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

ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

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

  • ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

    It has started.

    Shaq demands a trade - and the teams that are 'interested' are the Pacers and Dallas.

    The man makes $27 million. We would have to gut the team and include Jermaine.

    ENOUGH.

    This better be BS speculation.
    Heywoode says... work hard man.

  • #2
    Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

    I agree!! This is Highly unlikely. Shaq is in his 30's and O Niel in his 20's. Shaq has peaked and I will argue with anyone who says his best years are yet to come. JO still has his best years in front of him barring injury. This is a LAKERS daydream and that is it.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

      Yeah. Shaq is declining. Gutting the team for Shaq makes no sense at all.
      Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

        I don't believe we're interested. They must be making it up. Actually, I bet Vescey's making up giving up Jeff as well. Unless we're going to get another C.

        I just don't see any way that it's smart to trade Jeff unless you KNOW we're getting another C.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

          Are you sure that's what he said? How can anyone be sure what Mr. Mumbles says?
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

            Donnie and Larry aren't that Stupid ...it's all rumors and hype. I would have said Shaq might have went back too Orlando if Tmac stayed but he's not staying , Rumors are Dallas is Intrested , I think Jerry West would Be intrested also
            Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

              Are you sure that's what he said? How can anyone be sure what Mr. Mumbles says?
              How did iu coach Mike Davis get into the discussion??
              Well, true.
              The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                I tell you what, Mark Cuban is stupid enough to trade for him, and gut his team in the process. Then maybe he'll get Phil, too.

                This all reminds me of a SportsGuy article a couple years back, where he listed the top-40 NBA players, with the basis of the ranking being, you'd trade the #7 player straight up for #6, but not for #8, etc. He listed Shaq #1, not necessarily because he was the best player, but his reasoning was something like, "If you actually trade Shaq, he'll be so pissed off he'll actually take the offseason seriously, lose 50lbs., come back the next season in shape and angry, and proceed to rip everyone in the league a new one."

                Not that I particularly want to see something like that happen, but I'd love to see Shaq give one of his patented "hard fouls" to Kobe. Like, the one that broke LaSalle Thompson's leg, or broke Vern Fleming's wrist AND knocked his teeth out, etc.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                  I tell you what, Mark Cuban is stupid enough to trade for him, and gut his team in the process. Then maybe he'll get Phil, too.

                  This all reminds me of a SportsGuy article a couple years back, where he listed the top-40 NBA players, with the basis of the ranking being, you'd trade the #7 player straight up for #6, but not for #8, etc. He listed Shaq #1, not necessarily because he was the best player, but his reasoning was something like, "If you actually trade Shaq, he'll be so pissed off he'll actually take the offseason seriously, lose 50lbs., come back the next season in shape and angry, and proceed to rip everyone in the league a new one."

                  Not that I particularly want to see something like that happen, but I'd love to see Shaq give one of his patented "hard fouls" to Kobe. Like, the one that broke LaSalle Thompson's leg, or broke Vern Fleming's wrist AND knocked his teeth out, etc.
                  You should know by now Cuban is someone who would do it , I sometimes wonder what really makes his mind tick in the basketball world.
                  Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                    L.A. Lakers trades: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.8 minutes)
                    PF Stanislav Medvedenko (8.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 21.2 minutes)
                    L.A. Lakers receives: SG Allan Houston (18.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 2.0 apg in 36.0 minutes)
                    C Nazr Mohammed (7.4 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 0.5 apg in 20.1 minutes)
                    C Dikembe Mutombo (5.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 0.4 apg in 23.0 minutes)
                    Change in team outlook: +1.7 ppg, -1.5 rpg, and -0.8 apg.

                    New York trades: SG Allan Houston (18.5 ppg, 2.4 rpg, 2.0 apg in 36.0 minutes)
                    C Nazr Mohammed (7.4 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 0.5 apg in 20.1 minutes)
                    C Dikembe Mutombo (5.6 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 0.4 apg in 23.0 minutes)
                    New York receives: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 67 games)
                    PF Stanislav Medvedenko (8.3 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 0.8 apg in 68 games)
                    Change in team outlook: -1.7 ppg, +1.5 rpg, and +0.8 apg.

                    TRADE ACCEPTED

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                      I think that the Mavs could actually make a decent trade for Shaq that wouldn't ruin the team. Walker makes some crazy amount, over $14M, I think. If he were included the Mavs would be halfway there without losing an important piece to that team.

                      It will be fascinating to see if anyone is actually interested in trading for Shaq and his contract.
                      L.A. Lakers trades: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 36.8 minutes)
                      L.A. Lakers receives: PF Antoine Walker (14.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 4.5 apg in 34.6 minutes)
                      SG Michael Finley (18.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 38.6 minutes)
                      Change in team outlook: +11.1 ppg, +1.3 rpg, and +4.5 apg.

