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

I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

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

  • #16
    Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

    Indiana trades: PF Austin Croshere (10.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.8 apg in 29.0 minutes)
    SF Jonathan Bender (6.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.6 minutes)
    C Scot Pollard (6.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 0.8 apg in 24.6 minutes)
    SG Fred Jones (11.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 33.5 minutes)
    Indiana receives: PG Nick Van Exel (11.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.8 apg in 27.9 minutes)
    SG Derek Anderson (10.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 3.3 apg in 29.3 minutes)
    Change in team outlook: -13.2 ppg, -13.2 rpg, and +1.3 apg.

    Portland trades: PG Nick Van Exel (11.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.8 apg in 27.9 minutes)
    SG Derek Anderson (10.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 3.3 apg in 29.3 minutes)
    Portland receives: PF Austin Croshere (10.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.8 apg in 29.0 minutes)
    SF Jonathan Bender (6.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.6 minutes)
    C Scot Pollard (6.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 0.8 apg in 24.6 minutes)
    SG Fred Jones (11.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 33.5 minutes)
    Change in team outlook: +13.2 ppg, +13.2 rpg, and -1.3 apg.

    TRADE ACCEPTED

    This would be perfect for us. And not too bad for Portland. They get Freddie who is well liked there. Plus they get Pollard who is a decent C. So the trade would really be Freddie and Pollard for Nick and Derek with Cro and Bender thrown in and if they work out Portland looks good.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

      Okay, assuming the following:

      - Reggie retires
      - JB never makes it
      - Ron is traded for junk

      The obvious starting place is we need another swingman. And don't give me that "Fred can start" bull. He can't, and he won't. In the long run, if he can learn some ball-handling skills, he's better off coming off the bench.

      So, the question is, what kind of a guy do you want. People assume Steve is fine at SF, but I don't know. His size is an advantage at the 2, but I didn't care for how Pierce was pushing him around last night. So I think we should pencil Jack in at the 2 and get a real forward.

      So, what kind of skill set. Shooting isn't a priority, IMO, since Jack and Tins have improved in that area. It'd be nice to have a 3-point specialist off the bench, but it isn't necessary for the starter.

      However, as has been pointed out above, if Harrison continues in his lack of rebounding, we need someone who can board. Jack can, but Carlisle wants guards getting down court.

      Along those same lines, if David really becomes the traditional center we hope he becomes, we need someone out there doing the dirty work. Someone who's scrappy and makes guys work for their shot on D while not looking for his own on O.

      All the guys I can think of that fits that role retired 5 years ago. Posey has been mentioned, but I'd like someone with a bit more meat on their bones. If Battier had a little more edge, or if Najera had a little less, either of those could work with more talent. If Eric Williams was a couple years younger, he'd be good.

      Really, UB's right. Artest with that lineup is perfect. So, as a comprimise I guess I'm looking for someone who brings the intangibles Ron brings. The scoring ability isn't necessary if Jamaal and David score, but it sure is a nice bonus.

      The big problem I see is the system. Carlisle's D needs a lynch pin, and Steve's a gambler, not a lock down guy. Offensively, we're never gonna run, so can we count on Steve to be the second assist man in the half court. His dimes have gone up the last couple years, and if he can create off the dribble, he should be able to get some shots for the big boys.

      Benchwise, long term we're building on Fred and Jeff. We need a third guy, though. Jeff can handle the post minutes behind JO and David, so we don't need another bruiser in the rotation. So, it comes down to if Fred can play point. If he can, than we need a shooter at the 3. If JJ ever gets his confidence back, he can potentially be what we'd need. Rebounds well, so that's a plus.

      If not, we need another point. I like AJ, but he's just not doing the job this year, and I'm worried the game is passing him by. Fred can guard points, so we don't need a stopper there. But if Fred doesn't get a better handle, we need someone who can run the offense. I was high on Gill when we got him, but I'm not comfortable with him, and it looks like Rick isn't either.

      So, to sum up, we need a defensive-minded SF who hits the boards, and quite possibly another point. Besides that, we seem to have the pieces in place, assuming eveyone reaches their potential. But this is all stacked like a house of cards in my mind's eye, and one weak link could bring it all down. Alot of that has to deal with coaching, which I'm not able to articulate just yet. Let's just say I'm worried about Mike Brown leaving.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

        Well, if Artest is not in the team's long term plans, I think a new direction is in order.

