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

Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

    Anyone here an ESPN Insider?

    http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog...sheridan_chris





    Kobe to Knicks? Could happen posted: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 | Print Entry

    The Kobe Bryant situation has been quiet for almost two weeks now, ever since Bryant and owner Jerry Buss spoke on the telephone and Buss released a statement expressing his desire to keep Bryant in a Lakers uniform.

    Since Buss is now vacationing in China and is not due back for another week or so, expect things to stay quiet for a while longer.

    One thing to keep in mind as this thing bubbles beneath the surface: Nobody except Buss and Bryant knows exactly what was said on their phone call, but a day earlier Buss had responded to Bryant's formal trade request -- which was made to general manager Mitch Kupchak by agent Rob Pelinka -- by issuing a public statement essentially saying he wanted to hear those words come out of Kobe's mouth.


    To continue reading this article you must be an Insider.

  • #2
    Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

    full article:

    Kobe to Knicks? Could happen

    posted: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 | Print Entry

    The Kobe Bryant situation has been quiet for almost two weeks now, ever since Bryant and owner Jerry Buss spoke on the telephone and Buss released a statement expressing his desire to keep Bryant in a Lakers uniform.

    Since Buss is now vacationing in China and is not due back for another week or so, expect things to stay quiet for a while longer.

    One thing to keep in mind as this thing bubbles beneath the surface: Nobody except Buss and Bryant knows exactly what was said on their phone call, but a day earlier Buss had responded to Bryant's formal trade request -- which was made to general manager Mitch Kupchak by agent Rob Pelinka -- by issuing a public statement essentially saying he wanted to hear those words come out of Kobe's mouth.

    So we don't really know with 100 percent certainty whether in his heart of hearts Bryant does or doesn't want out, although I'm hearing that the formal trade request remains on the table.

    Now, if that trade request ever turns into a trade demand, there's a good case to be made that Kobe will end up with either the New York Knicks or Chicago Bulls.

    Here's why, and how.

    If Kobe really, truly wants out, the Lakers have almost no choice but to grant his wish.

    Yes, they could play hardball with him and make him hold out when training camp arrives, but Kobe would then be holding the entire franchise hostage while he waited them out. He's the league's pre-eminent superstar, and he's not going to be pushed around.

    He's also about as stubborn a person as the NBA has ever seen. Sometimes it serves him well, sometimes it doesn't. But he's stubborn. And if Jerry Buss plays poker against Kobe, he loses. And Jerry knows it.

    "If I'm Mitch Kupchak, I'm looking right now to see where my leverage would be, and I'm not finding any," one NBA general manager told me.

    A holdout would cost Bryant a lot of money and would be ruinous to all the image rehabilitation he's accomplished over the past year, but he'd make up for the financial loss many times over through his 15 percent trade kicker, and his image, as we've seen, is reparable no matter how bad things get.

    So here's the next big thing: Kobe's no-trade clause.

    Because Kobe can veto any trade, he can dictate where the Lakers must trade him by giving them a list of acceptable destinations. That is the power of the no-trade clause, and Kobe is the only guy in the league who has one.

    Next you would look at where he might want to go -- and where the Lakers could accommodate him while still helping themselves.

    I don't think Buss could live with trading Kobe to a Western Conference team and having him come into Staples to face the Lakers twice a year (and two times more to face the Clippers, plus, potentially, another set of visits in a playoff series vs. the Lakers), so I'm excising all West teams from my list of possibilities.

    So we move to the East, and we look at where Kobe might want to play.

    Philadelphia: One thought is Philly, because Kobe wants more than anything to be loved, and nowhere is he hated more than in his hometown (and nowhere would he be greeted as more of a hero). The problem is, it would take a minimum of Andre Miller and Andre Iguodala to get Kobe, and that would leave the Sixers with next to nothing other than Kobe. They've been down that path with Iverson, and anyway Kobe wants to win a championship.

    Miami: Forget it. Not unless the Heat are giving up Dwyane Wade, which they aren't.

    Atlanta: Too young. Years away from contending. Too far off the national radar.

    Detroit: You never say never, especially after they looked old and done against Cleveland, but the market-size drop-off would be a problem for Kobe.

    Boston: For Paul Pierce? Maybe, but they would still be far from a championship-level team, even with Bryant.

