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

Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

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

  • #31
    Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

    I really hope we can find some way to keep Daniels. He is the best on the Pacers at finding a way to the rim when nobody else can make a play imo. At least two or three times a game I see him drive and score when the shot clock is about to expire and nobody else was able to get through the defense. He also has the ability to play point guard; he was often used at that position in Dallas.

    I would bet that the Tinsley situation will effect what we do in the off-season too. If he isn't traded or bought out, does anybody think Bird would consider bringing him back? After sitting out an entire season it may be necessary to prove that he can still play. It would also allow TPTB to fill the void left by Jack and Daniels, without spending more money, in the event that they both leave. I highly doubt this would be considered, but stranger things have happened.

    (I apologize if that suggestion makes anybody vomit in their mouth a little while reading it)
    Last edited by switch; 03-02-2009, 10:32 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

      Perhaps Quis will demonstrate his future value to the team via a trade -- ideally, a draft-related one ... either to secure an additional first-rounder, or to trade up, or to trade (with our pick?) for a desirable veteran like Chicken Chandler.


      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

        Originally posted by DrFife View Post
        Perhaps Quis will demonstrate his future value to the team via a trade -- ideally, a draft-related one ... either to secure an additional first-rounder, or to trade up, or to trade (with our pick?) for a desirable veteran like Chicken Chandler.
        From my understanding, the only way to trade him in the offseason is to pick up his Team Option at $7 mil a season....which would mean that we would have to take back someone with at 2009-2010 salary between $5.83 mil to $9.19 mil...which would put us over the Luxury Tax threshold.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          From my understanding, the only way to trade him in the offseason is to pick up his Team Option at $7 mil a season....which would mean that we would have to take back someone with at 2009-2010 salary between $5.83 mil to $9.19 mil...which would put us over the Luxury Tax threshold.
          I read on ESPN that we could trade him and whoever we traded him to could refuse to p/u his option. I think we have to trade him before July 1st and then the team must waive his team option and cut him by July 1st. Its a sweet asset the Pacers have this summer.
          "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


          • #35
            Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

            Originally posted by aceace View Post
            I read on ESPN that we could trade him and whoever we traded him to could refuse to p/u his option. I think we have to trade him before July 1st and then the team must waive his team option and cut him by July 1st. Its a sweet asset the Pacers have this summer.
            This is wrong. He can't be traded without picking up his option first.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

              Count,

              Isn't it possible for a team that's under the salary cap to make trades where they bring in more salary than they send out?

              Perhaps we could find a team that's substantially under the cap and then pick up 'Quis option and send him (or some other higher paid player their way).

              Also, how does it work trading for guys with unguaranteed or partially guaranteed contracts? We could just trade for them and cut them, right?
              Last edited by OakMoses; 03-03-2009, 01:22 PM.
              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

              - Salman Rushdie

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                Count,

                Isn't it possible for a team that's under the salary cap to make trades where they bring in more salary than they send out?

                Perhaps we could find a team that's substantially under the cap and then pick up 'Quis option and send him (or some other higher paid player their way).
                Yes, we could pick up his option, then trade him.

                If we were to trade with someone currently over the cap, we'd have to take back about $5.9mm, unless that team had a trade exception of at least $7.4mm (which I can't think of any at the moment, except for maybe Denver).

                If we were to trade with someone under the cap, at least under the cap far enough to take on the $7.4mm, we would not have to take back any salary.

                However, I'm a little unclear if we could take back something in between. That is to say, could we trade Quis to someone under the tax, but only take back a guy making $2 or $3 million.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                  Here's a list of teams that would have enough cap room to take on 'Quis or another $7 million contract:

                  Atlanta
                  Charlotte
                  Detroit
                  Memphis
                  Oklahoma City
                  Portland
                  Sacramento
                  Toronto

                  See any takers?
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                    I see alot of teams that could use him, none that would spend 7 million on him due to the health history.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      I see alot of teams that could use him, none that would spend 7 million on him due to the health history.
                      The only way that I could see any team wanting to trade for Marquis' contract is if it was treated it as a 2009-2010 Expiring AFTER we decide to pick up the Team Option for ~$7mil. We would end up trading his 1 year Expiring / $7mil contract for some Multi-year / $7mil to $9.19mil per year Contract. We would take on the additional Salary. The only way that I would consider doing this is IF we got back a very solid Athetic Frontcourt Player that fits our needs Low-Post Scoring/Defense that has a Contract that expires AFTER the 2010-2011 season.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        I see alot of teams that could use him, none that would spend 7 million on him due to the health history.
                        Most of those teams could pick up Ford or Foster or even Dunleavy (I doubt anybody wants him).

