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

Bird interviewed by SLAM

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Bird interviewed by SLAM

    http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba...th-larry-bird/

    Some snippets:

    SLAM: Now if I understand, the three-point shot isn’t something you really like, is it?
    LB: [Laughs] I like it at certain times. I don’t like quick threes off the break, I don’t like three-on-twos that end up in a three-point shot. But a lot of coaches think that you play the percentages and if you have shooters you use it to your advantage.
    SLAM: I would imagine rookies seek your advice often. When you sign a rookie to the Pacers, is there anything that you make sure to tell each and every rookie that comes to you for advice?
    LB: Well, it’s funny, you know, all these kids that come in now have all the answers. I can remember when I came in, I went to Dave Cowens, I talked to Dave about different things. I can remember the first time we went on a west coast trip, we were going to be gone for 14 days and I said what’s the difference out here than how it is on the east coast and they said there’s a lot more running and gunning and there’s going to be a lot more opportunities for you to play your total game instead of just scoring and rebounding. The players today, when I talk to them, especially when I sign them, I tell them what we expect of them, and, you know, hard work, show up on time, work on your game in practice, try to improve each year. And some of them take it and some of them down. After I sign them I say, I hope I sign you again to a lot bigger contract. When it comes down to it’s not only about displaying your talents on the court, but you have a short time period here to make a living and to make the best of it.
    SLAM: I think you would probably agree that when you look at this current Indiana Pacers team, you’re looking at a challenge, and I think you’ve been looking at a challenge for the past several years, do you think this is the biggest challenge you’ve faced?
    LB: Oh yeah, no question about it. We haven’t had any money at all. We’ve been up against the cap to go out and get a free agent. When we lose a player when his contract ends for $6 or $7 million, we might have to go out and get three players. We can use the money but to stay under the cap we only have $5 or $6 or $7 million to go out and get three players to try to stay under it. So, you know, that’s just part of the struggle. Obviously losing is very difficult, but when you’re rebuilding you know you’re going through stages, it’s going to be tough, but as long as you draft the players and you see a bright future, I think it’s going to be lights at the end of the tunnel, it’s going to be very good, not only for me, but for the franchise and that’s what’s most important.

    SLAM: Absolutely, and I feel like each season this team and this franchise takes a step forward and looks a little better each season. What is it going to take before you, and this franchise, and this team can take that final step and be a powerhouse in the NBA and a threat towards other teams around the League and fight for a title?
    LB: What’s happening is we’re drafting young players, maybe some of them won’t be superstars, but will be great fill-ins, some will be back-up players, some will be starters. And when you get your salaries down, which we’re going to be down to about $28-30 million after next year and that’s the first time, I think, in the history of this franchise we’re going to have an opportunity to go out and look for players and try to fill this roster with the type of players we want here and ones that can win games.

    SLAM: What do you like to see in a basketball player? What do you look for when you’re trying to bring guys to Indianapolis?
    LB: Well first of all, they give as much off that court as they do on and we’ve been very fortunate for that for the last four or five years. Even when we had players here that got themselves into some trouble, they were excellent in our community. They were out there and they were giving, but overall I think if you want to get the type of players in here that’s going to play the game the right way, and not only give it to you in games, but do the right things in practice to prepare themselves.

    SLAM: Now, how has the process of scouting changed since 2004? Or has it changed? What are you doing differently now?
    LB: Well the kids are so young now. I mean, there’s a lot of kids that come out that have great talent, but they’re so young you don’t know how they’re going to mature of the years and I think it’s really just a guess. You know they have the talent, you know they have the fundamentals, it’s just about whether they’re going to get better and better. That’s probably been the hardest thing. We like to take guys that have had a lot of college experience and that had good coaching, and been good kids along the way, but you just never know until you’ve had then for a couple years because you never know how they’re going to turn out.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    And when you get your salaries down, which we’re going to be down to about $28-30 million after next year and that’s the first time, I think, in the history of this franchise we’re going to have an opportunity to go out and look for players and try to fill this roster with the type of players we want here and ones that can win games.
    Everyone expecting a bunch of trades better read the above twice. This is Bird's plan! He wants those expirings to expire so he can get the type player he wants.

    Another quote from him I read about a month ago was along the lines of "we won't do anything unless it helps our plan."

    So maybe you want to trade Murphy for Z, but for Bird, it will probably take what was rumored. Murphy for Z, a player, and a draft choice.

    In other words Bird isn't going to make a major trade unless it's a no brainer.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

      Keep in mind just because we might let the contracts expire doesn't mean we will necessarily get every new guy through free agency. We will be able to make financially lop-sided trades while we are under the cap.

