Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

    Doesn't say for how many years, I assume 5 years.


    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...p-365255c.html


    New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
    NBA market watch

    Sunday, July 9th, 2006

    The first wave of free agency has gone pretty much as expected, with Ben Wallace leaving Detroit, LeBron James accepting an extension from the Cavaliers, Sam Cassell and Jason Terry staying in Clipper-land and Dallas, respectively, and New Orleans/Oklahoma City, willing to overpay to make a run at the playoffs. A look at some of the moves that will become official Wednesday, the first day teams can sign free agents:
    Big Ben to Chicago

    The Bulls haven't won a playoff series since Michael Jordan played in Chicago, but they're obviously in a win-now mode after agreeing to give Wallace $60 million over four seasons. His minutes, rebounds and blocked shots have decreased every season since 2002-03, he'll turn 32 in September and he had run-ins with Rick Carlisle, Larry Brown and Flip Saunders - all factors in Detroit's decision to make him a $46 million offer they knew he would refuse.

    "I didn't feel insulted," Wallace said. "But looking at the league and the market and what players are paid, I thought I could get more. I thought I deserved a little bit more, but I was never insulted by the offer. At the end of the day, who can say that they had an opportunity to turn down $46 million?"

    The Bulls used a good deal of their $15 million in cap space on Wallace. He'll provide energy, rebounds and no one is a better help-defender, so he'll fit perfectly into Scott Skiles' system. The Bulls have led the league in field-goal-percentage defense the last two seasons and are locks to make it three straight.

    But Wallace is an offensive liability. He doesn't attract double-teams, he's amazingly a worse foul shooter than Shaquille O'Neal, and he's such a non-factor at the offensive end, his team has to play four-on-five. In Detroit, it got to the point where the team's executives, coaches and players did not want Wallace touching the ball, except if he were blocking a shot or clearing the boards.

    Wallace won four Defensive Player of the Year awards, so it's not as if the Pistons won't miss him. But they may adjust better to his loss than most people think. And for everyone who has penciled the Bulls into the 2007 Eastern Conference Finals, here's something to remember: Wallace is coming from a team that had more accomplished scorers - Chauncey Billups, Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace - than what he will have surrounding him in Chicago.

    "The Bulls had problems scoring last season," said one Western Conference executive. "They still haven't addressed that area."

    Nor are they going to be able to solve that problem by dealing off some of their assets, including Ben Gordon and Andres Nocioni, for Kevin Garnett. Since the draft, the Timberwolves have told several teams, including Chicago, Seattle and New Jersey, that they are not going to trade Garnett. Once they had an agreement with Wallace, the Bulls were out of the Al Harrington sweepstakes. To get something more than the mid-level exception, starting at around $5.1 mil, Harrington and Bonzi Wells will have to be part of sign-and-trades.

    Staying home becomes popular

    The Mavs and Clippers couldn't afford to lose their top free agents - and they didn't.

    Terry was Dallas' second-leading scorer at 17.1 points per game and, until Game 6 of the Finals, had a better series against Miami than Dirk Nowitzki had. Although Terry will turn 29 in September, he was regarded as the signing priority in Dallas, so Mark Cuban signed off on a six-year deal worth $50 million.

    The Clippers will continue to need Cassell's leadership to improve on their strong playoff showing. So it was imperative to retain him, as they did with a two-year agreement worth around $13 million. They lost Vladimir Radmanovic to the Lakers, but replaced him with Tim Thomas. That's a wash.

    Two high-profile members of the great 2003 draft class, Miami's Dwyane Wade and Denver's Carmelo Anthony, also agreed to extend for the maximum (five years, $80 million). But James made the Cavs sweat before inking a five-year, $80 million deal yesterday with Cleveland.

    The feeling among some executives is that James wanted to make sure the Cavs were committed to making the necessary changes that ensure him the best chance of winning. That won't be easy. The Cavs revamped their roster last offseason and don't have a lot of movable pieces. But James seemed comfortable yesterday with the direction of the franchise.

    "I am very excited and happy to be re-signing with the Cavaliers. Staying in Cleveland . . . provides me with the unique opportunity to continue to play in front of my family, friends and fans," James said in a statement. "I look forward to working toward bringing a championship to our great fans and the city of Cleveland."

    Hornets open the vault

    They'll never be confused with the Knicks, whose luxury-tax bill of $52 million exceeds several teams' entire payrolls, but the Hornets did emerge as the one team that decided to overpay for talent this summer. Now Chris Paul has a better scoring option to get the ball to, in Peja Stojakovic, even if it means that the Hornets have to slow down their offense.

