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

2012 NBA rumors thread part II

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

  • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

    Sources say that the league-owned Hornets remain adamantly against buying Kaman out if they can't trade the 7-footer and that Kaman has been warned not to expect a buyout if no trade is consummated. ESPN.com
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

      Shelvin Mack?


      @Pacers24Colts12

      Comment


      • http://tracking.si.com/2012/03/09/re...gh-draft-pick/

        The Boston Celtics attempted to trade shooting guard Ray Allen to the Indiana Pacers in exhange for forward Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round draft pick, according to NESN.com.

        The deal was killed, according to reports, because Larry Bird — the Pacers’ president of basketball operations — thought the price was too high.

        “Here’s the thing,” Bird said. “When Danny (Ainge) and I talked about trading for Ray, he wanted Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round pick. If that’s the value he’s putting on Ray Allen, he ain’t getting it. That tells me he’s in no hurry to trade him.”

        Comment


        • Originally posted by PacersCenter View Post
          Shelvin Mack?
          Eh Do we need another undersized two guard trying to play point?

          Comment


          • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

            I still want him.



            http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...3t9dSreK.8vLYF


            Of course Josh Smith wants to be traded from the Atlanta Hawks. There hasn't been a week that has gone by since Atlanta selected him in the 2004 draft that either Smith or his team hasn't considered the possibility of some sort of separation. Atlanta would love to move the guy, in order to find a more orthodox interior threat to pair with and/or replace the injured Al Horford, or a near All-Star point guard to break things down when that Hawks offense gets staid. But it's Josh Smith, so nobody's buying.

            That's the way it is with Smith, from fans, the media and other teams. We respect the heck out of him when he's got it all together, but we're not interested. Fans of 29 other NBA teams will read this column; and while you appreciate Smith's gifts, would you want his style of play and maddening up and downs on your team, at his eight-figure price, while having to give something significant back to Atlanta in the exchange?

            Probably not. Even expiring deals, as Bill Simmons mused about here, seem to be too much for someone owed over $13 million next season. This has everything to do with Smith's averages, because though they're impressive (17 points, 10 rebounds, 3.5 combined blocks and steals), they're just averages. They're what he ends up after all his per-game stats settle, and not something you can depend on every night.



            Smith should have been an All-Star this year. He's that good, and his contributions are worth that level of acclaim. But he remains the ultimate "nah, we're good"-player. Not unlike Philadelphia's brilliant Andre Iguodala, Smith's all-around contributions put a team in place to go over the top, but they don't put a team over the top. Unless it's a very good team. Unlike Iguodala, though, Smith isn't consistent, and he is still relying on raw talent alone to fill up that stat sheet. This isn't a case of selfishness, he's just stuck some eight years in.

            This is why he's a luxury of a player. Someone for Dallas to trade for, if it were two years ago. Someone that you don't mind writing off when he chucks a series of corner long-twos and doesn't box out, because he's not as important (despite his All-Star gifts) as the four other go-to guys on your very good team. And unless your team isn't very good, and doesn't mind paying through the teeth for Smith's contract, there's no reason to have him on your team.

            In this financial landscape, with even the Los Angeles Lakers potentially cutting their championship hopes off in order to save luxury tax money, who is going to take on Josh Smith? Respect him as an opponent, sure. But on your team? Nah, we're good.

            This is also why the Hawks are likely to ignore his trade request. Because they've proven, for the last half-decade or so, that they're happy where they're at. Middle of the pack in the East, not a lot of potential to move up (the matchups, even at full strength, just aren't there), but able to still make that playoff revenue even if a significant part (like Al Horford, this season) goes down with an injury.

            With or without Al, the Hawks need Smith. They need him to fill in the empty spaces, and are willing to pay him large amounts of cash and ignore those awful set-shot instincts of his to do it.