        If that is the case, I think it is crucial to build around JO, Tinsley, and Harrison.

        We have some other guys who have some nice trade value - work with that and get 'er done if that is the route you need to take.

        And please, PLEASE get a good backup PG.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

          Originally posted by btownpacer
          If we start Harrison (like we should), and put Foster in a back-up role, our bench could really use someone like Willie Green, a pure scorer.
          I'd be afraid that in a starting role, Harrison would tire out quickly and foul quickly, essentially giving us the same minutes as a second wave player. He does need a more prominant role tho. I would like to see Pollard start in lieu of Foster, w/ Foster spelling Jermaine/Pollard.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

            Originally posted by Kegboy
            Okay, assuming the following:

            -

            So, to sum up, we need a defensive-minded SF who hits the boards, and quite possibly another point. Besides that, we seem to have the pieces in place, assuming eveyone reaches their potential. But this is all stacked like a house of cards in my mind's eye, and one weak link could bring it all down. Alot of that has to deal with coaching, which I'm not able to articulate just yet. Let's just say I'm worried about Mike Brown leaving.

            In the begining of the offseason when there was talk about trading Ron Artest , Shawn Marion's name was brought up and many people shot that trade idea down. Its not going to happen now obviously but that would be a perfect small forward for this team. Great rebounder, very good defender and can obviously put the ball in the basket. It's funny how this position was strenght for us over the past three season's now all of a sudden its a major weakness for us.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

              Originally posted by Ragnar
              Indiana trades: PF Austin Croshere (10.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.8 apg in 29.0 minutes)
              SF Jonathan Bender (6.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.6 minutes)
              C Scot Pollard (6.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 0.8 apg in 24.6 minutes)
              SG Fred Jones (11.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 33.5 minutes)
              Indiana receives: PG Nick Van Exel (11.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.8 apg in 27.9 minutes)
              SG Derek Anderson (10.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 3.3 apg in 29.3 minutes)
              Change in team outlook: -13.2 ppg, -13.2 rpg, and +1.3 apg.

              Portland trades: PG Nick Van Exel (11.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 3.8 apg in 27.9 minutes)
              SG Derek Anderson (10.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 3.3 apg in 29.3 minutes)
              Portland receives: PF Austin Croshere (10.8 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.8 apg in 29.0 minutes)
              SF Jonathan Bender (6.4 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.6 apg in 14.6 minutes)
              C Scot Pollard (6.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 0.8 apg in 24.6 minutes)
              SG Fred Jones (11.0 ppg, 3.7 rpg, 2.6 apg in 33.5 minutes)
              Change in team outlook: +13.2 ppg, +13.2 rpg, and -1.3 apg.

              TRADE ACCEPTED

              This would be perfect for us. And not too bad for Portland. They get Freddie who is well liked there. Plus they get Pollard who is a decent C. So the trade would really be Freddie and Pollard for Nick and Derek with Cro and Bender thrown in and if they work out Portland looks good.
              I thought Nick is going to retire after this season. As least that what I heard in December.

              If we trade Artest, I would like to have get a bigger SF (Harrington?) and see Jackson move to the shoot guard position.



              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                Originally posted by Diesel
                In the begining of the offseason when there was talk about trading Ron Artest , Shawn Marion's name was brought up and many people shot that trade idea down. Its not going to happen now obviously but that would be a perfect small forward for this team. Great rebounder, very good defender and can obviously put the ball in the basket. It's funny how this position was strenght for us over the past three season's now all of a sudden its a major weakness for us.
                Marion's too offensive minded, and he'd fall apart in Carlisle's slow-it-down offense.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                  Originally posted by fwpacerfan
                  I think a b/u point guard, a starting small forward, a starting center, a b/u shooting guard and a b/u power forward would be helpful.

                  Sitting Reggie Miller and starting Fred Jones would help.
                  Playing Eddie Gill instead of Anthony Johnson would help.
                  Starting Stephen Jackson at SF helps.
                  Trading Bender for Kevin Ollie and a bag of fruit would help

                  I'm beginning to think this team needs to be overhauled. After watching yet ANOTHER lackluster performance last night I don't see anything that gives me hope that this team will not end up in the lottery. It's not a talent issue - it's an attitude issue and I don't know if it can be fixed.

