Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 182

Thread: Pacers asking too much for Murph

  1. #51
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,638

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    You aren't trading for a player, you are trading for a massive cash savings.

    To repeat what I've said elsewhere, let's say the lux is coming in so that we go $1m over.

    We pay $1m tax on that. We loose 4-5m in benefits paid to teams under the cap. We pay Troy his $12m. So trading him only for the 29th pick gets you maybe Booker or Poindexter, still a solid player and saves you 16-18m bucks.

    The space away from the lux tax means you can take a salary increase on another trade if need be without going over the tax.

    And if you buyout Z you likely get minor savings, maybe 500K perhaps.


    Or keep him and let him take the team to where? This isn't the NBA 3 years ago, this is the new, declining cap numbers NBA where every team values salary space MORE than talent.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Naptown_Seth For This Useful Post:


  3. #52
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,575

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I understand and can even agree with some things, BUT don't sell short the pick. It can be used to draft a player, or it can be used as a trading chip. I don't see Hickson in the equation with the Pacers, but Leon Powe might be gotten. Again, if nothing else he could be used in a trade. I, like you, want the best deal possible, but at the same time I don't want to see the demand so unreasonable that it kills trading Murphy's albatross contract and Jimmy's crutch either.
    I really think the best that we can get is Powe+Z+$$$$.....the Cavs don't give up something that they don't really want to give up and we get a PF that maybe able to help us. Unfortunately, Powe is likely to be out until after the ASB.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  4. #53
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,575

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You aren't trading for a player, you are trading for a massive cash savings.

    To repeat what I've said elsewhere, let's say the lux is coming in so that we go $1m over.

    We pay $1m tax on that. We loose 4-5m in benefits paid to teams under the cap. We pay Troy his $12m. So trading him only for the 29th pick gets you maybe Booker or Poindexter, still a solid player and saves you 16-18m bucks.

    The space away from the lux tax means you can take a salary increase on another trade if need be without going over the tax.

    And if you buyout Z you likely get minor savings, maybe 500K perhaps.

    Or keep him and let him take the team to where? This isn't the NBA 3 years ago, this is the new, declining cap numbers NBA where every team values salary space MORE than talent.
    Preach it from the mountain top!!!!

    It's not always about what we get in return......it's also about what we don't have to pay in the end.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  5. #54
    Member Wage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    423

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    I can't understand why people are arguing about luxury tax savings on a message board. It's like arguing about Granger's stock portfolio, who cares?

    The luxury tax is something that only ownership can have a valid opinion on. If ownership decides they value the LT savings more than other factors, they will give Bird the order to trade Murphy for expiring contracts. If the LT is not that large of a concern, they will let Bird do as he wishes with a prospective trade.

    As fans, we are out of the loop when it comes to luxury tax decisions.

  6. #55
    Formerly QuickRelease NapTonius Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    4,799

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Trophy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It appears that Cleveland still has hopes on getting him, but since Bird actually told Cleveland a deal, they're denying the trade. Washington never actually denied any rumors containing Jamison so it leaves Cleveland with the idea to still get him. Cleveland has many other options that can work. They're looking at Igudala.

    I think Bird wants him here and would want him to return if he can be brought back for a cheaper contract. That is if Tyler still isn't the go-to PF yet.
    For some reason, I don't see Iguadola as that great a fit in Cleveland, especially if they're needing another player to space the floor. His game seems redundant (of course on a much smaller scale) with LBJ.

  7. #56
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can't understand why people are arguing about luxury tax savings on a message board. It's like arguing about Granger's stock portfolio, who cares?

    The luxury tax is something that only ownership can have a valid opinion on. If ownership decides they value the LT savings more than other factors, they will give Bird the order to trade Murphy for expiring contracts. If the LT is not that large of a concern, they will let Bird do as he wishes with a prospective trade.

    As fans, we are out of the loop when it comes to luxury tax decisions.
    Because the NBA is more than just what players you like or don't like. The NBA is a business and money has more to do with the league than players and teams. That is why we consider salary cap perspective when talking about the decisions of the Pacers (a company) or other teams. If I told you that you were on the hook for $16M next year, would you not do what you could to avoid having to pay such a massive bill? Of course you would. Even if you wipe your a*s with $100 bills.

  8. #57
    Formerly QuickRelease NapTonius Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    4,799

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by d_c View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Murphy is hardly the last piece to a playoff team, much less a championship one.

    Look at the borderline 8th/9th seeds in either conference jockeying for the final playoff spot.

