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

Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

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

  • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    http://data.shamsports.com/content/p...ies/pacers.jsp

    These are the numbers that show how much money has already been committed for the Pacers. These are factual. I already stated why I think these numbers make trading Granger a possibility. That doesn't mean that there is 100% chance he will be. That means, it could happen. That is not irrational.

    Those numbers are factual, and certainly more so than anything in that article. Why you are using this article to make any kind of claim that it is factual evidence that any thoughts of him possibly being traded are irrational, is beyond me.

    This is all really weird.
    Again...i was on here months ago talking about the numbers problem....there are few that have a better understanding of the cap and things related to it than myself...and i was saying the pacers are gonna have some very difficult decisions...i know the numbers situation....thats not the issue here. The issue is that you..or more to the point, TJ seems to think that Danny is the odd man out. And TJ just goes on and on about how he will be traded this off season. And there is zero basis for such. zero. Danny is one of the three most important guys on this team. Hes not going anywhere unless this thing is blown up. Period. West, Granger and George are your true core. Others are very valuable, but are all pretty much replaceable to different extents. When one of those three can no longer be kept, then the team goes in a different direction. Not unlike what happened to the 2000 team. This team is on the way up....its just beginning to contend for a title. They simply wont then go and get rid of the very heart of the team. Thats just crazy and irrationall to think such. Let alone to do so even way before the issue even arises. The Pacers financial concerns dont really kick in til the end of Grangers contract. I mean geez.
    The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

    Comment


    • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

      Conversations like this are why I hate being an adult. I had no concept of NBA finances as a kid and well, that was just fine.

      Enjoy this year and see what happens. We have the entire offseason to talk about this ****. On the other hand, I will probably keep talking about it.

      Comment


      • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

        Originally posted by idioteque View Post
        Assuming we want to retain George, West, and Stephenson, I don't see how we have enough money for Danny. That said, I think it is highly unlikely we trade him next year. The Pacers are at a huge advantage in that his contract expires the same year PG is up for his first big contract. There would be very few if any contracts we could take back that would provide us with that kind of long-term financial flexibility AND production like Danny's does. Not retaining Danny is very, very possible, but the Pacers would be shooting themselves in the foot by trading him under almost all scenarios this offseason.

        Don't obsess over ""we get nothing of value if we let Danny go for nothing." The value is you have more flexibility to sign Paul George (and hopefully Lance) long-term deals. If we trade Danny for some high-priced player with 3 years left on a similar contract I will be worried about this team's basic business sense.
        The reason to trade Danny Granger this summer, is that may be the only possible way to retain David West, and stay under the LT line.

        If you can keep West without trading him, you do that. I'm just not certain that it isn't going to take a huge deal to keep West, which I think is more important than keeping Granger.

        Comment


        • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

          Originally posted by idioteque View Post
          Assuming we want to retain George, West, and Stephenson, I don't see how we have enough money for Danny. That said, I think it is highly unlikely we trade him next year. The Pacers are at a huge advantage in that his contract expires the same year PG is up for his first big contract. There would be very few if any contracts we could take back that would provide us with that kind of long-term financial flexibility AND production like Danny's does. Not retaining Danny is very, very possible, but the Pacers would be shooting themselves in the foot by trading him under almost all scenarios this offseason.

          Don't obsess over ""we get nothing of value if we let Danny go for nothing." The value is you have more flexibility to sign Paul George (and hopefully Lance) long-term deals. If we trade Danny for some high-priced player with 3 years left on a similar contract I will be worried about this team's basic business sense.
          Yeah. That's kind of what I expect to happen as well. Keep him for another chance at competing with this roster next season, then either his deal expires or we trade him for peanuts to get some value before he's completely gone. Or wait and see if he's cheaper than expected in free agency. It very well could be the latter.

          Comment


          • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            2 yrs 7.5 mil--TOTAL??

            Yea he'll get that if he doesn't get ANY better than what he is RIGHT now lol. Jeez.