    Chicago: This is the team I hear as one of the strongest possibilities, although its questionable whether John Paxson would be willing to gut the core of his team to get Bryant.

    Paxson would probably have to start with Luol Deng and Ben Gordon, and perhaps Chris Duhon, and he would probably have to include a signed-and-traded Andres Nocioni or P.J. Brown to make the salaries work.

    That would be an enormous amount for Paxson to surrender, especially given the way he has shaped the team's salary structure for the next 3-4 years.

    New York: If Chicago is one of the logical places for Bryant to end up, that raises the question of which team could make a competing offer. That's where Knicks coach and president Isiah Thomas would come in.

    I've known Isiah a long time, so trust me when I tell you he would go to the end of the earth and do whatever it takes to get a deal like this done. He wants his legacy to be something special in New York, and Kobe Bryant could help assure that. Furthermore, Bryant has previously expressed interest in lighting up Gotham.

    As a trade partner, what the Knicks lack in quality, they have in quantity. In terms of volume, Isiah could overwhelm almost any other offer out there, starting with combo guard Jamal Crawford, rebounding machine David Lee, Knicks starting power forward Channing Frye, a pair of unprotected No. 1 picks (let's say 2008 and 2010) and sundry throw-ins, including Nate Robinson, Randolph Morris, Renaldo Balkman, et al.

    Crawford can score 20 points a night, and he'll go prolific for you at least twice a month. Lee is a double-double man, and the most popular player on the Knicks, an energy guy who will easily play in the league for 10 more years if he stays healthy. He's far from a bum, and the same goes for Frye, who could start for the Lakers for the next seven seasons.

    No, there's no superstar in here, but it's a lot of lumber.And if you're rebuilding, you need a cache of young talent. Lee, Frye and Robinson are still on their rookie contracts. Crawford has a reasonable long-term deal ($7.9 next season, with a contract that ends after he makes $10.08 million in 2010-11). The Lakers would actually have cap space, lots of it, after Lamar Odom's contract ends in the summer of '09.

    Nothing, however, will happen unless Kobe forces Buss' hand. That hasn't happened yet, and it still might not happen if the Lakers can make a major deal to put some new talent around Kobe and placate him. Certainly we've all heard about the possibility of Jermaine O'Neal and/or other players joining Bryant in L.A.

    But if that doesn't happen, I wouldn't be surprised if Kobe pipes up publicly again, this time demanding -- not requesting -- a trade.

    And if that happens, I think he'll end up in Chicago or New York.
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-13-2007, 09:25 AM.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

      Some additional talk on Bryant and JO to the Knicks

      http://www.nypost.com/seven/06132007...arc_berman.htm

      WORKING PHONES IN SEARCH OF STUD
      By MARC BERMAN
      GAME ON! Isiah Thomas (2nd from right) attends news conference yesterday to announce Knicks' Oct. 11 MSG exhibition vs. Maccabi Tel Aviv. Joining Thomas were (l to r) former Israeli ambassador Arye Mekel, Maccabi president Tal Brody, and Tony Fromer, VP of American Friends of Migdal Ohr, a charity for underprivileged kids in Israel.June 13, 2007 -- Despite odds stacked against him, Knicks president/coach Isiah Thomas has not given up on making a big move this offseason.

      Though Thomas did not name them, he noted prominent players such as Kobe Bryant and Jermaine O'Neal have asked for trades - and promised he'd be active in attempting to acquire them.

      "It's safe to say we're active on the phones, trying to improve our team, whatever ways we can," Thomas said yesterday after a Garden news conference to announce next season's preseason game vs. Maccabi Tel Aviv.

      "Our goal one day is to put together a team capable of competing and winning a championship.

      "There are players who are still out there who publicly said they want to be traded. I'm hoping."

      Thomas has not approached the Lakers yet with a firm offer, though he admitted at Orlando's pre-draft camp he concocted a series of tentative offers. Sources say the Knicks would be atop Bryant's and O'Neal's wish lists. Bryant has a no-trade clause and can nix any deal
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

        Outakes from another article by the NY Post ...
        By MARC BERMAN
        June 12, 2007 -- Stephon Marbury said yesterday he'd like to see president/coach Isiah Thomas add another perimeter shooter in the June 28 NBA draft, in which the Knicks hold the 23rd pick.
        ......

