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

Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

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

  • Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

    I don't know if the salaries would match up, but I guess it depends on what Marcus Bank's S&T would be.

    Indiana Trades:
    Jeff Foster
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Stephen Jackson

    Recieves:
    Marcus Banks (S&T)
    Wally Szczerbiak

    Boston Trades:
    Wally Szczerbiak
    Theo Ratliff
    Delonte West

    Recieves:
    Jeff Foster
    Stephen Jackson
    Eddie Griffin
    Rashad McCants

    Minnesota Trades:
    Eddie Griffin
    Rashad McCants

    Recieves:
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Delonte West
    Theo Ratliff

    Why for us:
    Wally would help in the shooting aspect a lot. He's a guy that can knock down threes, and will stretch the defense. I think he's actually an underrated player, just a step down from Peja. Marcus Banks is one of those hidden gem type players, and him combined with Marquis could be a very dangerous backcourt.

    Why for Boston:
    Boston gets a lot of talent back in this deal. They are supposedly shopping Wally, and with the additions of Rajon Rondo and Sebastian Telfair, I could see them moving Delonte West. They get Wally's almost equal talent wise back in Jackson, an equal player to Theo Ratliff in Eddie Griffin, except with a better offensive game, then basically trade West for Foster and McCants. I could definitley see them pulling the trigger.

    Why for Minnesota:
    I think these are two guys Minnesota wouldn't mind moving. I think they have enough problems then to have to worry about guys like Griffin, they don't need any more trouble. Tinsley and West gives them a very nice point guard rotation if Tinsley can stay healthy. They can then move Jaric/Hudson or Peeler, hang on to just one of those guys, and have themselves a very set PG rotation. They also get a nice shotblocker to go next to Garnett in Ratliff, he just basically replaces Griffin.

    Give the MLE to Reggie Evans.

    Then we go on and S&T Fred Jones for Chris Mihm, and we look like this next year:

    Marcus Banks/AJ/Sarunas
    Marquis Daniels/Wally/James White
    Danny Granger/Wally/Shawne Williams
    JO/Reggie Evans
    Chris Mihm/David Harrison

    I like that lineup a lot.

  • #2
    Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

    Originally posted by Isaac@Section216
    I don't know if the salaries would match up, but I guess it depends on what Marcus Bank's S&T would be.

    Indiana Trades:
    Jeff Foster
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Stephen Jackson

    Recieves:
    Marcus Banks (S&T)
    Wally Szczerbiak

    Boston Trades:
    Wally Szczerbiak
    Theo Ratliff
    Delonte West

    Recieves:
    Jeff Foster
    Stephen Jackson
    Eddie Griffin
    Rashad McCants

    Minnesota Trades:
    Eddie Griffin
    Rashad McCants

    Recieves:
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Delonte West
    Theo Ratliff

    Why for us:
    Wally would help in the shooting aspect a lot. He's a guy that can knock down threes, and will stretch the defense. I think he's actually an underrated player, just a step down from Peja. Marcus Banks is one of those hidden gem type players, and him combined with Marquis could be a very dangerous backcourt.

    Why for Boston:
    Boston gets a lot of talent back in this deal. They are supposedly shopping Wally, and with the additions of Rajon Rondo and Sebastian Telfair, I could see them moving Delonte West. They get Wally's almost equal talent wise back in Jackson, an equal player to Theo Ratliff in Eddie Griffin, except with a better offensive game, then basically trade West for Foster and McCants. I could definitley see them pulling the trigger.

    Why for Minnesota:
    I think these are two guys Minnesota wouldn't mind moving. I think they have enough problems then to have to worry about guys like Griffin, they don't need any more trouble. Tinsley and West gives them a very nice point guard rotation if Tinsley can stay healthy. They can then move Jaric/Hudson or Peeler, hang on to just one of those guys, and have themselves a very set PG rotation. They also get a nice shotblocker to go next to Garnett in Ratliff, he just basically replaces Griffin.

    Give the MLE to Reggie Evans.

    Then we go on and S&T Fred Jones for Chris Mihm, and we look like this next year:

    Marcus Banks/AJ/Sarunas
    Marquis Daniels/Wally/James White
    Danny Granger/Wally/Shawne Williams
    JO/Reggie Evans
    Chris Mihm/David Harrison

    I like that lineup a lot.
    A lot of speculating, first we have to get Minn, and Boston to the table. Then we have to bring L.A to the table and then sign and trade Fred Jones. If we went through with the Boston, Minn trade and something happened with the Lakers we'd be screwed. Tinsley Jax AND Foster just for Wally and Banks WoW! I'm glad you aren't the GM. Then we have to sign and trade Fred for Mihm. Good luck with that lol. It's hard enough to get 1 team involved let alone 5. This is just a waste of PD space.