                  They look like a team that has tuned out the coaching staff and have decided that team basketball isn't the way to win. They seem to not even really care either. I'm sick of it and I'm as disgusted with this team as any I've ever rooted for. I would like to see some sort of trade done before the trading deadline, maybe to get some future draft picks because I really think the window of opportunity is slamming shut for this team - the Cavaliers are on the rise, the Bulls are on the rise, the Pistons are still young, the Wizards getting better. The common thing among these teams is that they show up to play EVERY night. This group of Pacers only seems to care when they play a top flight team and that is something that is unacceptable.

                  Chill dude, they've had about 10 different starting combos. Tinsley has HAD to score for this team. Things will return as the lineup sets and they get back to normal.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                    Originally posted by Mushmouth
                    I'd be afraid that in a starting role, Harrison would tire out quickly and foul quickly, essentially giving us the same minutes as a second wave player. He does need a more prominant role tho. I would like to see Pollard start in lieu of Foster, w/ Foster spelling Jermaine/Pollard.
                    I like the big kid a lot, but he's not a great rebounder, yet. Foster IS. You can't sit a guy averaging what he does. 24 minutes for Harrison/ same for Foster.
                    Pollard plays against the trees.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                      I think the future is already here up front. Harrison and Jermaine will come to be a dominant inside tandem. I also think that Foster/Jermaine/Jackson could run the legs right off many opposing front lines. 1/2 a game of running the pants off them and the other 1/2 of big guys pounding the stuffing out of them in the post would be ok with me. That and Tinsleys setup will be the cornerstones of the future offense. Jackson is ok at the 3, I think he'll grow into again. Not sure if Freddie is going to blossom like I'd hoped. SOlid backup at the least. Regardless we'll need another spot shooter to replace Reggie. James Jones may be part of the answer, but we'd need another 3 pt shooter for sure.
                      A top flight 2 guard OR 3 with Jackson at the other spot with the rest would a VERY good next few years.
                      Bender staying healthy would change all this

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                        I am staunchly in the don't trade Artest camp, but if we have to make a trade, I would favor bringing in quicker guards that can defend the quickest players in the league. I don't think that we can find a sf with Artest's toughness anywhere in the league, so we would need to look at our defense another way. As much as I like him that may mean that Tinsley doesn't fit into our plans. I would love to see JO and Harrison playing with two really quick guards that can stay in front of their men.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                          One more point. If we do trade Artest, then I think that JO is the only player on the team who is untouchable in redesigning the Pacers.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                            Where's the panic button smilie?

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                              Originally posted by Ragnar
                              I wonder if Portland would send Derek Anderson here for Bender. The Oregonian says they are looking at trading him and we have suckered them before. Maybe we could send Freddie to portland with Bender for Anderson and whatever else.
                              I love this idea - I've always been a big Derek Anderson fan. He's a good defender, a capable scorer and a good guy.

                              If a trade can't happen what about starting Croshere at SF and SJax @ SG? I know Cro's defense would be a detriment but no more so than Reggie's is right now. Cro seems to be one of the few that gives maximum effort everynight. His problem is that if his outside shot is not falling then he's in trouble. Maybe more PT would help him realize he can do other things when his shot isn't falling.
                              "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                              - Benjamin Franklin

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I'm stealing a line from Uncle Buck...

                                Assuming Reg retires, and Bender and Artest must go.

                                Guys I would Keep

                                Tinsley
                                F. Jones
                                O'Neal
                                Harrison
                                Jackson
                                Foster
                                Pollard

                                I am not going to deal with third stringers like Gill and Edwards in this, it won't matter much what they do.

                                Try to see if Mullin loves Bender enough to trade Pietrus for Jon and James. Not a big deal if this doesn't happen.

                                Draft a back-up PG with passing ability with our pick in the draft. I'm confident Donnie can find someone worth assigning back-up duty. If not, it's another season of AJ.

                                Lastly, sign and trade Artest and Croshere or maybe Pollard to the Suns for Joe Johnson. Toss in any other useless depth they want, whoever is left wasting away on the roster.

                                Get David Harrison slimmed down, and hope he improves his game.

                                Final Roster

                                Harrison/Pollard
                                O'Neal/Foster
                                Jackson/Pietrus
                                Johnson/Jones
                                Tinsley/[Rookie PG]

                                I don't like Jackson at SF, I'd rather have a SF who boards well and plays great defense, but short of acquiring AK47 or something crazy like that, this is my best shot at a one year quick fix.
                                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X