        But Thomas is looking to make a bigger score this summer - he even began plotting a package to acquire Kobe Bryant before Bryant backtracked on his trade request.

        Bryant was the first guest on Marbury's cable talk show, but he knows Knick fans would rather see them together in the backcourt - not schmoozing on the couch.

        "That would be spectacular, something that a lot of people would want to see," Marbury mused.

        Marbury feels if Bryant and Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, another Thomas target, still want out, he expects their wishes to be granted.

        O'Neal and Bryant both have wanderlust for New York. Bryant has a no-trade clause and can potentially steer his way to the Knicks, however unlikely. In figures released yesterday, Bryant's jersey was the NBA's No. 1 seller. Marbury's ranked seventh.


        Marbury isn't shocked by Bryant's stance.

        "This is a business at the end of the day," Marbury said. "He wants to win, he knows what it tastes like and he's still hungry for that taste."

        Meanwhile, O'Neal wants to reunite with Thomas, for whom he played in Indiana.

        "My personal opinion, if I'm the GM of a team and he doesn't want to play for you anymore, you move on [and] do everything possible to move him and get something in return," Marbury said.


        "Knowing [Pacer GM] Larry Bird as a player and his demeanor, his attitude, if you don't want to play for him, he'll get somebody else."

        Marbury feels the Knicks are easily a playoff team without additions but added, "If Isiah has the opportunity to add Kevin Garnett or O'Neal, you have to consider that - it's crazy not to."..cont'd


        marc.berman@nypost.com NYPOST
        Last edited by Frank Slade; 06-13-2007, 10:49 AM.

        Why Not Us ?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

          In my dream world, Thomas would get Garnett, forcing the Lakers and Pacers to deal with each other.

          I was really hoping to see a good trade with LA.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

            Marbury feels if Bryant and Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, another Thomas target, still want out, he expects their wishes to be granted.
            "My personal opinion, if I'm the GM of a team and he doesn't want to play for you anymore, you move on [and] do everything possible to move him and get something in return," Marbury said.

            "Knowing [Pacer GM] Larry Bird as a player and his demeanor, his attitude, if you don't want to play for him, he'll get somebody else."

            Marbury feels the Knicks are easily a playoff team without additions but added, "If Isiah has the opportunity to add Kevin Garnett or O'Neal, you have to consider that - it's crazy not to."..cont'd

            This sounds a lot like tampering.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

              Somebody needs to tell the entire Knicks organization to keep their ****ing mouths shut.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                did I miss something? when did O'Neal came out and demanded a trade?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                  isiah is probably talking about the comments SJax made about O'Neal wanting out.

                  and who knows really, maybe o'neal has asked TPTB for a trade, just not to the media or on ESPN radio
                  This is the darkest timeline.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                    Originally posted by bread View Post


                    This sounds a lot like tampering.

                    Agree 100%..........I hope TPTB take notice and file grievience.

                    I'll take Frye and 2 #1's
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                      Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                      isiah is probably talking about the comments SJax made about O'Neal wanting out.

                      and who knows really, maybe o'neal has asked TPTB for a trade, just not to the media or on ESPN radio
                      Yeah, I don't think JO would put us at the "Ron disadvantage".

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                        I'm assuming Kobe wants out of LA because he doesn't think they're winning enough. Why then would he want to go to the Knicks who can't even make the playoffs in the East?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                          playing in jordan's shadow vs. owning new york city because you not only led them back to the playoffs and possibly more since the knicks are prone to big spending. david stern would never suspend kobe again if he was a knick.
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                            David Stern would be the happiest person on the planet if Kobe went to NY.


                            and then they add JO................
                            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Chris Sheridan Blog re: Kobe to Knicks

                              Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
                              did I miss something? when did O'Neal came out and demanded a trade?
                              I don't know about you....but there is something in the back of my mind that thinks that IF there is any significant reports that any "possible trade talks" between the Pacers and Lakers are starting to "breakdown" and its beginning to clearly look like no deal is on the horizon.....that JONeal will actually say ( or leak ) something to force TPTB to concede on some demand so that the trade can happen and he can go join his buddy in LakerLand.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X