            They're right to, by the way, because Smith is an expert defender when he's engaged, and he sets up all manner of random possessions for that predictable Hawks offense because of his ability to cause turnovers or grab (if not box out for) rebounds on both ends. On any other team properly utilizing him, he'd have to be a luxury. But because the Hawks are so committed to this brand of basketball because of their financial and personnel choices, Josh Smith is an utter necessity.

            Which is why they're more than happy to overlook passages like this from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's Michael Cunningham:


            The person said one of Smith's complaints is that he believes the Hawks didn't do enough to promote him for selection to the All-Star team, which he thinks contributed to lesser players being voted to the team by Eastern Conference coaches. Smith, an Atlanta native who has played his entire eight-year career with the Hawks, also would like to play for a franchise he believes is more committed to winning a championship.

            Smith (or, more specifically, Smith's buddy) is right and wrong when it comes to discussing Atlanta's commitment to a championship. In terms of payroll, and spending LeBron James-level cash on Joe Johnson, they're pretty committed to a championship-level debit sheet. It's focused on the wrong people, including Smith, which is why we can write off the Hawks as not being "committed to winning a championship."

            The other part of that passage is the most annoying. Players who aren't voted in by fans as an All-Star starter have to make the team through a coach's vote. And head coaches will sometimes lobby other head coaches to influence their assistants to vote for certain players. Or, teams will send out promotional items to teams, hoping to sway that vote.

            The problem is that NBA assistant coaches are filled in equal measures with crusty old school-types, and new school thinkers who have more stat sheets in their hotel room than they do friends on Facebook. And either side ("Bad attitude, doesn't box out"; "shoots 27 percent on long 2-pointers, easily the worst shot in basketball") has a reason to dismiss Smith, even if he probably should have been an All-Star. No amount of campaigning from head coach Larry Drew or Atlanta's front office would have made a difference. Even if, yeah, he probably should have been on that team.

            Stuck in another season of the same old thing in Atlanta, a bored Smith (and people close to him) have this to fixate on. Because, with Smith and the Hawks, things will always be the same.

            Which is why, following the March 15 trade deadline, they'll probably still be with each other.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

              I really hope they make a trade for "the guy"




              http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...wwaQFU8Cm8vLYF


              Quote:
              Just because the Indiana Pacers can make a deal, it doesn’t mean they should

              Everyone's leaning on the Pacers these days. With less than a week to go before the March 15 trade deadline, Indiana's cap space and impressive ranking in the East (pretty safely ensconced in the fifth seed) make Indiana the team every desperate NBA squad and desperate media outlet's favorite fallback trading partner. The Pacers are good but have plenty of holes; the team has the flexibility to make a transaction without having to send any players back, and personnel chief Larry Bird has never been hesitant to swing a deal or two.

              What helps, though? Chris Kaman? Jamal Crawford? Why do the Pacers need to make a deal, just for the sake of movement and using up all that available cap space?

              One watch of one half of Pacers basketball, and the team's needs become obvious to the viewer. Indiana badly covets a point guard that can create for others, and they need more fans to fill in (and speaking as someone who lives in Indiana, Hoosiers can really "fill in") those seats at the fieldhouse with a corporate sponsor that the team plays in. Kaman and Crawford aren't solving anything, in this regard, and it's questionable as to how the Pacers can justify even meeting the salary cap limit with the league's 29th-worst attendance.



              On top of that, the Pacers seem unwilling to go after both Crawford and Kaman if it means giving up something we rarely see value in -- a middling non-lottery first-round pick. This is according to the Indianapolis Star's spot-on beat reporter Mike Wells.

              In most years, the 26th pick in the draft (the space where the Pacers would currently work from, entering Friday night's action) is one of the least-enviable spots to choose from, because you could be wasting a guaranteed contract on training camp fodder. This draft is deeper than most, and (more importantly to this writer, who knows absolutely nothing about this year's potential draftees) the Pacers will need a player to step in once they clear the books this summer. A contributor on a slim contract, following an offseason that might see the Pacers either whiff on free agents or stack the deck with a top-heavy team with little depth, is going to be worth his weight in gold.

