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

Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 9
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
  • #1

    Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

    I liked this article, its positive and realistic, I humbly think are options are not limited to : Hope PG sings an extension, or trade him to LA

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/tr...imited-pacers/

    The person most upset about Paul George not getting All-NBA honors is definitely Paul George. George missed out on being eligible for an extension worth $70 million more if the media voting had deemed him one of the top six forwards in the league this season.
    But almost as upset as George were the people who were going to pay him that extra $70 million. The Pacers seemed to have been dealt a massive blow in their efforts to retain George, which already seemed slim.

    Just to review:
    He started off the season by saying there was "no trust, no chemistry."
    He followed up in December, saying the season wasn't any fun and that he missed his old team that competed for conference titles.
    He said there was a "dark cloud" over the Pacers.
    George was unhappy about how communication was handled at the trade deadline when his name was part of talks.
    He said he "wasn't even at that point" to think about his future in Indy when asked about it after the Pacers' season ended, despite being under contract for another season.
    And George was recruited awkwardly by Magic Johnson on national television, and said he would be working out with Kobe Bryant. There are multiple reports linking him to interest in the Lakers.
    Then, on top of everything else, Larry Bird stepped down as Indiana's president of basketball operations last month, signaling to many that a true rebuild might be on the way after trading George.
    Losing a superstar like George is devastating. There's a reason teams try to avoid losing top players. The Magic traded Dwight Howard in 2012 and still haven't found a way back. It can take a decade to recover. So the Pacers are going to have to get together multiple plans, and fast, and know what they're doing to try and get ahead of the situation.

    Option 1: From our cold, dead hands
    This strategy follows a simple paradigm -- because you're very unlikely to be able to replace George if you trade him, and that even if you find another star, you're looking at several years until he's ready to compete, your best option is to fight to keep him to the bitter end.
    This is where the All-NBA vote hurts. If the Pacers could offer George an extension worth $70 million more, it would have pushed George to the limit of how much money one person can turn down. The Pacers can still offer more money and years than any team, including L.A., but the difference becomes at least easier to walk away from after the All-NBA vote.
    The basic plan now starts with doing everything possible to upgrade the roster this summer. Jeff Teague is a free agent, and the Pacers are going to need a starting point guard. Whoever it was that gave George such consternation with his attitude, they need to be gone. Keeping George is worth it. Trading one of Monta Ellis or Thaddeus Young would clear some cap space to add some upgrades ... but the point guard position is pretty bare this summer. Teague is realistically the fourth- or fifth-best player at the position available, even with the fact he's going to demand a huge salary at age 30.
    Keep Teague, and you don't have the option of improving the roster.
    You put off moving George as long as possible, hope that next season is better and things come together, and try and find deals during the season or at the deadline, then focus on having the most money to throw at George. It's not a great plan, and the conventional wisdom says you need to make sure you get something for George. But if you know you're not getting great return anyway and a rebuild is inevitable, taking that chance is an option.

