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

  • #76
    Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

    This team's chemistry is unreal.

    Comment


    • #77
      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
      Who said impossibility? Point is simple. Very, very simple. Give one fact. ONE!!!! That says Danny being traded is even remotely likely. JUST ONE. Irrational is in spite of there being many many facts that say he will not likely be traded and absolutely none that he will be, still thinking he will be traded. Clearly irrational. Do you feel Paul George will be traded? Why not? Do you think David West will not be re-signed? Why not? Its far far more likely David West will not be back versus Danny Granger. And that is a longshot at this point... So in spite of all the facts leading one to believe Danny will not be traded and indeed will be re-signed when the time comes, and in spite of there not being one solitary fact that would lead one to believe Danny will be traded, he still thinks Danny will be traded. And he thinks he will be traded this offseason. The Pacers wouldnt even wait til his contract runs out. They will just get rid of him this offseason. Not only is that irrational...its plain stupid.
      First off, the "facts" have been stated before. When factoring in current contractual obligations for the next two seasons, there is only so much money available to sign PG to an extension, West to a new contract, Granger to a new contract, and to fill out the rest of the roster. I don't know the exact figures, I know they've been stated before, and referenced to in this very thread.

      Second, I believe TJ mentioned the possibility that he'll be traded in the offseason OR not re-signed after his deal runs out. He never said he'll 100% be traded this offseason. This is all pure speculation, on a internet forum, by Pacer fans.

      And third, I'm not sure you know what irrational is. You can label him pessimistic all you want, but one thing you can't say is that he's being irrational (well you can but it doesn't make you look good doing so).

      Comment


      • #78
        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
        You guys crack me up...seriously...you cant stand prosperity or experience something so positive without trying to find something negative. To read this piece and somehow get that Danny will be traded is the mystery underlying message if you read between the lines...well....thats just plain nuts. Not to mention totally ignorant of how both Larry Bird and even Donnie Walsh work. If you get that message from this article then you absolutely, positively missed the exact point of the article.
        I think this initial reaction, to what was a completely innocuous comment by Trader Joe, was irrational.

        Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
        Who said impossibility? Point is simple. Very, very simple. Give one fact. ONE!!!! That says Danny being traded is even remotely likely. JUST ONE. Irrational is in spite of there being many many facts that say he will not likely be traded and absolutely none that he will be, still thinking he will be traded. Clearly irrational. Do you feel Paul George will be traded? Why not? Do you think David West will not be re-signed? Why not? Its far far more likely David West will not be back versus Danny Granger. And that is a longshot at this point... So in spite of all the facts leading one to believe Danny will not be traded and indeed will be re-signed when the time comes, and in spite of there not being one solitary fact that would lead one to believe Danny will be traded, he still thinks Danny will be traded. And he thinks he will be traded this offseason. The Pacers wouldnt even wait til his contract runs out. They will just get rid of him this offseason. Not only is that irrational...its plain stupid.
        I think your reaction to this article, and every post you've made in this thread, has pretty much been completely over the top. It started off poorly, and has yet to improve. All in all, any concerns of irrationality in this thread, should be aimed at you.

        You said, thinking that Granger getting traded this summer is a possibility, was irrational. What is rational about that?
        Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 02-28-2013, 01:48 PM.

        Comment


        • #79
          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 would like to clarify this comments because it looks like some people took it as a negative comment(somebody told me), my point is that by reading the article I believe that Paul George working out with Danny was a huge reason of why we got PG, had Danny been working out with somebody else(Hayward, Aldridge,Bledsoe or whoever) I don't think the Pacers draft him.

          So yeah thanks Danny for the referral, thanks Larry for listening to the referral and for doing a good job in drafting Paul George.
          I actually dont think it had much of anything to do with getting a referral from Danny or seeing what Danny actually thought about the guy. Larry had to know that they were working out together and knew they had become friends. You generally dont rely on your own guys to do your scouting for you except when u bring guys in. I think its much more likely Larry is just very smart and knew he was gonna draft George if he was available. And considering he played the position of his franchise star player he wanted to do so in such a way as to not create any drama and by calling Danny and "getting his opinion" and having Danny tell him to get him....well...theres a saying or motto when ur top level management. You never ask questions you dont already know the answers to. I think Larry was just incredibly smart and sly and look how it played out. When most of teh world thinks there will be big problems when Danny returns it turns out theyre all nuts because theyre such great friends and have a mentor/protege relationship. Think that happens if Larry doesnt make that call? Maybe....but maybe not. More than likely things dont go quite as smoothly. Kudos again to Larry.
          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

          Comment


          • #80
            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 would like to clarify this comments because it looks like some people took it as a negative comment(somebody told me), my point is that by reading the article I believe that Paul George working out with Danny was a huge reason of why we got PG, had Danny been working out with somebody else(Hayward, Aldridge,Bledsoe or whoever) I don't think the Pacers draft him.

