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

My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

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

  • #31
    Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

    Originally posted by Reggie4Three
    Draft picks have a set contract. I do not think this will change although I have not read the new CBA so I can't guarantee it. I would be willing to bet alot of money that anyone drafted and sent to the NBDL will still be paid according to their draft status. I would be shocked if the PA gave the owner's that. Aside from that, getting players that aren't ready off the NBA court DOES improve the product. A garbage man making $5 million a year is still a garbage man. The fact that the players get less, and I don't think they will, doesn't make them less of a player. They also aren't any better if they get paid more. If the player is ready to help a team, they will be on the NBA roster. If not, they'll be in the NBDL and I can watch a capable player instead in the NBA. And as far as player rotations go, some teams may use a rotation not including these players and some do. Even for those that don't, let's not forget that injuries and suspensions happen and teams often use these players not originally in their normal rotation.

    Therefore, the product on the court can only get better with this. If they really wanted to improve it they would set it a year higher. I don't think your argument has much merit.



    Explain to me in al logic why an owner would use a NBA draftpick to select a player for his NBDL team which he can sign outright for far less money?

    That is not going to happen.

    Perhaps a 2nd rounder, but not a guaranteed money first rounder.

    And do we really want to go over the list of garbage players making millions (or even the league minimum) that are 10 year veterans?

    I think most HS first round draft picks have more to offer then for instance Kendal Gill.
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

      Originally posted by SycamoreKen
      If you go back to this thread

      http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=12939

      the article indirectly makes the arguement that the age limit is uneeded. Acording to this writer, 4 of the best picks were high schoolers, and T-Mac isn't one of them, while the high schoolers only made up 2 of the worst picks. How does this rule apply to foriegn players, many of whom start playing professionally early on?

      This is just the owners trying to save themselves from themselves, nothing more.
      Once again, it's irrelevant how the pick turns out to me. If the player can come in and actually deserve his roster spot based on current ability and not potential, then I have no problem with them being drafted. With only a couple of exceptions, these 18 year olds aren't ready to play and their potential replaces the ability of a player who is currently superior. Therefore, the product is weakened.
      Can we get a new color commentator please?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

        Originally posted by able
        Explain to me in al logic why an owner would use a NBA draftpick to select a player for his NBDL team which he can sign outright for far less money?

        That is not going to happen.

        Perhaps a 2nd rounder, but not a guaranteed money first rounder.
        Then explain to me how an owners are going to save 900 million again. It sounded to me as if your argument was that the owners were going to be sending their draft picks to play in the NBDL in an attempt to get out of paying them their guaranteed contracts. All I was saying was that even if they do this, those picks will still get paid their guaranteed contract based on the position they were drafted. I don't see how the owners are going to be paying less money because of this.

        For the record, I do think that some 1st round picks will play some in the NBDL.

        Originally posted by able
        And do we really want to go over the list of garbage players making millions (or even the league minimum) that are 10 year veterans?

        I think most HS first round draft picks have more to offer then for instance Kendal Gill.
        I don't. Well, maybe Kendall Gill who isn't in the league anymore anyway. I think I heard the other day that he won his first professional boxing match. Perhaps the Pacers should sign him so Artest can have a sparring partner.

        At any rate, the 10 year vets and "garbage players" are still better players than the vast majority of the 18 year olds that have come into the league.
        Can we get a new color commentator please?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

          Originally posted by Reggie4Three
          At any rate, the 10 year vets and "garbage players" are still better players than the vast majority of the 18 year olds that have come into the league.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

            Out of the 8 HS rookies of last year, 6 made the roster,

            *Dwight Howard (Orlando) 82 st 32.6 mpg
            *Shaun Livingston Clippers 15 st 27.1 mpg
            *Sebastian Telfair Portland 26 st 19.6 mpg
            *Al Jefferson Boston 1 st 14.8 mpg
            *Josh Smith Atl. 59 st 27.7 mpg
            *JR Smith (prep) NO 56 st 24.5 mpg

            2 didn't make a roster, but weren't expected to.
            1 Coll rook did not make the roster,
            1 foreigner did not make the roster

            foreign

            *Udrih Spurs 2 st 14.4 mpg
            *Vujacic Lakers 3 st 11.5 mpg
            *Khryapa Blazers 5 st 16.3 mpg
            *Podkolzin Mavs 0 st 2 mpg
            *Biedrins Warriors 1 st 12.8 mpg

            coll:

