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

4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

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

  • 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

    Here is a neat trade idea I came up with......tell me what you think of it from each team's perspective:

    Indiana trades Shawne Williams to Chicago
    Indiana trades Jamal Tinsley and Mike Dunleavy to Houston

    Chicago trades Thabo Sefalosha, Tyrus Thomas, and Drew Gooden to Indiana.
    Chicago trades Joakim Noah to Houston

    Houston trades Steve Francis, Luis Scola, Rafer Alston, and Shane Battier to Golden State.

    Golden State trades Brandon Wright to Indiana.
    Golden State trades Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington to Chicago.


    Why perhaps for Indiana: Indiana gets rid of Tinsley and his contract. We pick up a really good wing defender in Sefalosha, who I think starts for us replacing Dunleavy, even though he obviously isnt as good on offense. We pick up 2 really great prospects for our frontcourt in Wright and Thomas, although I am not personally all that high on Thomas. We also get a fairly large expiring contract in Drew Gooden to get cap relief or to use in a future deal if we so choose.

    Why perhaps not for Indiana: We lose Dunleavy, one of the core players on our team and probably our second best player without getting an experienced replacement.

    Why perhaps for Chicago: Chicago gets a potentially really quality offensive post player in Harrington, and a dynamic leader in Stephen Jackson. Harrington is a much better post threat than either Noah or Thomas. Thomas and Noah each have character concerns, and limited offensive games. Jackson is a replacement for Ben Gordon, who they can sign and trade somewhere for additional front court help now as a reward for doing this deal.

    Why perhaps not for Chicago: Harrington and Jackson are somewhat risky attitude wise. Gooden isnt a very good player, but they are losing his expiring contract which may not be good for them.

    Why perhaps for Houston: Dunleavy provides much more offense than Battier, and acquiring Ron Artest makes him even more expendable. They desperately want to move Alston due to his attitude. Moving Scola hurts, but moving him gives them the ability to re sign Carl Landry, and Noah is another cheaper replacement.

    Why perhaps not for Houston: While Dunleavy is better than Battier, is he a better "fit"? Is losing both of Francis and Alston's baggage worth taking on Tinsley's?

    Why perhaps for Golden State: They add a nice piece in the experienced and tough Scola to play inside, obtain Alston as a bridge to help them survive losing Ellis for a few weeks, and hope he excels in Nellie's scheme. Battier is an ultimate "glue guy" who most coaches love having. Francis is just a throw in to make the numbers work.

    Why perhaps not for Golden State: Jackson, even though he is griping about his contract, in some ways is their true team leader, so losing him could hurt in the lockerroom....or maybe it helps, who knows? Wright has a lot of potential and it may be too early to give up on him.


    Its a reasonable good trade I think for all the teams involved, although I like it best personally from the Pacers and Golden State point of view. What do you all think? Reasonable enough for the 4 teams to at least think about it?

  • #2
    Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

    wow that must have taken some time to come up with this
    I like the trade and think it's fair for everybody... the only one I could see backing is Houston with Schola included. IMO management is higher on Luis than Landry. Still he could be replaced by a future first.

    As you said the deal is really nice for Indiana as we get rid of bad apples and big contracts to get addtionnal cap relief and youngs with good potential for our front court. We may have a logjam here and become thin at the SG spot with Mike gone. However that would enable us to maybe trade a big for a real SG.

    That makes me think of Ben Gordon sudently...
    Last edited by BKK; 09-01-2008, 06:50 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

      we get Luis Scola and Shane Battier instead of Tyrus Thomas and Drew Gooden.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Powered by RealGM: Software Provider to NBA Teams
      • Step 1: Select the TeamsChoose at least two teams from the menus below to start your trade.
      • Step 2: Choose the PlayersSelect the players you wish to trade from the rosters below.
      • Step 3: Verify the TradeConfirm that your trade proposal is valid according to the NBA collective bargaining agreement.
      Successful Trade Scenario
      Congratulations on a successful trade.

      Due to Indiana, Chicago, Houston and Golden State being over the cap, the 25% trade rule is invoked. Indiana, Chicago, Houston and Golden State had to be no more than 125% plus $100,000 of the salary given out for the trade to be accepted, which did happen here. This trade satisfies the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.


