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

You get to play GM for the Pacers

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

  • You get to play GM for the Pacers

    We all can sit back and b!itch and moan about player contracts, but as I was listening to some talk radio I heard more and more bickering about player being overpaid and underpaid.

    So lets assume for a minute that my premise is correct and JO could be a great complimentary player for any other superstar.

    How would you like to go about shaping this team. Keep in mind if you are like Peck and you think this team is fine you can leave it as is, but I do beleive JO has a player option coming up. While I do not think it is likely, he could just get up and leave us high and dry.

    Would you just leave this team alone and wait to build from the draft?
    If so, are there any teams you might make some trades with (say David Harrison) in hopes of getting extra draft picks or moving up in the draft (I realize you probably could not get anything but a 2nd round pick for DH, that was just an example.)

    Who do you consider untouchable?

    Assuming you have any untoucable players, what what you be willing to give up to build around them?

    Would you want to to get another perimiter player to compliment JO, a big man, or just get rid of JO and build some other way?

  • #2
    Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

    There are no untouchable players on this roster. There are no dominant superstars, either now or in a few years. I would trade any player on this team for a chance at a legitimate star quality player, but now that AI is gone, there are not any of those types available.

    The Pacers have no first round pick in this next draft. Building through the draft is going to take at least a couple of years, so unless you're willing to accept two to three years of being the 5-8 seed in the East and losing in the first or second round of the playoffs, it's not an option.

    I would trade JO for a top 10 pick in next years draft.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

      At this point, I'd be seriously considering blowing the team up and start again with the draft.

      I'd keep Granger for sure, and for now I'd hang on to Williams, Marshall, Jasikevicius, Baston, Foster, Greene, Harrington and Powell as well. Not that they're all untouchable (no one truly is, but Granger is the closest), they're just players I'm not hot to get rid of. Armstrong is retiring this year or next, but I like him. I'm lukewarm on Daniels, but unless I hear an offer that I feel I "win", I don't trade him at this point.

      I'd see what my best offer for Jermaine O'Neal was, and unless I felt like I was getting low-balled, I'd take it if it made any sense for a rebuilding effort (looking for young talent and picks). I'd sell Tinsley, Jackson, and Harrison to the least-lowest bidders.

      Leaving me (without plugging in what I get back):

      Jasikevicius/Armstrong
      Daniels/Marshall
      Granger/Williams
      Harrington/Baston/Powell
      Foster

      From what I've given away, (O'Neal, Tinsley, Jackson, Harrison), I'd expect to have at least 2 first rounders, at least 2 second rounders, an expiring deal, and one or two starting-quality players.

      From there, my scouts better do a damn good job for June 2007.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

        [QUOTE=vapacersfan;516927] I do believe JO has a player option coming up. While I do not think it is likely, he could just get up and leave us high and dry.


        Not high and dry by a long shot -- his contract would be gone and the Pacers would become instant players in the F.A. market. JO is a good player, a great player some nights, but his contract exceeds his worth.

        If there were an option to trade with Chicago, i.e. JO to the Bulls for a package plus that Knicks draft pick, we should do it. It would be a good deal for both teams. And a good deal for JO as he goes to a good team which he makes better, and plays alongside Ben.

        We should also attempt to trade two or three of our bench players (e.g., Harrison) for a solid rotation player, if possible.

        We need a pick in next year's draft.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          At this point, I'd be seriously considering blowing the team up and start again with the draft.

          I'd keep Granger for sure, and for now I'd hang on to Williams, Marshall, Jasikevicius, Baston, Foster, Greene, Harrington and Powell as well. Not that they're all untouchable (no one truly is, but Granger is the closest), they're just players I'm not hot to get rid of. Armstrong is retiring this year or next, but I like him. I'm lukewarm on Daniels, but unless I hear an offer that I feel I "win", I don't trade him at this point.

          I'd see what my best offer for Jermaine O'Neal was, and unless I felt like I was getting low-balled, I'd take it if it made any sense for a rebuilding effort (looking for young talent and picks). I'd sell Tinsley, Jackson, and Harrison to the least-lowest bidders.

          Leaving me (without plugging in what I get back):

          Jasikevicius/Armstrong
          Daniels/Marshall
          Granger/Williams
          Harrington/Baston/Powell
          Foster

          From what I've given away, (O'Neal, Tinsley, Jackson, Harrison), I'd expect to have at least 2 first rounders, at least 2 second rounders, an expiring deal, and one or two starting-quality players.

          From there, my scouts better do a damn good job for June 2007.
          I agree on the scheme, but I think you are way too optimistic on the results.
          Tinsley & Jackson are virtually untradeable because of their longterm contracts. The only way to trade them is to take back an even worse contract (like say KMart, Nene or Adonal Foyle...). That's far away from "2nd rounders and 1-2 starter-quality players". BTW, I'm not sure it's a bad deal... One bloated contract for a non-player might actually hurt less than 2 semi-bloated contracts for "detrimental-to-the-team" players.

