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

chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

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

  • #46
    Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

    Murphy would be a ridiculous fit in Phoenix. I think Phoenix would have to consider Ford/Murphy/Picks for Amare.
    *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

      You aren't making the playoffs, not losing games to the Knicks and Wolves.

      So let's consider team structure goals instead, and I don't mean losing to get a higher pick. What I mean is that moving JO allowed Danny to step up into more of a best player on the court role and establish a new role in the hierarchy. He's JUST GOT THERE and doesn't even have his feet wet as "the star".

      Bringing in Amare messes with that. Now if he had a great personality that made people better (Nash for example) it could actually enhance Danny's growth to share the spotlight and take some of this new pressure off of him. And this would include planning to be here awhile because a short stay would undermine that feeling with the sense of it not lasting or being "serious".

      But the last thing Danny needs right now is competition for the top guy. He's put in a lot of hard work and been asked to ride out the very worst of times with the team. It sucks to be stuck with lesser talent around you that keeps you from winning, but this is a period of learning for Danny, learning to be "the man" which he will then apply when the talent improves rather than reverting to a passive role (see B Rush).

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

        I see no reason why Granger and Amare wouldn't coexist with both being 20+ ppg scorers for our team. Danny's clearly the more mature of the two and would have the longer tenure here, so there's no question that he would be the team leader. Amare would accept this.

        Talent wins basketball games. If we have a chance to land an All-NBA power forward for a fair price, we'd be foolish not to do it. The only reasonable objection I can see to bringing in Stoudemire would be if you were afraid he'd walk when his contract was up.
        Last edited by Quis; 02-04-2009, 12:18 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
          Wow, some people think we could really get possibly the best offensive PF in the game without giving up one of the top 3 players on a lottery team. Amazing. Nobody wants Murphy.

          I'd give them anyone except Granger. Then work to replace whoever they take with defensive role players.
          How do you know they do not want cap space + draft picks back? Amare makes 15M, we can only trade 13-17M back, Dun makes 10M, TJ makes 8M. So who else would they want?
          "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
          Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

            Much as I love Murph and don't want to see him traded...here's a trade that works:

            RealGM Trade Checker™

            Powered by RealGM: Software Provider to NBA Teams 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: +8.8 ppg, -3.3 rpg, and -0.3 apg.

            Incoming Players
            Amare Stoudemire
            6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
            21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes
            Outgoing Players
            Troy Murphy
            6-11 PF from Notre Dame
            12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
            Jamaal Tinsley
            6-1 PG from Iowa State
            0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes



            Phoenix Trade Breakdown
            Change in Team Outlook: -8.8 ppg, +3.3 rpg, and +0.3 apg.

            Incoming Players
            Troy Murphy
            6-11 PF from Notre Dame
            12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
            Jamaal Tinsley
            6-1 PG from Iowa State
            0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes
            Outgoing Players
            Amare Stoudemire
            6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
            21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes



            Go Pacers!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

              Originally posted by BobbyMac View Post
              Much as I love Murph and don't want to see him traded...here's a trade that works:

              RealGM Trade Checkerâ„¢

              Powered by RealGM: Software Provider to NBA Teams 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: +8.8 ppg, -3.3 rpg, and -0.3 apg.

              Incoming Players
              Amare Stoudemire
              6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
              21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes
              Outgoing Players
              Troy Murphy
              6-11 PF from Notre Dame
              12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
              Jamaal Tinsley
              6-1 PG from Iowa State
              0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes



              Phoenix Trade Breakdown
              Change in Team Outlook: -8.8 ppg, +3.3 rpg, and +0.3 apg.

              Incoming Players
              Troy Murphy
              6-11 PF from Notre Dame
              12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
              Jamaal Tinsley
              6-1 PG from Iowa State
              0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes
              Outgoing Players
              Amare Stoudemire
              6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
              21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes



              Sorry, but the Suns would not do this....they send out the best player in the deal and take on about $22mil in guaranteed $$$ and add about $18+ mil in salarycap to their 2010-2011 season.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                it has nothing to do with him loving conseco. it's our poor defense.

                kapono scored 25 against so we can get him too.
                Okay. I'd love to have Kapono.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                  I really don't see this happening, and not even sure I'd want it to, but there is that curiosity of wondering what it would be like to have someone like Amare here, teamed up with Granger.

                  I imagine Jack/Ford/Diener would have some fun throwing up some jump balls for Amare to dunk on people's heads.

                  The players I would not want to get rid of would be Granger and Dunleavy... and I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'd hafta give consideration for Murph, too... his rebounding and 3-point shooting is awfully enticing this year.

                  So whatever. Don't see it happening... I would be interested but not so much hopeful of a serious playoff run if it did happen. Then again, I'm an armchair GM and not paid for my skills, so what do I know.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                    Originally posted by BobbyMac View Post
                    Much as I love Murph and don't want to see him traded...here's a trade that works:

                    RealGM Trade Checkerâ„¢

                    Powered by RealGM: Software Provider to NBA Teams 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: +8.8 ppg, -3.3 rpg, and -0.3 apg.

