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

We Need Chauncey Billups...

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

  • #16
    Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

    Let's just do this whole rebuilding thing the right way (the Jazz/Spurs/Cavs/Bulls way) and stop going for quick fixes. Besides, unless JO is involved (which would make bringing in Billups pointless) we dont have what it takes to get the job done.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

      Originally posted by Y2J View Post
      Let's just do this whole rebuilding thing the right way (the Jazz/Spurs/Cavs/Bulls way) and stop going for quick fixes. Besides, unless JO is involved (which would make bringing in Billups pointless) we dont have what it takes to get the job done.

      The Cavs and Spurs got lucky in the draft. The Cavs tanked for the best chance, the Spurs had a horrific injury season and leapfrogged several teams.

      The Jazz and Bulls watched a pair of Hall of Fame players retire and had 3-4 solid drafts coupled with a big free-agent signing.

      Which do you propose we follow?


      We could follow the Cavs and trade away JO for nothing so that we suck. We could hire the Mafia to injure our players to replicate the Spurs.

      We could also trade Murphy/Dunleavy/Tinsley for as many expiring contracts as possible, while letting JO walk. Suck for five years, make solid draft picks, and sign an All-Star in free agency like the Jazz/Bulls.

      I don't know if I would quite recommend any of these, but I'm just laying it out there.
      Last edited by FlavaDave; 06-01-2007, 03:50 PM.
      The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
      http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
      RSS Feed
      Subscribe via iTunes

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

        What are we going to sign him with? Hopes and dreams?

        And there is no way in hell you could be 26 years old. 14 years old max. Dude posts like he just left The Carter and got a whole bunch of base.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

          Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
          The Cavs and Spurs got lucky in the draft. The Cavs tanked for the best chance, the Spurs had a horrific injury season and leapfrogged several teams.

          The Jazz and Bulls watched a pair of Hall of Fame players retire and had 3-4 solid drafts coupled with a big free-agent signing.

          Which do you propose we follow?


          We could follow the Cavs and trade away JO for nothing so that we suck. We could hire the Mafia to injure our players to replicate the Spurs.

          We could also trade Murphy/Dunleavy/Tinsley for as many expiring contracts as possible, while letting JO walk. Suck for five years, make solid draft picks, and sign an All-Star in free agency like the Jazz/Bulls.

          I don't know if I would quite recommend any of these, but I'm just laying it out there.
          All teams rebuilt via the draft, and a lesser extent, free agency. That's what I suggest the Pacers do.

          Spurs (Duncan, Parker, Manu - DRAFTED)
          Jazz (Williams, AK-47 - DRAFTED Boozer, Okur - SIGNED)
          Cavs (LeBron, Varejao - DRAFTED Hughes - SIGNED)
          Bulls (Deng, Gordon, Thomas - DRAFTED Wallace, Noccioni - SIGNED)

          These teams all went young and rebuilt via the draft and free agency. They didn't trade for 32 year olds about to be signed to long term $50M+ contracts in order to temporarily improve the team, yet further kill it in the long run.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

            Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
            Then trade Quis, Baston, Williams, and a future lottery-protected first to Portland for Aldridge and the #1 pick.

            And then trade the city of Indianapolis for Manhattan and Brooklyn.

            And then pick up the dancing banana smiley off waivers to backup the PG position.

            And hire Thunderbird14whatever as assistant (to the) head coach.
            You make some good points here.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

              Originally posted by Y2J View Post
              All teams rebuilt via the draft, and a lesser extent, free agency. That's what I suggest the Pacers do.

              Spurs (Duncan, Parker, Manu - DRAFTED)
              Jazz (Williams, AK-47 - DRAFTED Boozer, Okur - SIGNED)
              Cavs (LeBron, Varejao - DRAFTED Hughes - SIGNED)
              Bulls (Deng, Gordon, Thomas - DRAFTED Wallace, Noccioni - SIGNED)

              These teams all went young and rebuilt via the draft and free agency. They didn't trade for 32 year olds about to be signed to long term $50M+ contracts in order to temporarily improve the team, yet further kill it in the long run.
              With the exception of the Spurs, all of those teams were terrible for years. YEARS. Is that also what you're suggesting the Pacers do?
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                Originally posted by Y2J View Post
                All teams rebuilt via the draft, and a lesser extent, free agency. That's what I suggest the Pacers do.