    According to one Indiana official, the Pacers were "blown away" that the Hornets gave Stojakovic a five-year, $64 million deal after he bowed out of the Nets series with a knee injury and added to his reputation of failing to deliver in the postseason. Ever conscious of the luxury tax, the Pacers were willing to go up to $46 million for Stojakovic. So they ended up getting nothing in return for Ron Artest, whom they dealt to Sacramento to acquire Stojakovic before the trade deadline. Now they're looking at Harrington or Wells, who are among the last of the top free agents in a weak field.

    The Hornets were $18 million under the projected $51 million cap, so they had more than enough for Stojakovic and Memphis' Bobby Jackson. Their $17 million deal (over three years) was more than the Kings or anyone else was willing to give Jackson. And as if you needed more proof that they're willing to throw money around, they took on Tyson Chandler's bloated contract ($54 million over five years) in sending off P.J. Brown, with one year left on his deal, to Chicago. That's a move straight out of Isiah Thomas' playbook.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

    I think $46 million for 5 years would have been a good deal for us, alas the Hornets came with a "slightly" better () offer.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

      http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/s...printstory.jsp

      On the NBA | Debunking free-agency myths

      By David Aldridge
      Inquirer Columnist

      Conventional wisdom is conventional for a reason: It's easy. Doesn't require any deep thinking. Often, it's correct, but many times, it's just lazy.

      We try very hard around here not to just blithely accept the CW, whether it's about politics, movies or sports. And in our neck of the woods, the first week of free agency offers the opportunity to either accept the NBACW being thrown around, or see things differently.

      We always believe in differently.

      NBACW: Detroit is grievously wounded over the loss of center Ben Wallace to division rival Chicago, and will fall to the back of the pack next season.

      Don't buy it. Losing Wallace hurts the Pistons; there's no doubting that. Few teams took their emotional cue from a single player as the Pistons did from Wallace. He was the linchpin of Detroit's half-court defense, making OK but not great defenders such as Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton look better than they were.

      But Detroit might have lost Wallace at exactly the right time.

      He clearly did not mesh with coach Flip Saunders, despite what the local media in Detroit tried to sell as isolated incidents. The Pistons imploded against the Heat in the Eastern Conference finals because they had no answer for Dwyane Wade, but also because Wallace checked out emotionally for much of the series.

      Going forward, the Pistons were going to be more of an offensive team; that's Saunders' specialty. And with the new rules and enforcement of same tilting the balance toward offense, they probably had no choice, anyway. With Billups, Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace and Antonio McDyess, Detroit's top five players are excellent one-on-one scorers. Ben Wallace doesn't fit that description, by a long shot.

      Now, Saunders is freed up to use all five players on offense. And team president Joe Dumars won't have $15 million annually tied up in an aging, one-dimensional center.

      If Dumars goofed in 2003 by taking Darko Milicic second overall, it's not because he should have taken Carmelo Anthony; it's because he should have taken Chris Bosh, or Chris Kaman, or somebody he could now plug in to replace Ben Wallace. But that's hindsight. With foresight, it says here, the Pistons still will win 50 games next season and be a factor in the playoffs.

      NBACW: LeBron James will agree to a contract extension and stay in Cleveland.

      This one happened. James agreed yesterday, but what in blazes took so long?

      NBACW: The Mavericks will stand pat for the most part and won't touch the core group that got to the Finals.

      Maybe. So why are they trying so hard to get Kenyon Martin from Denver?

      They won't be able to acquire Martin for D.J. Mbenga, let's just put it that way.

      You hear that the Nuggets are interested and wouldn't mind dealing Martin within the Western Conference. The problem is that Denver covets Jerry Stackhouse in return, and Dallas is loath to move its aggressive sixth man in any deal at the moment. The Mavericks did just get Austin Croshere from Indiana for Marquis Daniels, but they can't trade Croshere again as part of a package for two months under existing rules.

      (You also hear that even though Nenê has agreed to a contract extension in Denver, it's not guaranteed that he might not ultimately be moved by the Nuggets. But that's another story.)

      NBACW: Free-agent guard MikeJames, the best point guard available this summer, will end up with Houston, Dallas or Minnesota.

      Could be true. But don't forget one other team: Miami, which is making an effort to repatriate James to South Florida, where he broke into the league as an undrafted free agent in 2001.

      The Heat have at least a puncher's chance for four reasons:

      1. Miami's now the defending champion, and never discount that as a factor for a player.

      2. James immensely enjoyed playing for Pat Riley when he was with the Heat and often has said that Riley helped him believe he could play in the league.

      3. With Gary Payton on his last legs, Miami needs a third guard to rotate with Wade and Jason Williams.

      4. The Heat owe James' agent, Bill Duffy, a monster favor.

      Three years ago, Duffy's office failed to inform the Heat that his client, then-Heat guard Anthony Carter, wanted to exercise a player option in his contract. That mistake cleared more than $4 million in unexpected cap room for the Heat that summer, which allowed Miami to make a play for Clippers free-agent forward Lamar Odom.

