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

If this had been a SINGLE trade...

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

  • #76
    Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

    He clearly did invest in this team. How you can say he didn't is just beyond me. He apparently just didn't do it in a manner you agree with, but that's not from a lack of investing as you're trying to say. How does 120+ million in contracts qualify as not investing? If we take the average salaries of their contracts we're looking at being in the 65 million dollar range this year cap wise right now, and that doesn't even count signing Barbosa. That's not too far from the luxury tax.

    Also you're splitting the smallest hairs ever trying to skirt away from the 'cheap' implication.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
      He clearly did invest in this team. How you can say he didn't is just beyond me. He apparently just didn't do it in a manner you agree with, but that's not from a lack of investing as you're trying to say. How does 120+ million in contracts qualify as not investing? If we take the average salaries of their contracts we're looking at being in the 65 million dollar range this year cap wise right now, and that doesn't even count signing Barbosa. That's not too far from the luxury tax.

      Also you're splitting the smallest hairs ever trying to skirt away from the 'cheap' implication.
      Has little to do with how I agree with. The once in a blue moon opportunity to invest in such a way as to make a significant upgrade was available and we simply didnt make it. Period. Dont have to worry. It wont be there again. For a long time. The window is officially closed. Would it have meant a higher payroll and likely paying the lux tax at some point? probably...would it have meant a much more legit shot at competing for the title? probably....Thats the way business works. Potential investment with potential return. No guarantees. And yes, most of the teams that have any real legit chance at the title the next few years will be paying the tax. We chose not to go that route. Not coincidentally we wont be having any legit title chances now. IMO and time will tell.

      If they let HIbbert and Hill walk and kept Amundson and Barbosa, then I wouldve called him cheap. Never once have I thought Simon was cheap in all of his years here. He paid the tax back in the late 90s. Not coincidentally we were competing for a title. Guess we arent going to do either now. Hence why I say shame on him and why Ive never been this disappointed in my over 40 years of following the team.
      The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

        Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
        Has little to do with how I agree with. The once in a blue moon opportunity to invest in such a way as to make a significant upgrade was available and we simply didnt make it. Period. Dont have to worry. It wont be there again. For a long time. The window is officially closed. Would it have meant a higher payroll and likely paying the lux tax at some point? probably...would it have meant a much more legit shot at competing for the title? probably....Thats the way business works. Potential investment with potential return. No guarantees. And yes, most of the teams that have any real legit chance at the title the next few years will be paying the tax. We chose not to go that route. Not coincidentally we wont be having any legit title chances now. IMO and time will tell.

        If they let HIbbert and Hill walk and kept Amundson and Barbosa, then I wouldve called him cheap. Never once have I thought Simon was cheap in all of his years here. He paid the tax back in the late 90s. Not coincidentally we were competing for a title. Guess we arent going to do either now. Hence why I say shame on him and why Ive never been this disappointed in my over 40 years of following the team.
        For the third time, what would moves would you have made this offseason?

        also i dont know why would you expect the team go into the luxury tax ever. Simon has made it clear he doesnt want to pay it and wont. cant blame him when we are at the bottom of attendance still.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
          For the third time, what would moves would you have made this offseason?

          also i dont know why would you expect the team go into the luxury tax ever. Simon has made it clear he doesnt want to pay it and wont. cant blame him when we are at the bottom of attendance still.
          Im not playing GM...this is a matter about principle not specifics. Theres any number of things that couldve been pursued. When you have that kind of capspace you have many ways to go. YOu can look to sign a free agent outright. We all know who those were. You can pursue a player thru a trade given the fact you can take back a lot more salary than u send out and that is very often times appealing. They could pursue some of these amnesty release players. Again. This is about asset management. Period. And in my mind we did an absolute terrible job of asset management. We didnt use our capspace at all. In fact we gave away players. Literally. Did we get better? Yes. But thats not the point. We likely couldve gotten a whole lot better, not only now, but down the road. With better asset management. A great deal of sacrifice was made to acquire those assets. To turn around and waste them..well...As to specific targets? Ill leave that to the basketball minds at the Pacers front office. Thats what theyre there for. But the point is its very clear now that they werent given the opportunity to do so...