    Ask yourself this: Would you say that adding Murphy to any one of those teams all of sudden pushes that team over the top to "secure" that playoff spot or make them the favorite to get it? I just don't get the sense that Troy would all of a sudden be the difference maker. I never have.
    This is the difference between a championship squad and a team struggling to make the playoffs. We're looking for the missing ingredient. Cleveland is looking for a missing garnish. Murphy's not a difference maker that ensures Cleveland wins the title. He just adds an element that might make it a bit easier to do so with what he provides.

  9. #58
    Formerly QuickRelease NapTonius Monk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    4,799

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Preach it from the mountain top!!!!

    It's not always about what we get in return......it's also about what we don't have to pay in the end.
    Getting under the cap also helps with trades next year, wouldn't it? Because we'd be able to absorb a higher salaried impact player, even if the salaries aren't an exact match. Is that correct?

  10. #59
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,575

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can't understand why people are arguing about luxury tax savings on a message board. It's like arguing about Granger's stock portfolio, who cares?

    The luxury tax is something that only ownership can have a valid opinion on. If ownership decides they value the LT savings more than other factors, they will give Bird the order to trade Murphy for expiring contracts. If the LT is not that large of a concern, they will let Bird do as he wishes with a prospective trade.

    As fans, we are out of the loop when it comes to luxury tax decisions.
    You're right....we have no clue what the Owners are directing Bird to do with those Contracts....for all we know....they could be telling Bird to get the most out of a trade for any of the Big 4 regardless of the Financial impact to the Team.

    I'd really wish this were the case.....but the reality is that the Pacers aren't the same as the Lakers where they could afford to pay a lot of $$$ for going over the LT based off of the sale of Kobe Bryant Jerseys along. Given the financial woes of PS&E over the last couple of seasons, dwindling Revenues and fanbase.....it's not out of the realm of possibility that the financial impact to the Team of any trade is not a major concern for the Owners.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  11. #60
    Member Trophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    8,556

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Would Bird be more optimistic about moving Mike if a team offered as oppose to Troy which we see is happening now?

  12. #61
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,575

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by QuickRelease View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Getting under the cap also helps with trades next year, wouldn't it? Because we'd be able to absorb a higher salaried impact player, even if the salaries aren't an exact match. Is that correct?
    Yes, you are correct ( as Seth eloquently pointed out )
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  13. #62
    Member Wage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    423

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by pacergod2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Because the NBA is more than just what players you like or don't like. The NBA is a business and money has more to do with the league than players and teams. That is why we consider salary cap perspective when talking about the decisions of the Pacers (a company) or other teams. If I told you that you were on the hook for $16M next year, would you not do what you could to avoid having to pay such a massive bill? Of course you would. Even if you wipe your a*s with $100 bills.
    I really don't follow what any of this is supposed to mean.

    Of course the NBA is about more than what players you like or don't like. No idea what this is even referencing.

    As far as salary cap concerns go, I understand why fans want to discuss such things. It's fun to pretend GM the team and imagine what we can do with our cap room. This, however is about the Luxury Tax. Only ownership can have a valid opinion on how important that number is to them.

    As to your last point about "being on the hook for $16M next year", there are far too many factors to just say "get out from under it at all costs."

  14. #63
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    42
    Posts
    25,575

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I really don't follow what any of this is supposed to mean.

    Of course the NBA is about more than what players you like or don't like. No idea what this is even referencing.

    As far as salary cap concerns go, I understand why fans want to discuss such things. It's fun to pretend GM the team and imagine what we can do with our cap room. This, however is about the Luxury Tax. Only ownership can have a valid opinion on how important that number is to them.
    What I think that pacergod2 is trying to say is that the NBA is a business. What moves Owners sign off on can often be motivated purely for Financial reasons....mostly ( as we have seen with the Nuggets dumping Camby for a 2nd round pick and the Jazz including Maynor to move Harpring for Financial relief ) due to LT concerns.

    Of course, we're just fans and all we're doing is making assumptions based off of what Ownership wants to do and how important the LT is....but is it really far fetched to assume that Owners that have been losing a lot of $$$ over the last couple of seasons would be reluctant to pay LT next season and therefore factor this consideration into their decision making process on what to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    As to your last point about "being on the hook for $16M next year", there are far too many factors to just say "get out from under it at all costs."
    Could you elaborate on what factors you are referring to?
    Last edited by CableKC; 02-02-2010 at 07:49 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  15. #64
    Member Wage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    423

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Ok, my quote-fu is weak, so this is in response to CableKC.

