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

Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

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

  • Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

    Yes, we've beat this into the ground, and I was just going to add it to my Kobe and the Logo thread, until I realized that's on PD3. Still, thought it was newsworthy for the front office sources line.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/...ame=stein_marc

    New Staples center for Kobe?


    by: Marc Stein
    posted: Monday, May 28, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry

    I've heard nothing in the last month to sway me from the belief that Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal is the most realistic trade target for L.A. -- much more realistic than Jason Kidd or Kevin Garnett -- no matter who in the Lakers' front office is doing the chasing.

    If O'Neal leaves Indy, everyone knows Kobe's Lakers and Isiah Thomas' Knicks are the teams he'd love to join.

    Kobe Bryant remains equally geeked about hooking up with a younger O'Neal, who has been his close friend since they were drafted into the league together in 1996.

    The Pacers, meanwhile, are increasingly open to moving O'Neal, according to NBA front-office sources.

    What kind of package can the Lakers assemble? Lamar Odom (shoulder) and Kwame Brown (ankle) might be coming off surgeries when next season begins, but the notion that neither would remain tradeable as a result is a bit flawed.

    Odom is still marketable because of his talent and versatility. As you'll recall, he also played pretty gamely through the shoulder problems late in the season and during the Phoenix series after putting off surgery to help his team. Barring unexpected problems in his recovery, why wouldn't he still be a valued commodity?

    As for Brown, since his expiring contract ($9.1 million next season) was the attraction to other teams all along, he could easily still be thrown into a deal. Other potential trade assets include young center Andrew Bynum -- who was deemed off-limits at midseason when the Lakers backed out of a potential Jason Kidd deal -- and L.A.'s decent first-round pick (No. 19) in the June draft.

    The Pacers, at present, have no first-round pick next month.
    IMO, the Lakers have to include Bynum. You can't tell me we couldn't get a better deal from NY if they don't.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  • #2
    Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

    The Lakers defiantly have to include Bynum.

    I think there a few ways they could get Jermaine on the Lakers.

    One is send Jermaine/Marquis/Jeff for Odom/Kwame/Bynum/Mo Evans.

    Another is Jermaine/Dunleavy/Jeff/filler(s) for Odom/Kwame/Bynum/Vladimir/Mo Evans.

    I'm sure we could work their draft pick (19th overall) or Sasha Vuijac in there somewhere.

    I think it would be a good start.

    I like Bynum, I think he will pan out alright.

    Odom is a good player, very versitile.

    Brown is expiring. That will only help our cap problems.

    If we get rid of Dunleavy that would be great because we have a problem of to many small forwards and not enough shooting guards.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

      Does anyone recall whether TPTB have issued a formal "JONeal hasn't asked to be traded, want to be traded or we want to keep JONeal" statement ( similiar to what the TWolves and Nets have said about their prospective Franchise/Top players that maybe leaving this offseason ) AFTER the firing of Carlisle?

      Such statements are usually intended as a "warning" to potential suitors that IF they want the services of that All-Star player that it will cost them a pretty penny.

      Although I know its implied that TPTB do not want to move JONeal......that's different then actually coming out and saying it to the Public....ESPECIALLY during the offseason.

      I maybe wrong...but I don't recall such a statement by TPTB. If that is the case....anyone find that odd?
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

        If a trade like this one really comes together, what would your lineup be?
        Would you start Diogu over Bynum?
        I'd really love a trade that gives us Bynum and the Lakers' Pick, he's such an amazing talent..

        Granger, Williams, Diogu, Bynum..that would be great..

        I'm confident the Lakers would pull the trigger on this one! It makes the Lakers a contender and Kobe satisfied!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

          OH MY . . .Atleas JO will be on one of my favorite teams. .but the West is already hard enough. . .You have 10 teams (if healthy) battling for the playoffs. . . but with KD and Oden being on the West too.. LOL, WOW, Jermaine might as well stay in Indy cause he wouldn't be winning anythng anytime soon
          R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

            They'd be better than they are right now, for sure!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

              Originally posted by Oneal07 View Post
              OH MY . . .Atleas JO will be on one of my favorite teams. .but the West is already hard enough. . .You have 10 teams (if healthy) battling for the playoffs. . . but with KD and Oden being on the West too.. LOL, WOW, Jermaine might as well stay in Indy cause he wouldn't be winning anythng anytime soon
              The Lakers made the playoffs without JO on their team, if he got on their team it would make them so much better. They would easily be a top 4 seed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                IMO, the Lakers have to include Bynum. You can't tell me we couldn't get a better deal from NY if they don't.
                how would we get a better deal from the knicks? i think the main competition for the lakers would be the celtics.
                This is the darkest timeline.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                  What does everyone see in Bynum that makes them so excited about him?

