, about being a teammate on and off the court, from coach Brown," Jackson said. He also is comfortable with Pacers coach Rick Carlisle. "We have a great relationship," Jackson said. "That's another blessing."
O well we didnt need harrington anyway. Too undersized to play the 4 and doesnt have any range to play the 3, which would be bad since we need spacing for yao.
GREAT move by the Hawks. Was it cap concerns in Indy? Al H was supposedly worth the #3 pick in this year's draft.
No cap concerns. Chicago would NOT give the #3 up for Harrington. Reggie is running on fumes and a youthful SG with size to play D was ESSENTIAL. McGrady fell through, Barry (though older) went to SA, and the price was too high for Pirece and Ray Allen. Atlanta and Jackson's agent apparently convinced Indiana that there were other sign-and-trade suitors for Jackson, and that Indiana could not get him for the MLE alone. Hence Atlanta gets Harrington for essentially giving Jackson a tiny boost in salary above the MLE (6 years, 44 mill instead of 6 years 39 mill). ESPN insider says that Indiana wants to keep the MLE to split between 2 players, a PG and a C. The Harrington-Jackson deal only save the Pacers $750,000 or so for next year, and they still have about the 5th highest payroll in the league in one of the smaller markets. Good trade for Atlanta since they gave up little (Jackson wasn't staying there) and good trade for Indy since it balances their roster and lifts the glut at the 3, now Artest-Bender. They think when healthy Bender will produce as much as Harrington anyway. It would be nice if the Pacer also get a protected draft pick, so that Atlanta is sacrificing something besides cap room. Harringon's demand for a trade certainly decreased his value above normal for a 13/6 SF/PF who's only 24. He may well put up Zach Randolph numbers in Atlanta, and Jackson won't score 18 ppg in Indy. If Indy actually uses the MLE to sign a backup PG of significance (Damon Jones, Troy Hudson) or a backup C (??) then they will have done very well with this trade, though, becaude they filled glaring needs.
This deal still confuses me. Assuming the Rockets were willing to part with their TE and a draft pick for Harrington, why wouldn't Indiana consider doing that. They then clear up the cap space to sign Jackson outright, still have the MLE and make out with an extra draft pick (potentially first round lottery protected, the way the Rockets hand those out). Am I missing something?
I agree. The only thing I could think of is that Harrington wouldn't want to come to the Rockets. With Howard and Taylor, that doesn't leave much playtime nor a starting position for him. In Atlanta he would in theory get both.
I think this trade is OK for both teams, probably a little better for Atlanta in getting Harrington because it's tougher to find quality big men than it is finding a SG. I know Harrington has asked for a trade, but I think the Pacers could have done better. I like Harrington's overall game. He's got a variety of low post moves and can handle the ball pretty well. At 6'9" he is a little undersized for a PF, but nevertheless is a tough defender in the Ron Artest mold and can defend 3 positions well. However, like Jackson he can be a selfish offensive player. I don't have the stats, but I bet he ranked up there in terms of shots per minute. I guess it's because his limits were limited as the 6th man, but he definitely jacked up the shots last season. This might be Reggie Miller's last year with the Pacers, but even without Reggie the Pacers have a log jam at SG with Bender and Fred Jones around. Intended or not, this move suggests that the Pacers don't feel that Jones or Bender can carry the torch once Miller retires. Despite the fact that Bender has been in the league 4 years now, I still think he could develop into a stud at the 2. He's only 22 and has crazy skills for someone his height. With Jackson there the Pacers will again limit his development, but what the hell do I know? If I were Donnie Walsh I would have tried to package do a sign and trade for someone like Dampier. I know the guy was playing for a new contract last year, but he is a true center and great shot blocker. He's got a good low post game as well. Plus, last year was the only I can remember that he didn't have to split his minutes with Foyle (due to Foyle's injury). Jeff Foster and Scot Pollard are serviceable, but a frontcourt of Artest, Dampier and O'Neal would have been awesome.
Yes. The Pacers are WAY over the cap (>15 million), and trading Harrington for nothing would still leave then way over the cap, and unable to offer more than the MLE.
I see. It doesn't make any sense to me that a team that is way over the cap should be able to trade for another player in such a manner thus enabling them to make a move they want to do while retaining the MLE - I mean, what is the cap for if you can be way over it? Same rules for everyone though, so no biggie. From a player perspective, do you think the Pacers are spending the money wisely?
