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

Insider request...

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

  • Insider request...

    Chris Sheridan's top 25 Free Agents

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...26id%3d2399432

    Hope this is the kosher way to do this... anyway, very interested in the list.

  • #2
    Re: Insider request...

    Updated: April 7, 2006, 11:10 AM ET
    Free agent roundup: Look for price of big men to rise
    Insider
    Sheridan
    By Chris Sheridan
    ESPN Insider
    Archive

    When summertime comes and the Detroit Pistons and Ben Wallace sit down to discuss a new contract, Big Ben won't have his longtime agent working on his behalf.

    Wallace fired the agent, Steve Kaufman, a few months ago and plans to replace him with an attorney who will bill him on an hourly basis.

    If he wants a trade kicker in his deal, Wallace had better hope his new attorney knows how to get one. If he wants bonus payments for making the All-Star team, winning the NBA championship or being named Defensive Player of the Year, that new lawyer had better be proficient in the collective bargaining agreement language pertaining to bonuses he is likely or unlikely to earn.

    Normally, an agent would take care of those types of details -- as well as playing the Pistons off any other potential suitors.

    But the fact that Wallace will be going the cheap route in the biggest negotiation of his career is the surest sign of all that he's dead set on staying with the Pistons when he becomes an unrestricted free agent this summer.

    "The last thing I need at this point in my career is someone taking 4 percent of my next contract," Wallace told ESPN.com last week, raising his eyebrows but declining to comment when it was pointed out that the Chicago Bulls might be in the market for his services if they truly believed he was available.

    Instead, the Bulls will almost certainly look elsewhere to fill their big man needs when they enter this summer as the No. 1 player on the free agency market. Depending on the size of the salary cap, the Bulls should have some $15 million to $20 million to play with. One problem, however, is how the caliber of available centers drops off after Wallace.

    And with the Toronto Raptors also seeking some size on the open market (they are one of only a few teams -- Chicago and Charlotte among them -- with significant cap room), the price of big men might inflate.

    That is why Nazr Mohammed and Joel Przybilla are getting ranked higher than other players with more talent as ESPN.com breaks down the free agent class of 2006 into an updated Top 25.

    (All free agents are unrestricted unless otherwise noted. Restricted free agents are subject to having offers matched by their current teams.)

    The Top 25:

    1. Ben Wallace, Pistons
    The midseason trade of Darko Milicic and Carlos Arroyo to Orlando was made with the express intent of clearing money for Wallace. To make him the highest-paid Piston, Detroit would have to offer him a deal beginning at $12,000,001. If the Pistons come in south of that level, which they will almost certainly try to do, Wallace may regret his decision to proceed without a traditional agent.

    2. Al Harrington, Hawks
    What kind of starting salary will Atlanta bring to the table when negotiations begin? If Harrington believes the offer is too low, he'll look to leave through a sign-and-trade deal. But how many teams out there are willing to pay Harrington's price? And can they give Atlanta a good player(s) in return in a sign-and-trade? The presence of Marvin Williams and Josh Smith will make Harrington expendable if his price is more than the Hawks will pay, but as of now there are more questions than answers here.

    3. Jason Terry, Mavericks
    Stop us if you've heard this before: The Mavs have a point guard who may command more money on the open market than owner Mark Cuban is willing to pay, and that point guard could turn to his former team, which is desperate for a playmaker. But in this case, we're talking about Terry and the Hawks, not Steve Nash and the Suns.

    4. Nazr Mohammed, Spurs
    There were a few people wondering what Nazr must have been thinking when he turned down an extension worth more than $20 million prior to opening night, but this 7-footer has upped his value over the course of the season by reclaiming his starting spot from Rasho Nesterovic.

    5. Joel Przybilla, Trail Blazers
    When a couple of his teammates angered him with their effort level, Portland coach Nate McMillan urged Przybilla to take his complaints public. He did, and he'll probably decide it's a wise move to bail out of this sinking ship while he can.