    Option 2: Get ahead of the game
    Any conversations with the Lakers start with the No. 2 overall pick in next month's NBA Draft. They just have to. There's no way you can do a deal with the Lakers and not get that selection, particularly since the Lakers don't own their 2018 pick. The Lakers, Lonzo Ball fans that they are, probably balk, but that's why if the Pacers are going to go down this road, they have to establish, and inflate, a market for George. The Celtics will be interested, and have the Nets' 2018 pick.
    The backlash is going to be "Why should the Lakers give up assets for a player who wants to come there in a year anyway?"
    Well, it's a gamble. If they don't trade for him, he could wind up being traded to Boston, loving it and re-signing there. Or any other team. If the Lakers decide that the No. 2 pick is a non-starter and they're not going to give up anything of real value for a player they could just get in free agency, the Pacers are going to have to make a tough decision. If it's Luol Deng and a second-rounder, you're better off letting him walk. The cap space alone has better value. If it's Julius Randle or D'Angelo Russell and filler? Is that enough?
    Let's say the Lakers bite on it, though. Let's say they offer the No. 2 overall pick, Julius Randle and filler contracts in Tarik Black and Corey Brewer for George. (Note: They have to draft Ball and then trade him due to the "Stepien Rule" preventing trading first-round picks in consecutive years.)
    In that scenario, the Pacers can acquire Ball, the consensus No. 2 pick in the draft, and rebuild around Ball, Randle and Myles Turner, and have a good team, with the upside of being great. If they can figure out a way to offload Young and Ellis, they basically have a clean slate.
    However, here's another idea:
    Indiana could make the pre-draft agreement to trade George for Ball, and then swap Ball. The Pacers could send Ball to Sacramento for the fifth and 10th picks, conceivably, giving them theoretically De'Aaron Fox and Zach Collins or Lauri Markkanen, as a stretch-four/five next to Turner. Congratulations, you have successfully rebuilt the Pacers in one fell swoop.
    Alternatively, snag the No. 2 pick, and offer Ball to Orlando for the No. 6 pick, Elfrid Payton and Mario Hezonja. Not great return, but moving back four spots still allows you to take one of Josh Jackson, Fox, Malik Monk or Jayson Tatum most likely. Monk, Payton and Hezonja (on a flyer) is pretty good.
    Of course, if you're going to go that route, you could just offer George straight up to Orlando, but without a promise of return, it's unlikely the Magic would accept.
    The Timberwolves, however...
    The Wolves have the No. 7 pick, so you're in range to still get a very talented player, and they have Zach LaVine. LaVine is coming off an ACL injury, so you have to be confident he's going to recover. But before that injury, he looked like he was headed for James Harden territory, a player too good to stay as a third option, but one who was never going to be more with the Wolves. If they could add Paul George to Karl-Anthony Towns and Andrew Wiggins? That's a terrifying core. Plus, George gets to play for Tom Thibodeau, a well-respected coach he has worked with at Team USA.

    These are all hypotheticals, though. Maybe the Lakers won't offer Ball at all. Maybe the Wolves think LaVine is too valuable to surrender, and certainly not without a pick, and don't believe he'll re-sign. There are always ways these things seem like good ideas on the surface, or at least to one side, and the other side thinks it's a horrific idea they would never do. But for Indiana, these options are not only relatively appealing, they might honestly provide more hope than their current course.
    To have two young players and a top-10 pick in a loaded draft is one of the few scenarios that might be better than having a true superstar with little chance of building a contending team around him.
    Of course, there's one more team the Pacers can look to make a deal with: the team with the No. 1 pick, the Celtics.
    Unfortunately, you're not peeling that No. 1 pick away from Danny Ainge, not even for George. However, they do have good talent and the Nets' 2018 pick. Perhaps the Celtics would part with the Nets' pick in 2018, Avery Bradley (since they can't feasibly pay both Isaiah Thomas and Bradley next summer, especially if they add George), Jae Crowder and maybe throw in one of the two extra picks (Clippers, Grizzlies) they have in 2019 as insurance. Then the Celtics get to keep Thomas, Marcus Smart, Terry Rozier and Al Horford while adding George and Markelle Fultz. Even for Ainge, that's pretty good.
    But of course, you run into the same logic problem. Why would the Celtics offer up assets for George when they could just sign him in free agency? Well, for starters, it's not like they can keep everyone from their current core and add George. There's just not enough room in the rotation. Second, as with the Lakers, you run the risk of L.A. swooping in and grabbing him.
    The Celtics have the best set of assets for a reasonable trade partner, and have them to spare. But they had them at the trade deadline, too, and opted to wait. It cannot be overstated how the Celtics want to win a trade by large margins.
    The leverage problem
    All of this feeds into the fact that the Pacers' leverage has been compromised. George is not expected to re-sign, and he has telegraphed a specific destination. For Indiana to re-establish leverage in a deal, it has to take one of two approaches.
    Wait it out, letting the market grow for George between now and the deadline. This comes with risk, if things go south and they improve for the potential suitors, things can go downhill in a hurry. You can wind up with a worse deal.
    Try and get ahead of it. You make a deal unexpectedly early, catch the market off guard with an opportunity to get ahead of a bidding war, and prosper. The Jazz did this with Deron Williams in 2011. No extended drama of trade talks, no distractions, a quick cut of the cord.
    In the end, this is the central problem the Pacers will face, and they'll have to sort through all these options, including just letting George walk at season's end. Something is better than nothing in terms of return, but if the return is only marginal impact, and players you have to tie yourself to despite concerns, whatever they might be, it might just not be worth it. The Pacers had a championship-caliber team just a few years ago. But how they manage however long is left of the Paul George era in Indy will have drastic consequence on the future of the franchise.
    That bolded part , to me, is the best way to go moving forward
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