      Trade ID
      Trade ID #4763124

      Every trade made by fans is allocated a unique Trade ID which you can share with friends and fellow basketball fans to allow them to see your trade scenario.

      Try Another Trade or visit our Trade Forum.


      Indiana Trade Breakdown
      Change in Team Outlook: -7.4 ppg, +6.3 rpg, and -7.5 apg.

      Incoming Players
      Thabo Sefolosha
      6-5 SG from Switzerland (Foreign)
      6.7 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 1.9 apg in 20.8 minutes
      Luis Scola
      6-9 PF from Buenos Aires (Argentina)
      10.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 24.7 minutes
      Shane Battier
      6-8 SF from Duke
      9.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.9 apg in 36.3 minutes
      Brandan Wright
      6-10 PF from North Carolina
      4.0 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.2 apg in 9.8 minutes
      Outgoing Players
      Shawne Williams
      6-9 PF from Memphis
      6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 0.9 apg in 14.9 minutes
      Jamaal Tinsley
      6-1 PG from Iowa State
      11.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 8.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
      Mike Dunleavy
      6-8 SF / PF from Duke
      19.1 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.0 minutes



      Chicago Trade Breakdown
      Change in Team Outlook: +6.4 ppg, -10.7 rpg, and +0.7 apg.

      Incoming Players
      Shawne Williams
      6-9 PF from Memphis
      6.7 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 0.9 apg in 14.9 minutes
      Stephen Jackson
      6-8 SF / SG from Oak Hill Academy (HS)
      20.1 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.1 apg in 39.1 minutes
      Al Harrington
      6-9 PF / SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
      13.6 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 27.0 minutes
      Outgoing Players
      Thabo Sefolosha
      6-5 SG from Switzerland (Foreign)
      6.7 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 1.9 apg in 20.8 minutes
      Joakim Noah
      6-11 PF from Florida
      6.5 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 1.1 apg in 20.5 minutes
      Tyrus Thomas
      6-8 PF from LSU
      6.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 1.2 apg in 18.0 minutes
      Drew Gooden
      6-9 PF from Kansas
      14.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.7 apg in 31.0 minutes



      Houston Trade Breakdown
      Change in Team Outlook: -0.7 ppg, -2.9 rpg, and +1.5 apg.

      Incoming Players
      Jamaal Tinsley
      6-1 PG from Iowa State
      11.9 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 8.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
      Mike Dunleavy
      6-8 SF / PF from Duke
      19.1 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 3.5 apg in 36.0 minutes
      Joakim Noah
      6-11 PF from Florida
      6.5 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 1.1 apg in 20.5 minutes
      Outgoing Players
      Steve Francis
      6-3 PG / SG from Maryland
      5.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.0 apg in 19.9 minutes
      Luis Scola
      6-9 PF from Buenos Aires (Argentina)
      10.3 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 1.3 apg in 24.7 minutes
      Rafer Alston
      6-2 PG from Frenso State
      13.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 34.1 minutes
      Shane Battier
      6-8 SF from Duke
      9.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 1.9 apg in 36.3 minutes



      Golden State Trade Breakdown
      Change in Team Outlook: +1.7 ppg, +7.3 rpg, and +5.3 apg.

      Incoming Players
      Tyrus Thomas
      6-8 PF from LSU
      6.8 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 1.2 apg in 18.0 minutes
      Drew Gooden
      6-9 PF from Kansas
      14.0 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 1.7 apg in 31.0 minutes
      Steve Francis
      6-3 PG / SG from Maryland
      5.5 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.0 apg in 19.9 minutes
      Rafer Alston
      6-2 PG from Frenso State
      13.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.3 apg in 34.1 minutes
      Outgoing Players
      Brandan Wright
      6-10 PF from North Carolina
      4.0 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.2 apg in 9.8 minutes
      Stephen Jackson
      6-8 SF / SG from Oak Hill Academy (HS)
      20.1 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 4.1 apg in 39.1 minutes
      Al Harrington
      6-9 PF / SF from St. Patrick's (HS)
      13.6 ppg, 5.4 rpg, 1.6 apg in 27.0 minutes

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
        Here is a neat trade idea I came up with......tell me what you think of it from each team's perspective:

        Indiana trades Shawne Williams to Chicago
        Indiana trades Jamal Tinsley and Mike Dunleavy to Houston

        Chicago trades Thabo Sefalosha, Tyrus Thomas, and Drew Gooden to Indiana.
        Chicago trades Joakim Noah to Houston

        Houston trades Steve Francis, Luis Scola, Rafer Alston, and Shane Battier to Golden State.