    6. Nene, Nuggets (restricted)
    The injured Brazilian forward fired agent Michael Coyne and switched to Dan Fegan, who has a reputation for getting his clients top dollar on the open market. The decision on whether Nene will go or stay will be influenced by whether general manager Kiki Vandeweghe survives in Denver.

    7. Mike James, Raptors (opt out)
    Newly installed GM Bryan Colangelo has reservations about whether it's worth the long-term risk to keep James, who will be 31 at the start of next season, for the amount of money James will command after what has been by far the best season of his career. Look for a sign-and-trade deal here.

    8. Peja Stojakovic, Pacers (opt out)
    It's tough to find anybody who believes Stojakovic will truly be on the market this summer, the thinking being that the Pacers were smart enough to get a wink-wink deal in place before they acquired Peja for Ron Artest. Such deals are in violation of NBA rules, but their existence is hard to prove.

    9. Vladimir Radmanovic, Clippers
    He surrendered his Larry Bird rights when he accepted the deal that sent him from Seattle to Los Angeles, so the most he can get is the midlevel exception (about $5 million). But there will be teams lining up to offer him that money.

    10. Drew Gooden, Cavaliers (restricted)
    We'll rank him as the third-best power forward on the market behind Harrington and Nene simply because more teams like Nene's upside, whereas there's a general feeling that the Gooden we're seeing now is as good as he'll ever be.

    11. Chris Wilcox, SuperSonics (restricted)
    It's hard to find any other big man who has improved his stock over the second half of the season as much as Wilcox, who is now being spoken of as a member of Seattle's core group of young players.

    12. Bonzi Wells, Kings
    There is a dearth of free agent talent available at the shooting guard spot, and if the Kings don't get out of the first round of the playoffs (or make the playoffs, for that matter) they won't be willing to make Wells the same type of long-term commitment he might find elsewhere.

    13. Reggie Evans, Nuggets
    Another player who forfeited his Bird rights when he agreed to a midseason trade, Evans is establishing full midlevel value through his play off the bench for Denver.

    14. Marcus Banks, Timberwolves
    If Wilcox has done the most of any big man to improve his value, Banks certainly takes the award in that category among guards. Went from being unused in Boston to a starter in Minnesota. But can he get Earl Watson-type money on the open market?

    15. Alonzo Mourning, Heat
    You'd think he's happy now that he's back in Miami and still laughing over the buyout he got from the Raptors. But 'Zo is never completely happy, and now he wants one more big money deal. You buying, Riles?

    16. Bobby Jackson, Grizzlies
    He's been pigeonholed into a career as a sixth man, but he's been getting the job done lately for the Grizzlies while Chucky Atkins and Eddie Jones have struggled.

    17. Sam Cassell, Clippers
    If he doesn't end up back with Los Angeles (they'd like to keep him if the price is right), he'll find a new home somewhere else and probably lead that team to the playoffs, too.

    18. Flip Murray, Cavaliers
    Gave up his Bird rights because he wanted to establish some value, and he's getting his chance as Cleveland's starting two guard. Will likely get at least a piece of somebody's midlevel exception.

    19. Rasual Butler, Hornets
    A great shooter, and one of the best under-the-radar players out there, he's been a decent contributor for the league's most surprising team.

    20. Tim Thomas, Suns
    Has already re-established some nice value with his strong play for Phoenix, and a big postseason could put him over the top. That's how he got his last monster contract from the Bucks.

    21. Speedy Claxton, Hornets
    His stock has fallen as fast as Banks' has risen, but he's still one of the few solid veteran point guards available. Played for Larry Brown in Philadelphia and the Knicks might seek a reunion if they can't get James from Toronto.

    22. Lorenzen Wright, Grizzlies
    Lost his job to Jake Tsakalidis before regaining it by default when Big Jake hurt his thumb two weeks ago. Memphis tried to trade him before the deadline and is unlikely to want him back.

    23. DJ Mbenga, Mavericks (restricted)
    Interest in him might be reduced by the fact that other teams will expect Mark Cuban to match any reasonable offer for the center who has supplanted Erick Dampier as Dallas' most effective defensive big man.