    The market for George will grow towards the deadline, but the price will drop. Teams will offer less and less, believing the Pacers will eventually have to take whatever they can get for him. The Celtics aren't going to deal the Nets 2018 1st for him, short of a commitment on George's part, or unless the nets make a miracle recovery next season and devalue their pick.
    Last edited by Kstat; 05-31-2017, 05:48 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

      I would rather wait and see if the super max and a summer or 2 of movescan save us before trading him for nothing.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

        the price drops by the day. ok maybe not day, but there are dates it gets less and less. draft night is the 1st, then opening day, then the deadline.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

          But, what if we keep PG for next year, extend him for more money than anyone else can pay, then trade him? Could his asking price be more or less than keeping him for one more year? How long after the draft can we still trade him?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

            Very good article. From a purely front office PoV, some interesting things there I hadn't considered.

            That being said, I'm willing to take the 'KD to the Warriors' worst case scenario. Again, with the same caveat I always give; that Paul has told KP straight to his face he will NOT re-sign or demands a trade behind closed doors.

            Yep, I'm stubborn and probably shortsighted. Whatever. If there is even a miniscule chance of retaining PG, I want us to pursue that path.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

              Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
              But, what if we keep PG for next year, extend him for more money than anyone else can pay, then trade him? Could his asking price be more or less than keeping him for one more year? How long after the draft can we still trade him?
              If Paul George signs another contract in Indiana then why would you trade him at all? That would imply he wants to stay in Indiana.
              Last edited by Kstat; 05-31-2017, 06:17 PM.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
                But, what if we keep PG for next year, extend him for more money than anyone else can pay, then trade him? Could his asking price be more or less than keeping him for one more year? How long after the draft can we still trade him?
                He won't sign an extension at currently eligible levels, and (as I understand it) the DPE special maxes he would qualify for by re-signing after making All-NBA don't allow him to be traded in the first year of his new contract.
                BillS

                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  If Paul George signs another contract in Indiana then why would you trade him at all?
                  I think the idea would be to do a sign-and-trade because Paul wants out. Not something I would see us doing even if it were possible, considering what we'd have to take on in exchange contract-wise.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                    no idea if it applies for the DPE, but PG signed his first extension before he actually qualified for the Rose Rule. he did, then he got 27.5% of the cap instead of 25% (coulda demanded 30% btw). if that kind of contingency is available, and he's still balking, well...

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      I think the idea would be to do a sign-and-trade because Paul wants out. Not something I would see us doing even if it were possible, considering what we'd have to take on in exchange contract-wise.
                      That wouldn't benefit the Pacers at all. George would be picking his destination, at which point the pacers would have to accept whatever table scraps the other team was willing to offer them, all so Paul George could earn a few more bucks from his next team. It's not like they could sign him and then auction him off to the highest bidder. That's not how sign and trades work.

                      Paul George's motivation isn't to ensure the Pacers get value for him in trade. That's Pritchard's job, not his.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        no idea if it applies for the DPE, but PG signed his first extension before he actually qualified for the Rose Rule. he did, then he got 27.5% of the cap instead of 25% (coulda demanded 30% btw). if that kind of contingency is available, and he's still balking, well...
                        This is a really important question to answer.
                        "I’m your favorite player’s favorite player. And it’s not enough for me for him to know that. I want the world to know that." -- Michael Beasley

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          the price drops by the day. ok maybe not day, but there are dates it gets less and less. draft night is the 1st, then opening day, then the deadline.
                          You could argue that the deadline this past season was one of those dates too.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                            Another "Roll the dice and hope he stays" article. Not falling for it unless Paul George says he wants to stay.


                            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Trading Paul George to Lakers or Celtics aren't only options for limited Pacers

                              Originally posted by cdash View Post
                              You could argue that the deadline this past season was one of those dates too.
                              The clock really started at the end of last season. Not that Bird was going to entertain offers for him then, but he obviously wasn't ever going to do that.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
                              Working...
                              X