                  I've got to admit that I don't watch the Lakers, but didn't Bynum lose his starting spot to Brown, and don't most people kind of look down on Brown?

                  I'm not saying the guys got no talent, 'cause I've not watched him enough to form my own opinion. I'd just like to know what those who have seen him play (more than I have) like about him.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                    Yes, we've beat this into the ground, and I was just going to add it to my Kobe and the Logo thread, until I realized that's on PD3. Still, thought it was newsworthy for the front office sources line.

                    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/...ame=stein_marc



                    IMO, the Lakers have to include Bynum. You can't tell me we couldn't get a better deal from NY if they don't.
                    If we do trade JO to the Lakers, it better be at least Bynum and the #19 pick as well, and whatever else it takes to make it work numbers wise.

                    Can they Sign and trade Bynum out of his rookie contract to make the numbers closer?

                    Then if we could trade Tins and Murph to the nicks for Francis, we will be well on our way to rebuilding. Francis' only has 2 years left on his contract, whereas Tins and Murph have 4 years. I know, I know - im not a fan of Franchise, but he may be servicable for 2 years and we also get rid of 2 players we dont want for 1 player.

                    Starters:
                    Bynum
                    Ike
                    Danny
                    Quis
                    Franchise

                    Reserves:
                    Shawn
                    DunDun
                    McLeod
                    #19 draft pick - Crittendon?
                    Jeff
                    Maceo
                    Hulk?
                    Army?
                    x player from lakers - Brown?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                      Originally posted by BoomBaby33 View Post
                      If we do trade JO to the Lakers, it better be at least Bynum and the #19 pick as well, and whatever else it takes to make it work numbers wise.

                      Can they Sign and trade Bynum out of his rookie contract to make the numbers closer?

                      Then if we could trade Tins and Murph to the nicks for Francis, we will be well on our way to rebuilding. Francis' only has 2 years left on his contract, whereas Tins and Murph have 4 years. I know, I know - im not a fan of Franchise, but he may be servicable for 2 years and we also get rid of 2 players we dont want for 1 player.

                      Starters:
                      Bynum
                      Ike
                      Danny
                      Quis
                      Franchise

                      Reserves:
                      Shawn
                      DunDun
                      McLeod
                      #19 draft pick - Crittendon?
                      Jeff
                      Maceo
                      Hulk?
                      Army?
                      x player from lakers - Brown?
                      i wouldn't mind the NYK deal as long as a future (or maybe even this year's) pick was involved. but francis is a shell of the player who was offered that contract and the knicks would be getting two players they could get much more mileage out of. a pick would have to be involved IMO.
                      This is the darkest timeline.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                        Originally posted by 31andonly View Post
                        If a trade like this one really comes together, what would your lineup be?
                        Would you start Diogu over Bynum?
                        I'd really love a trade that gives us Bynum and the Lakers' Pick, he's such an amazing talent..

                        Granger, Williams, Diogu, Bynum..that would be great..

                        I'm confident the Lakers would pull the trigger on this one! It makes the Lakers a contender and Kobe satisfied!
                        << Server Admins - you can move this over to the trade forum if you think its more appropriate >>

                        From what I have gathered from the many posts about this topic in PD and RealGM ( yes, I know...a truly informed bunch of fans ), the most promising "trade proposals" come from the Lakers ( obviously ) and the Celtics.

                        With the Lakers, IMHO.....any ikely trade would start with:

                        Kwame+Bynum+19th Pick+MoEvans( some combination of Cook, Vujacic, Farmer and/or S&T of Parker ) for JONeal

                        At this point....it comes down to how much Kobe...I mean the Lakers....would want to give up in order to get JONeal. I really do not think that they will want to give up Odom. But of the 3 potential teams that the Lakers will likely deal with to get a Big Man Post player ( TWolves, Grizzlies or the Pacers ) for Kobe, thanks to some of Kobe's comments, I don't think that they will budge on wanting to get Odom in return. As to whether we should hold out for Odom or not....is matter of whether we really want Bynum or not and whether TPTB think that it is enough for JONeal.

                        With the Celtics, IMHO....any likely trade would start with:

                        Ratliff+Gerald Green+5th pick+( somc combination of players that make up about 2.66 mil in 2007-2008 contracts ) for JONeal

                        The obvious best fit for that 2.66 mil in contracts should start with Delonte West ( not because he's the "favorite" PG on the Celtics that many of us PD posters want....but because he's the best one that the Celtics could give up that we would want ). We clearly don't want Telfair, couldn't get Rondo and probably don't want Tony Allen since his recent injury...so West...by default...is the best choice IF TPTB really want a decent PG in return. Although many of us would love to get Al Jefferson, there is no way that they will trade him for JONeal.

