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

Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #52)

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

  • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
    Paul may well be the face of the Pacers, but West is the heart.
    I'm sorry but sometimes you guys get all sentimental with players saying things like "he is the heart" or "he is our soul", like the famous Allen Iverson said long time ago "it's just a game".

    I remember when not long ago people told me the same thing about Jeff Foster, "he is our veteran presence in the locker room we should re-sign him forever", or "he is the hearth of smashmouth basketball we need to keep him at any cost even if we have to pay him the max", now look how much better the Pacers are doing without him.

    Sometimes I wonder if other teams fans are as sentimental as some Pacers fans, "West is the heart" SMH.
    Last edited by vnzla81; 01-22-2013, 10:48 AM.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      I'm sorry but sometimes you guys get all sentimental with players saying things like "he is our heart" or "he is our soul", like the famous Allen Iverson said long time ago "it's just a game".

      I remember when not long ago people told me the same thing about Jeff Foster, "he is our veteran presence in the locker room we should re-sign him forever", or "he is the hearth of smashmouth basketball we need to keep him at any cost even if we have to pay him the max", now look how much better the Pacers are doing without him.
      I agree with your sentiment, but I think he meant something different.

      In short, the "identity" and style of the team was clearly established once West came aboard. Paul George plays within that identity. He is not a leader really in any way that West is. George is clearly the upcoming star of the team, but he is still young and impressionable.

      West is the bedrock of this team at this moment in time, period.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

        Originally posted by docpaul View Post
        I agree with your sentiment, but I think he meant something different.

        In short, the "identity" and style of the team was clearly established once West came aboard. Paul George plays within that identity. He is not a leader really in any way that West is. George is clearly the upcoming star of the team, but he is still young and impressionable.

        West is the bedrock of this team at this moment in time, period.
        The person that to me implemented that new "identity" was Vogel no West, or we forgot about the time he took over and how he changed the team? how about the Bulls series? the Pacers new "identity" is defense, that's all on Vogel no West.

        I agree that West is one of the leaders, that doesn't mean that somebody else can't replace him and be that leader once he is gone though.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

          Vogel would have just been preaching hollow words to a bunch of nice, soft, likable guys that played well against Chicago but lacked the ability to make plays at crunch time. Vogel can talk about it all he wants. Bird did something different - he realized the roster he had did not include the type of players that the team needed in the fourth quarter so he went out and got them -- Hill and West.

          Hill and West make this team's identity. Guys like Paul and Lance are certainly benefitting from it, and may actually put up better "stats" over time than Hill and West. But don't confuse "leading scorer" with "team's leader(s)". Those are not synonyms and if you take away David and Hill, our wings will shoot us to about a 0.500 record.

          As Seth keeps saying, we've already identified our starting five that we're going to make this run with. With the exception of Danny, that is what we've got this season. And it is working pretty well through mid season (in spite of all the anxiety on here through the first ten games of the season as we adjusted to Danny's absence.) I'm confident that the front office is going to do what is needed to keep that core five players in tact. Assuming that they all stay healthy, of course.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            The person that to me implemented that new "identity" was Vogel no West, or we forgot about the time he took over and how he changed the team? how about the Bulls series? the Pacers new "identity" is defense, that's all on Vogel no West.

            I agree that West is one of the leaders, that doesn't mean that somebody else can't replace him and be that leader once he is gone though.
            I am all for letting West walk if he cost over 11 million but to me he is more important than Danny is to this team like Seth said. The reason he is more important is because he gives you scoring from the block and works well with creating for others in the pnr.

            The FO will still have to make calls to Milsap and Josh Smith just to make sure they leave no rock left unturned but the likely hood of getting those guys are minimal so unless you have a better option you have to resign West to a decent contract. I don't see ways to replace West production but PG is showing that Danny is replaceable IMO.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              I'm sorry but sometimes you guys get all sentimental with players saying things like "he is the heart" or "he is our soul", like the famous Allen Iverson said long time ago "it's just a game".

