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

ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

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

  • ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...od_nba_xxx_xxx

    Not a lot of optimism here. Their projected starting 5:

    Collison
    Dunleavy, Jr.
    Granger
    McRoberts (!)
    Hibbert

    NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30
    Timberwolves, Pistons, Raptors, Pacers, Wizards, Nets, projections and previews
    EmailPrintComments
    4
    By Chris Broussard and John Hollinger
    ESPN The Magazine and ESPN Insider

    Getty Images
    A tough road lies ahead for the teams of Kevin Love, Gilbert Arenas and Richard Hamilton.
    With the most highly anticipated free-agency period in NBA history now in the books, ESPN Insider is surveying the new landscape of the Association over the next five days. Chris Broussard examines what changed for each team and what issues still linger, before ranking the teams from No. 30 to No. 1 for the coming season. And John Hollinger weighs in with per-40 minute statistical projections for each squad's starting lineup.




    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    30. Minnesota Timberwolves
    The more things change: Losing the best player on a 15-win team is no big deal, so bye-bye Al Jefferson. Now, the Wolves' most talented player, though perhaps not their best, is Michael Beasley, who's already had a duffle bag's worth of controversy in his disappointing two-year career. While you hope Beasley can turn it around in Minny, it just doesn't seem like the place to build a problem child into a professional. Elsewhere on the roster, Luke Ridnour replaces Ramon Sessions. Ho-hum. Both are truly backups.

    The more they stay the same: The Timberwolves remain, undisputedly, the worst team and franchise in the league. Since Kevin Garnett left for brighter days in Boston three years ago, the Timberwolves have become a joke. They're overstocked at point guard, yet all of them are mediocre, and perhaps the best of the bunch (Ricky Rubio) refuses to play for them, choosing instead to remain in Europe. The one bright spot is Kevin Love, but even he's not bright enough to overcome the darkness covering this club.


    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    29. Detroit Pistons
    The more things change: Years ago, when Tracy McGrady was healthy and in his prime, the Pistons tried and failed to trade for him. Well, they finally got McGrady, signing him as a free agent this summer for the veteran's minimum of $1.35 million. But the 31-year-old McGrady is such a shell of himself that the Pistons were perhaps the only team that wanted him. McGrady will get a chance to shine in Detroit, though, which is an opportunity he would not have received in most places. The Pistons also finally got a skilled big man, happily drafting Georgetown's Greg Monroe. Monroe has great talent, but his toughness and determination have been questioned, as he underachieved in NCAA ball.

    The more they stay the same: Detroit's three best players may still play largely the same position. Point guard Rodney Stuckey may be more like a shooting guard, a position that's already stocked with Richard Hamilton and Ben Gordon. The three are too small to start in a three-guard lineup, but the Pistons' front line is too offensively challenged to put up big points without those three on the floor.


    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    28. Toronto Raptors
    The more things change: The Raptors played the Chris Bosh situation all wrong. It seems that every single individual in the league knew Bosh was leaving Toronto except those working in Toronto. Why else would the Raptors hold onto him until the summer, when they would have been far better off trading him before last season's deadline? In the end, Toronto was left to take whatever it could get in the form of draft picks and a huge trade exception for its best player. The Raptors were able to get rid of the disgruntled Hedo Turkoglu, bringing in another international player in Leandro Barbosa, and they also added free agents Amir Johnson and Linas Kleiza and draft pick Ed Davis. Those are decent players, but this was, without question, a lost summer for the Raptors.

    The more they stay the same: The Raptors organization has to begin seriously wondering whether it can get an American-born star to stay in Toronto. McGrady left as a free agent years ago, then Vince Carter forced his way out of the country and now Bosh has followed suit. If talented second-year guard DeMar DeRozan blossoms into a star, will he eventually bolt, too? You can't help but think "probably."


    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    27. Indiana Pacers
    The more things change: The Pacers added a potential star in Darren Collison, who put up big numbers while filling in for Chris Paul last season in New Orleans. James Posey also came along in the trade that cost Indiana Troy Murphy, and he brings championship pedigree and leadership. For all their struggles on the court, the Pacers are beginning to manage their cap well and could be players in free agency next summer.