                        If I am to look at either "trade proposals", if there were no other trade offers on the table AND TPTB really wanted to move JONeal to start the rebuilding process ( a really Big IF ), then the answer depends on what happens on the day of the Draft. Obviously, IF the Hawks are stupid enough to not draft Conley at the 3rd pick.....and he is available at the 5th pick....then the best deal would be the Celtics "trade proposal" to get a huge Expiring Contract ( Ratliff ), Green ( solid athletic SG prospect ), West ( assuming that Bird can get that out of Ainge as well ) and Conley ( our PG of the future ). Although Bynum would be a solid player to play next to Granger/Ike/Shawne....if we had to rebuild...I would much rather do it with what Boston could "potentially" offer.

                        NOTE - ALL of this is based on the assumption that TPTB would actually consider trading JONeal...which IMHO is based on what type of offers we get. If we are lowballed or offered huge contracts...then it JONeal ( obviously ) won't be moved. Also....I think that any trade of JONeal and the quality of the trade offers that we get for him is based off of whether we force teams to take on Tinsley or Murphy or not ( not Dunleavy....I really think that TPTB would prefer to keep him as opposed to other 2 ).
                        Last edited by CableKC; 05-29-2007, 09:22 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          Does anyone recall whether TPTB have issued a formal "JONeal hasn't asked to be traded, want to be traded or we want to keep JONeal" statement ( similiar to what the TWolves and Nets have said about their prospective Franchise/Top players that maybe leaving this offseason ) AFTER the firing of Carlisle?

                          Such statements are usually intended as a "warning" to potential suitors that IF they want the services of that All-Star player that it will cost them a pretty penny.

                          Although I know its implied that TPTB do not want to move JONeal......that's different then actually coming out and saying it to the Public....ESPECIALLY during the offseason.

                          I maybe wrong...but I don't recall such a statement by TPTB. If that is the case....anyone find that odd?
                          I've been talking about this very issue for days now. And yes, I find it very odd that Bird hasn't stood firm behind JO. I realize JO may be the team's #1 trade commodity, but you don't go into the off-season with this kind of a dark cloud looming overhead especially when your CEO has already stated publicly that they player in question hasn't asked to be traded.

                          Frankly, I don't see why all the question marks on JO's tenure anyway. Seems to me it's up to him whether or not to exercise the player option in his contract for the '07-08 season. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if he does exercise this option all it means is that he commits to play for the Pacers for the next 3 yrs and the only way he could be moved is via a sign-N-trade. But if he doesn't exercise this option he becomes a FA, correct? So, the choice really is up to him, right? The Pacers really can't touch him until he makes a move.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                            Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                            I've been talking about this very issue for days now. And yes, I find it very odd that Bird hasn't stood firm behind JO. I realize JO may be the team's #1 trade commodity, but you don't go into the off-season with this kind of a dark cloud looming overhead especially when your CEO has already stated publicly that they player in question hasn't asked to be traded.
                            Although its implied that TPTB doesn't want to move JONeal.....I don't feel that this is one of those cases where "no news is good news" when it comes to saying whether JONeal is staying or not. However, we do know that Walsh isn't the type that likes to do any type of negotiations in the public....so maybe nothing said is a good thing?

                            Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                            Frankly, I don't see why all the question marks on JO's tenure anyway. Seems to me it's up to him whether or not to exercise the player option in his contract for the '07-08 season. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if he does exercise this option all it means is that he commits to play for the Pacers for the next 3 yrs and the only way he could be moved is via a sign-N-trade. But if he doesn't exercise this option he becomes a FA, correct? So, the choice really is up to him, right? The Pacers really can't touch him until he makes a move.
                            Could someone clarify the situation on exactly when JONeal can execise his Player option?

                            Is it before the start of the 2007-2008 regular season ( as in sometime within the next 5 months )?

                            or

                            Is it after the end of the 2007-2008 season ( as in "no earlier" then 1 year from now )?

                            I am under the impression that it is AFTER ( and not before ) the 2007-2008 season.

                            If that is the case.....its going to be a gamble for TPTB. Right now....unless JONeal pulls a Iverson on us.....TPTB are in the Driver's seat with JONeal sitting in the passenger seat ( sort of ) giving directions. But by next season...if they wait...they will have less control of what to do with JONeal....IF ( for whatever reason ) he is not happy with the way things turned out and forces some type of Player option "S&T".

                            Although the amount of leverage that TPTB have over JONeal this season isn't great ( since JONeal will likely have some say in where he goes )....it will be better compared to next season IF JONeal does force something to happen.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Mark Stein: Pacers increasingly open to moving JO

                              Indy wants Odom more than they want Bynum.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X