              I remember when not long ago people told me the same thing about Jeff Foster, "he is our veteran presence in the locker room we should re-sign him forever", or "he is the hearth of smashmouth basketball we need to keep him at any cost even if we have to pay him the max", now look how much better the Pacers are doing without him.

              Sometimes I wonder if other teams fans are as sentimental as some Pacers fans, "West is the heart" SMH.
              2 things.

              To start, I think that other fans are absolutely as sentimental as Pacers fans... its part of what makes supporting a team so enjoyable. If you don't believe that most teams have a fan favorite player or two then I don't really know what to tell you.

              Are you really going to compare David West's contributions to this year's team to Jeff Foster's over the past few years? David West has a serious chance to make his third All-star appearance this season... Something Jeff Foster never got close to. The reason why people are so supportive of keeping West as the "heart" of this team is that he combines the veteran presence we need with top of the line talent.

              "It's just a game." After watching the Colts rally around Pagano I am pretty surprised to see anyone here try to ignore the emotional aspect of sports. Emotions win games. The Colts had no right making the playoffs this year, yet they rallied behind their coach and somehow pulled off an 11 win season. Obviously talent is more important... But that's what makes the Pacers so exciting this year. We have the talent. It would be silly to pretend that David West's presence on this team is not a huge positive when we hit crunch time, whether that be late in games or just once we reach the playoffs.

              Also, I am pretty sure no one ever suggested giving Jeff Foster a max contract.
              Last edited by Jrod Jones; 01-22-2013, 11:55 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                Why does anyone care about Fosters salary? It was on crappy teams when we were not going to have any cap space anyway.
                "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  Vogel would have just been preaching hollow words to a bunch of nice, soft, likable guys that played well against Chicago but lacked the ability to make plays at crunch time. Vogel can talk about it all he wants. Bird did something different - he realized the roster he had did not include the type of players that the team needed in the fourth quarter so he went out and got them -- Hill and West.

                  Hill and West make this team's identity. Guys like Paul and Lance are certainly benefitting from it, and may actually put up better "stats" over time than Hill and West. But don't confuse "leading scorer" with "team's leader(s)". Those are not synonyms and if you take away David and Hill, our wings will shoot us to about a 0.500 record.

                  As Seth keeps saying, we've already identified our starting five that we're going to make this run with. With the exception of Danny, that is what we've got this season. And it is working pretty well through mid season (in spite of all the anxiety on here through the first ten games of the season as we adjusted to Danny's absence.) I'm confident that the front office is going to do what is needed to keep that core five players in tact. Assuming that they all stay healthy, of course.
                  I'm sorry ChicagoJ but you are sounding like the Pacers won a championship last year or something, I mean the Pacers beat a team without Dhoward and lost to a team without one their best players in six games, yes Hill and West made them better but is not like the previous team that faced Chicago was garbage because they didn't have "the hearth and soul of the team", do we win another game on that series if instead of DC we had Hill and instead of Tyler we had West? maybe, the Pacers would have still lost that series though.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    I'm sorry ChicagoJ but you are sounding like the Pacers won a championship last year or something, I mean the Pacers beat a team without Dhoward and lost to a team without one their best players in six games, yes Hill and West made them better but is not like the previous team that faced Chicago was garbage because they didn't have "the hearth and soul of the team", do we win another game on that series if instead of DC we had Hill and instead of Tyler we had West? maybe, the Pacers would have still lost that series though.

                    No, I'm acting like they won a playoff series. They're in the game.

                    The last time the Pacers won a playoff series was 2004-05, Reggie's grande finale. The team then imploded.

                    Winning a playoff series is a step in the right direction to build the team, not an excuse to blow them up.

                    With Hill and West, maybe we win that series against Chicago. We only got blown out of one game by the #1 seed, and led substantially more minutes of the other games but COULD NOT make plays on offense to win close games (whereas they had Rose.) That Pacers team needed creators, and Bird went out and got them. The Bulls only beat us that season because they had a special creator in the fourth quarter with Rose and we didn't have any creators. Vogel needed help but the help he needed was a roster upgrade. He got it.