    The more they stay the same: Second-round pick Lance Stephenson's recent altercation with the mother of his child, in which he allegedly pushed her down a flight of stairs and slammed her head against a step, brings back despicable memories of the havoc wreaked by Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley a few years ago. Indiana, in an effort to win back its fan base, has brought in nothing but "good guys" the past few years, but diverted from that strategy in drafting Stephenson, whose troubled past is well-documented. They got burned for it.



    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    26. Washington Wizards
    The more things change: There's a new leader off the court, in new owner Ted Leonsis, and one on the court, in new point guard John Wall. Wall has explosive talent and is expected to become a superstar, and the Wizards acquired Kirk Hinrich to give Wall a veteran sounding board to help him maximize his potential. There's been a ton of team turnover, both at last February's trade deadline and over the summer, including a minor move that brought Yi Jianlian over from New Jersey. The Wizards are now a young team with big talent.

    The more they stay the same: Gilbert Arenas is back, but back in a different role. When Gilbert left the team after being suspended because of his foolish gunplay with Javaris Crittenton, he was the face of the franchise, on and off the court. Now both of those titles belong to Wall, and no matter what he says, Arenas will have a hard time accepting that. The Wizards would love to trade him but his baggage and the four years and $80 million left on his contract make that awfully hard to do. Arenas helped ruin last season; the Wizards are determined not to let him ruin this one, as well.


    PG | SG | SF | PF | C
    25. New Jersey Nets
    The more things change: Rod Thorn and Kiki Vandeweghe are out, and Billy King, Avery Johnson and celebrity Russian owner Mikhail Prokhorov are in. Johnson was one of the league's most successful coaches during his tenure in Dallas and will whip the talented but young Nets into shape. Free agency was a failure, pure and simple, since the Nets missed out on all the big names, but they added some quality in Travis Outlaw (though they overpaid him with a five-year, $35 million deal), Jordan Farmar and Anthony Morrow. No. 3 pick Derrick Favors has a world of potential, and the Nets smartly brought in Troy Murphy to hold down the power forward spot until Favors learns the ropes.

    The more they stay the same: The Nets are still stuck in a sort of limbo. While they've left the Izod Center in the New Jersey swamps, they're still not in their permanent digs yet. They'll spend the next two years in Newark, playing at the Prudential Center, before moving to Brooklyn for good in 2012. The failure to reach Brooklyn earlier, which was the initial plan, certainly cost the Nets a legitimate shot at LeBron James and the other big-name free agents this summer. Some would say it was fitting for a franchise that, despite its back-to-back trips to the Finals in 2002 and 2003, is still largely regarded as backward.

    Chris Broussard is a senior writer for ESPN The Magazine.

  • #2
    Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

    So are these their rankings of how they think the league will be record-wise this upcoming season?? And they're making us as this bad of a team while getting Collison by dealing Murphy and his horrible defense among other things, and then also because of Lance Stephenson and his troubles, who has yet to play an NBA game?? ESPN cracks me up. Talk about being irrelevent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

      Originally posted by Chuck Chillout View Post
      Not a lot of optimism here. Their projected starting 5:

      Collison
      Dunleavy, Jr.
      Granger
      McRoberts (!)
      Hibbert
      That exclamation point should belong next to Dunleavy Jr.

      He has no business starting for this team.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
        That exclamation point should belong next to Dunleavy Jr.

        He has no business starting for this team.
        Agreed, but given his past comments, it's not that outrageous that O'Brien would choose him over Rush.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

          We added a potential star....yet are ranked 27th, as in got worse.

          That's Hollinger for ya.
          "man, PG has been really good."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

            If our roster were to stay as is, I wouldn't be surprised if McBeard started.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
              If our roster were to stay as is, I wouldn't be surprised if McBeard started.
              I'd be VERY surprised. This is the same McBob that O'Brien had behind Dahntay Jones and Mike Dunleavy on the PF depth chart last year

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                I'd be VERY surprised. This is the same McBob that O'Brien had behind Dahntay Jones and Mike Dunleavy on the PF depth chart last year
                The addition of Collison at PG makes our PF position look much worse.

                Actually, McBob should probably backup Hibbert. Unless Foster is proven healthy, no one else on the team is remotely capable of defending the paint. If Foster is healthy, fine, McBob can put some time in there.

                Other options at PF are Granger, Tyler and Magnum. I fully expect Granger to put some time in there.