        Golden State trades Brandon Wright to Indiana.
        Golden State trades Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington to Chicago.



        Its a reasonable good trade I think for all the teams involved, although I like it best personally from the Pacers and Golden State point of view. What do you all think? Reasonable enough for the 4 teams to at least think about it?

        Just an awful trade for everyone involved except the Pacers. None of those other 3 teams have any need for this trade. Houston doesn't like Alston and his attitude, so the solution to make things better is Jamaal Tinsley (and his bigger, longer contract)? C'mon.
        Last edited by d_c; 09-01-2008, 02:48 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

          Originally posted by d_c View Post
          Just an awful trade for everyone involved except the Pacers. None of those other 3 teams have any need for this trade. Houston doesn't like Alston and his attitude, so the solution to make things better is Jamaal Tinsley (and his bigger, longer contract)? C'mon.
          I agree
          "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

            Originally posted by HCPacerIN View Post
            I agree
            I just read that proposal over again, and actually it's not as bad as I first thought but I still don't see the other 3 teams doing it.

            Battier has been excellent for the Rox. Scola as well. Dunleavy would work nicely for them, but Battier has simply been a more proven player and he plays way better defense. And they want to win now with Yao/TMac still in their primes, so they'd rather go with that experience (Dunleavy/Noah with zero playoff experience). Then there's the part where they won't trade Alston's 2 years for Tinsley's 3.

            For the Warriors, it's not horrible, but I just don't see this fitting in their plans. Brandan Wright is a young guy with a lot of talent. Scola and Battier are very good role players, but their prime years (now) don't coincide with the prime years of all the Warriors young guys. In the short run, they'd probably be about the same if they made that trade, but they'd lose young talent in the long run. It's just a not a practical trade for them to make.

            For the Bulls, it's just flat out terrible. They wouldn't touch this trade. They're pretty much trading young for old, which is one of the golden rules you don't break. They're trading younger talent for older talent, and they're not getting rid of any bad contracts. Harrington and Jackson don't fit in with Rose (this is their major building block moving forward) in the long run because of the difference in age.

            For the Pacers, it's highway robbery. You're trading Dunleavy (who plays the same position as Granger) for 3 good young players, 1 solid vet role player, getting rid of Tinsley's deal, and at the same time not taking a single bad contract.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

              Originally posted by d_c View Post
              I just read that proposal over again, and actually it's not as bad as I first thought but I still don't see the other 3 teams doing it.

              Battier has been excellent for the Rox. Scola as well. Dunleavy would work nicely for them, but Battier has simply been a more proven player and he plays way better defense. And they want to win now with Yao/TMac still in their primes, so they'd rather go with that experience (Dunleavy/Noah with zero playoff experience). Then there's the part where they won't trade Alston's 2 years for Tinsley's 3.

              For the Warriors, it's not horrible, but I just don't see this fitting in their plans. Brandan Wright is a young guy with a lot of talent. Scola and Battier are very good role players, but their prime years (now) don't coincide with the prime years of all the Warriors young guys. In the short run, they'd probably be about the same if they made that trade, but they'd lose young talent in the long run. It's just a not a practical trade for them to make.

              For the Bulls, it's just flat out terrible. They wouldn't touch this trade. They're pretty much trading young for old, which is one of the golden rules you don't break. They're trading younger talent for older talent, and they're not getting rid of any bad contracts. Harrington and Jackson don't fit in with Rose (this is their major building block moving forward) in the long run because of the difference in age.

              For the Pacers, it's highway robbery. You're trading Dunleavy (who plays the same position as Granger) for 3 good young players, 1 solid vet role player, getting rid of Tinsley's deal, and at the same time not taking a single bad contract.

              Besides the points you have already made, this is like a novelty trade that people sit around and make up for fun. (not that there is anything wrong with that but....). A trade of this magnitude is highly unlikely and very rarely, if ever, actually happens.
              "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 4 way trade proposal: Golden State, Houston, Chicago, and Indiana

                This just strips any and all frontcourt depth that the Bulls have. They basically trade their entire frontcourt, minus Aaron Gray, for Harrington.

                Comment

                Working...
                X