                    Then last year we lost to the eventual Champion, and played them as competitively as any of their playoff opponents. I don't see any shame in that.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                      ADDENDUM:

                      Good gracious. You've turned me into an optimist.

                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                        No, I'm acting like they won a playoff series. They're in the game.

                        The last time the Pacers won a playoff series was 2004-05, Reggie's grande finale. The team then imploded.

                        Winning a playoff series is a step in the right direction to build the team, not an excuse to blow them up.

                        With Hill and West, maybe we win that series against Chicago. We only got blown out of one game by the #1 seed, and led substantially more minutes of the other games but COULD NOT make plays on offense to win close games (whereas they had Rose.) That Pacers team needed creators, and Bird went out and got them. The Bulls only beat us that season because they had a special creator in the fourth quarter with Rose and we didn't have any creators. Vogel needed help but the help he needed was a roster upgrade. He got it.

                        Then last year we lost to the eventual Champion, and played them as competitively as any of their playoff opponents. I don't see any shame in that.
                        Thanks for making it about what they bring to the table argument and what they do on the court instead of talking about feelings and how much the Pacers needed a "hearth" on that series against the Bulls, you are right, they won a playoffs series but you can't ignore that the other team didn't have Howard though.

                        I can tell you that I'm starting to believe that this team can do some damage on the playoffs, but I'm thinking this because of what they can do on the court not because they have somebody that is "the hearth and soul of the team".

                        I would also like to point out that the myth that I want to go into rebuild mode is just that a myth.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          I would also like to point out that the myth that I want to go into rebuild mode is just that a myth.
                          I know. You and I both take bold positions to make our points. I'm not dismissing your position at all. I just think this team -- as currently constructed -- deserves at least one more playoff run and maybe two before thinking about making any changes to the core five players. Because I do believe they can do things in the playoffs.

                          It wasn't that long ago that I was still willing to trade one of our wings for a SG that could create his own shot. Hill and West have changed my opinion on that.
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            I know. You and I both take bold positions to make our points. I'm not dismissing your position at all. I just think this team -- as currently constructed -- deserves at least one more playoff run and maybe two before thinking about making any changes to the core five players. Because I do believe they can do things in the playoffs.

                            It wasn't that long ago that I was still willing to trade one of our wings for a SG that could create his own shot. Hill and West have changed my opinion on that.

                            Well they are going to have a shot this year, I believe that probably next year Danny is gone because cap space and the Pacers willingness to pay whatever they have to pay to keep West, I know you disagree because you are a West fan but I think that overpaying West is going to be a huge mistake, paying a guy that old that kind of money is a huge mistake.

                            I expect that the same issues we had last year(shot creation and shooting) to come up once again to put the nail on the Pacers coffin on the playoffs, I don't see this team making it past the second round.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Well they are going to have a shot this year, I believe that probably next year Danny is gone because cap space and the Pacers willingness to pay whatever they have to pay to keep West, I know you disagree because you are a West fan but I think that overpaying West is going to be a huge mistake, paying a guy that old that kind of money is a huge mistake.

                              I expect that the same issues we had last year(shot creation and shooting) to come up once again to put the nail on the Pacers coffin on the playoffs, I don't see this team making it past the second round.
                              Agree that overpaying West, who is going into his mid-30's is a mistake.

                              I think we just need to get more specific on what that means. Is >10 million per year too much? For me, it depends on how many years the contract is for. If we could do another 2yr/20mil, I'd be thrilled. You?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers looking to keep West next season? (Update: new story from Kravitz in post #51)

                                Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                                Agree that overpaying West, who is going into his mid-30's is a mistake.

                                I think we just need to get more specific on what that means. Is >10 million per year too much? For me, it depends on how many years the contract is for. If we could do another 2yr/20mil, I'd be thrilled. You?
                                2/20 would be perfect but like I said before I expect him to get way more than that(Walsh in in charge and he already said he loves him).
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X