                    Incoming Players
                    Amare Stoudemire
                    6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
                    21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes
                    Outgoing Players
                    Troy Murphy
                    6-11 PF from Notre Dame
                    12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
                    Jamaal Tinsley
                    6-1 PG from Iowa State
                    0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes



                    Phoenix Trade Breakdown
                    Change in Team Outlook: -8.8 ppg, +3.3 rpg, and +0.3 apg.

                    Incoming Players
                    Troy Murphy
                    6-11 PF from Notre Dame
                    12.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg, 2.4 apg in 33.2 minutes
                    Jamaal Tinsley
                    6-1 PG from Iowa State
                    0.0 ppg, 0.0 rpg, 0.0 apg in 0.0 minutes
                    Outgoing Players
                    Amare Stoudemire
                    6-10 PF from Cypress Creek (HS)
                    21.1 ppg, 8.1 rpg, 2.1 apg in 37.1 minutes



                    No way the Suns do this. Theyre not even getting a pick or expirer.
                    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                      Originally posted by aceace View Post
                      How do you know they do not want cap space + draft picks back? Amare makes 15M, we can only trade 13-17M back, Dun makes 10M, TJ makes 8M. So who else would they want?
                      Because I live in AZ about 3 hours from Phoenix, and I know first hand Amare is far and away the face of that franchise. He is adored by fans out here, you see Amares' jersey constantly. The fans would go ape**** if he was dealt away for expiring contracts and a few mid first round draft picks. Or anything involving Troy Murphy and Jamal Tinsley for that matter.

                      I doubt we could put together a package that could rival what other offers they'll get quite frankly. But any combination of players they would want on our team that didn't involve Granger, is a move forward. Amare and Granger together could be lethal on offense. But I doubt they would even listen to us if Granger wasn't involved.
                      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        Because I live in AZ about 3 hours from Phoenix, and I know first hand Amare is far and away the face of that franchise. He is adored by fans out here, you see Amares' jersey constantly. The fans would go ape**** if he was dealt away for expiring contracts and a few mid first round draft picks. Or anything involving Troy Murphy and Jamal Tinsley for that matter.

                        I doubt we could put together a package that could rival what other offers they'll get quite frankly. But any combination of players they would want on our team that didn't involve Granger, is a move forward. Amare and Granger together could be lethal on offense. But I doubt they would even listen to us if Granger wasn't involved.
                        I wouldnt add Granger in a deal for sure. I dont think I'd even trade Amare straight up for Granger. You got to remember, our draft pick looks like its going to be a top 9 pick (so far), therefore its going to be a nice pick (lottery), and the Pacers have a lot of expirers
                        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                          Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                          I wouldnt add Granger in a deal for sure. I dont think I'd even trade Amare straight up for Granger. You got to remember, our draft pick looks like its going to be a top 9 pick (so far), therefore its going to be a nice pick (lottery), and the Pacers have a lot of expirers
                          How would you feel if we traded Granger for expirings and the 9th pick in the draft?

                          The Suns wouldn't do that in a million years.
                          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            How would you feel if we traded Granger for expirings and the 9th pick in the draft?

                            The Suns wouldn't do that in a million years.
                            The only way I would do that is if we know that Granger has peaked (like Amare has) and the team wasnt really going anywhere further with the player (like Suns) then I would trade away for picks and expirer
                            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                              The only way I would do that is if we know that Granger has peaked (like Amare has) and the team wasnt really going anywhere further with the player (like Suns) then I would trade away for picks and expirer
                              except the suns have two bigger parts (shaq, nash) they could unload WAY before their youngest star. they still have a chance to build around amare. why keep shaq and nash but trade the younger star?

                              nash is unguarenteed for next year so maybe you find a taker for him first - but his contract should be easier to move and he's just as much a face of the franchise as amare. if you deal, maybe new york for a duhon, lee, rose type package. by far the bigger challege would be shaq. maybe cleveland? wally, big z for the big cactus type deal. i'm not sure if all those numbers add up but they seem to be about right in my head... regardless you make those first before trading amare away. it doesn't make any sense to blow it all up by trading your youngest star away.
                              Last edited by avoidingtheclowns; 02-04-2009, 08:48 PM.
                              This is the darkest timeline.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: chad ford said this about the Pacers/Amare in his chat today...

                                Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                                The only way I would do that is if we know that Granger has peaked (like Amare has) and the team wasnt really going anywhere further with the player (like Suns) then I would trade away for picks and expirer
                                Why has Amare peaked and Granger hasn't? They are the same age. And why can't the Suns go any further with Amare than they have? They have very similar issues as us and a lot more pieces to use in trades.

                                I just don't see that as the issue.

                                I don't see any team trading a 26 year old all star for expirings and a decent draft pick. It just doesn't happen. If you are rebuilding the 26 year old is the one you keep.
                                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X