                      Dallas trades: PF Antoine Walker (14.0 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 4.5 apg in 34.6 minutes)
                      SG Michael Finley (18.6 ppg, 4.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 38.6 minutes)
                      Dallas receives: C Shaquille O'Neal (21.5 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 2.9 apg in 67 games)
                      Change in team outlook: -11.1 ppg, -1.3 rpg, and -4.5 apg.

                      TRADE ACCEPTED

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                        I gained a ton more respect for Shaq after reading this article:

                        http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=1824721

                        By Tom Friend
                        ESPN the Magazine

                        Jerry Buss is going to break up the Lakers or the state of Colorado is going to break up 'em up, but, either way, say your goodbyes.

                        Because the exits are coming in droves. Phil Jackson is already gone, and, the truth is, Shaquille O'Neal wants to join him.

                        It looks like Buss, the Lakers' owner, has made his choice: Kobe stays, the other Hall of Famers go. In other words, he is not averse to trading Shaq and is willing to build his franchise around a narcissist who's on trial for rape, doesn't make his teammates better and is in denial over all of it.

                        Buss apparently will stop at nothing to keep Kobe off the open market, and I've been told that means he will offer Bryant partial ownership down the road. In the short term, he'll at least offer Kobe a quasi-general manager job, meaning Kobe can help pick the new coach, and, ostensibly, Shaq's replacement.

                        Shaq knew this was coming, has known it for months, because he's refused to take the pay cut Buss wants him to take, the pay cut Kevin Garnett bent over backwards and took in Minnesota. Shaq says the Laker organization asked him to recruit Karl Malone last summer, asked him to recruit Gary Payton, and that it was understood they'd take care of him down the road. But they're not taking care of him, and, I'm not surprised that today he's just demanded a trade. He told me in late April he was resigned to the fact that it was time to go.

                        "Well, I've seen it before," he said as we sat alone in the team's El Segundo training complex. "I've seen it before. It happens with the Ewings and the Dominiques. But give me enough respect and enough courtesy and let me know. And I'll make it easier for everybody.

                        "But just don't tell me one thing and do another. Because you insult my intelligence like that. Just tell me. I ain't tripping. But the good thing about this country we live in, somebody will want this. Someone will want the Diesel. I've got about five, six good years left in me. Because the stuff that I'm doing, I still got a whole lot of stuff in me. I'm not even allowed to really take over the game how I want to. So I'm just out there playing on fumes right now."


                        Shaq says the Lakers vowed to get him 'whatever you need' after recruiting Malone and Payton.
                        O'Neal has a lot of beefs with the franchise. They are, in no particular order:

                        Buss hasn't made his contract extension a priority.
                        "People act like they care, but they don't really care about you," he said in our interview. "Because if they cared about you like they said they did, then stuff would be in place. And that's the only problem I have with business. I'm so honest and stern that if you don't want me here, just let me know. I'll do my time, and we can make up a story together, and it can be easy. But don't say, 'Hey, if you do this [recruit Malone], and you do this [recruit Payton], I'll get you whatever you need, baby. And then when I do that and it comes time and here you are messing around and jiggling around.

                        "My thing is, if you're not going to pay me that, let me go. I've been in the game 12 years, I've been lucky enough to get three extensions in one lifetime, which is unheard of. So I'm not really complaining. But let me know. And don't try to match my numbers up against somebody else's numbers [Garnett's].

                        "I'm not a dummy. I understand they want to go younger, [Kobe's] only 25, 26. I'm not tripping over that. But let me know, just let me know. I don't have a problem, just let me know. Give me that respect and give me that courtesy. Let me know."

                        They should appreciate the fact that he didn't rip Kobe's head off this year.
                        Think about it. Bryant called Shaq "fat" before the season. He said that Shaq begs out of games with mysterious injuries and that if he leaves the franchise, it'll be because of the big fella.

                        Shaq, somehow, never retaliated. When Kobe was late for meetings all year and late for practices, Shaq never said anything. When Kobe had his own mysterious injury [the sliced finger], Shaq never said anything. When Kobe wouldn't shoot that day in Sacramento, Shaq never said anything.

                        And the reason is, he'd promised Malone and Payton back in November he'd stay off of Kobe's case.

                        "[The rift] didn't flare up again, because I promised Karl and Gary and all my other teammates," Shaq said. "I was advised to be the bigger man. To be corporate. Because he's already going through a delicate situation [in Eagle, Colo.] and I don't want to add to it. So I said, 'Just be the bigger man.' I'm big. I'm corporate.

                        "See, even though I'm Shaq, I still have people over me. People over me who I respect and when they speak, there's no questions asked. A lot of people called me. The owner of the Staples Center called me and said, 'You did the right thing.' I always have corporate meetings, and they said, 'You did the right thing. You're good, Shaq. Appreciate that.'

                        "See, with me and Karl and Gary and a lot of other guys, you can say something and it doesn't matter how you say it. They don't take it the wrong way. For example, I can say, 'Come on, Devean, mother------, play hard.' I can say that to Karl. But a sensitive guy will take that very sensitively."

