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

Trade Wants vs. Needs

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

  • Trade Wants vs. Needs

    There's a lot of trade rumors out there, which are only going to get worse tomorrow when a lot of previously-traded players become available to move again. The Pacers need to add a few pieces to remain competitive, and prove they're no first-round exits.

    Who do we get rid of? Who do we pick up? Who is realistically attainable?

    Words in the grapevine say Steve Nash may depart Phoenix; Leandro Barbosa may get shipped out of Toronto to make room for Wilson Chandler; Chris Kaman may or may not be available, due to recently being granted playing time; Monta Ellis is all over the trade block, but supposedly has been for two years; Rajon Rondo and the rest of the Celtics might get moved, but Danny Ainge could just be pulling the league's collective chain.

    I personally only want to go for two of those players mentioned above. But do we need someone with a big name and big game to join the team? Or are there "lesser" players who can do the job we need, and then some?

    Can JaJuan Johnson, Ryan Hollins, Jeremy Tyler, Jordan Hill, or Earl Clark good enough replacements for Chris Kaman, and/or back-ups for David West and Roy Hibbert? Would Luke Ridnour, Ramon Sessions, Reggie Jackson, Goran Dragic, Greivis Vasquez, or even Elliot Williams be able to out-perform AJ Price's capabilities as a pass-first point guard? Adding the "pivotal" high-volume scorer could be as easy as adding two medium-volume scorers, one of which who can contribute more assists to the better/more valuable/more consistent scorers.

    Who can we pick up? Do we just take a couple more lower-quality players (compared to Nash, Monta) who can fill the voids, while stealing some draft picks who can outperform them in the next couple of years? What does Larry Bird have in mind that's going to "strengthen" this team? I don't see us picking up an Eric Gordon this year, so what can make this team better without destroying it in the process?

    Genuinely interested in intelligent responses. We need to make moves, Larry's going to, I'm just impatient and want them to happen as soon as possible, so the team can get used to each other, and we can get ready for the playoffs.
    witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

    Originally posted by Day-V
    In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
    Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.



  • #2
    Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

    See, I guess I'm in the minority. I don't think we need to make any big moves at this time. I'm happy where our team is at.

    That said, if you're able to trade some cap space and a guy like Juice for a role player and maybe a 1st rounder, you do it. But, I just don't feel comfortable in trading any of our Core 8-9 guys at this time.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

      Originally posted by Day-V View Post
      See, I guess I'm in the minority. I don't think we need to make any big moves at this time. I'm happy where our team is at.

      That said, if you're able to trade some cap space and a guy like Juice for a role player and maybe a 1st rounder, you do it. But, I just don't feel comfortable in trading any of our Core 8-9 guys at this time.
      The only way I'm comfortable losing core players is if quality players are acquired as well. Steve Nash + 1st for DC + Hans is an example. Even if we can't pick up a simple PF to replace Hansbrough (via trade or FA), Steve Nash's court vision and scoring alone can make up for Hans' absence. In addition to that, the first round pick could go a LONG way beyond that.

      Just an example, but I don't really want us to lose Hill, George, Granger, West, or Hibbert at this point. The rest of the players (despite Coach Vogel's lineup) have value to other teams, whom we can trade for players who have more value to our team. I'm proud of all of our players for doing what they have, but if you can make an obvious upgrade, while getting rid of (potentially) dead-end players, you don't say no.
      witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

      Originally posted by Day-V
      In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
      Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

        I'd like for the Pacers to make a move. Pacers def need a backup C. I still think Robin Lopez would be a great fit.

        Would love Reggie Jackson, but with Maynor out for the season, I'm not sure the Thunder would trade him.

        If anything though, please, Pacers, try to secure another first round pick (middle round would be fine) at the expense of taking a huge expiring contract (hopefully expiring, not multiple years).
        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

          Originally posted by imbtyler View Post
          The only way I'm comfortable losing core players is if quality players are acquired as well. Steve Nash + 1st for DC + Hans is an example. Even if we can't pick up a simple PF to replace Hansbrough (via trade or FA), Steve Nash's court vision and scoring alone can make up for Hans' absence. In addition to that, the first round pick could go a LONG way beyond that.

