Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

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

  • #31
    Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

    Originally posted by Shade View Post
    continues to show his ignorance.
    Yet people keep agreeing with him.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

      Originally posted by iPACER View Post
      Ditto.

      Hold on to JO for a good offer. His value increases as his contract nears expiration. Bosh and Lebron expire at the same time as JO. Who wants 09-10 capspace?

      There is no way in hell that Lebron will play for the Pacers.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

        Originally posted by Larry Bird
        "I think at the small forward and two guard, we're pretty well set with Danny (Granger), Shawne (Williams) and Mike (Dunleavy),'' Bird said. "Any time you go into the draft, you look for point guards and you look for big guys. It's according to what's going to be there. If there's a point guard we really like, we have to look at him. But if there's a big man there, you always like the bigs.

        "At the four position we could use another guy. We've got a lot of holes to fill.''
        Man....unless Bird thinks that Westbrook can run the point....then that means that we're gonna draft either Augustine or Collison ( assuming that Love is gone )
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Kravitz: Deal Tinsley and O'Neal

          Originally posted by Putnam View Post
          Seriously, can anyone discuss knowledgeably what a buyout of Tinsley might cost, what benefits to the team would balance the straight-up loss, and so forth? I'm assuming they'd pay less than the full amount owed, but that it would still be an awesome chunk of money coming out of Herb's pocket.
          If the Simons buy out Tinsley....I would think that the difference is that the Simons pay him a couple of mil less then he is owed, he won't be sitting at the end of the bench in his suit but will still show up in our Salary cap for years to come.

          Honestly....given the likely financial situation that we are in now....I don't see how the Simons can afford to throw money at Tinsley just to see him gone. Teams that are bulging with Revenue can do that....but small market teams like the Pacers can't afford to pay to have him leave.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Man....unless Bird thinks that Westbrook can run the point....then that means that we're gonna draft either Augustine or Collison ( assuming that Love is gone )
            If Westbrook's ever able to run the point (which I doubt), it'll be several, several years.

            Augustin wouldn't be a bad pick. In fact I think a lot of people would be pretty satisfied simply because he'd be an upgrade over Travis Diener and Flip Murray. Of course those sentiments would change when people realize his upside is Jameer Nelson and not Chris Paul. Then people would be scrutinzing all his weaknesses and demanding the Pacers draft another PG a couple years later because they want Chris Paul.

            The Pacers just need more talent. Just take the most talented player available.

            If Westbrook is available at #11, he would be an excellent pick that Pacer fans should be really happy with.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

              Trading Jermaine would not be smart, as others have mentioned. Plus, this team plays much better with him in the lineup. Give him 20-25 min a game. Maybe he won't get hurt that way, and we can play him the whole year.
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                I also agree with UB. Let's take a realistic view at trading JO:

                1. Where would he go? You certainly don't want to trade him to a EC team, and if you do it would be foolish to trade him to a contender (in this case any team that made the playoffs in my book is a contender). So, the first place you look is at non-playoff teams, but you start first out on the WC. Seattle, Memphis and the Clippers would be ideal until you start to consider the financial dealings. That's when things become alittle bit more tricky.

                2. At what cost to both sides? Staying with the Clippers, Sonics and Grizzlies as examples, it's difficult to image finding a win-win scenario for either side. The Clippers might be the only negotiator considering the other two teams are clearly in the rebuilding phase. As such, it's difficult for me to conceive that they'd actually give up so many of their young "up-and-coming" pieces for an 11 yr vet. But here's the rub: These young teams need veteran leadership. So, one might be willing to take a chance on JO, but like Bird said you have to have a willing partner on the other end in order to make a trade work. And I really don't see many teams trying to absorb JO's $42M price tag by themselves which means you've got to include another team or two in the mix - very hard to do, but not impossible if one side is very willing to concede that they are truly going to rebuild.

                3. That "willingness to rebuild" has to also be part of the Pacers mindset. Even with the Lakers/Grizzlies blockbuster trade, the Grizzlies didn't just give up one guy nor did the Lakers. However, as stated in paragraph #2 above, somebody was willing to give up a lot for a little in return all - for the sake of rebuilding. Are the Pacers willing to do that? Answer: NO! And frankly, I don't blame them.

                Here's the truth of it: Bird may be tired of holding on to JO in the hopes that he becomes that player who can put his team on his shoulders and carry them to victory, but I get the sense that neither coach O'Brien nor Herb Simon shares his view. Coach has stated from the beginning that he sees JO as "the anchor of the defense". He showed his ability to do that in the limited time he returned to the court. Now, imagine if the focus for JO shifted from "can he be a 20/10 player" to "how many blocks, deflections, altered shots can he get per game" that go along with 10-15 ppg? In other words, would Bird be willing to settle for a JO who scores fewer points for a JO who is able to decrease an opponents points in the paint?