          As for Simon not willing to pay the luxury tax, I wholeheartedly disagree. In fact, thats where you then get to the point that Simon should sell the team then. Its quite clear that the teams that will be competing for the title in the next few years will all likely be taxpayers. When we were competing for a title in years past there were times we were tax payers and Simon had said he was willing-didnt like, who would-to pay the tax to try and win a championship. Not so coincidentally, we werent at the bottom of the league in attendance then either....Its one thing to not want to pay the tax if you have no realistic chance of competing for a title. But given the core the pacers have they couldve made some pretty dramatic moves this offseason that certainly wouldve put them into lux tax land, but would also certainly make them legit title contenders and almost assuredly affected attendance dramatically. The decision was made not to go that way. And thats why i say..shame on you herbie...and why im pretty sure Bird chose to leave now. You dont get that sort of chance very often, hardly ever. To just let it go by the wayside....well...tough pill to swallow...especially after all the pain over the past few years to get into that position where you could have that opportunity.
          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
            When you have that kind of capspace you have many ways to go.
            Huh? You realize we had about 10 million in cap space, right? We didn't have some monumental amount.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
              Huh? You realize we had about 10 million in cap space, right? We didn't have some monumental amount.
              You realize that 10 million in capspace is actually a huge amount, right? And after their S&T with Dallas cleared up even more space, to which I said it appears theyre preparing for something bigger...because you just wouldnt give away players for a salary dump when youre under the cap unless you wanted that space for smething else. That is..unless you just wanted to dump salaries. But...foolish me....We were just dumping salary. In which case we probably shoulda waited til we could at least get something more. But apparently maintaining the ability to sign Barbosa to something other than a minimum deal was more important than that...oh well...

              And dont you have better things to do than to debate how monumental 10 or 12 million in capspace is? you know like get together with kstat and find that missing offer sheet for roy hibbert?
              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                10 million isn't huge by any means in a league where guys like Omer Asik are getting offered 8. And the "salary dump" trade netted us a whopping 1 million or so this year. You really thought that 1 extra million meant we were going to get something major that we weren't otherwise? It was more about getting something for 2 guys who aren't going to be here past this season, and one of whom probably wasn't going to be happy with his role. It was a long term decision, not short. Fans don't tend to like long term decisions, but without them you end up being Golden State, or the Knicks with Isiah Thomas. They're not sexy, but they're just as important.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                  Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                  10 million isn't huge by any means in a league where guys like Omer Asik are getting offered 8. And the "salary dump" trade netted us a whopping 1 million or so this year. You really thought that 1 extra million meant we were going to get something major that we weren't otherwise? It was more about getting something for 2 guys who aren't going to be here past this season, and one of whom probably wasn't going to be happy with his role. It was a long term decision, not short. Fans don't tend to like long term decisions, but without them you end up being Golden State, or the Knicks with Isiah Thomas. They're not sexy, but they're just as important.
                  That ten million couldve gotten both Elton Brand and Luis Scola....Using Asik as an example...well....and the Dallas deal netted 2 million, not 1...if we are gonna go there...AND FOR THE 10MILLIONTH TIME...WE GOT NOTHING FOR THE 2 GUYS THAT WERENT GONNA BE HERE PAST NEXT SEASON...THATS THE WHOLE FRIGGEN POINT...HELLO. we couldve signed Mahinmi without ever making that deal...period....but we just gave the other two guys away...unless u think 10 million in capspace isnt enough to sign someone whose deal starts at about 3 million....10 is bigger than 3 in my book...but hey...again...i might be missing something...(like the condescending tone-im mimicking you) Had no problem getting rid of either one....but forgive me if im not gonna congratulate the front office for literally giving them away for absolutely nothing...unless cuban kicked in a million or two...in which case, given the circumstance i could definitely see why that would be being kept hush hush....
                  The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                    Im not playing GM...this is a matter about principle not specifics. Theres any number of things that couldve been pursued. When you have that kind of capspace you have many ways to go. YOu can look to sign a free agent outright. We all know who those were. You can pursue a player thru a trade given the fact you can take back a lot more salary than u send out and that is very often times appealing. They could pursue some of these amnesty release players. Again. This is about asset management. Period. And in my mind we did an absolute terrible job of asset management. We didnt use our capspace at all. In fact we gave away players. Literally. Did we get better? Yes. But thats not the point. We likely couldve gotten a whole lot better, not only now, but down the road. With better asset management. A great deal of sacrifice was made to acquire those assets. To turn around and waste them..well...As to specific targets? Ill leave that to the basketball minds at the Pacers front office. Thats what theyre there for. But the point is its very clear now that they werent given the opportunity to do so...