      Odom signed with Miami. And without Odom, there's no way the Heat could have put together a package attractive enough to the Lakers to acquire Shaquille O'Neal in the summer of 2004.

      General managers rarely forget when player agents help them out, willingly or unwillingly. Lord knows Duffy probably hasn't.

      NBACW: The Hawks will execute a sign-and-trade with free-agent forward Al Harrington, either to the Pacers or, perhaps, to the 76ers.

      Problem: A Maryland judge who's handling the ownership dispute between the team's current owners and forced-out owner Steve Belkin ruled Thursday that the Hawks (and their NHL cousin Thrashers) can execute only one-year contracts with players until the final decision on who runs the team is made.

      That wasn't a problem with existing negotiations such as those with free-agent guard Speedy Claxton, who agreed to a contract in Atlanta earlier in the week. But it might well make it near impossible to trade Harrington for anything approaching market value, since the Hawks could take back only players with a year remaining on their deals.

      For example, it would be impossible for Atlanta, if it so desired, to get Jamaal Tinsley (who has five seasons left on his contract) or Stephen Jackson (four seasons) - two players the Pacers have been shopping - in any sign-and-trade for Harrington.

      The Hawks' universe would be limited to veterans such as Lakers center Chris Mihm, Bucks forward Joe Smith, Knicks forward Mo Taylor, and Grizzlies guard Eddie Jonesin potential sign-and-trade deals.


      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

        Originally posted by Mourning
        I think $46 million for 5 years would have been a good deal for us, alas the Hornets came with a "slightly" better () offer.
        It was probably 46mil for four years. So it was almost the same amount of money per year, but for a shorter time.

        That would have been a good deal for Peja if Nawlins hadn't thrown crazy money at him, and about in line with what I'd expect the Pacers to offer.
        This space for rent.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

          Good for Peja that he got that money. Good for us. We made a reasonable offer. I'm glad NO came along and trumped us in a big way.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

            NBACW: The Hawks will execute a sign-and-trade with free-agent forward Al Harrington, either to the Pacers or, perhaps, to the 76ers.
            Well that's interesting that this source states it so matter-of-factly
            I wonder what their source is ?

            Edit: nevermind after reading the article I understand he was stating that Conventional Widsom was indicating that Al was going to one of these two teams but he believes that may not be the case...

            Why Not Us ?

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

              So is there anyone we can trade to ATL for AL? Maybe a scrub and some future draft picks?
              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                I hope for Cro's sake Dallas doesn't turn around and ship him back out.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                  Originally posted by Jon Theodore
                  So is there anyone we can trade to ATL for AL? Maybe a scrub and some future draft picks?
                  It is still possible to trade for a player that has a multi-year contract, the only catch is that the owner (I forget his name) who got the injunction, he has to approve it.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                    I'm glad somebody else is stating that the Bull's still have a lot of question marks going into this season. Listening to Chicago sports radio, you would think it was time to start drawing up the parade route.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                      Originally posted by McClintic Sphere
                      I'm glad somebody else is stating that the Bull's still have a lot of question marks going into this season. Listening to Chicago sports radio, you would think it was time to start drawing up the parade route.

                      I was going to type out a long response, but TSG said it best in his recent column:

                      (That reminds me, am I the only one who thought Chicago wasted much of its cap space for two extra rebounds per game, a mild defensive upgrade and the ongoing comedy of a Buckwheat-caliber afro? Congratulations, you get to play four-on-five for the next four years in a league where every rule adjustment favors teams that can score. Why not just keep Chandler for two-thirds the price? Instead, they overpaid for Wallace and gave away Chandler for a washed-up P.J. Brown and a draft bust that New Orleans was trying to dump? I don't get it. This is like Paramount Pictures signing William H. Macy to a four-picture, $60 million deal -- sure, he's a great actor, but that doesn't mean you pay him like a superstar. They will eventually regret this one almost as much as Wallace probably regrets filming that T-Mobile commercial that made him seem whipped.)

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                        Originally posted by Kegboy
                        I hope for Cro's sake Dallas doesn't turn around and ship him back out.
                        Poor Cro and his $51 million bank account. Poor, poor Cro...someone please pass me the Kleenex.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                          Originally posted by bulletproof
                          Poor Cro and his $51 million bank account. Poor, poor Cro...someone please pass me the Kleenex.
                          Harm, I didn't take you for a "NBA players make more money than the rest of us so they're not real people" kind of guy?
                          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                            Originally posted by Kegboy
                            Harm, I didn't take you for a "NBA players make more money than the rest of us so they're not real people" kind of guy?
                            Not really. But they're not going to get a lot of sympathy from me regarding their jobs either.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers willing to pay $46 Million for Peja

                              51 million can soothe a lot of pain regardless of the circumstance your
                              job finds you.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X