    It is quite reasonable to believe that the owners are eager to get under the LT and would make a trade where that was the primary, or even only real benefit. We have no real evidence to suggest where ownership stands on the matter right now though. A LT debate makes more sense to me after a trade like this is completed, and we have evidence of it's importance to ownership.

    As to the last comment you quoted about "getting out from under $16M", I was simply responding to Pacergod, and trying to make sense of it all.

  16. #65
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Absolutely! Only a blind person hasn't noticed the change this year. Or one wearing blinders and is so stubborn they can't see the trees for the forest.
    Call me blind then because I honestly hadn't noticed. What makes you guys say that beyond rumors from outsiders? Looking directly at Murphy, I don't see anything like that.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  18. #66

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ok, my quote-fu is weak, so this is in response to CableKC.

    It is quite reasonable to believe that the owners are eager to get under the LT and would make a trade where that was the primary, or even only real benefit. We have no real evidence to suggest where ownership stands on the matter right now though. A LT debate makes more sense to me after a trade like this is completed, and we have evidence of it's importance to ownership.

    As to the last comment you quoted about "getting out from under $16M", I was simply responding to Pacergod, and trying to make sense of it all.

    IIRC, Bird acknowledged during the past off season ownership was not going to go over the LT. Keep in mind that teams under the LT will share the money other teams pay for being over th LT. For a team like the Pacers who are having finanical difficulties, it means they will get about 5 mil for being under the LT. Hence, Pacers ownership is not wanting to do any trades that would put them over the LT and lose them 5 mil. Nor do they want to pay a dollar for each dollar they are over the LT. Thus the LT plays a very important part in making trades. You probably already knew this, but just in case you didn't maybe it helps to put it in perspective.

  19. #67
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Wage View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ok, my quote-fu is weak, so this is in response to CableKC.

    It is quite reasonable to believe that the owners are eager to get under the LT and would make a trade where that was the primary, or even only real benefit. We have no real evidence to suggest where ownership stands on the matter right now though. A LT debate makes more sense to me after a trade like this is completed, and we have evidence of it's importance to ownership.

    As to the last comment you quoted about "getting out from under $16M", I was simply responding to Pacergod, and trying to make sense of it all.
    Bird and the Simons have been quite clear for years that they (Simons) don't want to pay the luxury tax. That's been solidly established.

    So whether or not the team is looking at having to pay it plays a direct role in any moves they will or won't make.

    The further below the LT they are, the more likely they are to take on salaries.

  20. #68

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Here the thing about Murphy: If we keep him, are we a playoff contender? Doubtful. If we trade him, what types of savings would we realize? Let's break it down:

    -- Murphy makes roughly 12 million for 2010/2011
    -- We realize LT savings of 1-2 million
    -- We gain the tax that other teams play 4-5 million
    -- Maybe Cleveland sends us some money for Z's buyout (1-2) million.
    -- Additional savings this year (1-2 million)

    Plus, I understand that Z has been paid most of his salary thus far, so the cost to us would be minimal.

    Let's also assume we grab a pick in 2011 (that turns out to be a later first rounder)

    Keeping Murphy (assuming we go over the LT): 19-20 million
    Trading Murphy: Savings of 19-20 million

    I'm not the one signing the checks, but you know that Morway and Bird know the implications.

    My main concern is that the Pacers are playing musical chairs with Murphy and once the trade deadline comes, they might be stuck with Murphy if another team comes in with a better deal that Cleveland jumps at first. In this NBA environment, other teams are looking at savings and may make a deal that may not make sense from a talent standpoint, but they realize savings.

    If Foster retires and, if the Pacers deal Murphy for an expiring, the Pacers could realize savings of 18.6 million off the cap, plus additional luxury tax savings that may push the savings up towards 25 million.

    Better players than Murphy have been dealt for salary cap purposes and Larry needs to evaluate the situation so that we're not in a position like we were last year with Tinsley.

    My dark horse team to acquire Murphy: Dallas. Dampier's contract is not guaranteed for next season and they could obtain immediate salary cap relief.