                BTW, if Jeff and Tyler are both out...we are in deep doo doo.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                  Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
                  I'd be VERY surprised. This is the same McBob that O'Brien had behind Dahntay Jones and Mike Dunleavy on the PF depth chart last year
                  If Tyler is not yet approaching 100%, and I'm pretty certain he is not there yet, McRoberts isn't a bad choice to start. Having a relatively quick PF on the floor next to Hibbert might not be a bad idea.

                  The real question mark is the peculiar mind of JOB, the same guy who had McRoberts hoisting up 500 3s per day. Who knows what that bozo will say or do...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    BTW, if Jeff and Tyler are both out...we are in deep doo doo.
                    Which would be fine with me, while I'm excited about this season, I'm aware we're in a win-win scenario. If we suck, and we can get a lottery pick, we may be able to plug that PF hole with a cheap and talented rookie. Plus.

                    If we make the playoffs, we should be able to attract some good PF's in free agency because they'll see a playoff team with a glaring weakness that they could help fill to improve the team overall. Plus.

                    It's a rare situation in sports where we should be able to come out like roses no matter how we do. It's gonna be fun to see how it all shakes out.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                      Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                      We added a potential star....yet are ranked 27th, as in got worse.

                      That's Hollinger for ya.
                      Hollinger is useless to me, so I will not let this get me worked up. Besides, ESPN has their head so far up big money's *** they don't care about Indiana and never have, never will.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                        Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                        Which would be fine with me, while I'm excited about this season, I'm aware we're in a win-win scenario. If we suck, and we can get a lottery pick, we may be able to plug that PF hole with a cheap and talented rookie. Plus.

                        If we make the playoffs, we should be able to attract some good PF's in free agency because they'll see a playoff team with a glaring weakness that they could help fill to improve the team overall. Plus.

                        It's a rare situation in sports where we should be able to come out like roses no matter how we do. It's gonna be fun to see how it all shakes out.
                        i do sorta agree with this. looking at the rankings i was a little surprised we are ranked so low, but considering the uncertainty we have at PF, i can understand the doubt espn has in the pacers.

                        if it did play out were one of the worst teams in the league, it could be to our advantage in having one more solid rookie prospect to add to this core group of players; or Bird could also use it as leverage to bring in a veteran PF, and perhaps acquire a later pick in the first round. those are good things considering the direction the team is going.

                        however, losing sucks, and with the recent addition of collison im now rooting for the pacers to make the playoffs, to gain some additional experience. dont get me wrong, i wanted them in the playoffs regardless, but it felt less worthwhile when the team really had no direction before the trade except that we had ample cap space next year.

                        so like i said above, i agree the pacers are in a win-win. even if we fall somewhere in the middle, and end up with a pick around 10-14, its not bad because i want to see the group get use to winning. losing 50-60 games i would imagine could take alot out of a team and not sure acquiring a top 5 pick is worth that. we may not win 50, but somewhere around 35 or more is at least a low point that i dont think the team will go below as the young guys get more experience.

                        all in all, im rooting for the team to make the postseason. but if we end up just missing the playoffs, and have a top 10 pick it will only help long term.

                        how good this team can be really hinges on the overall health of players like Foster, Hansbro, Dunleavy, and Price; in addition to everyone else of course.

                        if that happens i could easily see the pacers winning 40-45 games and earning a playoff spot.

                        whatever does happen, i am finally looking forward to watching pacer games again! the past few seasons its been pretty hard to watch the product assembled on the court. now with the clear direction of the team, i can tolerate the losing a little better than before, as long as there is continued improvement, and wise decision making in the FO.

                        with all that said, i think there is gonna be one more move made prior to the season beginning involving Ford, and possibly another player. as someone else pointed out in another thread, before we were looking to move Ford for a PG; now there are more options available to us. it may not be a blockbuster deal or anything, but i dont think the team will stay as is heading into the season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                          Two points:

                          1. Training camp material.

                          2. Commentators always underestimate the Pacers. No consideration of Tyler and Danny at the 4, the continued development of Roy and Rush, and our 1st round draft pick, PG.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                            I don't see the outrage? We were a bottom 5 talent team last year. We (smartly) traded a vet 4 for a young PG with upside. How creating a hole by plugging another makes us some sort of contender is beyond me?

                            Another punt year, that hopefully leads to a Horford and a high lotto/franchise level talent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                              what's the bigger change....


                              Watson, Ford to Collison

                              or

                              Murphy to Hansbrough, McBob
                              "man, PG has been really good."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X