            So yeah thanks Danny for the referral, thanks Larry for listening to the referral and for doing a good job in drafting Paul George.
            Aside from you saying he played at a superstar level during the last month of last season (never letting you live it down lol) this is the nicest thing you've ever said about Danny

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

              This article gave me a warm fuzzy. Seriously, got to love this team.
              Danger Zone

              Comment


              • #82
                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
                I think this initial reaction, to what was a completely innocuous comment by Trader Joe, was irrational.



                I think your reaction to this article, and every post you've made in this thread, has pretty much been completely over the top. It started off poorly, and has yet to improve. All in all, any concerns of irrationality in this thread, should be aimed at you.

                You said, thinking that Granger getting traded this summer is a possibility, was irrational. What is rational about that?
                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.
                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                  James Harden.


                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                    The money situation is pretty tough. Now, granted, the LT could very well be a bit higher in 2 years, but probably not by a lot.

                    Let's say it remains at what ShamSports currently reports it as, ~$70.3m.

                    I'll try to be somewhere in between realistic and rosey with my salary projections:

                    George Hill ($8m) / BackupPG
                    Paul George (~$14m) / Lance Stephenson (~$5m aka MLE range) / Orlando Johnson (~$0.9m)
                    Danny Granger (~$8m) / Gerald Green ($3.5m)
                    David West (~$12m) / Miles Plumlee ($1.2m)
                    Roy Hibbert (~$14.9m) / Ian Mahinmi ($4m)

                    That adds up to $71.5, over the tax.

                    Odds are we WILL NOT be willing to be a tax payer. There's a small chance; Simon allowed it in the past 10 years, but I wouldn't bet on it, either.

                    And that doesn't account for 2013 draft picks, 2014 draft picks, or even if we give those all away to save money you still need to sign some minimum salary guys to keep the roster at the minimum size of 13 players. (Though, someone remind me, do minimum salary guys still count against the cap, or not? Or am I thinking that the league or someone other than the team that is, pays for their salary but it still goes on the cap?)

                    So, if you think we'll give away all of our draft picks the next two years, AND Danny will take less than $8m per AND David will take less than $12m per AND Lance will take a minimum of $5m per... you might just get by.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      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.
                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        James Harden.
                        Unfortunately this is a VERY good example. Harden was entrenched in OKC's culture but when it came to the money, he wanted more than OKC was going to be able to pay, and he was traded.

                        The only unknown when it comes to Danny is how much he expects to make. Harden was going into his first big contract, following his rookie deal. Danny is coming off his first big contract, and is going to be 31...not old, but definitely on the backside of his career.

                        I think it all comes down to what Danny feels he's worth, monetary wise.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          James Harden.
                          Tyson Chandler, Rudy Gay, whoever Memphis send to Cleveland.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                            One thought.

                            We know that the Simons have been willing to go into the LT in the past for the right players. We know that Donnie is willing to pay our players (arguably too much at times) for their loyalty.

                            Though I don't agree, let's assume the story of Bird leaving because Simon wouldn't do something is somehow true. We know it wasn't that he wouldn't go over the cap - he went over the cap. He wouldn't have been able to go over the LT on players this year because he couldn't have signed the combination that would have that much pay THIS year (possibly could grow to it in the future if signed in the right order, but that's for another debate). To make this work at all, it would really need to mean that Simon didn't want to spend the money on players Bird wanted if it meant getting rid of certain players already on the team.

                            IF that is the case, there is every possibility that Simon would be willing to go over the LT to keep this core together. Now, that could be good or bad, considering that contracts which end up being too long can be devastating. However, IF we're in a Pistons Position, where one good well-fitting trade could push us over the top, keeping this core together for at least another two years might be worth the money.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              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
                              And that doesn't account for 2013 draft picks, 2014 draft picks, or even if we give those all away to save money you still need to sign some minimum salary guys to keep the roster at the minimum size of 13 players. (Though, someone remind me, do minimum salary guys still count against the cap, or not? Or am I thinking that the league or someone other than the team that is, pays for their salary but it still goes on the cap?)
                              You can sign players for the minimum to fill out the roster, if you are over the cap. But I'm pretty sure they still count against the luxury tax.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Danny Granger and Paul George have unique bond that makes Pacers real threat in East (Article about Granger/George)

                                You can expect Danny to at least get a deal comparable to West's IMO. 2/20


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X