                I will go on record and say this: "ANYONE who viewed JO as the type of player who could put his team on his shoulders and carry them to victory were fooling themselves. Don't misunderstand me, however. JO, hobbling or not, is still very effective. You just have to rethink how to use him. After all, basketball is and always shall be a Guard oriented game. Very few big men have changed the game so radically that they were able to single-handedly (or with alittle help from a teammate or two) lead his team to championship glory: Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, Shaq, David Robinson. So, to think that somehow JO or any Center or PF will be able to do it in today's era of the game is simply ridiculous! IMO, in order for the Pacers to move forward they have to rethink who will make up their core group of players and start building around that core. Coach O'Brien has mentioned that core as: Danny Granger, Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, Jeff Foster and Jermaine Oneal. You now have to "identify" a PG and a 6th Man along with one other player to make up your top 8. Everyone from 9 down are expendable and should come in as "servicable role players" to complement the top 8. As for JO's future with the team, at this point it's more in his hands than Birds'.

                We all know he can opt out this year. His "willingness to leave" will be based on how much he's made to feel welcomed from management as a Pacers not just for the next year or two but beyond. Think that through for a minute...

                Bird sees reason to trade him; CEO Herb seems very willing to retain him; coach O'Brien sees where he can fit in with the team, but like Bird wants to know if he can be a dependable body out on the court. It's up to JO, but if he's not encouraged to stay I'm convinced he'll allow a trade to take place. Now, that's not saying "feed his ego". On the contrary. Nobody wants to be somewhere where he's not wanted. I believe JO wants to remain a Pacer. When he returned to the court I heard nothing but screaming fans who were happy to see him play again. I've never heard JO speak negatively against the team or the city of Indianapolis. If anything, he has chose his words carefully when discussing Bird. Thus, if he feels that Bird's commitment to him isn't as strong as his committment to the team, you can rest assured he'll be willing to leave. Hence, the reason I was glad to hear Herb Simon step up in support of retaining JO during the management level press conference.

                Bottom Line: Unless he's convinced that he's no longer needed or welcomed, JO will stay if HE wants to stay. He won't be traded easily because not many teams will be able to take on his contract by themselves. In order for JO to be effective next year, the coaching staff will have to change their focus from a dominate offensive JO to a dominate defensive JO. But just as important, JO will have to return in the best condition of his life and prove his durability. If he sits for something as minor as a paper cut...

                'Nuff Said.
                Last edited by NuffSaid; 04-18-2008, 12:31 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                  Originally posted by grace View Post
                  There is no way in hell that Lebron will play for the Pacers.
                  I think that he is saying that teams will be more interested in acquiring a player like JONeal that has a huge Contract that expires the season before Lebron/Bosh/Wade becomes UFAs.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                    Originally posted by d_c View Post
                    If Westbrook's ever able to run the point (which I doubt), it'll be several, several years.

                    Augustin wouldn't be a bad pick. In fact I think a lot of people would be pretty satisfied simply because he'd be an upgrade over Travis Diener and Flip Murray. Of course those sentiments would change when people realize his upside is Jameer Nelson and not Chris Paul. Then people would be scrutinzing all his weaknesses and demanding the Pacers draft another PG a couple years later because they want Chris Paul.

                    The Pacers just need more talent. Just take the most talented player available.

                    If Westbrook is available at #11, he would be an excellent pick that Pacer fans should be really happy with.
                    Since I don't think that Tinsley is going anywhere soon.....I don't mind having having Westbrook as our SG playing behind Granger/Shawne/Dunleavy in the SG/SF rotation with a secondary role as a 3rd option PG playing behind Tinsley and Diener ( when necessary ).

                    I don't want to gamble in this draft....cuz as you said...we need talent....but if Bird really thinks that we need to draft a Big Man or PG....I would much rather draft Love ( who will probably be gone ) as a Big Man or Westbrook over Augustine/Collison.

                    But who knows.....Bird will probably chase another Big Man like Marreese Speights, DeAndre Jordon or JaVale McGee.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                      Before I agree with U.B.'s comment regarding J.O. I want two assurances.

                      1. Under no circumstance are we to build the team in any fashion around J.O., his day's of being top dog are over.

                      2. He is willing to not be the top dog over a season. It has been said that J.O. went to Danny and told him this was his team now, but J.O. did this at a time he knew he would not be back and when he came back he would be way out of shape.

                      So assuming, and believe me this is takes the kind of faith that you would have in the Loch Ness Monster or Big Foot, that he comes back and is healthy all season long is he going to accept rebounding, defending and scoring when needed as his job title.

                      So far I'm not convinced considering I actually heard him say the other day he is going to come back next year and dominate. Now you can interperate that any way you like, but I've heard J.O. enough over the years to believe that that means I am going to be the M.V.P.

                      If that is the case, then no I don't agree.

                      However if the case is that he is willing to do the rebounding, shot blocking, post defense and score in double figures a game. Well then I am willing to rethink my entire stance on J.O.

                      But history is not on his side here, IMO.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        Since I don't think that Tinsley is going anywhere soon.....I don't mind having having Westbrook as our SG playing behind Granger/Shawne/Dunleavy in the SG/SF rotation with a secondary role as a 3rd option PG playing behind Tinsley and Diener ( when necessary ).
                        If Tinsley is here and playing next year, I may possibly drop off as a Pacer fan.

