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

How do we keep Lance?

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

  • Re: How do we keep Lance?

    Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
    Just sign lance for around $8-$10 mil a year and offer Granger the MLE and worry about getting under the tax next year before the deadline...I am a huge George Hill fan but a lineup of Lance George Granger West Hibbert is pretty sexy but maybe Larry can talk Hill into being what he was doing in San Antonio and being the 6th man like he was born to do and it might be possible that Hill prefers that role to starting point. Just a thought...

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    IMHO…the sensible route to take is to dump Copeland BEFORE the February 20th 2014 Trade Deadline NOT dump his contract AFTER the 2014-2015 Offseason while taking a "just re-sign Lance and Granger and then sort it out later" approach. I don't think that it is as easy as many of you think to simple shed Expiring Contracts WITHOUT getting back any Salary beyond the 2014-2015 season. This makes negotiations worse ESPECIALLY if Teams know that we have to dump Salary just to avoid being over the LT…something that ALL Teams know that the Simon's won't do. You don't think that opposing Teams will ask for the "Moon and Stars" when they know that you have no choice but to dump someone's Salary and get back LITERALLY nothing?

    How do you think that Teams dump Expiring Contracts for nothing? They do it by giving up A LOT of assets. What assets do you think that we have now to get Teams to take on Copeland or even Scola AFTER the Team decides to re-sign Lance and Granger ( which I can see as laughable given our Salary Cap / LT situation )? OJ, Solo and future 1st round picks?

    Given that the majority of the Salary Cap will be devoted to the Starting Lineup…it is imperative that the Team has a source of cheap talent that can improve over time. Where does such talent come from? Look at our roster and you can figure it out……through the Draft. This does not mean that I do not think that OJ, Solo or any of the two 2nd round picks are not expendable if it meant that we can dump Copeland's contract…..it means that my preference is to keep either OJ or Solo as a future 8th/9th Man wing that can develop over time.

    The choice is clear….at this point…shed Copeland's Contract at the cost of OJ or any of the two 2nd round picks that the Pacers have in the 2014-2015 draft by this season's Trade Deadline. AT WORST……include Solo if you have to.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: How do we keep Lance?

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      Tyreke's got his problems, but he can't hold Lance's jock? Seriously. Let's see what we think Lance is worth once his jumper dies for 2 weeks again. So contracts be dammed, in a vacuum, you'd take Lance over Tyreke? Hey, welcome to Pacers Digest I guess.
      Lance has the highest FG% and is right there with Paul and GHill on 3%. He's 2nd in ppg, 2nd in rebounds, 1st in assists by some distance. This is happening on a team with the BEST record in the NBA. A team that is probably the best team in the East. Lance is just getting started and, at least for this year, I'd be more worried about Danny Granger getting healthy than Lance Stephenson's shot vanishing.

      Comment


      • Re: How do we keep Lance?

        Originally posted by kellogg View Post
        I think the guys here who think Lance can be signed for just above the MLE, or even George Hill money, are going to be shocked. I really wouldn't be floored if some idiot GM gave him a max contract, but I think 10-12 mil isn't at all unrealistic given that an underachiever like Tyreke Evans got 10 mil/yr...and his potential and resume isn't that impressive. Desperate GMs do desperate things.
        +1

        I go back to what I said…..we are fanboys that have watched Lance all season long. We know what he's capable of doing ( Good Lance ) and what he is not capable of doing ( Bad Lance ). Would it be a stretch for some GM out there that is desperate or even looking to make a major move look at Lance as Tyreke ( at worst ) or even Wade ( at best ) ESPECIALLY for a Player that has only started since the 2012-2013 season? Some Team will gamble that he hasn't reached his potential yet and overpay him at the tune of $9 to 10+ mil a year.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: How do we keep Lance?

          Scola or not I don't think Cope gets playing time the guy is garbage Vogel knows better than playing him.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: How do we keep Lance?

            Originally posted by cdash View Post
            He has cornered a very niche market in this league: A stretch power forward in a small forward's body who can't really guard either position effectively.
            I don't think you have seen his garbage minute stats the guy is amazing.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: How do we keep Lance?

              Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
              Just sign lance for around $8-$10 mil a year and offer Granger the MLE and worry about getting under the tax next year before the deadline...I am a huge George Hill fan but a lineup of Lance George Granger West Hibbert is pretty sexy but maybe Larry can talk Hill into being what he was doing in San Antonio and being the 6th man like he was born to do and it might be possible that Hill prefers that role to starting point. Just a thought...

              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
              I don't understand why many of you are hung up on this whole notion of GH ( this year's scapegoat ) and who should be the Starting PG and who isn't.