                        Portland keeps saying they want an upgrade at PG. We could send Ford to the Blazers for Blake and save $4 million. Then we'd have enough to possibly keep 'Quis and Jack. Foster would be a pretty good back-up big for them as well.

                        I suppose Charlotte or Atlanta might be interested in 'Quis or Foster also.

                        I can't see Memphis, OKC, or Sacramento being interested.

                        Detroit's a possibility, but they're going to try to make a bigger splash than anything we can ofer.
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                          Here is my opinion on exactly what the Pacers FO is thinking for this off-season. I will make one caveat in this whole scenario, that moving Tinsley is our top priority. I am not going to consider his situation in our off-season, because I will assume we trade him for a player with two years and $14M left on their contract as well.

                          1. We will not pick up the team option on Daniels. We are exercising our ability to reduce salary. I love Daniels and his defense. Realistically, we need to reduce payroll and he is a definite casualty. He will get paid solid money by someone. If we were to decline his option and look to resign him, we would be looking at four years and about 16-19M, IMO. In order to get enough of a discount for us to want to sign him, he would need four years at least on that deal. I don't think the Pacers would even consider that. Plus, if we do sign him, he will count against our MLE to do so, and that would be most of our MLE. Not good.

                          2. We are going to sign the offer sheet for Jack's restriction. That is 2.9M for next year. We are praying that no one signs him to a contract. I think realistically we could get him for his restriction price. The better he plays down the stretch, the less likely we can sign him for his restriction price. We therefore will be keeping Jack unless he gets a big or lengthy offer from someone else. If I were a betting man I would say that Jack will be back. We can exercise our Bird Rights on him, and thus alleviate using the MLE.

                          3. Rasho will go elsewhere. He wasn't real happy to get traded here in the first place, and we don't have a need for him, unless he will take a low ball offer. At that point he could take less to play for a championship caliber team or command a heck of a lot more money in Europe.

                          4. Travis Deiner will take his team option.

                          5. Maceo will be playing in Europe.

                          6. Stephen Graham and Josh McRoberts I will put in the same boat. We want to resign these guys for a couple of years to see if they produce more. They will be happy to be in the NBA still I am sure, and both would probably look to stay with us. Graham has been given a chance to play by us, and McRoberts is from here. Both have an opportunity to actually fill a role with us. Both of these players are "Early Bird Free Agents", meaning that they have been in the league for two years and we can use the "Early Bird Exception" to sign them to contracts without using our MLE or BIA. I think this is mandatory that we resign them since they will be cheap and allow greater flexibility in signing other players (This is assuming that we re-sign them for more than the minimum contracts, that they would probably sign elsewhere). Also, we could use the Minimum player salary exception if either one of them would accept a minimum deal, which would be optimal.

                          7. We then have our MLE left to sign whoever we would like. This gives us the ability to take our team to the LT threshold. We have a lot of options. We can make use of a lot of these exceptions to re-sign our guys, which I think will be necessary for our flexibility. I can almost guarantee we will be re-signing most of our own players and not making any big splashes in free agency. I could see us not using our MLE at all in the pre-season. Possibly signing a free agent rookie to a minimum deal. That way, if necessary, we have our entire MLE to use during the year.

                          Let me know your thoughts. I know this is probably just a long-winded version of what many of us already know, but I figured I would put a bit more depth into the thoughts. If I am incorrect on anything I said, please feel free to correct me. I won't be offended if you just skip the post too.
                          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                            Pacergod2, most of what you said I agree with. #1 priority will be Tinsley, that will probably have the biggest effect on what we do next. Who we trade him for SG,PF or C will be key. Mostly guys that are making 6-7M have at one time been a pretty good player to get money like that. Hopefully they will be able to help, at the very least a 2nd string player. Another key will be "what is Duns situation". Will he play next season, probably won't know that until August at the earliest. I don't see us as having more than 65M in salaries at the most. That would be the two differences which might make some of your points, not happen.
                            "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


                            • #44
                              Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                              Here is my opinion on exactly what the Pacers FO is thinking for this off-season. I will make one caveat in this whole scenario, that moving Tinsley is our top priority. I am not going to consider his situation in our off-season, because I will assume we trade him for a player with two years and $14M left on their contract as well.