                Spurs (Duncan, Parker, Manu - DRAFTED)
                Jazz (Williams, AK-47 - DRAFTED Boozer, Okur - SIGNED)
                Cavs (LeBron, Varejao - DRAFTED Hughes - SIGNED)
                Bulls (Deng, Gordon, Thomas - DRAFTED Wallace, Noccioni - SIGNED)

                These teams all went young and rebuilt via the draft and free agency. They didn't trade for 32 year olds about to be signed to long term $50M+ contracts in order to temporarily improve the team, yet further kill it in the long run.

                The Spurs and Cavs will meet in the finals in large part because they got lucky. Both got #1 picks in a year with a surefire franchise player.

                My point is that the only definite plan we can make is to follow the blueprint of the Bulls and the Jazz (suck for a few years, hit on all your lottery picks, clear cap room, sign a big free agent or two). If we get lucky in the process, great.

                But you can't plan on being the next Spurs or Cavs. Ask Boston and Memphis about that.

                So we can't intentionally follow San Antonio or Cleveland.

                The part where we are kind of screwed is that we can't follow the model of Chicago or Utah just yet. JO, Murphy, Dunleavy, Daniels, and Tinsley have made it so that we can't clear cap room for 3 years.

                That's why I would trade JO and Murphy for Bynum, Brown, Odom and #19. Assuming we can spin Odom and #19 into a top ten pick and an expiring, we can cut $10-20 million off of the cap while aquiring two draft picks (counting Bynum as a pick). That's a head start. Then will will have two more lottery picks to add to Granger/Ike/Williams/Bynum when Tinsley and the rest go off the books. That summer, we would have another pick (possibly not a lottery pick since the team has had time to grow) with cap room as well.
                The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                RSS Feed
                Subscribe via iTunes

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  With the exception of the Spurs, all of those teams were terrible for years. YEARS. Is that also what you're suggesting the Pacers do?
                  Those teams were terrible for years and years because they botched the rebuilding process with horrible, horrible drafting. If you draft right, the rebuilding process takes only a few years.

                  Let's use the Bulls as an example. They had basically had 2 rebuilding processes, one under Jerry Krause, which started out with some good moves all of which he botched badly, and the present one started by John Paxson.

                  Jerry Krause (1998-2003)
                  1999 - Draft Elton Brand - Good
                  1999 - Draft Pre-Completely Insane Ron Artest - Good
                  2000 - Sign Brad Miller - Good
                  2000 - Draft Marcus Fizer - Horrible
                  2000 - Draft Jamal Crawford (via draft night swap with Cavs for Chris Mihm) - Bad
                  2001 - Trade Elton Brand for Tyson Chandler - Horrible
                  2001 - Draft Eddy Curry - So-So
                  2002 - Trade Artest and Miller for Jalen Rose and his enormous contract - Horrible
                  2002 - Draft Jay Williams - Horrible
                  2003 - Resign amidst the team being as bad now as when you started the rebuilding process 5 years ago.

                  Basically 5 years wasted due to an incompetent GM. I will give Jerry Krause a bit of a break, the 2000 draft was horrible and no one knew Jay Williams was an idiot at the time.

                  John Paxson (2003-)
                  2003 - Fire Bill Cartwright, hire Scott Skiles - Good
                  2003 - Draft Kirk Hinrich - Good
                  2004 - Draft Ben Gordon - Good
                  2005 - Draft Luol Deng (via trade with Phoenix) - Good
                  2005 - Sign Andres Noccioni - Good
                  2006 - Trade Eddy Curry to the Knicks for their 2006 1st (ended up being #4) and the rights to swap picks in 2007 (ended up being #23 for #9) - Good
                  2006 - Sign Ben Wallace - Good

                  So once the Bulls 2nd rebuilding process began in 2003, it was filled with excellent moves, and as a result, it only took 2 seasons to return to the playoffs. And as they stand now, they probably have the brightest future in the East. Not too shabby.

                  As for the Jazz, they missed the playoffs a whopping 3 years before heading right back to the Western Conference Finals with a team thats not even close to peaked. I'd gladly take that.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                    i think people who are for completely rebuilding need to be very, very careful. the pacers have not done that well in the draft in recent years. yes, we got granger two years ago, but NO ONE thought he would slide that far down, and honestly, im shocked larry had the sense to pick him.

                    im not sure its fair to give a full assessment on harrison, granger, or shawne williams yet, but i also dont think any of them, including granger, are close to being the savior that we need them to be.

                    i understand fans who don't want to be in the middle every year, and im right there with you. but lottery draft picks do not ensure success. they dont even come close, especially with the likes of a talent evaluator in bird, who traded this year's second rounder to get james white before they cut him.

                    until we get a front office that can get players like ginobli, parker, nowitzki, barbosa, bell, diaw, etc. instead of sarunas jasi-cant-play-any-d-vic, primoz brezec, erazem lorbek, and all the other foreign players that you still refer to using two names, then i dont see us making many great decisions in the draft where luck isnt involved (granger).
                    This is only my opinion. Please hold it against me.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                      Originally posted by clemdogg View Post
                      primoz brezec
                      Hey man, don't be dissing Peanut Butter.
                      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                        From Bill Simmons of ESPN Page 2

                        Mr. Big Shot No More?

                        Announcers and studio guys steadfastly continuing to call Chauncey Billups "Mr. Big Shot," quite possibly the most undeserved sports nickname of this century. Here's a quick recap of Chauncey's career:


                        1997-2001: Bounces around from Boston to Toronto to Denver to Orlando to Minnesota.


                        2002: Plays well enough for the T-Wolves (0-3 in the '02 playoffs) that Detroit gives him a $30 million contract.


                        2003: Leads a Pistons team that eventually gets swept in the 2003 Eastern finals by New Jersey … and gets destroyed by Jason Kidd in the process. Billups shot 11 for 40 in the series; Kidd averaged 23.5 points, 7.5 assists and 10 rebounds per game. To be fair, Billups was playing with a sprained ankle. Just pointing out that the "Mr. Big Shot" nickname hadn't kicked in yet.


                        2004: Shoots 39 percent in the regular season, gets hot in the playoffs, leads the Pistons to the title, makes some big shots along the way, and somehow picks up the name "Mr. Big Shot."


                        2005: Leads the Pistons to the Finals, makes some big shots along the way, then pulls a relative no-show in Game 7 (13 points, 3 for 8 from the field, no big shots).


                        2006: Heading into the playoffs, with the Pistons peaking as a 64-win team, I wrote that Billups was "one more killer spring away from moving into the pantheon of Big Game Guards, along with Sam Jones, Jerry West, Dennis Johnson and Walt Frazier. Out of anyone in the playoffs other than Kobe, he's the one who can make the biggest leap historically. Well, unless Artest charges into the stands again."


                        Didn't happen. During the last three games of the Eastern semis against Cleveland -- which the Pistons nearly blew -- Billups shot 13 for 34. In the six-game loss to Miami in the Eastern finals, he shot 39 percent and 3 for 14 in the deciding game. So much for the pantheon of Big Game Guards.


                        2007: Struggled in the Chicago series (39 percent shooting), then completely flopped in the first four games of the Cavs series (22-for-57 shooting, 32 turnovers, some killer mistakes at the end of Games 3 and 4), to the point that people are now openly wondering how much money he's costing himself this summer.


                        So here's my question: With all due respect to Billups -- who's been a valuable player, a gamer and a winner over the past few years -- can we really keep calling a 41 percent career shooter who slapped together one great playoffs and nine-tenths of another great playoffs "Mr. Big Shot"? Isn't that a little insulting to Robert Horry? I vote that we call him "Chauncey" or "Billups" unless he completely redeems himself over these next few weeks. This meeting is adjourned.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                          uhhhhhh no...he hit that shot last night vs the cavs that i thought had them done. But lebron just made a big play
                          "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                            Originally posted by Y2J View Post
                            So once the Bulls 2nd rebuilding process began in 2003, it was filled with excellent moves, and as a result, it only took 2 seasons to return to the playoffs. And as they stand now, they probably have the brightest future in the East. Not too shabby.
                            They had a lot of chips to work with... a ton of young talent, and no bad salaries.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              They had a lot of chips to work with... a ton of young talent, and no bad salaries.
                              What young talent? And they had Jalen Rose's massive contract.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: We Need Chauncey Billups...

                                Originally posted by Y2J View Post
                                What young talent? And they had Jalen Rose's massive contract.
                                Well, the Baby Bulls (off the top of my head). I'll have to go back and see their rosters.

                                Long and short - they were a lottery team for half a decade before Pax got there. That's not a foundation I'd be interested in.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X