                        I think Kravitz is touching correctly on a very exposed nerve in Pacerland. Last year, it was only the possibility of JOB reforming JT that kept me around. As expected, a proper dose of accountability from JOB led to our current scenario.

                        If he finds his way back on the court, it means Pacer management has learned no lesssons and that JOB's no-nonsense style is a pile of crap.

                        The consequences of not moving JT are more than financial. And the finances lost are greater than just his salary. Hopefully this summer they will finally get it.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                          Nuff said:

                          I see your point. I'll add, I don't want them to unload JO because Bird doesn't like him, because he was mad about Isiah.

                          It's kind of about managing expectations. If I see him as Mutombo and by some miracle he plays 78 games next year then I like having JO. Not at that price, granted, but it is what it is.

                          I'd rather have a defensive lane prescence and bide my time to get a palatable deal than to make a bad deal.

                          UB is right about the expiring contract being his value point. I still see the possibility of a JO to Dallas or a JO to Phoenix for some expiring contracts and a few late first round picks. Maybe this offseason, that would be enough to me. Maybe I'm wrong.

                          One of Bird's problem is he doesn't like to do the dance and I like him for it, but its counter productive for a guy in his position.

                          Instead of eluding to moving him for the last two years, he should be pimping him for defensive player of the year and say what awful darned luck its been that he's been so injured.

                          This serves two purposes. It sends the signal to the league that JO has tons of value to the Pacers and he should to you too. Secondly, it lets JO know were his focus is or should be. JO says ya thats right, I am a top 3 shot blocker in the league.

                          Perception creeps towards reality, but Bird can't or won't roll that way.

                          It always reminds me of a mini version of Chapelles show "When keeping it real, goes wrong" or whatever it is called.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            I think that he is saying that teams will be more interested in acquiring a player like JONeal that has a huge Contract that expires the season before Lebron/Bosh/Wade becomes UFAs.
                            Correct.

                            I know hoopshype has some incorrect info, but some of these guys who become FAs have the option of opting out a year earlier - the same time JO's contract comes off the books.

                            Hence, a team like NY might be very interested in JO's contract.

                            Easy fixes right now could be Daniels, Harrison, and possibly Williams. Tinsley will require some creativity and convincing. The guy has talent though and a team that doesn't mind attitude or could overlook it like Denver could be interested.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever made

                              Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
                              Croz man, you can drop this Trade Granger thing. It will not happen. He's the one thing that's right about this organization. We have other good young pieces to sweeten a deal, but Danny ain't one of em. I understand what you're saying, but trading Danny would probably be the benchmark for stupid moves by The Big LB.
                              i won't drop it because granger is the ONLY player we have worth a damn, and even then i view most of his production as a product of how bad we are as a team and the volume of shots he receives. i do not trust this organization to ever get us a top 5 pick in the nba draft, or at least not for another 10+yrs. people need to realize that one, granger is not as good as his production insists, and we will find ourselves vastly overpaying somebody who is NOT a franchise player. and two, that teams win championships with top 5 picks. that is a fact that can not be disputed. keeping danny granger maintains our mediocrity, especially at his age. at 25, granger has 5-6 peak years left. i don't think the pacers will be a contender in 5-6 years so what's the point? if you can trade granger straight up for a top 5 pick (not many busts 1-5) you have to do it imo. i'm tired of mediocrity and keeping granger will further that...

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Trading JO this summer, might be the worst move the Pacers ever make

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Before I agree with U.B.'s comment regarding J.O. I want two assurances.

                                1. Under no circumstance are we to build the team in any fashion around J.O., his day's of being top dog are over.

                                2. He is willing to not be the top dog over a season. It has been said that J.O. went to Danny and told him this was his team now, but J.O. did this at a time he knew he would not be back and when he came back he would be way out of shape.

                                So assuming, and believe me this is takes the kind of faith that you would have in the Loch Ness Monster or Big Foot, that he comes back and is healthy all season long is he going to accept rebounding, defending and scoring when needed as his job title.

                                So far I'm not convinced considering I actually heard him say the other day he is going to come back next year and dominate. Now you can interperate that any way you like, but I've heard J.O. enough over the years to believe that that means I am going to be the M.V.P.

                                If that is the case, then no I don't agree.

                                However if the case is that he is willing to do the rebounding, shot blocking, post defense and score in double figures a game. Well then I am willing to rethink my entire stance on J.O.

                                But history is not on his side here, IMO.
                                He cannot and will not stay healthy - sure he might play a few more games next season - and he might look a lot healthier while he's playing, but he is incapable of staying healthy for more than about 15-20 straight games.

                                If JO is used like he was the past 9 or 10 games, and is able to play 30 minutes per game - the Pacers team could really benefit. (Pacers defense is much, much better when he's on the court) JO came into the NBA has a shotblocker, defender, rebounder - no one ever figured his offensive game would ever amount to much.

                                You might say well he'll never accept that type of role now - well he may not have any choice. I would love for him to average around 14-15 points a game - but more importantly than that - his shooting % must be over 45%.

                                I was just listening to Kravitz, and I think he said there is a 99.99% chance that JO is not on the Pacers next season. (My guess is Wells is feeding him this info - I'm sure Wells would never steer him wrong)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X