                              1. We will not pick up the team option on Daniels. We are exercising our ability to reduce salary. I love Daniels and his defense. Realistically, we need to reduce payroll and he is a definite casualty. He will get paid solid money by someone. If we were to decline his option and look to resign him, we would be looking at four years and about 16-19M, IMO. In order to get enough of a discount for us to want to sign him, he would need four years at least on that deal. I don't think the Pacers would even consider that. Plus, if we do sign him, he will count against our MLE to do so, and that would be most of our MLE. Not good.
                              If we decline his options, I believe we still retain his Bird rights. Therefore, it would not strictly count against our MLE.

                              However, we would not be able to re-sign Daniels for any amount and still use any of our MLE. Therefore, it has the same net effect.

                              Originally posted by pacergod2
                              2. We are going to sign the offer sheet for Jack's restriction. That is 2.9M for next year. We are praying that no one signs him to a contract. I think realistically we could get him for his restriction price. The better he plays down the stretch, the less likely we can sign him for his restriction price. We therefore will be keeping Jack unless he gets a big or lengthy offer from someone else. If I were a betting man I would say that Jack will be back. We can exercise our Bird Rights on him, and thus alleviate using the MLE.
                              We'll certainly make the tender, and only two things would keep us from matching his offers: He gets something significantly higher than $4mm, or we get Daniels for $4mm or less.

                              Originally posted by pacergod2
                              3. Rasho will go elsewhere. He wasn't real happy to get traded here in the first place, and we don't have a need for him, unless he will take a low ball offer. At that point he could take less to play for a championship caliber team or command a heck of a lot more money in Europe.

                              4. Travis Deiner will take his team option.

                              5. Maceo will be playing in Europe.
                              Yup

                              Originally posted by pacergod2
                              6. Stephen Graham and Josh McRoberts I will put in the same boat. We want to resign these guys for a couple of years to see if they produce more. They will be happy to be in the NBA still I am sure, and both would probably look to stay with us. Graham has been given a chance to play by us, and McRoberts is from here. Both have an opportunity to actually fill a role with us. Both of these players are "Early Bird Free Agents", meaning that they have been in the league for two years and we can use the "Early Bird Exception" to sign them to contracts without using our MLE or BIA. I think this is mandatory that we resign them since they will be cheap and allow greater flexibility in signing other players (This is assuming that we re-sign them for more than the minimum contracts, that they would probably sign elsewhere). Also, we could use the Minimum player salary exception if either one of them would accept a minimum deal, which would be optimal.
                              I'm relatively sure McBob will be back...as to Graham, I'm less sure, but it will be him or some other min-level player filling out the roster

                              Originally posted by pacergod2
                              7. We then have our MLE left to sign whoever we would like. This gives us the ability to take our team to the LT threshold. We have a lot of options. We can make use of a lot of these exceptions to re-sign our guys, which I think will be necessary for our flexibility. I can almost guarantee we will be re-signing most of our own players and not making any big splashes in free agency. I could see us not using our MLE at all in the pre-season. Possibly signing a free agent rookie to a minimum deal. That way, if necessary, we have our entire MLE to use during the year.
                              We won't use our MLE, unless we lose both Daniels and Jack. We only have $11mm to sign 6 players. The 1st rounder and Daniels-or-Jack will chew up $7-8mm of that, leaving us 3-4 to sign the other four players...so you're looking at 2nd rounders and min level players.

                              Originally posted by pacergod2
                              Let me know your thoughts. I know this is probably just a long-winded version of what many of us already know, but I figured I would put a bit more depth into the thoughts. If I am incorrect on anything I said, please feel free to correct me. I won't be offended if you just skip the post too.
                              There's going to be a lot of speculation, but I think we're going to re-sign Jack, sign our first rounders, and fill out the roster with cheap guys. There simply aren't a lot of options.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Is not picking up Marquis Team Option but trying to sign him as a UFA for cheaper an option?

                                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                                Here's a list of teams that would have enough cap room to take on 'Quis or another $7 million contract:

                                Atlanta
                                Charlotte
                                Detroit
                                Memphis
                                Oklahoma City
                                Portland
                                Sacramento
                                Toronto

                                See any takers?
                                I don't see anyone there who would want to pay $7M for Marquis Daniels to be on their roster next season. Not in this economic climate, no. If you're one of those teams interested in Daniels' services, you'll just wait for the Pacers to decline his option, then offer him a deal for probably less than half that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X