    No offense of course.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

      If you think we can get anything better then Banks and Wally for a Jack/Tins/Foster, then you are sorely mistaken.

      Hah, I just realized you are the one who posted the Jack/Foster/Tins trade for Kidd and Nenad, so a response like that is expected.

      You are clearly a ridiculous homer who overevaluates our players. Wally is a guy who is close to a 20 ppg scorer, his trade value is much higher then Tinsley and Jackson's are combined. The only reason Boston is on board is because Minnesota is involved. Didn't I already post why each team would be interested?

      A lot of speculating, first we have to get Minn, and Boston to the table.
      That's right, all 3 teams DO have to agree for a trade to go through, Congrats, you've just passed the first grade!!

      It's hard enough to get 1 team involved let alone 5.
      It's a hell of a lot harder to get a team to give up 2 of their 4 franchise players for our junk that we need to get rid of.

      Then we have to sign and trade Fred for Mihm. Good luck with that lol.
      I don't understand your point... you don't think LA would do it? OK, well then I'll post a why both teams do this trade as well.

      Why for us: We get a solid starting Center back for someone who was likely just to leave anyways, we play JO at his NATURAL position and he has less of a load defensively.

      Why for LA: They seem to be a good fit for Fred, he'd be a good backup for Kobe, and would fit in well with the triangle. He then makes them able to trade Deavan George, plus they have a logjam at Center with Bynum and Brown. I think Mihm is the odd guy out that they will look to move, they won't get a whole lot better then Freddie.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

        Originally posted by Isaac@Section216
        If you think we can get anything better then Banks and Wally for a Jack/Tins/Foster, then you are sorely mistaken.

        Hah, I just realized you are the one who posted the Jack/Foster/Tins trade for Kidd and Nenad, so a response like that is expected.

        You are clearly a ridiculous homer who overevaluates our players. Wally is a guy who is close to a 20 ppg scorer, his trade value is much higher then Tinsley and Jackson's are combined. The only reason Boston is on board is because Minnesota is involved. Didn't I already post why each team would be interested?



        That's right, all 3 teams DO have to agree for a trade to go through, Congrats, you've just passed the first grade!!



        It's a hell of a lot harder to get a team to give up 2 of their 4 franchise players for our junk that we need to get rid of.



        I don't understand your point... you don't think LA would do it? OK, well then I'll post a why both teams do this trade as well.

        Why for us: We get a solid starting Center back for someone who was likely just to leave anyways, we play JO at his NATURAL position and he has less of a load defensively.

        Why for LA: They seem to be a good fit for Fred, he'd be a good backup for Kobe, and would fit in well with the triangle. He then makes them able to trade Deavan George, plus they have a logjam at Center with Bynum and Brown. I think Mihm is the odd guy out that they will look to move, they won't get a whole lot better then Freddie.

        Alright Homer, where do I start hmm... Well at the beginning I guess. You seriously think all we can get is something like Banks and Wally for Jax/Tinsley/Foster? You know that's three of our starters? I don't over value our players, I think you get caught up in the hoopla' and forget that the PD is one of the only places that wouldn't think Jax wasn't a decent player. You have to realize the PD is VERY critical of their players more then any other forum, and that is because we evaluate their attitude mixed in with their performance. That's why when you click on the "should we get Iverson thread" you see NO!, Hell NO, WTF, NO!. So subconsciously people like you think they suck.