      Also, keep in mind that this 3-year plan will probably end with us being back in the thick of the playoff hunt, but not a contender. That will be its own chapter. First things first. I think if things go right, we'll be a 2nd round playoff team (roughly), and then from there you are more likely to see trades to take us further as we go along and/or as needed.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Keep in mind just because we might let the contracts expire doesn't mean we will necessarily get every new guy through free agency. We will be able to make financially lop-sided trades while we are under the cap.
        A agree with that. I don't think Bird is interested in overpaying free agents anyway.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

          SLAM: Now if I understand, the three-point shot isn’t something you really like, is it?
          LB: [Laughs] I like it at certain times. I don’t like quick threes off the break, I don’t like three-on-twos that end up in a three-point shot. But a lot of coaches think that you play the percentages and if you have shooters you use it to your advantage.
          Yet he signed him to an extension.

          Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

          Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

          Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.


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

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Yet he signed him to an extension.

            Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

            Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

            Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.

            Bird doesn't want another coach until the rebuilding is done. Where are we going in the next year and a half anyway? No where. So what difference does it really make? None, except we probably get better draft choices.
            Last edited by Will Galen; 01-23-2010, 03:16 AM.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
              Everyone expecting a bunch of trades better read the above twice. This is Bird's plan! He wants those expirings to expire so he can get the type player he wants.

              Another quote from him I read about a month ago was along the lines of "we won't do anything unless it helps our plan."

              So maybe you want to trade Murphy for Z, but for Bird, it will probably take what was rumored. Murphy for Z, a player, and a draft choice.

              In other words Bird isn't going to make a major trade unless it's a no brainer.
              Why doesn't trading Murphy just for Z+$$$ not fall into the plan? Wouldn't part of the plan also include saving $$$ and waiting it out until the 2011-2012 offseason?

              I'm all for getting the most out of our assets....but if I'm Bird....I'm also all for saving my boss some $$$ as well. I'm pretty sure that the Wizards asking price ( at the very least ) is Z+Prospect+Draft choice ( if not more )....if that is the case...why pick a less athletic Big Man that can't post up when the Cavs can get a more versatile player at the same price?

              I don't mind asking for the sky then working our way down to a more reasonable price....but I don't also want the Cavs to back away from the negotiating Table with a "Really, you want all that just for Troy Murphy?" response and we are back at "square one".
              Last edited by CableKC; 01-23-2010, 03:53 AM.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                Yet he signed him to an extension.

                Why is it every single time I read or hear something he say's it is in almost complete contridiction to Jim O'Briens coaching. Yet he extends him and gives him huge giant vote of confidence early in the season.

                Think about it, every free agent he has signed, every draft he has made since O'Brien has been here is in complete contrast to the style of play Jim wants.

                Talk about confusing and talk about shooting yourself in the foot. He should either just get Jim what he wants and needs or get a coach more in step with his spoken philosophy.
                Maybe the Players Bird drafted/signed should help in the short term with JO'B ( as in getting defensive minded Player to improve the defense ) but really fit the style that he wants beyond JO'B and the next season.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Why doesn't trading Murphy just for Z+$$$ not fall into the plan?
                  Because Bird isn't going to do a trade just to save the owner some money until he has to. We're a full year away from him having to do that.

                  If you take the money out of it Bird would be giving away an asset for nothing. Just not Bird's style if you ask me.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                    Because Bird isn't going to do a trade just to save the owner some money until he has to. We're a full year away from him having to do that.

                    If you take the money out of it Bird would be giving away an asset for nothing. Just not Bird's style if you ask me.
                    Thank You! Thank You! Thank You! I'm tired of hearing over and over lets just get it done for the $$$... When we are the one's with the asset and bargaining postilion... that means we can get more out of a deal...

                    Multiple teams want Murph therefore we have the upper hand, as well in that we do not have to trade him! BUT if they see him as a key piece for a playoff run, then they'll give more to get him...

                    I guess all I'm saying is I know we have a history of starting out at a disadvantage in trade talks (Artest, Jackson, Tinsley) but here we are not, so please stop talking as if we are! Only bad trades result that way...

                    Be patient and let Bird play the negotiation game... and again I say be patient b/c most trades don't happen till very close to the deadline, and that's still weeks away folks....
                    "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                      Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                      Bird doesn't want another coach until the rebuilding is done. Where are we going in the next year and a half anyway? No where. So what difference does it really make? None, except we probably get better draft choices.
                      Agreed wholeheartedly.... I also think Herb had a part in that thinking as well...
                      "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                        Tad ? Why on earth are you calling Troy Murphy an asset ?