          Just an example, but I don't really want us to lose Hill, George, Granger, West, or Hibbert at this point. The rest of the players (despite Coach Vogel's lineup) have value to other teams, whom we can trade for players who have more value to our team. I'm proud of all of our players for doing what they have, but if you can make an obvious upgrade, while getting rid of (potentially) dead-end players, you don't say no.
          The only players I wouldn't mind getting traded (doesn't mean I don't like them) is DC, Hans, Price, Lou, Pends. Possibly Hill if the Pacers were getting something pretty good in return.
          First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

            I'm wondering if the amount of minutes A.J. has been getting recently is to raise his value or it's simply because he's playing well. Maybe it's a little of both. I'll be honest I think some kind of move needs to be made just because of the struggles we have had against Miami. The team looks like it has a new sense of urgency after the All-Star break, but we all know that when this team looks really good they can look really bad the next game. I would love for us to add any of these guys: Marcin Gortat, Leandro Barbosa, and Chris Kaman. I know Gortat hasn't been mentioned as being on the block or anything, but I think he is exactly the guy we need to backup Roy. We are still lacking that scorer off the bench to pair with Hill and Hansbrough when they don't have it going. Barbosa is that kind of guy. I'm not gonna be mad if we don't make a move necessarily because we have a solid team.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

              I think that Raymond Felton is the way to go. For Felton, I'll give them a first, and Felton could pan out to be a huge player for us, in a similar role as Mark Jackson back in the day. As the team grows, he grows, and he will finally have the opportunity to have a stable role. He can get into shape and work his *** off knowing that he is running the team. That is when the defense and court vision comes into play. I don't think there's any doubt that he'd be available. He's no sexy choice, but neither was David West, and we'd still keep DC and give him the role he would suit best, a spark plug off the bench. We would have 48 minutes of solid point guard play, and Raymond Felton has a real chance to become a difference maker here. We like two-way players, and Felton is one of those guys.

              I would be willing to absorb Barbosa or Kaman for nothing for sure.

              I like Reggie Jackson of course, but we don't know if he's really available.

              If the Nets need trade partners to facilitate a Dwight Howard trade, we need to look into Anthony Morrow or Marshon Brooks. They would be great additions for cheap, and they would be steals. I think in the right situations, two years from now, they could be leading scorers on a team.
              Last edited by BringJackBack; 02-29-2012, 03:36 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                Originally posted by imbtyler View Post
                There's a lot of trade rumors out there, which are only going to get worse tomorrow when a lot of previously-traded players become available to move again. The Pacers need to add a few pieces to remain competitive, and prove they're no first-round exits.

                Who do we get rid of? Who do we pick up? Who is realistically attainable?

                Words in the grapevine say Steve Nash may depart Phoenix; Leandro Barbosa may get shipped out of Toronto to make room for Wilson Chandler; Chris Kaman may or may not be available, due to recently being granted playing time; Monta Ellis is all over the trade block, but supposedly has been for two years; Rajon Rondo and the rest of the Celtics might get moved, but Danny Ainge could just be pulling the league's collective chain.

                I personally only want to go for two of those players mentioned above. But do we need someone with a big name and big game to join the team? Or are there "lesser" players who can do the job we need, and then some?

                Can JaJuan Johnson, Ryan Hollins, Jeremy Tyler, Jordan Hill, or Earl Clark good enough replacements for Chris Kaman, and/or back-ups for David West and Roy Hibbert? Would Luke Ridnour, Ramon Sessions, Reggie Jackson, Goran Dragic, Greivis Vasquez, or even Elliot Williams be able to out-perform AJ Price's capabilities as a pass-first point guard? Adding the "pivotal" high-volume scorer could be as easy as adding two medium-volume scorers, one of which who can contribute more assists to the better/more valuable/more consistent scorers.

                Who can we pick up? Do we just take a couple more lower-quality players (compared to Nash, Monta) who can fill the voids, while stealing some draft picks who can outperform them in the next couple of years? What does Larry Bird have in mind that's going to "strengthen" this team? I don't see us picking up an Eric Gordon this year, so what can make this team better without destroying it in the process?

                Genuinely interested in intelligent responses. We need to make moves, Larry's going to, I'm just impatient and want them to happen as soon as possible, so the team can get used to each other, and we can get ready for the playoffs.

                I don't expect a Chris Kaman, but I'd like to see Bird pick up Robin Lopez. Young athletic 7' who the Suns aren't using much to b/u Hibbert. Shouldn't cost much. If the Pacers finish out the season where their pick would be in the 20's, I wouldn't balk at trading the 012 1st pick for him.

                Elliot Williams was injured most of last year and has not played much this year. Not sure of your interest in him. Are you sure he's a PG??

                I know this isn't going to happen, but I'd like to see the Pacers do a S&T for Wilson Chandler. He can score and play "D". Could be the heir apparent to Granger at SF future core player. Lock him up long term for a reasonable contract.

                I'd also be interested in Ray Allen to get the Pacers into the 2nd rd of the playoffs if the price is right. He's a player that can bring instant offense off the bench. Not sure what it would cost, might be to pricey.

                I'd gamble on DC and AJ to finish out the season at PG.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  I don't expect a Chris Kaman, but I'd like to see Bird pick up Robin Lopez. Young athletic 7' who the Suns aren't using much to b/u Hibbert. Shouldn't cost much. If the Pacers finish out the season where their pick would be in the 20's, I wouldn't balk at trading the 012 1st pick for him.