        You must of missed the Timerwolves, Boston trade mid-season last year. Wally was pretty much traded Straight up for Ricky Davis. Jax is the most comparable player to Davis in the league. Wally being a 20ppg scorer (really he average 17.5) is your main argument for his stock, how many points do you think Jax averaged last year? 16.4 and he was on a team with a lot more talent. If you remember Jax was traded straight up for Harrington (his stock isn't that low). Jax is just as good as Wally, Tinsley is better sitting on the bench then Banks is starting and Foster the lead offensive rebounder and semi-decent Center you are giving them for free. Like I wrote before "I'm glad you aren't our GM"

        The L.A trade is all wrong. First, I don't know how they are going to trade George when he is a free agent, and they haven't signed him yet. Mihm is pretty much their only center, him being injured last year made huge problems for L.A. A jogjam at Center? lol I'll consider that a joke. Bynum was a scrub last year, L.A couldn't keep him in longer then 5 minutes without Phil getting physically sick. He didn't start one game, nor did he play more then 20minutes in a game even with Mihm being out. Some Logjam. This would be a first: "their starting Center would be the odd man out" lol Wow! now I'm really glad you aren't our GM... and Kwame is a PF, he just shifted over to Center because Mihm was injured leaving the PF position undersized.
        They don't need a full time Kobe back up because guess what Kobe plays 45 minutes a game, some games he doesn't even come out. Fred wants more playing time, I doubt he is going to sign and trade; knowing he is going to sit on the bench the rest of his career behind Kobe. Again, Good luck with that.

        I'll give you the benefit of the doubt; Jax and Tinsley, for Wally and Banks something maybe to think about. We won't get L.A to bite on the Jones deal. We'd have to give them a big, or they would have to have something in lock for a big. I want Mihm, but Jones isn't going to do the trick alone unless they have something in lock with another Center.
        __________________________________________________ ______________________________________
        Originally posted by Isaac@Section216
        It's a hell of a lot harder to get a team to give up 2 of their 4 franchise players for our junk that we need to get rid of.
        It must be nice having 4 franchise players, lol... FOUR, usually a team only has one at MOST 2. You consider Kristic a franchise player? AGIAN, I'm glad you aren't our GM. Who are the Pacers franchise players? Granger, JO, JAX, Foster lol

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          Alright Homer, where do I start hmm... Well at the beginning I guess. You seriously think all we can get is something like Banks and Wally for Jax/Tinsley/Foster? You know that's three of our starters?
          One of those starters is always injured, one has a serious attitude problem and we will have problems finding anyone who will take him, and one of whom isn't a starting quality player.

          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          I don't over value our players, I think you get caught up in the hoopla' and forget that the PD is one of the only places that wouldn't think Jax wasn't a decent player. You have to realize the PD is VERY critical of their players more then any other forum, and that is because we evaluate their attitude mixed in with their performance. That's why when you click on the "should we get Iverson thread" you see NO!, Hell NO, WTF, NO!. So subconsciously people like you think they suck.
          Stephen Jackson is my favorite Pacer. I wear my Stephen Jackson jersey proudly, and I think he was the mvp of our team last season. I had a Jack avatar at this site for the entire regular season. That doesn't mean his trade value isn't very low.


          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          The L.A trade is all wrong. First, I don't know how they are going to trade George when he is a free agent
          Ok, I misworded myself, it makes him less important to the team, they can either s&t him or let him walk.

          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          Mihm is pretty much their only center, him being injured last year made huge problems for L.A. A jogjam at Center? lol I'll consider that a joke. Bynum was a scrub last year, L.A couldn't keep him in longer then 5 minutes without Phil getting physically sick. He didn't start one game, nor did he play more then 20minutes in a game even with Mihm being out. Some Logjam. This would be a first: "their starting Center would be the odd man out" lol Wow! now I'm really glad you aren't our GM... and Kwame is a PF, he just shifted over to Center because Mihm was injured leaving the PF position undersized.
          Since you are being all attacking with your posts, I can play that game too. You are a complete idiot for everything you said about Bynum. There is a reason they picked him 10th, and a reason that Mihm WILL be traded this offseason. Learn to watch someone play and judge them rather then looking at their stats page on nba.com. Bynum has an incredibly long wingspan, and has an excellent hook shot he's developing. Remember he is only 19 years old, he only just came out of high school last year and he showed a lot of potential, A LOT. He'll be a great Center in the years to come, and they want to develop him quickly rather then slowly. Pick at straws all you want with the Kwame argument, the fact is that Kwame and Bynum on the floor together isn't something LA wants to do too often, they'll be playing Kwame at center.



          Originally posted by BoomBaby31
          It must be nice having 4 franchise players, lol... FOUR, usually a team only has one at MOST 2. You consider Kristic a franchise player? AGIAN, I'm glad you aren't our GM. Who are the Pacers franchise players? Granger, JO, JAX, Foster lol
          There's a reason they are being called the big 4 in New Jersey. Krstic has all star talent, and he certainly showed it against us in the playoffs. Matter of fact, I don't think New Jersey would even trade Krstic for Jermaine, they are that high on him. Then you ask them to throw in Kidd, and you have absolutley no right to be slamming my trade ideas. At least mine is reasonable for all sides involved.