          About JO, I'd stick with him and part with Harrington. JO can be 2nd fiddle one day, and the only supporting cast guy that does still has any trade value is Harrington. Getting him was a mistake, and giving up the 2007 1st rounder was even worse.

          I'm not sold on Daniels either - I have a feeling he's moving straight to the Tinsley-Jackson category, and if he's not traded soon he'll be untradeable soon enough...

          Harrison will go for a 2nd rounder. Not much more to get out of there...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

            Well, va, For me, first thing I do is look at the top teams and consider if this team as it's currently comprised could topple the top east teams, since the goal is to get to the Finals.

            Who are the top teams?

            That's something that's pretty subjective, but I think you can get a general idea.

            Cleveland: Do we have an answer for Lebron?
            Miami: They ARE the champs. Are they viable only as long as Shaq is around?
            Detroit: A team whose window hasn't closed yet. Could be a hard push for them to get it done again with a 1-2 year window left.

            Then there are the teams who are just a hair from putting it together.

            Chicago: Great mix of talent and young.
            Orlando: Smoke and mirrors, or real deal?
            Boston: 1-2 years away from doing damage.
            New Jersey: Hard to beat Kidd in his prime, Krstic hitting his stride and talented backups. If not for RJ being injured....

            You build your team based on your ability to get past the top tier teams, then compare your chances against the next lowest tier.

            The way this team is right now, I don't see us taking the top three teams, with us having an extremely hard time getting past Chicago, NJ or Boston.

            So what do you do to improve your odds?

            Do the old strengths/weaknesses thing with your own team.

            Most glaring strength is the JO/Al/Granger combo. I think you build from there. Either surround them with better players, or trade them for an upgrade.

            Weakness? For me, it's pretty simple: starting PG and a better rounded center. All our other players can plug the SF/SG spots depending on the situation. Because of the age of this group, I don't think looking for a draft pick for next year helps.

            So based upon that, who has a surplus of what you need? What players appear disgruntled? What talented players are buried on their respective benches? (a Jermaine O'neal situation in Portland. Or look at Melvin Ely) Sonics are an example of surplus with Petro/Swift/Sene, or the Knicks with their guard situation. I think you start there. If that doesn't strike you enough to push you to a next level, then I think you look at who is hurting at a position when you are strong and see if they have anyhting YOU want.

            Okay, that my rationale.

            Now what would I do with THIS team?

            I don't think this team does anything of note with JO as it's main figurehead, so I either trade him or get someone with stronger talents to lead this team. Everyone else is/could be trade material. My emphasis would be to lose Tinsley & Jackson.

            Now before anyone gets too pissed, remember, this is what I would do, if I could and was GM. Two trades to clear this team of the guys I perceive as problems.

            Push Minn hard for a JO/Tinsley for Garnett/Foye based trade. Small contracts guy like Marshall/Powell etc, or Craig Smith/Bracey Wright, etc, could be thrown in to make the deal better for both sides.

            The other trade I'd hope for is Watson/Petro for Stephen Jackson/Armstrong.

            (Another trade that would work is Cassell/Maguette for Tinsley/Jackson/combination of Powell, Green & Marshall to make numbers work.)

            I don't mean to sound like cavalier fantasy trading, but with my goal of ridding this team of the unholy trio, I see that as the best, realistic way to get it done and not put us in rebuilding mode. I guess in a sense, it would be "blowing the team up", but I just don't see us getting anywhere with those three as our core.

            Bottom line, as GM, as someone put it on here (I'm forgetting who), I'd quit putting lipstick on a pig and make some real changes.
            Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

              I would either make a move for another star player to take a shot at the title now, or trade JO and go into full rebuild mode. I would do ANYTHING necessary to get Greg Oden.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                I would either make a move for another star player to take a shot at the title now, or trade JO and go into full rebuild mode. I would do ANYTHING necessary to get Greg Oden.
                What if we do all that get the first round pick, and Greg doesnt come out? Wouldnt that be **** in your cereal.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                  I would fire the coach and get someone who would be more suited to this roster. Its not that Rick is a bad coach he is simply the wrong coach for this team.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                    Trade Jermaine/Harrison/Quis for the best deal you can get that obviously should include draft picks and hopefully just a really good center. We have Al Harrington who is easily as good as Jermaine in every aspect minus the blocks.

                    So if you ask me whatever we can get for Jermaine is a good deal, especially if it involves some first round draft picks. No reason to trade Jack/Tins they aren't as bad as people think. Especially Tins cuz we have nothing to gain by trading him and no one wants Sjack.

                    Jackson is the number one competitor on our team so I want him here. He wants a title and all the baggage isn't as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Dennis Rodman also has a few rings.

                    I really think we just need to get rid of Jermaine for a really good center A REAL CENTER. Maybe Bogut, Krstic, Kaman, Camby...any of those guys and the deal obviously has to include some good draft picks.