              The way Vogel runs the offense and the way that Bird has constructed this Team..….there is no actual Starting PG. Well, technically there is...but there isn't one that is used in the same manner a Starting PG is used on other teams ( GH and CJ play as much "off the ball" as they do "on the ball" while Lance and PG24 handle the ball ). I think that having a Starting Spot on the roster is important to Lance….but having the Title of "Starting PG" ( on a Team that can have the Starting PG, Starting SG or Starting SF have the offense flow through them at any given moment of time ) is minor if not irrelevant. Now…if Bird said to Lance that he wants Lance to be the 6th Man….then I can see Lance balking at that ( cuz ANY Team that is interested in him can offer him a Starting position ).

              If Lance stays…it will be for the $$$, the chance to play for a contender and have Larry as a Boss…not because he's named the Starting PG on the Team over GH.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                I don't understand why many of you are hung up on this whole notion of GH ( this year's scapegoat ) and who should be the Starting PG and who isn't.

                The way Vogel runs the offense and the way that Bird has constructed this Team..….there is no actual Starting PG. Well, technically there is...but there isn't one that is used in the same manner a Starting PG is used on other teams ( GH and CJ play as much "off the ball" as they do "on the ball" while Lance and PG24 handle the ball ). I think that having a Starting Spot on the roster is important to Lance….but having the Title of "Starting PG" ( on a Team that can have the Starting PG, Starting SG or Starting SF have the offense flow through them at any given moment of time ) is minor if not irrelevant. Now…if Bird said to Lance that he wants Lance to be the 6th Man….then I can see Lance balking at that ( cuz ANY Team that is interested in him can offer him a Starting position ).

                If Lance stays…it will be for the $$$, the chance to play for a contender and have Larry as a Boss…not because he's named the Starting PG on the Team over GH.
                First off I said I like George Hill... my preference would for him to stay the starter but what if he is more comfortable coming off the bench? And lance becomes the point guard we all know he can be? If we run an offense that we don't have a point guard then why does it matter if it's Lance and Paul or GHill and Lance? If it puts us in a better position to win and makes GHill more comfortable, why not?


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                  Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                  Tyreke's got his problems, but he can't hold Lance's jock? Seriously. Let's see what we think Lance is worth once his jumper dies for 2 weeks again. So contracts be dammed, in a vacuum, you'd take Lance over Tyreke? Hey, welcome to Pacers Digest I guess.
                  I don't think you need to be a homer to prefer Lance over the seriously disappointing Tyreke. I mean, the dude's best year was his rookie season, and he's been downhill since.

                  Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                  Anyone that thinks Lance's people has a negotiating point at 10 mil, understand that that's more than Steph Curry. Lance's dad wouldn't take him over Curry. So all this "this single player makes a lot of money so Lance needs to make at least that," no, he doesn't. Yes, ankles and all. Let's not pretend Lance is 30 and far removed from having a ton of baggage.
                  And then Lance's agent will point out that DeRozan is making nearly $10m. As with all things, timing is everything. Curry signed his undermarket extension right after a season where he played in only 26 games. Lance OTOH is on the rise. You think he'd be interested in talking discounts?

                  Anyway, Lance will be on the open market. Whatever valuation we put on him, if there's another team that values him higher, well that's his market value.

                  Comment


                  • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                    Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
                    Just sign lance for around $8-$10 mil a year and offer Granger the MLE and worry about getting under the tax next year before the deadline...I am a huge George Hill fan but a lineup of Lance George Granger West Hibbert is pretty sexy but maybe Larry can talk Hill into being what he was doing in San Antonio and being the 6th man like he was born to do and it might be possible that Hill prefers that role to starting point. Just a thought...


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                    I just don't see why it would be necessary to make changes to a starting lineup that went to Game 7 of the ECF's last year and is 23-5 this year. Inserting George Hill into the starting lineup at the end of the 11-12 season made us a better team and he's been a big reason why we've been so successful since then. Sure he's had a few ugly games this year, but I have complete confidence that he will be completely reliable for us down the stretch this season. We didn't look so hot last year when he missed Game 5 against the Knicks.

                    The starting lineup should be set in stone the way it for the foreseeable future.