                    As for Simon not willing to pay the luxury tax, I wholeheartedly disagree. In fact, thats where you then get to the point that Simon should sell the team then. Its quite clear that the teams that will be competing for the title in the next few years will all likely be taxpayers. When we were competing for a title in years past there were times we were tax payers and Simon had said he was willing-didnt like, who would-to pay the tax to try and win a championship. Not so coincidentally, we werent at the bottom of the league in attendance then either....Its one thing to not want to pay the tax if you have no realistic chance of competing for a title. But given the core the pacers have they couldve made some pretty dramatic moves this offseason that certainly wouldve put them into lux tax land, but would also certainly make them legit title contenders and almost assuredly affected attendance dramatically. The decision was made not to go that way. And thats why i say..shame on you herbie...and why im pretty sure Bird chose to leave now. You dont get that sort of chance very often, hardly ever. To just let it go by the wayside....well...tough pill to swallow...especially after all the pain over the past few years to get into that position where you could have that opportunity.
                    And who is to say they didn't pursue those opportunities? I don't know about you, but i didn't see any super stars changing teams this off season. Thats not a coincidence. You can't just snap your fingers and make a trade for Dwight Howard. The reason you aren't playing GM is cause there aren't feasible trades out there. Seriously, who are we supposed to trade for? You won't even name ONE player. Why is that? Who is this big difference maker that we could trade for? How about Durant? He's pretty good. We could send them all of our picks and any player they want. Whats that? They wont want to trade Durant? Oh. Westbrook? No? Ok...

                    Nash and Williams weren't coming here, no matter what we offered them. Williams wasn't gonna leave $25 million on the table from Brooklyn and Nash wasnt interested in Indiana. Other than Nash, the biggest name that switched teams was Joe Johnson. And the Nets traded a **** ton to get him. If the Pacers made that trade, I'd be pissed.

                    Your assuming there was a better option out there than to keep our starting 5, which was one of the BEST line ups in the entire league, together. I'm sorry, but I dont see those moves out there. Outside of bringing in a super star, why screw with what we got? And super stars arent just available for trade. Dwight's about the only one, and I don't want a one season rental. The starters weren't the problem. The bench was. They improved the bench. Were they sexy moves? Nope. Were the effective moves? Yep.

                    This team was damn good how it was constructed last year, with 3 young guys starting (1 of them new to the team), a veteran PF coming off an ACL tear (who was also new to the team) and our best player not being able to shoot for the first half of the season and had no training camp. Last year was NOT a peak for this team. It was the start. They have a full off season together, West is 100%, Hill is the official starting point guard and will have an off season to get into that role with his teammates. Granger shouldn't start so slow with no lock out. Roy Hibbert should continue to improve and so should Paul George. This 5 man unit will be even better than last year.

                    We lost in 6 games to the NBA champions. The Thunder lost in 5. This team is better than a lot of people are giving them credit for.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      And who is to say they didn't pursue those opportunities? I don't know about you, but i didn't see any super stars changing teams this off season. Thats not a coincidence. You can't just snap your fingers and make a trade for Dwight Howard. The reason you aren't playing GM is cause there aren't feasible trades out there. Seriously, who are we supposed to trade for? You won't even name ONE player. Why is that? Who is this big difference maker that we could trade for? How about Durant? He's pretty good. We could send them all of our picks and any player they want. Whats that? They wont want to trade Durant? Oh. Westbrook? No? Ok...