                        assets are things of value that can be readily converted into cash

                        Troy is worth very little, in fact an expiring contract is worth more then Murphy
                        As it is he is a liability, he costs a large fortune in salary ( he is our highest paid player @ 11 million dollars and your income in change)
                        For that it is statistically proven (or to be proven) that he is making our team play worse, in other words, the results when he plays are inherently worse then when he doesn't.
                        I state a case for the fact that Murphy falls into these definitions:

                        "anything that is a hindrance or puts an individual or group at a disadvantage."

                        "an obligation of an entity arising from past transactions or events"

                        both are definitions of a "liability"
                        So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                        If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                        Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                          Let's also consider the following, as an afterthought:

                          The difference between salary cap and luxury tax is something most seem to easily forget.
                          We want the team to be under the latter, but not the 1st.

                          cap for 2010-2011 prognoses are between 50 and 53 million
                          lt for 2010-2011 is related to that between 62 and 65 million

                          Pacers projected salary for 2010-2011 is 64 million with 12 players on the roster (we will be minus Head, Watson and Diener) (btw 12 million of that is for Murphy)

                          Pacers projected salary for 2011-2012 is 16 million, but that is with 6 players on the roster.

                          Now in that situation we would have approx 35 million to play with, but......
                          - that is for 9 players
                          - Danny by then costs 12 million a year
                          - You have one more year left before you have to extend Hibbert and Rush

                          So if you spend the full 35 (you can not go over the cap on new signings) for 9 players u can buy what ?

                          You also will be in LT problems the year after when it comes to the above mentioned rookies and one year later Tyler, and AJ.

                          Now if you trade your contracts for "some" alleviation on salary so to be surely under LT + some prospects or picks, you have some room to move,
                          Yes a little less to spend but more wiggle room and "cheaper" players.

                          Getting "under the cap" as he seems to think is a big feat, is very simple, let the contracts run their course and one day they stop, not that hard to figure out, but.....

                          It is in the "wrong" year, as most "toppers" will be available at the end of THIS season, not next.
                          Indy is not perse the greatest attraction to those "top players" as it is.


                          The more I read the more I am convinced that LB is simply not that good a gm.
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                            Murphy is an asset because other teams want him. Furthermore, he expires after next year, along with all of the other large contracts. It is significant that they expire together, rather than individually, because it provides the Pacers with more flexibility when looking to trade.

                            Trading him for a contract that expires after this year (Z) and just chilling under the cap does nothing for the playoff prospects of this team. If eating more salary can turn him into a another player that contributes, that is a win.

                            While this team will need 9 players, hopefully one or two will be draft picks making very little. A couple more will be deep bench players making very little. That leaves a lot of room to play with.

                            Those big name free agents ain't coming to Indy this year, and shedding Murphy's contract does not make Indy competitive irrespective of the desirability of the team and market. That is why moving his contract for merely cap relief is wasting a resource.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Bird interviewed by SLAM

                              I just read this article, and I had to re-read it to even try to understand what points the author was trying to get across.

                              I actually feel sorry for people in Bird's position. They have to be nice to people like this who haven't been paying much attention to what has been going on with the franchise, and then speak very carefully to them, weighing every syllable for fear that an interviewer like this will misinterpret them and print what they think was said and intended due to their own assumptions prior to the interview.

                              For this person to look at this season (and I double checked when it was posted to make sure it was not back in August) and infer that just because changes were made in the off season that the franchise has progressed this year is hard to fathom. Even the most casual of observers who have watched much NBA basketball would understand that this is not the case.

                              The most telling thing, assuming that Bird was not taken out of context, is that he intends to just let the expirings actually expire unless something virtually risk free that hastens the expirations comes along. If true, Bird is capable of leading this franchise back where it needs to be, IMO. He won't just make popular moves to put people in the seats, and will use his refusal to just get rid of players to do so, with the apparent blessing of Herb Simon, unless there is absolutely no hope to get anything for them any other way as his initial bargaining leverage point. Patience in these circumstances is admirable and very necessary if the Pacers are not to be the Clippers of the East.

                              His statement about knowing that the players being drafted have the fundamentals is OK on its surface, but it does reveal that the fundamentals of basketball are being assumed here due to the fact that the players are now at the professional level. Larry Brown, Rick Carlisle, Gregg Popovich, and Jerry Sloan would disagree with that. They would counter that there is a certain level of proficiency and awareness of fundamentals that players reach this level with, and then make absolutely sure that those players DO in fact have those skills and then continue to polish and further enhance those skills in actual games. Notice that these are the coaches that are old school and don't push the tempo beyond the physical or mental capacity of their players to do so. At some point I believe Bird will realize that, if he doesn't already, and hopefully there will be a coach that fits this mold available and willing to come in and untrain and then re-train whoever we have after the "Summer of Great Expirations" besides Granger.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X