          Hey I've got a trade idea, Foster and Tinsley for Duncan, what do you think of that one?

          Wait, we shouldn't do that because that's giving up two starters for one right? That would be stupid.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

            Originally posted by Isaac@Section216
            Since you are being all attacking with your posts, I can play that game too. You are a complete idiot for everything you said about Bynum. There is a reason they picked him 10th, and a reason that Mihm WILL be traded this offseason. Learn to watch someone play and judge them rather then looking at their stats page on nba.com. Bynum has an incredibly long wingspan, and has an excellent hook shot he's developing. Remember he is only 19 years old, he only just came out of high school last year and he showed a lot of potential, A LOT. He'll be a great Center in the years to come, and they want to develop him quickly rather then slowly. Pick at straws all you want with the Kwame argument, the fact is that Kwame and Bynum on the floor together isn't something LA wants to do too often, they'll be playing Kwame at center.
            Well all 25 regular season games, and the 2 playoff games I went to last year wasn't enough. I watched more of the Lakers last season then even the Pacers (I know feel sorry for me lol). Bynum by no means is ready to play significant minutes, and definitely not ready to start. I'm not saying he doesn't have potential because he does. He just isn't ready to start especially with Phil being the coach (he doesn't play rookies). You are right they don't want Kwame and Bynum on the floor at the same time. They traded for Kwame to be a PF and when Mihm went down it messed everything up in L.A. They need another big, it is the last year of Mihm's contract and they would/are willing to move him but they need a big to fill that spot though. L.A picked him at 10th but, I'm sure you heard all of the controversy about it or maybe it was just local T.V here.
            ____________________________________________
            Originally posted by Isaac@Section216

            There's a reason they are being called the big 4 in New Jersey. Krstic has all star talent, and he certainly showed it against us in the playoffs. Matter of fact, I don't think New Jersey would even trade Krstic for Jermaine, they are that high on him. Then you ask them to throw in Kidd, and you have absolutley no right to be slamming my trade ideas. At least mine is reasonable for all sides involved.

            Hey I've got a trade idea, Foster and Tinsley for Duncan, what do you think of that one?

            Wait, we shouldn't do that because that's giving up two starters for one right? That would be stupid.
            LoL, you're funny... I had no Idea NJ was so high on Krstic where do you get your information certainly not where I get mine? Maybe you just misused "franchise player" as well. A franchise player is someone a team builds around if all 4 of them are "franchise" players how do they build? Just keep trading that 5 guy? I told you why it would work, I also wrote 10-15 times it was speculation, I didn't think it would happen and NJ would half to be thinking all of those steps which they aren't. I guess the Duncan analogy is good since Duncan and Krsitic is on the same level.
            ____________________________________________
            Originally posted by Isaac@Section216
            One of those starters is always injured, one has a serious attitude problem and we will have problems finding anyone who will take him, and one of whom isn't a starting quality player.



            Stephen Jackson is my favorite Pacer. I wear my Stephen Jackson jersey proudly, and I think he was the mvp of our team last season. I had a Jack avatar at this site for the entire regular season. That doesn't mean his trade value isn't very low.
            Even with an attitude problem and Tinsley being injured; it still wouldn't be fair to give up Jax/tins/foster for Wally and Banks. We are already slim on bigs, and for us to give up a big and Jax. What if our rookies don't pan out? How we going to score? Wally is decent but, he doesn't "shine" plus he has had injuries in the past. Banks would just sit on the bench (like in Boston) behind A.J and Sauras. I don't see how it's worth it, maybe it's just me. Jax/Tinsley and maybe a future 2nd round draft pick but, not Foster. I think Jax can draw more then you think, like I wrote before, we're one of the only teams that care about "attitude". The Timberwolves just traded Wally for Ricky Davis, and I think Jax is the most comparable player to Davis except a tad bit better.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

              Yeah because we are a little short on PGs and SFs....

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Indiana/Boston/Minnesota + Indiana/L.A. Lakers

                Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry
                Yeah because we are a little short on PGs and SFs....
                We need a new point guard badly, and if you don't think our outside shooting needs help...

                Comment

                Working...
                X