                      Nash and Williams weren't coming here, no matter what we offered them. Williams wasn't gonna leave $25 million on the table from Brooklyn and Nash wasnt interested in Indiana. Other than Nash, the biggest name that switched teams was Joe Johnson. And the Nets traded a **** ton to get him. If the Pacers made that trade, I'd be pissed.

                      Your assuming there was a better option out there than to keep our starting 5, which was one of the BEST line ups in the entire league, together. I'm sorry, but I dont see those moves out there. Outside of bringing in a super star, why screw with what we got? And super stars arent just available for trade. Dwight's about the only one, and I don't want a one season rental. The starters weren't the problem. The bench was. They improved the bench. Were they sexy moves? Nope. Were the effective moves? Yep.

                      This team was damn good how it was constructed last year, with 3 young guys starting (1 of them new to the team), a veteran PF coming off an ACL tear (who was also new to the team) and our best player not being able to shoot for the first half of the season and had no training camp. Last year was NOT a peak for this team. It was the start. They have a full off season together, West is 100%, Hill is the official starting point guard and will have an off season to get into that role with his teammates. Granger shouldn't start so slow with no lock out. Roy Hibbert should continue to improve and so should Paul George. This 5 man unit will be even better than last year.

                      We lost in 6 games to the NBA champions. The Thunder lost in 5. This team is better than a lot of people are giving them credit for.
                      Hmmm....I dont see too many Nets fans pissed...so you would be pissed if your team went out and got a superstar level talent? Well that certainly explains things. Theres a reason why some teams try so desperately to get them...and yes, you inevitably overpay....but unless youre fortunate enough to land a top draft choice the odds of getting one are pretty slim. And take a quick perusal past all the NBA champions and see how many of them didnt have one of these alpha dogs....Yes we were pretty good last year...nobody has said we werent..I certainly havent. And we very well could be better next year than we were this year...though that doesnt guarantee a better record...because other teams have improved as well....Im glad u love our team....I do to...thats not what this is about...this is about even though we could very well be better than last year, we quite possibly couldve been even better.

                      Youre really gonna tell me you would be pissed if the Pacers were being as aggressive as the Nets are in trying to improve? cmon man....Please dont give me lets just stick with our five and live or die with them. Cause if living is defined by winning a title, then we are gonna die...no ifs, ands or buts about it....and isnt that ultimately what this is all about...You take a look at what teams with significant capspace have tried to do with it-its a very small window where u can be very aggressive in trying to make major moves given the flexibility you have. Again, i wasnt necessarily an advocate of going aggressively after gordon, but that is certainly something along the lines of what we are talking about...Maybe they couldve gotten active and gotten involved in the Howard talks as a facilitator, not unlike Houston. At the very least, going after Brand and Scola wouldve been something. West has one year left on his deal. You couldve gotten Scola or Brand and done everything else we have done. Would that be better than what we have now?? Most likely. Youre gonna tell me you wouldnt be in favor of that? Cmon.
                      The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post

                        We lost in 6 games to the NBA champions. The Thunder lost in 5. This team is better than a lot of people are giving them credit for.
                        And please do me a favor. If you happen to hear when the banner raising is for this before I do, could you please let me know...I wanna make sure I dont miss it....
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                          Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                          Hmmm....I dont see too many Nets fans pissed...so you would be pissed if your team went out and got a superstar level talent? Well that certainly explains things. Theres a reason why some teams try so desperately to get them...and yes, you inevitably overpay....but unless youre fortunate enough to land a top draft choice the odds of getting one are pretty slim. And take a quick perusal past all the NBA champions and see how many of them didnt have one of these alpha dogs....Yes we were pretty good last year...nobody has said we werent..I certainly havent. And we very well could be better next year than we were this year...though that doesnt guarantee a better record...because other teams have improved as well....Im glad u love our team....I do to...thats not what this is about...this is about even though we could very well be better than last year, we quite possibly couldve been even better.