    24. Keith Van Horn, Mavericks
    He's done for the year after breaking his hand, which will probably cost him some money. He would have had a chance to boost his stock in the postseason.

    25. David Wesley, Rockets
    There are quite a few veteran guards vying for this final spot, so take your pick of Wesley, Nick Van Exel, Atkins, Gary Payton, Tony Delk or Milt Palacio.

    Others: Restricted: Alex Acker, Pistons; Trevor Ariza, Magic; Keith Bogans, Rockets; Antonio Burks, Grizzlies; Kevin Burleson, Bobcats; Jackie Butler, Knicks; Ronald Dupree, Timberwolves; Francisco Elson, Nuggets; Melvin Ely, Bobcats; Devin Green, Lakers; Jared Jeffries, Wizards; Fred Jones, Pacers; Mario Kasun, Magic; Boniface Ndong, Clippers; Andre Owens, Jazz; Shavlik Randolph, 76ers; Justin Reed, Timberwolves; Bernard Robinson, Bobcats; John Salmons, 76ers; Awvee Storey, Wizards; Jiri Welsch, Bucks.

    Unrestricted: Shandon Anderson, Heat; Darrell Armstrong, Mavericks; Stacey Augmon, Magic; Matt Barnes, 76ers; Lonny Baxter, Bobcats; Michael Bradley, 76ers; Rick Brunson, Rockets; Anthony Carter, Timberwolves; Kelvin Cato, Pistons; Calbert Cheaney, Nuggets; Jarron Collins, Jazz; Antonio Davis; Richie Frahm, Rockets; Reece Gaines, Bucks; Devean George, Lakers; Eddie Gill, Pacers; Adrian Griffin, Mavericks; Alan Henderson, Cavs; Lindsey Hunter, Pistons; Jermaine Jackson, Bucks; Jim Jackson, Lakers; DerMarr Johnson, Nuggets; Ervin Johnson, Bucks; Jumaine Jones, Bobcats; Toni Kukoc, Bucks; Voshon Lenard, Trail Blazers; Sean Marks, Spurs; Darrick Martin, Raptors; Walter McCarty, Clippers; Terence Morris, Magic; Lamond Murray, Nets; Michael Olowokandi, Celtics; Greg Ostertag, Jazz; Bo Outlaw, Magic; Jannero Pargo, Bulls; Eric Piatkowski, Bulls; Scot Pollard, Pacers; Bryon Russell, Nuggets; Jamal Sampson, Kings; Charles Smith, Nuggets; Latrell Sprewell; Jacque Vaughn, Nets; Jake Voskuhl, Bobcats; Mike Wilks, Sonics; Aaron Williams, Hornets; Loren Woods, Raptors; Qyntel Woods, Knicks.

    Player options: Derek Anderson, Heat; Ryan Bowen, Rockets; Greg Buckner, Nuggets; Eddie House, Suns; Mark Jackson, Hornets; Jeff McInnis, Nets; Mikki Moore, Sonics; Ruben Patterson, Nuggets; James Posey, Heat; Darius Songaila, Bulls; DeShawn Stevenson, Magic; Maurice Taylor, Knicks; Chris Webber, 76ers; Eric Williams, Raptors.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Insider request...

      I wish that were broken down by position so I didn't have to think so hard.
      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Insider request...

        Thanks Hicks

        Claxton and Marcus Banks are intriguing.

        Terry probably unattainable.

        Sam Cassell anyone?

        Wilcox is going to make some team very happy.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Insider request...

          This is out of left field, but would Dallas take Tinsley and Peja for Terry and either Howard or Daniels? I'm not saying Dallas would want Peja, but you have to admit that would be a wicked amount of shooting from the 3/4 with Peja and Dirk.

          Secondly, can a trade like that happen? I understand not being able to sign someone else's FA to sign and trade him, but shouldn't you be allowed to when it's your own? Actually, I need to clarify that. I don't mean just one way. I mean TWO teams, each with their respective FAs. Can they sign and trade them for each other? Why or why not?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Insider request...