              Assuming the Pacers don't draft a woman. Troglodytes. Get with the times, Larry Bird.

              Even with 11 players under contract for 2012-13, the Pacers have enviable depth presuming all options are picked up and the team doesn't sign and trade a litany of rotation fillers away. It's not championship depth, to be sure, and the Pacers are still lacking that franchise player in spite of Danny Granger, David West and Roy Hibbert's past All-Star appearances, but outside of those All-Stars the Pacers boast nothing but solid contributors on tiny contracts. And yet they'll still have nearly a maximum deal's worth of cap space to spend this summer.

              So to toss out a first-round selection or A.J. Price just for two months' worth of a player that might be redundant? It wouldn't be the worst deal in the world, but we can understand if the Pacers give this trade deadline a miss.

              This won't stir the echoes in Indiana, though. For whatever reason, this team isn't connecting with fans; possibly because we're all out of money and like staying home to take in the Pacers on TV or radio (the team sports possibly the best radio/TV combo in the biz).

              If the Pacers make a deal, it has to be for someone that stirs the imagination of those who are bored with this team. Not just because of the exposure that deal would create, but because the team needs a superstar. We don't often talk in these terms, but the Pacers need a game-changer, and someone opposing teams just can't counter. Sometimes team ball just isn't enough; and this part is being written in a vacuum, irrespective of the team's attendance woes.

              It has to be for Rajon Rondo. It has to be for Steve Nash. It has to be for someone that absolutely tips the scales. Because Indiana has size, interior scoring, frontline depth, help on the wings, and able defenders all around. They have a fantastic third guard that happens to start, in Darren Collison. They have everyone besides the guy that can create a 12-2 run on his own. They need Rondo, or Steve Nash. Neither, unfortunately, might end up in Indy; though both would work in any number of two or three-way packages that would take advantage of Indy's many movable parts and cap space.

              (Ray Allen, sublime player that he is, will not be included in that stratum. And not for Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round pick, a deal that makes no sense for either the Pacers or the Celtics.)


              Beyond that, there's really no point. If the Pacers do pull off a trade for a lesser light, it'll blow up on Twitter that afternoon, 14 websites will come out with analysis of the deal, and it will be an absolute afterthought by the time Ersan Ilyasova turns 25 years old on May 15. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
              The Pacers won't be winning a championship this year, but they're one of the deeper teams in this league even in cost-cutting mode, and they've done a terrific job in Frank Vogel's first year considering the new parts, shortened season, and "wait 'til 2012-13"-stance. If the Pacers pass on any moves during this trade deadline, it shouldn't be a disappointment to the team's fan base.

              And it wouldn't kill them to go to a few games, now and again.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                Chris Mannix: Kyle Lowry still not in the mix for any deal involving Pau Gasol, sources say. Twitter
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                  Been going back and forth on trades that would work for both sides. Love rondo and think he would do wonders here. That being said, we do have to give up some core pieces to get him, but think we are ultimately a better team after

                  Collison+granger+kaman( two 2nd rounders and maybe Lou or aj) for rondo and Allen
                  ----C's do it bc they get much younger and deeper, a solid starting center in kaman who is only 29 a young point guard and a borderline all star

                  Or

                  Collison+hibbert for rondo, then trade for kaman

                  ----do the C's want a young all star center in hibbert for rondo? Probably, but Roy will get paid big time this summer...I think both of these offers are fair, benefiting both sides. I think the C's would be more interested in first trade IMO
                  Murph

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                    2 future 1st round picks?


                    The Orlando Magic have called teams to ask about their interest in trading for starting small forward Hedo Turkoglu prior to Thursday's NBA trade deadline, reports Marc Stein of ESPN.com, but have found little interest in the 32-year-old. "It's one thing to try to foist Turkoglu on a team that's trading for [Dwight] Howard," Stein says, "and quite another to try to move Turkoglu, or any other vet in Howard's supporting cast, when Dwight himself isn't part of the deal."