            *Okafor Charlotte 73 st 35.6 mpg
            *Gordon Bulls 3 st 24.4 mpg
            *Devin Harris mavs 19 st 15.4 mpg
            *Childress Atl. 44 st 31.2 mpg
            *Deng Bulls 45 st 27.3 mpg
            *Araujo Raptors 41 st 12.5 mpg
            *Iguadola Sixers 82 st 32.8 mpg
            *Luke Jackson Cavs 0 st 4.3 mpg
            *Humphries Jazz 4 st 13.0 mpg
            *Snyder Jazz 7 st 13.3 mpg
            *Jameer Nelson Magic 21 st 20.4 mpg
            *Delonte West Bost 7 st 13 mpg
            *Tony Allen Bost 34 st 16.4 mpg
            *D Harrisson Pacers 14 st 17.7 mpg

            Seeing the minutes played (average) and games started, please name vets for hs players onthose teams that would fill those places better?

            the best product is on the floor, including the HS players.
            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

            If you've done 6 impossible things today?
            Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

              Originally posted by able
              Out of the 8 HS rookies of last year, 6 made the roster,

              *Dwight Howard (Orlando) 82 st 32.6 mpg
              *Shaun Livingston Clippers 15 st 27.1 mpg
              *Sebastian Telfair Portland 26 st 19.6 mpg
              *Al Jefferson Boston 1 st 14.8 mpg
              *Josh Smith Atl. 59 st 27.7 mpg
              *JR Smith (prep) NO 56 st 24.5 mpg

              2 didn't make a roster, but weren't expected to.
              1 Coll rook did not make the roster,
              1 foreigner did not make the roster

              foreign

              *Udrih Spurs 2 st 14.4 mpg
              *Vujacic Lakers 3 st 11.5 mpg
              *Khryapa Blazers 5 st 16.3 mpg
              *Podkolzin Mavs 0 st 2 mpg
              *Biedrins Warriors 1 st 12.8 mpg

              coll:

              *Okafor Charlotte 73 st 35.6 mpg
              *Gordon Bulls 3 st 24.4 mpg
              *Devin Harris mavs 19 st 15.4 mpg
              *Childress Atl. 44 st 31.2 mpg
              *Deng Bulls 45 st 27.3 mpg
              *Araujo Raptors 41 st 12.5 mpg
              *Iguadola Sixers 82 st 32.8 mpg
              *Luke Jackson Cavs 0 st 4.3 mpg
              *Humphries Jazz 4 st 13.0 mpg
              *Snyder Jazz 7 st 13.3 mpg
              *Jameer Nelson Magic 21 st 20.4 mpg
              *Delonte West Bost 7 st 13 mpg
              *Tony Allen Bost 34 st 16.4 mpg
              *D Harrisson Pacers 14 st 17.7 mpg

              Seeing the minutes played (average) and games started, please name vets for hs players onthose teams that would fill those places better?

              the best product is on the floor, including the HS players.
              You honestly think Telfair and Livingston were anything more than just a potentially good young player getting minutes on a terrible team? Put those players on a decent team and they don't see any minutes.

              I'm going to end the discussion on this note because you obviously aren't going to change your mind and I am confident I am right about my position as well. If you think the best product is on the floor right now, you think the owners are trying to lower the quality of the game by bringing in the age limit. The owners, who have millions invested in the NBA, would never do this. Somehow you come up with some magical 900 million in savings via this age limit. That doesn't add up. There is no reason the owners would do anything damaging to their investment, and they obviously are advised by alot of people more in the know than we are. Unless you can show me where this 900 million comes from, I don't see your argument adding up.
              Can we get a new color commentator please?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                Originally posted by foretaz
                Do you watch NBA basketball?
                Can we get a new color commentator please?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                  Originally posted by Reggie4Three
                  You honestly think Telfair and Livingston were anything more than just a potentially good young player getting minutes on a terrible team? Put those players on a decent team and they don't see any minutes.

                  I'm going to end the discussion on this note because you obviously aren't going to change your mind and I am confident I am right about my position as well. If you think the best product is on the floor right now, you think the owners are trying to lower the quality of the game by bringing in the age limit. The owners, who have millions invested in the NBA, would never do this. Somehow you come up with some magical 900 million in savings via this age limit. That doesn't add up. There is no reason the owners would do anything damaging to their investment, and they obviously are advised by alot of people more in the know than we are. Unless you can show me where this 900 million comes from, I don't see your argument adding up.
                  youre right.....id much rather have had eddie gill than telfair or livingston....dude seriously, do u have any idea how ridiculous some of the stuff is ur typing?? im trying to stay quiet...but dude...ur soo far off its not even funny....

                  but u are right about one thing....the owners do have some people advising them....its their accountants....and this is all about money....and has nothing to do with the product....they would rather pay eddie gill 750,000 than a livingston or a telfair millions....but more than that....a decent size of their fanbase-evidently ur a part of this chunk-doesnt relate to the highschoolers and has a certain resentment regarding them, feeling they dont deserve the millions....ud rather see scott pollard and eddie gill in the league versus a handful of high schoolers that have far more talent than these type of guys ever dream of having.....so please....dont talk to me about product, and the quality of such...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                    Originally posted by Reggie4Three
                    You honestly think Telfair and Livingston were anything more than just a potentially good young player getting minutes on a terrible team? Put those players on a decent team and they don't see any minutes.