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Smoothdave1 For This Useful Post:


  22. #69
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,748

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by QuickRelease View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Getting under the cap also helps with trades next year, wouldn't it? Because we'd be able to absorb a higher salaried impact player, even if the salaries aren't an exact match. Is that correct?
    Yep. We're also much more likely to be a sign a decent player over the summer. We won't have crazy money to throw around, but a DJones/JJack-type deal would be very do-able. If we've got Murphy past the trade deadline, that means we'll be only paying for minimum-level players next summer.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  23. #70
    Member owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,460

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You're right....we have no clue what the Owners are directing Bird to do with those Contracts....for all we know....they could be telling Bird to get the most out of a trade for any of the Big 4 regardless of the Financial impact to the Team.

    I'd really wish this were the case.....but the reality is that the Pacers aren't the same as the Lakers where they could afford to pay a lot of $$$ for going over the LT based off of the sale of Kobe Bryant Jerseys along. Given the financial woes of PS&E over the last couple of seasons, dwindling Revenues and fanbase.....it's not out of the realm of possibility that the financial impact to the Team of any trade is not a major concern for the Owners.
    It also may be a case not being able to look past the end of your nose. We really do not know Troys value. If they feel he is worth more than Z and some tinker toys and not trading for that would be better long term for the Pacers then just maybe I give the benefit of the
    doubt to management.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to owl For This Useful Post:


  25. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,443

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Trophy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Would Bird be more optimistic about moving Mike if a team offered as oppose to Troy which we see is happening now?
    Murphy, for all his flaws, has proven that he's much more durable than Dunleavy.

    Any team looking to acquire Dunleavy right now is going to pay a lot of money while not knowing how many minutes he can handle. That's not exactly something that goes over well with team owners and management these days.

  26. #72
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,795

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Although d_c and many here would have to confirm this...I thought that it was the Pacers insistance on getting Diogu that the GSW trade expanded from a Dunleavy for SJax to one that included Harrington and Murphy.

    I always thought all the Diogu talk was just someone blowing smoke up someone else's rear. I don't mean that comment towards any of the posters. I'm talking about writers/broadcasters supposed sources.

  27. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,795

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Sam Perkins could guard centers.
    Sam was also simply way cooler.

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Tom White For This Useful Post:


  29. #74
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,443

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Although d_c and many here would have to confirm this...I thought that it was the Pacers insistance on getting Diogu that the GSW trade expanded from a Dunleavy for SJax to one that included Harrington and Murphy.
    It's most likely the other way around.

    The original trade the Warriors wanted was the same thing they tried to do with the Hawks the previous summer: They wanted a straight up Murphy for Harrington swap. They tried all summer long to get that done with Atlanta but the Hawks wanted nothing of it (Hawks ownership at the time didn't want any long term contracts).

    The Pacers were also unwilling to do that.

    It wasn't until Dunleavy for Jax as well as Diogu were thrown in that the Pacers were willing to do it. The Warriors also liked Sarunas a lot. Nellie said his son had scouted him extensively and liked what he saw. They thought he was a a pretty good asset to "even out" the trade.

  30. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brown County, Indiana
    Posts
    3,795

    Default Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Quote Originally Posted by Kraut N Beer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From the Cavs side, Murphy is a good addition for a championship run but likely not someone you go and get by trading away a promising young talent. At this point, I would even be close to considering Murphy for Z straight up just for the cap savings, or Murphy for Z plus a pick (any pick) and we agree to drop Z in a month to re-sign with the Cavs. Sign someone off the NBDL that is hungry and finish out this awful season.

    I just can't see anyone else making an aggressive play for Murphy. No one wants to take on more salary next year due to the free agency bonanza this summer. Who is there besides Cleveland that has a serious chance at the Finals and would be going after Murphy with a fat offer? Cleveland has a lot more leverage on this trade if they are the only one looking to deal for Murphy.
    Agreed. I don't know how anyone could consider the team with the best record in the league to be desperate enough to trade off a promising young player and a 1st for Murphy.

    I would have to think Cleveland looks at him as a player it would be nice to get, but the fate of the franchise doesn't hang in the balance if they don't.

Similar Threads

  1. Pacers-Celtics Matchups (IndyStar)
    By ChicagoJ in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-28-2010, 09:36 AM
  2. Pacers End the Season with a 115-108 Win Over Bucks
    By rocksballer58 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-16-2009, 04:47 PM
  3. Pacers Destroy Thunder, 117-109, Slim Playoff Hopes Still Alive
    By rocksballer58 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-06-2009, 04:23 PM
  4. J.J. to the Pacers, Not a Redickulous Thought!
    By FerengiMiller in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 07-19-2008, 01:08 AM
  5. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-18-2005, 01:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •