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

Andrew Bynum 13-14 General Discussion

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

  • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

    Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
    And if not, I think we need to start playing Orlando Johnson and Soloman Hill from time to time to rest PG a bit more, maybe
    The thing is, even though Danny's playing poorly he's still a better option than OJ or Solo.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      The thing is, even though Danny's playing poorly he's still a better option than OJ or Solo.
      Danny has struggled with his shot for the past few games but he isn't far removed for 7 straight double figure games and even when his shot isn't falling he's still been good at driving with the ball and hits his foul shots. Danny needs to know he has consistant minutes and Vogel is over playing Paul and Lance. I'd still like to see Vogel make Danny the primary focus of the offense in the second unit which has never happened. Run Danny with GH at the 2 and Watson at the point for 10 minutes, then bring in Paul for GH. I'd like to see Danny get at least 25 minutes per game going forward.
      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

      Comment


      • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

        So will Bynum be on the bench tomorrow vs Orlando?

        Comment


        • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

          three reasons pacers signed Bynum article from cbs

          http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-...f-andrew-bynum
          More NBA: Pacers sign Bynum | Latest news, notes

          With the Pacers making it official Saturday morning, we can turn now to the impact, of Indiana signing center Andrew Bynum to a one-year, $1 million contract (per Ken Berger of CBSSports.com).

          Here are three lines of thoughts for why this deal makes sense for Indiana:

          1. The 'Lotto Ticket' concept: The Cavalierssunk six times the money into Bynum without knowing if he'd ever play again. His experience in Cleveland provides both the confidence to sign him to this deal and a cautionary tale of Bynum. He was limited in the amount of minutes he could play, and when he was bad, he was awful. But when he was good, he was still way too big for any team to handle.

          But he still burned his bridges there. He was such a problem that they chose to eat the salary rather than keep him and pay him the full $12 million. So the odds of this working out are not good. He has poor work ethic, a poor attitude, doesn't get along with people, and can't play extended minutes. He admitted to significant pain whenever he played.

          This is not unlike playing the lottery once. In this analogy, the Pacers have managed their money well, they don't spend much in the way of extravagances. So their spending $5 dollars on a lottery ticket isn't going to hurt them. It's not a wise investment over time; basic math will tell you that. But it's also not going to hurt anything.

          The idea with the Cavaliers was that they had the cap space so it didn't matter what they paid him. I disagreed on that front (though overall I supported the move). I'm always of the mind that even beyond cap indications, you need to get return on investment. Smart teams make the most of the money they spend. A $6 million dollar lottery ticket has the same odds as a $1 million lottery ticket, which is to say, not good. But the hit for Indiana is considerably less.

          If they hit, it's a jackpot. If not, it's disappointment, but they have a lot less riding on it than Cleveland.

          2. Indestructible locker room: So the big problem with Bynum is that he's a mess in the locker room. He disrespected Mike Brown in LA. He pretty much screwed over the Sixers by getting hurt bowling,for crying out loud. And whatever happened in Cleveland, it was enough for them to suspend and then dump him.

          So if you're going to invite that kind of trouble in, why would you feel OK about it?

          Because unlike a lot of organizations, the Pacers have a strong enough foundation to withstand any problems he may present. When Larry Legend looks you in the eye and says he's not going to put up with anything, you know it's true. That probably won't set Bynum straight, the guy has a history of just flat-out not caring. It's not as if his time with Kobe Bryant set him on a straight and narrow path. But it does reinforce to others on the roster that they don't have to be bothered by Bynum. They can ignore whatever distraction he may create because of their bond with each other.

          That's part of what makes Indiana so good. Not only have they developed great in-house talent (Paul George, Roy Hibbert) but they've built it on character guys. Lance Stephenson is the only player with a significant history of issues off-court, and it's been dead silent on that front with him for two years. You don't have to be a "good guy" to make it in Indiana, you just have to do your job. And with consummate pro David West there, you're not going to have much choice.

          They have the components to deal with any Bynum issues. And if he buys in, it's another win for an organization with a lot of them.

          3. The Heat Postulate: So did Indiana sign him so that the Miami Heatwouldn't? Was that the plan, to keep a dangerous big man away from Miami to maintain their advantage down low?

          Not likely. Miami probably could have found a way to trade for him or made a more compelling pitch if they wanted. And Indiana knows its primary target to counter is Miami, but they're also not going to compromise their own roster just to prevent a guy from signing with the Heat. Plus, Miami already has Greg Oden.

          But there are factors to signing Bynum that have to do with the Heat. For starters, there's this: It's six more fouls. The Pacers know they have to foul LeBron James in the playoffs. They know they have to force Miami to the line and discourage the Heat from getting to the rim. Even if Bynum can't make the stellar rotation or block, he can give a hard foul (often too hard). And one of their problems has been foul trouble for Hibbert. With Bynum, they have 18 fouls to give the Heat inside with Hibbert and backup Ian Mahinmi.

          Whether Bynum is a legitimate upgrade over Mahinmi is a serious question of debate. But if Mahinmi gives them 10 good minutes instead of 10 good minutes and 5 bad, and Bynum gives them five good minutes, that's still a bonus overall.

          Then there are lineup shifts. If Mahinmi is struggling and they don't have Bynum, the Pacers might have to go with a smaller lineup vs. Miami if Hibbert's in foul trouble. But with Bynum, they can maintain their sizeable authority.

          Finally, there are the trade implications. If Bynum can play, is not a problem and stays healthy (three big ifs), then the Pacers can look to move Mahinmi at the deadline. They've got the best team in the league, why would they do that? Because this organization remains focused on pursuing whatever it must to topple Miami. If adding another shooter helps them more than having both Bynum and Mahinmi, they'll look at it. Oh, and Mahinmi has two more seasons at a combined $8 million. That's money that can be spent on re-signing Stephenson.

          Overall, the move has a lot of positive turns to it. Bynum could be a disaster, as he has been for the last two teams who have paid him. But Indiana can withstand it. If you're gunning for a title, you're going to have to take some chances. Signing Andrew Bynum is just another sign of how serious Indiana is at making a title run this season.
          Last edited by PacersPride; 02-02-2014, 11:37 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

            Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
            So will Bynum be on the bench tomorrow vs Orlando?
            Probably not. I think I've read a couple places that he won't join the team until later in the week.

            Comment


            • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              Sollozo, it's certainly normally possible that the team faced a couple of tough teams and that sent them into a spiral. But the problem here is we know 100% that Lance got into a lockerroom fight with vet players in the middle of this run and that outside of that run the team played a much higher brand of ball.

              They faced other blowouts but then also won the night before or after.

              I wasn't trying to downplay the quality of DAL or OKC but I admit it sounds like that. The issue was the quality of their own competition. They could have lost by more to OKC and DAL if either of those teams wanted to throttle them and were absolutely non-competitive in Houston. Foster expressed his frustration directly to Gnome and I, that's not 2nd hand info.

              That stretch was not just "playing some bad ball" right now, there was a chemistry issue that wrecked the output on the floor. Insiders don't even try to deny it when I bring it up...casually and more in reference to how far things have come, etc.


              Also this isn't a Lance-bash. He was young and part of the problem but most have at least indirectly acknowledged that other problem players were moved which really helped chemistry. Lance had to mature and has done a pretty good job of that so far.
              I know that what you're saying about the locker room incident is true. But my point is simply that the 2011 team was still pretty immature. They had never even made the playoffs and were still a very young and inexperienced team. A locker room incident for a team like that is pretty common and I'm sure that stuff like that happens far more often than is reported. This was a team that was transitioning from a coach they despised in O'Brien to a young guy in Vogel who they didn't quite fully know yet. Plus a guy like PG was a rookie who virtually had no clout in the locker room by then. This was an 8 seeded team who was only able to win one playoff game. They weren't yet good enough on the basketball court, nor did they have the necessary mental toughness to succeed at a high level. This is why Bird added Hill and West in the 2011 off-season.

              As far as this team is concerned, that locker room incident is about as ancient as the Magna Carta. So much has happened since then. We added West and Hill, won multiple playoff series, were a game away from the 2013 Finals, and have won an obscene amount of games. This team is about a billion times more mature than that 2011 team and it's honestly an apples to oranges comparison at this point. I think it would be virtually impossible for Bynum to cause any sort of locker room divide that caused a noticeable problem which hurt us on the basketball court. The only thing that he can screw up is the opportunity to resurrect his career and help us out. He can't do anything more than that, IMHO. If he causes a substantial problem then I will be the first to say that I was wrong big time.

              Comment


              • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                Danny has struggled with his shot for the past few games but he isn't far removed for 7 straight double figure games and even when his shot isn't falling he's still been good at driving with the ball and hits his foul shots.
                Agreed. He's doing a good job of creating for the guys, and it doesn't bother me that he's not hitting shots in traffic. If he could just nail his threes at a good clip I'd feel fine about him.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                  Sorry I've been busy, but any news on when he'll suit up?

                  Comment


                  • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Sorry I've been busy, but any news on when he'll suit up?
                    Pacers coach Frank Vogel told reporters in Indianapolis that Bynum will join the team next week, but isn't expected to be available for duty for several weeks after that.

                    http://msn.foxsports.com/ohio/story/...-pacers-020114

                    They are going to bring him along very slowly. He hasn't played in over a month now, so they're going to want to make sure that they don't rush him physically. Plus they want to give him plenty of time to learn the system and what is expected of him. This move was made with the playoffs in mid.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                      Wait if he was trying to sign with a team why would he be out of shape? He should be staying in game shape. Reduces what little hope i had that hes serious about this.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                        Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                        Wait if he was trying to sign with a team why would he be out of shape? He should be staying in game shape. Reduces what little hope i had that hes serious about this.
                        I don't think anyone is saying that he's out of shape. But he did miss all of last season because of knee issues. He came back and played 24 games this year with the Cavs, but it's been over a month since he last played. I just don't think that the Pacers want to rush someone in who has had such recent delicate health issues. They need to be as cautious as possible since the main reason we signed him is playoff production.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Bynum is less risk and has more upside now because he signed with the Pacers? I like optimism but not too much I suppose.
                          This is the biggest problem I have with the mentality. But....This is Bynum backing up Roy going against Heats frontcourt. Not Bynum going against Roy and getting under Roy's skin.

                          I really want to see these two go at each other in practice.

                          I feel Seth is overreacting. But I feel like it is coming from too many are dismissing that this could be bad. The risk is not worth it. This isn't a Chris Anderson pickup. Bynum comes with more baggage with teams.

                          There are two sides to this coin. If he can help...then there is a likliehood that it might not. I think that West and the experience together is worth more than what Seth is dismissing. I mean come on: If tanking out to get a 13 pick is so much worse than getting the 8th seed because of the experience young players get....then maybe two hard fought series with the Heat means something when a risk is thrown their way.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                            These are my first comments on this move. This doesn't excite me nor does it make me angry. I don't think this will make any real difference in whether we win a championship or not. Way too many ifs with Bynum. Sure the risk is minimal, but I see the reward as marginal at best.

                            Bynum has not been in basketball shape for two seasons now, I doubt he is going to get into shape over the next few weeks.

                            At best he is a better backup than Ian and can provide some low post scoring off the bench playing 10-15 minutes per game. And sure there is some value in that, I don't see this as a game changer.

                            At worst he never gets into the regular rotation (for any number of reasons) and we are what we have been for for the first 46 games of the season.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                              Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                              Danny has struggled with his shot for the past few games but he isn't far removed for 7 straight double figure games and even when his shot isn't falling he's still been good at driving with the ball and hits his foul shots. Danny needs to know he has consistant minutes and Vogel is over playing Paul and Lance. I'd still like to see Vogel make Danny the primary focus of the offense in the second unit which has never happened. Run Danny with GH at the 2 and Watson at the point for 10 minutes, then bring in Paul for GH. I'd like to see Danny get at least 25 minutes per game going forward.
                              Danny should definitely be getting 25 minutes every game, while either Lance of Paul playing over 36 minutes should be more of an exception than a common occurrence.

                              I'm not sure I am ready to make Danny the main focus of the bench offense. They force fed him some against the Nets, and it didn't working out very well. I do think his role does need to increase though.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                These are my first comments on this move. This doesn't excite me nor does it make me angry. I don't think this will make any real difference in whether we win a championship or not. Way too many ifs with Bynum. Sure the risk is minimal, but I see the reward as marginal at best.

                                Bynum has not been in basketball shape for two seasons now, I doubt he is going to get into shape over the next few weeks.

                                At best he is a better backup than Ian and can provide some low post scoring off the bench playing 10-15 minutes per game. And sure there is some value in that, I don't see this as a game changer.

                                At worst he never gets into the regular rotation (for any number of reasons) and we are what we have been for for the first 46 games of the season.
                                If he makes it into the rotation I am thinking it will be more, give up a little defense for some better offense. He isn't as nimble as Mahinmi, and certainly won't be in the best shape of his life. You also have to wonder how well he will do at verticality. So I doubt he will be as effective as Mahinmi in our defensive system, but he is more of an offensive threat simply because he probably has better hands.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X