                    I'm going to end the discussion on this note because you obviously aren't going to change your mind and I am confident I am right about my position as well. If you think the best product is on the floor right now, you think the owners are trying to lower the quality of the game by bringing in the age limit. The owners, who have millions invested in the NBA, would never do this. Somehow you come up with some magical 900 million in savings via this age limit. That doesn't add up. There is no reason the owners would do anything damaging to their investment, and they obviously are advised by alot of people more in the know than we are. Unless you can show me where this 900 million comes from, I don't see your argument adding up.

                    If you'd take the time to read what I wrote you would see that I more the sufficiently explained where that money comes from.

                    Furthermore I am not saying that they are risking the product for a profit, but in business one makes decisions based on gains in more then one way, so does a NBA owner.
                    It is not about a lesser product, but the almost same product for less money.
                    Excluding risks is a wish for every business man, and this is one way to save money and make their risks cheaper and less of an influence on the team straight away.

                    It does not exclude the wins for them, they just became cheaper.
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                      Originally posted by Reggie4Three
                      Do you watch NBA basketball?

                      ummm...its becoming increasingly obvious by ur statements that im not the one who is uninformed....

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                        Originally posted by foretaz
                        u have to have a 'better' product to have successful marketing...

                        if the increased marketing was not received in a positive manner, then u could definitely argue that the product wasnt better....

                        the fact that the product has been so well received globally indicates the product is better....

                        more marketing doesnt guarantee a positive reception....ultimately the product dictates the success....not the marketing...
                        Seems to me the reception to the league in the US is waning, and the league is countering that by taking its game overseas.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                          Originally posted by able
                          That can not be blamed on them, but only on the person drafting them for selecting them and not making sure that said understanding is entered into the head of said player.
                          And now they (the owners) have taken a step, albiet a small one, in remedying that situation.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                            Originally posted by able
                            By "forcing" the "hardship" cases to the NBDL they haev themselves a nice minor league for little money, can put their hands on lottery picks for pennies thus save themselves millions upon millions....
                            Does it upset you that Major League Baseball owners can draft players (regardless of age) and pay them much smaller salaries to play for their minor league teams, or do you think those players, simply because they were drafted, should be allowed to go straight to the majors and make what major leaguers make?

                            Gee, those poor baseball players have to ride on buses and share hotel rooms and, god forbid, PROVE themselves worthy of playing in the best league in the world BEFORE they get paid like they're already ready. That's just awful!

                            We need to save these poor souls from the injustice they face by being forced to make less before they've proven they're ready.

                            The expansion of the NBDL is going to be the best thing for the NBA.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                              Originally posted by able
                              And do we really want to go over the list of garbage players making millions (or even the league minimum) that are 10 year veterans?

                              I think most HS first round draft picks have more to offer then for instance Kendal Gill.
                              I would much rather see a 10 year vet making millions as a garbage player than an 18 year old kid who's never done anything in his life but dominate at the high school level.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: My Take on the NBA Age Limit Rule

                                Originally posted by A-Train
                                Does it upset you that Major League Baseball owners can draft players (regardless of age) and pay them much smaller salaries to play for their minor league teams, or do you think those players, simply because they were drafted, should be allowed to go straight to the majors and make what major leaguers make?

                                Gee, those poor baseball players have to ride on buses and share hotel rooms and, god forbid, PROVE themselves worthy of playing in the best league in the world BEFORE they get paid like they're already ready. That's just awful!

                                We need to save these poor souls from the injustice they face by being forced to make less before they've proven they're ready.

                                The expansion of the NBDL is going to be the best thing for the NBA.


                                and this is why there is a fan problem in the usa....the underlying resentment that these youngsters havent 'earned' the right to make all these millions...

                                bottom line is they are more talented than many playing in the league....there are many players, as scot pollard would tell u, that get paid alot of money to suck....

                                as long as eddie gill and half the atlanta roster is in the league...not too mention at least 2 players on every roster that is just not that good....there should be no problem with a handful of the very best teenagers in the world joining the league....

                                but then jealousy and resentment are funny things...

                                some evidently feel they should earn that right....well, my friend....its based on talent...not on years served or a persons age....and if u dont believe for a second that sebastian telfair and sean livingston arent more talented and better players than eddie gill and at least another dozen players in this league, then im sorry....but u must be watching something different than what im watching....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X