            Originally posted by Hicks
            This is out of left field, but would Dallas take Tinsley and Peja for Terry and either Howard or Daniels? I'm not saying Dallas would want Peja, but you have to admit that would be a wicked amount of shooting from the 3/4 with Peja and Dirk.

            Secondly, can a trade like that happen? I understand not being able to sign someone else's FA to sign and trade him, but shouldn't you be allowed to when it's your own? Actually, I need to clarify that. I don't mean just one way. I mean TWO teams, each with their respective FAs. Can they sign and trade them for each other? Why or why not?
            Isn't that what happened in the Harrington/Jackson deal? If I have my facts straight (which I rarely do ) both contracts were up and they were sign-and-traded for each other.
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Insider request...

              Originally posted by Hicks
              This is out of left field, but would Dallas take Tinsley and Peja for Terry and either Howard or Daniels? I'm not saying Dallas would want Peja, but you have to admit that would be a wicked amount of shooting from the 3/4 with Peja and Dirk.

              Secondly, can a trade like that happen? I understand not being able to sign someone else's FA to sign and trade him, but shouldn't you be allowed to when it's your own? Actually, I need to clarify that. I don't mean just one way. I mean TWO teams, each with their respective FAs. Can they sign and trade them for each other? Why or why not?
              Didn't we sign-and-trade Al Harrington and ATL sign-and-trade Jackson during that transaction?

              I can't see why it would be disallowed even if that was not the specifics in that case.

              In short, I don't think Dallas will come off Terry period. I am very interested to find out exactly where Peja's trade or new contract value stands. Is he worth 11million a year? I don't think so.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Insider request...

                Originally posted by Los Angeles
                Isn't that what happened in the Harrington/Jackson deal? If I have my facts straight (which I rarely do ) both contracts were up and they were sign-and-traded for each other.
                No, Al was in the middle of the contract that is finally expiring in a few months.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Insider request...

                  Originally posted by Hicks
                  No, Al was in the middle of the contract that is finally expiring in a few months.
                  I stand corrected... again.
                  “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                  “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Insider request...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Insider request...

                      Originally posted by Hicks
                      Updated: April 7, 2006, 11:10 AM ET
                      Free agent roundup: Look for price of big men to rise
                      Insider
                      Sheridan
                      By Chris Sheridan
                      ESPN Insider
                      Archive

                      8. Peja Stojakovic, Pacers (opt out)
                      It's tough to find anybody who believes Stojakovic will truly be on the market this summer, the thinking being that the Pacers were smart enough to get a wink-wink deal in place before they acquired Peja for Ron Artest. Such deals are in violation of NBA rules, but their existence is hard to prove.
                      I hope that is the case....but I am skeptical as to how much the Pacers are willing to offer and how much Peja wants.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Insider request...

                        Originally posted by Hicks
                        This is out of left field, but would Dallas take Tinsley and Peja for Terry and either Howard or Daniels? I'm not saying Dallas would want Peja, but you have to admit that would be a wicked amount of shooting from the 3/4 with Peja and Dirk.

                        Secondly, can a trade like that happen? I understand not being able to sign someone else's FA to sign and trade him, but shouldn't you be allowed to when it's your own? Actually, I need to clarify that. I don't mean just one way. I mean TWO teams, each with their respective FAs. Can they sign and trade them for each other? Why or why not?
                        I think that Howard is one of their best defenders on the team and I would be surprised if Cuban would trade him....even for Peja.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Insider request...

                          If the Pacers had the money....I would resign Peja and make a decent offer to Adrian Griffin and Francisco Elson.

                          If we want an upgrade at the PG positon....I would hope that we can live with the AJ/Sarunas experiment for another season or two...when the Free Agent market is improved.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Insider request...

                            I know it's spilled milk, but Maggette/Wilcox for Ron sure looks good right now.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Insider request...

                              I don't think Peja is going anywhere, Bird really likes him, and he doesn't have an attitude.

                              As for Maggette/Wilcox for Ron, sure it looks good, but it was never offered. How do I know? Because the Pacers wouldn't have agreed to just Maggette for Ron if Wilcox would have been offered too.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X