                          Youre really gonna tell me you would be pissed if the Pacers were being as aggressive as the Nets are in trying to improve? cmon man....Please dont give me lets just stick with our five and live or die with them. Cause if living is defined by winning a title, then we are gonna die...no ifs, ands or buts about it....and isnt that ultimately what this is all about...You take a look at what teams with significant capspace have tried to do with it-its a very small window where u can be very aggressive in trying to make major moves given the flexibility you have. Again, i wasnt necessarily an advocate of going aggressively after gordon, but that is certainly something along the lines of what we are talking about...Maybe they couldve gotten active and gotten involved in the Howard talks as a facilitator, not unlike Houston. At the very least, going after Brand and Scola wouldve been something. West has one year left on his deal. You couldve gotten Scola or Brand and done everything else we have done. Would that be better than what we have now?? Most likely. Youre gonna tell me you wouldnt be in favor of that? Cmon.
                          The Nets are not winning a title next year or any year with that roster. I think they will be good, but I don't think they will be better than the Pacers. Their best move was resigning Williams, which they had a huge leg up on everyone. They ridiculously overpaid for Lopez and added Joe Johnson's insane contract to their payroll. Joe Johnson is good, but he is not superstar talent. If he is, then so is Danny Granger. There is a reason they can't trade for Dwight Howard, because they have nothing left. Throwing money around isn't always the best way to go about things.

                          Teams don't just trade Superstars. The only one actually available right now is Howard. And he wont resign in Indiana. So traded for him would be moronic. I'm fine with the FO being aggressive and making moves, as long as they are smart moves. I don't see many moves that would have been feasible and smarter than keeping the starting 5 together, which was what our coach wanted and what our front office wanted. This franchise was built like this in the 90s and was good enough to win a championship (yes even teams that don't win the championship can be good enough to win one). They are doing it again.

                          When George Hill was starting, guess who had the best 5 man line up in the league? http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusmi...split=22&team= Oh thats the 5 man line up the front office kept together! Hmmmmmmm

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                            The Nets are not winning a title next year or any year with that roster. I think they will be good, but I don't think they will be better than the Pacers. Their best move was resigning Williams, which they had a huge leg up on everyone. They ridiculously overpaid for Lopez and added Joe Johnson's insane contract to their payroll. Joe Johnson is good, but he is not superstar talent. If he is, then so is Danny Granger. There is a reason they can't trade for Dwight Howard, because they have nothing left. Throwing money around isn't always the best way to go about things.

                            Teams don't just trade Superstars. The only one actually available right now is Howard. And he wont resign in Indiana. So traded for him would be moronic. I'm fine with the FO being aggressive and making moves, as long as they are smart moves. I don't see many moves that would have been feasible and smarter than keeping the starting 5 together, which was what our coach wanted and what our front office wanted. This franchise was built like this in the 90s and was good enough to win a championship (yes even teams that don't win the championship can be good enough to win one). They are doing it again.

                            When George Hill was starting, guess who had the best 5 man line up in the league? http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusmi...split=22&team= Oh thats the 5 man line up the front office kept together! Hmmmmmmm
                            You did read that the reason Williams signed in Brooklyn instead of DAllas was the nets acquisition of Joe Johnson. So lets see. You still think thats a bad move? You dont think theyre better than the Pacers. Thats fine...time will tell....But theyre front office and ownership are exhausting all possibilities and sparing no expense in order to go after a title and make their team as good as possible. Again, you would be pissed about such? Yea...ok...
                            The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post

                              When George Hill was starting, guess who had the best 5 man line up in the league? http://www.nba.com/statistics/plusmi...split=22&team= Oh thats the 5 man line up the front office kept together! Hmmmmmmm
                              Really ?? cool....again...if you hear when the banner is going up, please let me know...
                              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: If this had been a SINGLE trade...

                                Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                                You did read that the reason Williams signed in Brooklyn instead of DAllas was the nets acquisition of Joe Johnson. So lets see. You still think thats a bad move? You dont think theyre better than the Pacers. Thats fine...time will tell....But theyre front office and ownership are exhausting all possibilities and sparing no expense in order to go after a title and make their team as good as possible. Again, you would be pissed about such? Yea...ok...
                                lmao you really believe that? Its about the money dude. Don't kid yourself.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X