                  Elliot Williams was injured most of last year and has not played much this year. Not sure of your interest in him. Are you sure he's a PG??

                  I know this isn't going to happen, but I'd like to see the Pacers do a S&T for Wilson Chandler. He can score and play "D". Could be the heir apparent to Granger at SF future core player. Lock him up long term for a reasonable contract.

                  I'd also be interested in Ray Allen to get the Pacers into the 2nd rd of the playoffs if the price is right. He's a player that can bring instant offense off the bench. Not sure what it would cost, might be to pricey.

                  I'd gamble on DC and AJ to finish out the season at PG.
                  I know he hasn't shot much but Elliot Williams is shooting 38% from the charity stripe. hahahaha

                  He's also no point.
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                    I think a MAJOR move is going to cost us too much that could affect Team Chemistry. Given how well we are doing with what we have but the obvious holes that we need to plug up in our rotation....I think that a minor move to shore up the Wing and Backup Center rotation will immensely help the Team.

                    If the options were available, I'd prefer to look into these type of Players to fill out our rotation ( in this order ):

                    1 ) A "decent to solid" Scoring SF that can play some SG minutes that can play 20-24 mpg that has an expiring Contract.

                    2 ) A "solid Backup Center" that is also considered an "acceptable but not great Starting Center" that isn't absolutely inept on the offensive or defensive end of the court that can consistently play 15 to 18 mpg and has an Expiring Contract.

                    3 ) A "solid Backup Center" that is also considered an "decent Starting Center" that isn't absolutely inept on the offensive or defensive end of the court that can consistently play 15 to 18 mpg that has a 2 year Contract .

                    4 ) A "solid" Scoring SF that can play some SG minutes that can play 20-24 mpg that has a 2 year Contract.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                      I guess our biggest needs at the moment are a better starting point guard and a backup guard who can score the ball.
                      About the starting point guard upgrade, I don't think it's going to happen this season. There are many point guards in the league who are better than Collison, but the "semi" upgrades aren't worth it (Why break your chemistry?) and the really good ones won't be available without trading good pieces.
                      Backup guard, I think there are many options available. I wouldn't trade our 1st round pick for a backup though. If Toronto needs to shed Barbosa, or Nets need to shed Morrow or Farmar, then I'd send them a 2nd. These trades will only happen under specific circumstances though, so I wouldn't really count on them.
                      Originally posted by Piston Prince
                      Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                      "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                        Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                        See, I guess I'm in the minority. I don't think we need to make any big moves at this time. I'm happy where our team is at.

                        That said, if you're able to trade some cap space and a guy like Juice for a role player and maybe a 1st rounder, you do it. But, I just don't feel comfortable in trading any of our Core 8-9 guys at this time.
                        start out with a caveat. i'm probably nit-picking here.

                        with the salary cap, a team doesn't have a core of 8 or 9 guys. a team has a core of 3,4 or maybe 5 guys that the rest of the team is built around. the pacer core is danny, paul and roy. the rest of the guys are there to help the core win. some by playing and some by being traded.

                        if the pacers can add a guy to the core, trading anyone not named danny, paul or roy would be ok with me. but the guy coming in has to be a near max guy. otherwise i don't really care who gets traded or not.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                          Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                          start out with a caveat. i'm probably nit-picking here.

                          with the salary cap, a team doesn't have a core of 8 or 9 guys. a team has a core of 3,4 or maybe 5 guys that the rest of the team is built around. the pacer core is danny, paul and roy. the rest of the guys are there to help the core win. some by playing and some by being traded.

                          if the pacers can add a guy to the core, trading anyone not named danny, paul or roy would be ok with me. but the guy coming in has to be a near max guy. otherwise i don't really care who gets traded or not.
                          Yes, you are nit-picking. I was implying the 8-9 guys that get heavy minutes on a regular rotation each night.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                            You don't give a first for Felton at this point, he is not even starting anymore.

                            Not sure what trade if any I would go after, but I would be interested in hearing what offers the Pacers are getting.

                            I just hope that any trade we do is more focused on getting younger than getting Older, no Ray Allen please...
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Trade Wants vs. Needs

                              Team Needs: A better starting PG, a backup 4/5 that's athletic (athletic bigs just kill the Pacers, a backup 2/3 that can shoot/score the ball in limited mins.

                              Team Wants: A superstar (unless drafted, this will most likely not happen), a consistent scoring threat SOMEWHERE within the team

                              I think I am in the minority in thinking that we need to make a trade in order to ensure 100% that we make it out of the first round. (Our record against the teams we are most likely to play in the first round; Phi, ORL, ATL, BOS: 4-5. And we haven't played NY yet)

                              I think it would be beneficial to utilize the opportunity that we have, and add a piece or two to ensure at the very least that we are able to get out of the first round, and build some momentum into next season.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X