                    Comment


                    • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                      Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
                      First off I said I like George Hill... my preference would for him to stay the starter but what if he is more comfortable coming off the bench? And lance becomes the point guard we all know he can be? If we run an offense that we don't have a point guard then why does it matter if it's Lance and Paul or GHill and Lance? If it puts us in a better position to win and makes GHill more comfortable, why not?
                      Ignoring that the Pacers can't afford to pay Lance AND Granger at that combined price without going over the LT ( I think that Granger is gone after this season regardless hence this whole "make GH the 6th Man" discussion is "moot" ), I have seen no indications that GH would be more comfortable as the 6th Man role to the Starting role in the 1.5 seasons that he has been here. Maybe he does and just hasn't said anything....but I just haven't seen that coming from him....nor does it fit ( what I think ) his personality.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 12-24-2013, 02:03 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                        I don't think you need to be a homer to prefer Lance over the seriously disappointing Tyreke. I mean, the dude's best year was his rookie season, and he's been downhill since.



                        And then Lance's agent will point out that DeRozan is making nearly $10m. As with all things, timing is everything. Curry signed his undermarket extension right after a season where he played in only 26 games. Lance OTOH is on the rise. You think he'd be interested in talking discounts?

                        Anyway, Lance will be on the open market. Whatever valuation we put on him, if there's another team that values him higher, well that's his market value.
                        and if theres a team out there thats willing to overpay for Lance, then Lance will have a decision to make...somewhat similar to the choice Bosh, Wade and Lebron made and not unlike the choice David West just made...

                        I will tell you right now...Lance will be able to get more money elsewhere than he will with the Pacers...Now how much more will certainly play into the decision...Paul George has given the team a discount...David West gave the team a discount....and Lance will have to do the same to remain...the only real question at this point is how much that discount will have to be...
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment


                        • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          I just don't see why it would be necessary to make changes to a starting lineup that went to Game 7 of the ECF's last year and is 23-5 this year. Inserting George Hill into the starting lineup at the end of the 11-12 season made us a better team and he's been a big reason why we've been so successful since then. Sure he's had a few ugly games this year, but I have complete confidence that he will be completely reliable for us down the stretch this season. We didn't look so hot last year when he missed Game 5 against the Knicks.

                          The starting lineup should be set in stone the way it for the foreseeable future.
                          Sorry I started my post thinking we could trade GHill but as I got into my post I realized I didn't want him traded. LMAO but anyway that whole post was because I was talking about trading GHill and changed my mind halfway through!!! haha (but I got so far into it I didn't want to just erase it!!! So I put him on the bench as a 6th man...thought like a good idea at the time)


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                          • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                            Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                            Why is Kyrie better? I don't care about the premature Kyrie over-hyping by the media. On the contrary, Lance has been comically under hyped.
                            More clutch, I truly think better playmaking ability, very very good shooter, keeps a woefully mediocre team relevant shouldering much of the burden while being the primary target on opposing defenses...I think most if not all people would take Kyrie over Lance in their sleep
                            Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                            Comment


                            • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                              Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                              More clutch, I truly think better playmaking ability, very very good shooter, keeps a woefully mediocre team relevant shouldering much of the burden while being the primary target on opposing defenses...I think most if not all people would take Kyrie over Lance in their sleep
                              IDK and think the jury is out still given the stage of their careers. But honestly, I have not been impressed by Irving as compared to his reputation. He seems fairly easy to shut down...

                              Comment


                              • Re: How do we keep Lance?

                                Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                                Here are teams with salary cap space next year, from Hoopsworld:

                                Lakers: 25.8 million
                                Philadelphia: 20.2 to 32.7 million (depends on Evan Turner's and Lavoy Allen's QO)
                                Dallas: 31 million
                                Utah Jazz — $23-43 million (Gordon Hayward's QO and a bunch of not guaranteed contracts)
                                Phoenix Suns — $19.5 million
                                Charlotte Bobcats — $19 million
                                Orlando Magic — $19 million
                                Washington Wizards — $15 million
                                Atlanta Hawks — $12 million
                                Detroit Pistons — $12 million
                                Milwaukee Bucks — $12 million
                                Golden State Warriors — $10 million
                                Toronto Raptors — $3-23 million (Salmons, Amir Johnson, and Hansbrough are not guaranteed)
                                San Antonio Spurs — $7 million
                                Cleveland Cavaliers — 6.5-$24 million (Bynum, Clark, and Varejao are not guaranteed contracts)

                                The Grizzlies will have about $18m if Randolph opts out. The Bulls will have $12m if Boozer gets the amnesty.

                                http://www.hoopsworld.com/looking-to...14s-salary-cap
                                No offense but I think your list is a bit unrealistic. Sure they can get down to those numbers but a lot of teams would have to drop the option on some good players as well. Plus teams like the GSW don't have 10 mill in cap space. The Bucks also have Mayo and non of those teams listed above 8 mill are contenders.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X