                        Like Kobe?

                        "Like Kobe."

                        Kobe's style of play drives him batty.
                        No question, he admires Kobe's skills, but everything Shaq's stepfather said in San Antonio -- that Kobe essentially plays with blinders on -- Shaq agrees with.

                        "John Wooden told me when I was 18, 19 years old, the sign of a great player is not how many points you score, but how you make your other guys play with you," Shaq said. "That's a great player. A lot of these guys now think if you score points and if you do all that sh-- around the basket, you're a great player. And that's not true basketball, and that's not the type of basketball I know how to play. If you've got a guy open, hit him. I may miss a guy once or twice, but I'm not gonna miss you three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 times.

                        "I could score 40 every night. If I shot the mother------ all the time. But you've got to keep Rick Fox involved, because you're gonna need Rick. You've got to keep D-Fish [Derek Fisher] warm. You've got to keep all these guys warm."

                        Phil and his beloved triangle shouldn't be the scapegoats.
                        Obviously, Shaq enjoyed that Phil ran the offense through him, but he also knows where the Lakers were before Jackson showed up: nowhere.

                        "So, to bring somebody else in would be to start all over, and I don't have time to start all over," he said in our interview. "And I don't really need to start all over, because the formula's written, we know what we've got to do."

                        Shaq also thought Kobe was inappropriate when he said he didn't like Phil "as a person" this year.

                        "Me being a professional, that wouldn't happen with me, because I was raised under discipline," he said. "Of course, you'll have your disagreements and all that. But if I didn't like the man like that, I wouldn't make it a national thing. Like I said, I'm loyal. Because I could never get over the hump, and Phil's the man that brought me over. Period. He's the best at what he does. Track record proves it. He has 9 [titles], going on 10."

                        But what Shaq says doesn't matter anymore, which is why he blew off his exit meeting Friday with general manager Mitch Kupchak. He's convinced the Lakers are already planning to trade him ... the same way Wilt was traded once, the same way Kareem was traded once.

                        Orlando is the place that has the first overall pick to dangle, the place that has tons more No. 1s stockpiled to give up, the place Shaq still owns a home in.

                        And Orlando is the only place that makes sense. Orlando is the place that has the first overall pick to dangle, and a ton of other No. 1 picks to add to the package. Orlando is the place that has huge contracts to send back to make the deal work, like Grant Hill's and Juwan Howard's. Orlando is the place Shaq still owns a home, and if Shaq comes, trust me, Tracy McGrady will rescind his trade request. This is the trade that Shaq wants.

                        And trust me, he's thought about life after Kobe ... thought about it a lot. Thought about all the scenarios.

                        Like the scenario of him staying and Kobe going to the Clippers.

                        "It wouldn't be a real rivalry," he said. "It'll be a media rivalry. Won't be a real rivalry. You have to do something and be something before you can become a rival. Like, Napoleon wouldn't have had a rival with a guy that had one sheep and one cow and no army. You know? I don't care how much they say, 'Hey, this guy with one sheep and one cow and his brother that's 50 years old, he's a cold cat. And he's gonna take out Napoleon and that whole army by himself.' So Kobe on the Clippers, that wouldn't be no rivalry. It'd just be, hey, he used to play here and now he's duh duh duh. It'll just be hype. Hype for a night."

                        Or the scenario of Kobe going not to another team ... but to jail.

                        Or the scenario of them playing against each other in next year's Finals.

                        "If we split up and I don't win, then everybody'll say, 'Well, if Shaq had Kobe, he would've won.' And if he don't win, it'll be, 'Well, if Kobe had Shaq, he could've won.' That's what everybody will be saying next year ...

                        "Well, I like my chances better."
                        "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                          "I still got a whole lot of stuff in me. I'm not even allowed to really take over the game how I want to. So I'm just out there playing on fumes right now."

                          So he mailed it in? Is that what Shaq is saying? I don't think he's saying that really but that's crap.

                          Look, he was the guy who looked like he wanted a ring this year, but I still don't buy all this extremely self-centered and self-righteous crap.

                          If he really wanted it he would get his weight under control and get a consistent free throw motion. These things have not happened for years now. He's as guilty as anyone else as he's no leader. He can talk about others but there are things he could take care of that he refuses to and wtf does that say about him? He's too good for that? He'd rather slack off and point fingers at others than take charge on things he can control.

                          When the man is motivated, my God; but get over it. He didn't win a championship without Kobe either so unitl one does without the other... Not very coherent, sorry. I just don't buy it.
                          Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ENOUGH with the Shaq to the Pacers crap

                            If we split up and I don't win, then everybody'll say, 'Well, if Shaq had Kobe, he would've won.' And if he don't win, it'll be, 'Well, if Kobe had Shaq, he could've won.' That's what everybody will be saying next year ...

                            "Well, I like my chances better."


                            I'm not a Shaq fan, but it's hard to disagree with that.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X