            I honestly think with the recent trend of 2nd nd 3rd tier players getting paid less and less (Felton, Crawford, Mayo, etc) I think Danny can expect between 6.5 and 8 mil per--from a winning team. And 8 Mil would come from a younger team that needs that Vet
            I thought Suckleavy was making more my bad, I'm thinking that Danny is going to get like 5/6mil a year max for his next contract at 31 years of age and with bad kness, maybe less.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

              Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
              Ah...so you cant come up with any facts that might lead one to think its a possibility so you then go to the last resort...attack on a personal level since the facts wont do you any good. Gotcha. Your opinion of my posts combined with a dollar will get you a cup of coffee at McDonalds. GEt my drift? Ill just wait til you give me one actual fact that might lead one to beleive Danny might get traded this summer. ONE. With regards to his "innocuous" comment, he has alluded to this same sort of thing numerous times on this board. Again, in spite of there being no facts pointing to such. Its more like an insecurity than anything else. Anything this good has obviously got to come to an end....and sooner rather than later. I mean cmon. Theres a wealth and i do mean wealth of reasons they would never trade Danny this summer. And they are in two camps...The camp that says they will never trade him and will not only not trade him but re-sign him....and the other camp being if you were going to trade him, it wont be this summer. But again, in spite of every fact known to man, he still runs around like a dude going out with a hot chick that is just certain shes gonna break up with him and can talk about nothing but. This article should serve to quell such thoughts....instead he somehow tries to irrationally use it as some sort of evidence to support his ill-conceived notion. Just like the hot chick who calls him up and tells him she wants to take him to dinner....for him to only think shes gonna do so because she wants to break up with him. I mean cmon.
              Dude relax, take a deep breath...

              I actually tend to agree that Danny and the team would strongly prefer to NOT part ways. Danny seems like the rare type of player who might turn down more lucrative offers (within reason) in order to stay with the Pacers (this is not unheard of, Dirk did this with the Mavs in order to win a championship).

              However they way you have been reacting to some of the other posters here is indeed over the top.

              People HAVE presented facts for their side of the argument (namely salary considerations, which are a real issue). The Pacers are not made of money, and attendance is still lagging behind where we all hoped it would be at this point. Simon has refused to go into the luxury tax for a very long time now. We still have to re-sign DWest and plan for keeping PG. Something might have to give. Let's hope it doesn't, but much crazier things have happened.

              Finally it's fine for people to disagree, but that doesn't necessarily make one side "irrational." I agree with the other poster that you might not be using that word correctly... Not trying to attack you, just pointing out that you're not doing yourself any favors with how you are presenting your argument... JMHO

              Comment


              • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                I thought Suckleavy was making more my bad, I'm thinking that Danny is going to get like 5/6mil a year max for his next contract at 31 years of age and with bad kness, maybe less.
                In which case he's affordable to us, and he's made it clear he's ready to take a step back in roles.

                Comment


                • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  What you are describing is literally the hope of every single fan of any team involved in professional team sports. It is hard for me to believe, yes, because it basically never happens. I think they will want to do what is best for their families, and not one single person should begrudge them for doing so. We'd all do the exact same thing.

                  Obviously, the Tom Brady extension has been in the news lately, but I don't think that is a comparable situation. Brady has already won 3 titles. He's already a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. He's playing for legacy, and legacy alone. He didn't really "take less money," because the CBA allows NFL teams to be much more creative with their accounting than the NBA's CBA does.

                  This also doesn't even mention the fact that he is married to a woman who makes more money than Brady (or any other NFL'er ever has) by a wide margin. Basically, what I'm saying is, Tom Brady beats every other man at life.
                  Diana Taurasi and Penny Taylor (WNBA, Phoenix Mercury) took a pay cut so that their team could resign their center, so they could challenge for a championship a few years ago. And I'd imagine any pay cut they took would be more impactful than any pay cut West or Granger would take. I believe Lebron and Bosh took less money to go win. Even though they get the max (or at least Lebron does), they would have made more money had they stayed in their cities. Both situations were done for "Legacy" reasons. Aka..winning a championship.