                    Shawne WIlliams and Granger look to be real promising, along with Rawle Marshall. Hold on to these guys and get a few more young guys and our future is looking pretty bright. We just need to draft a really good shooting guard ASAP.
                    *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                      Originally posted by Jon Theodore View Post
                      We just need to draft a really good shooting guard ASAP.
                      Since we traded away our 07 draft pick it won't be next season we draft a really good SG. Unless the protection kicks in. Or unless we make a trade and get a 1st rounder in return.

                      -Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                        I'll chime in with my own thoughts soon enough but I would like to ask you guys what you think the chances are of a player of JO's caliber (or a "Batman" which many of you seem to be hoping for) coming from the draft in...

                        1.)...the top 5 picks?
                        2.)...the late lottery?
                        3.)...15-20?
                        4.)...20-25?
                        5.)...25-30?
                        6.)...second round?

                        My answers would be:
                        1.) OK. The draft is pretty deep this year. Oden is a future superstar. Durant, Noah. There are good players available here. Possible future all-stars.
                        2.) Fair. If you keep sticking with the depth of the draft, the late lottery might also hold some true gems.
                        3.) Poor. This is being generous. No one should expect Al Harrington-level players, let alone all-stars here.
                        4.) Extremely poor. These are picks that can usually be acquired fairly easily (i.e. Philadelphia just acquired two in this range) but then again, you're reaching if you expect greatness here.
                        5.) Rare. End of the first round usually holds few all-stars.
                        6.) Once in a blue moon. Rashard Lewis and Gilbert Arenas don't come around every year.

                        Now, take into account the Pacers' chances of getting one of these picks. What do you think they could get? Our best chip is probably Granger and he might get us a late lottery pick if we wanted. JO would be more difficult to move because of matching his contract. By comparison, AI, one of the best players in the league, couldn't fetch a lottery pick. But for arguments sake, I do think that we might be able to get a lottery pick for JO if we really wanted to try.

                        In addition to this, I would like to compare this year's draft to the 2003 draft, the arguably greatest draft in the past decade.

                        Look at the player distribution among the categories:

                        1.) Two guys that are complete home runs: LeBron and Wade. Two guys that would qualify as "Batman" status for you guys: Bosh and Melo. Then a wildcard in Darko. Unfortunately, I can guarantee you that JO won't fetch a top five pick in this draft. Picks are valued too high. So forget these guys.
                        2.) Here you got Chris Kaman who is rapidly becoming an overpaid big man and not at all a "Batman." Kirk Hinrich is fascinating because he is very good at his position and a good talent but I seriously doubt that he can be the first option on a championship team. Then you got solid guys like T.J. Ford, Luke Ridnour, and Michael Pietrus. Solid, but nothing you'd give JO up for.
                        3.) David West is the only player we could miss out on in this range and to be fair, Al Harrington, with his contract, outside shooting, and popularity in Indy, is a good deal here.
                        4.) 5.) Boris Diaw available here and Josh Howard later at the end. Both are very nice talents but I doubt that they'll ever be all-stars.
                        6.) The best of the second round is probably Kyle Korver or James Jones. But even in a deep draft like 03, the second round is really tough to predict.




                        Also, why does JO's contract bother everyone so much? This is a league where Sam Dalembert and Nene got 60 million. I'm glad we gave him that money. San Antonio easily could have gotten him that summer too. Big men are generally overpaid. I can accept JO being overpaid as an argument but it's not like he is overpaid by a lot. He's going to be in his prime for his entire contract.

                        With all this being said, I can foresee one possibility where we might be able to shop around JO and getting it to work for us. If we can somehow get Chicago to trade us P.J. Brown's deal, Ben Gordon, cap filler, and the Knicks' pick...then you do it. Chicago might be willing to overpay just so they can get some low-post scoring help.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                          Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                          I would fire the coach and get someone who would be more suited to this roster. Its not that Rick is a bad coach he is simply the wrong coach for this team.
                          I started to think that way last year, but the more I've thought about it and the more I've watched this team, from O'Neal, to Jackson, and least of all Tinsley (but I'll still include him because he's not the ideal PG for a Carlisle team), we have the wrong players for this team, not the wrong coach.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            I started to think that way last year, but the more I've thought about it and the more I've watched this team, from O'Neal, to Jackson, and least of all Tinsley (but I'll still include him because he's not the ideal PG for a Carlisle team), we have the wrong players for this team, not the wrong coach.
                            So Tinsley,Jackson and O'Neal are not right for this team.
                            But Jasikavicus and Foster are right for this team. Ohh okay.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: You get to play GM for the Pacers

                              Once the team committed to the coach with the extension AND fancy new title all eyes should've moved toward the players. It's up to them....

                              I don't think the team can backtrack philosophically on that commitment to the coach at this point.

                              Altho I suppose an argument could be made that they made a commitment both ways (to the core of the players AND the coach) by keeping the core intact and changing on the fringes while also giving Carlisle a new contract.

                              -Bball
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X