                    Turkoglu, whom the Magic re-acquired from the Phoenix Suns in December 2010, is averaging 11.2 points, 3.7 rebounds, and 4.7 assists for Orlando during the 2011/12 season. The Magic are hoping to add another star to complement Howard, and Stein says Turkoglu's name "is the first" Orlando's offered to opposing teams in trade talks "over the past week or so."

                    One "front-office source" Stein consulted for his story says the Magic would need to include "at least two [future] first-round picks" to entice another team to take the two years and $18 million remaining on Turkoglu's contract.

                    Since starting the 2011/12 season strong, Turkoglu's productivity has dipped sharply, as the 12-year veteran is shooting just 37.1 percent in his last 20 games.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                      Originally posted by PacerPride33 View Post
                      Been going back and forth on trades that would work for both sides. Love rondo and think he would do wonders here. That being said, we do have to give up some core pieces to get him, but think we are ultimately a better team after

                      Collison+granger+kaman( two 2nd rounders and maybe Lou or aj) for rondo and Allen
                      ----C's do it bc they get much younger and deeper, a solid starting center in kaman who is only 29 a young point guard and a borderline all star

                      Or

                      Collison+hibbert for rondo, then trade for kaman

                      ----do the C's want a young all star center in hibbert for rondo? Probably, but Roy will get paid big time this summer...I think both of these offers are fair, benefiting both sides. I think the C's would be more interested in first trade IMO
                      Neither trade would work. Your first trade has to much salary going to Boston. Your second trade has to much salary going to Indiana.

                      If you don't know about the following site, check it out, It's cool!

                      http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine
                      Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        2 future 1st round picks?
                        His final year (2013) is a 6mil payout on his non-guarantee final year. That is a heck of a deal. Hedo is not that bad of a player for 1 year of him and getting 2 1st. The dude just can't find his shot.

                        If Danny could be traded for a good pg, I would actually do this. Infact, I know a trade that would go really well, but I couldn't figure why to (so called) pull the trigger. Granger to Clippers for Mo Williams and Ryan Gomes and Wolves 2012 1st rnd pick.

                        This would give 3 2012 1st round picks and 2 2013 1st round picks. This would be a lot of assets for big time trades...just sayin!
                        Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          2 future 1st round picks?
                          yes his contract is awful but IMO this is the type of deal we need to do and if the Magic want to get rid of him bad enough they would need to give us at least 2 1st rd picks. I hope we can do a trade like this at the deadline.

                          Hedo's contract would come off the books when it is time to pay George and others.

                          Hedo would really help the offense in terms of ball movement he wouldn't be my first choice to pull a take a bad contract for picks but it wouldn't be that bad especially if Dwight bolts.

                          the Hornets own the Wolves 2012 pick pacer fan and even if they didnt I am not a fan of that trade Mo Williams isn't a big enough upgrade and isnt the type of pg I think we need.
                          Last edited by pacer4ever; 03-10-2012, 02:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                            the Hornets own the Wolves 2012 pick pacer fan and even if they didnt I am not a fan of that trade Mo Williams isn't a big enough upgrade and isnt the type of pg I think we need.
                            Your right, don't know what I was thinking. The clips give Hornets the most favorable of the Clippers 2012 1st picks which will prolly be Wolves pick going to Hornets. Then the Clippers still have their own 2012.

                            Your prolly right too on Mo. I just heard acouple months ago about the Clippers needing another piece and Danny would be a great fit but they don't have much to offer back to the Pacers. With a Hedo possibly coming in then I seen the opportunity of Danny's salary going out for a PG. You have someone in mind that would fit? A trade of Danny for point guard? I don't see Boston wanting Granger at all. Of coarse this is under the assumption of Hedo being a Pacers.
                            Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                              Just because the would need to give 2 1sts doesn't mean they are actually thinking about giving 2

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012 NBA rumors thread part II

                                Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
                                Just because the would need to give 2 1sts doesn't mean they are actually thinking about giving 2
                                True, but It's fun to think about.
                                Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X