                  Danny's decision will be similar. (And West, for that matter). Although no one would/should blame Danny, if he does decide to go for more money..which I'm sure he'd get. The reality is, him and West are getting older. They're all stars, and they haven't won a championship. If this team shows the potential to do that in the playoffs, I can imagine a scenario where career goals beat out money. And I don't think it's that rare for that to happen.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                    The reason to trade Danny Granger this summer, is that may be the only possible way to retain David West, and stay under the LT line.

                    If you can keep West without trading him, you do that. I'm just not certain that it isn't going to take a huge deal to keep West, which I think is more important than keeping Granger.
                    Even if West made $16m next year (I'd be beyond stunned, but hey it's possible), we'd still be (with Danny) at least a few million under the LT and only needing to replace Augustin and Sam Young in our rotation. That's workable. I think they'll both be here next season.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                      Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                      The reason to trade Danny Granger this summer, is that may be the only possible way to retain David West, and stay under the LT line.

                      If you can keep West without trading him, you do that. I'm just not certain that it isn't going to take a huge deal to keep West, which I think is more important than keeping Granger.
                      West's contract expires after this season correct? So if we traded Granger, wouldn't we have to take back basically the same amount of money in a contract that wouldn't expire until the next season (or later), thus not giving us any more flexibility to bring back West?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                        Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                        Roy also has no injury history, has much rarer size and a more in demand skill set, and had never signed a big contract before. I don't think Danny would come back cheap, but they are entirely different case studies.
                        Roy got offered a max contract by another team taking that decision out of his hands, I expect the same thing to happen with West and probably Danny.

                        Even if they have "good intentions" some team is going to offer some crazy contract making the Pacers to overpay them.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                          Originally posted by idioteque View Post
                          West's contract expires after this season correct? So if we traded Granger, wouldn't we have to take back basically the same amount of money in a contract that wouldn't expire until the next season (or later), thus not giving us any more flexibility to bring back West?
                          We could take back 75%.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                            Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                            We could take back 75%.
                            So, we're talking about Trading Granger, someone who still is the face of the franchise, even if he's not the best player..to a team that's not going to give us equal value for him. (In terms of what Danny's worth to us.) But even worse, he'll be worth perhaps 75% of Danny's contract...which we'll likely mean...that the player we'll get is going to be someone like Reddick. If we're lucky.

                            Oh, and seeing as how close George and Granger are, we'll likely upset George in the process.

                            This just blows.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              Diana Taurasi and Penny Taylor (WNBA, Phoenix Mercury) took a pay cut so that their team could resign their center, so they could challenge for a championship a few years ago. And I'd imagine any pay cut they took would be more impactful than any pay cut West or Granger would take. I believe Lebron and Bosh took less money to go win. Even though they get the max (or at least Lebron does), they would have made more money had they stayed in their cities. Both situations were done for "Legacy" reasons. Aka..winning a championship.

                              Danny's decision will be similar. (And West, for that matter). Although no one would/should blame Danny, if he does decide to go for more money..which I'm sure he'd get. The reality is, him and West are getting older. They're all stars, and they haven't won a championship. If this team shows the potential to do that in the playoffs, I can imagine a scenario where career goals beat out money. And I don't think it's that rare for that to happen.
                              Yes Bosh, Wade and Lebron gave Miami a "discount", the "discount" is kind of fake because in Florida they don't pay state taxes, also remember that Bosh was in Canada and the taxes there are a killer so even if he got the max there he would probably be making less than now at the end.

                              Dwade is probably the only one giving a "discount" because he was already there is guess.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                                So, we're talking about Trading Granger, someone who still is the face of the franchise, even if he's not the best player..to a team that's not going to give us equal value for him. (In terms of what Danny's worth to us.) But even worse, he'll be worth perhaps 75% of Danny's contract...which we'll likely mean...that the player we'll get is going to be someone like Reddick. If we're lucky.

                                Oh, and seeing as how close George and Granger are, we'll likely upset George in the process.

                                This just blows.
                                I am sure George would be consulted before such a trade, in large part because in would be done so that he could get a serious pay day at the end of next year. However at this point I doubt even his agent knows exactly what he'll be worth.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X