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

The trade almost one year later

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

  • #16
    Re: The trade almost one year later

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    As far as attendance, the actual players were half of the problem. Winning was the rest.
    Nah, I'm still going to say that winning is the whole problem and the players were the excuse to stay away.

    Hell, when the Jail Blazers were within' mins of going to the NBA Finals....I didn't see the Rose Garden any less empty then what it was when they sold out for years and years. Seemed like the Blazers became a local embarrasment when the wins were replaced with losses.
    ...Still "flying casual"
    @roaminggnome74

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The trade almost one year later

      Another reason I want to see a lot more Ike is that he can really get to the foul line. With our defense fouling as often as it does we need a guy like Ike that can help balance it out.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The trade almost one year later

        Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
        Nah, I'm still going to say that winning is the whole problem and the players were the excuse to stay away.

        Hell, when the Jail Blazers were within' mins of going to the NBA Finals....I didn't see the Rose Garden any less empty then what it was when they sold out for years and years. Seemed like the Blazers became a local embarrasment when the wins were replaced with losses.
        QFT.


        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The trade almost one year later

          to quote Steve Smith from the Atlanta game while he was broadcasting

          "I give Ike A for effort but C's and D's for production"

          lol
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The trade almost one year later

            The salary cap problems it has presented us with aside, I'm much, much happier with the trade now than I was 9 months ago or so. I was in the "Larry's an idiot camp" back then. I still don't think he's savvy enough to handle the business aspects as well as Donnie, but there's no questioning his talent evaluations (other than that European guy).

            Jax's perimeter defense is what I miss the most though. By far. I understand after what happened the team had to be gutted. Doesn't change the fact that as a player I love Jackson though. Sure his shot selection was questionable, but whose isn't in today's basketball?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The trade almost one year later

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Call me when a player that we got in the trade gets into trouble, then you may have a point.
              No, I have a point right now.

              You make the trade to solve those problems. That trade didn't solve those problems. Therefore it failed.

              I have a flat front tire. I buy a new tire and put it on the back. This new tire is not flat, and in fact it's perfectly good. Did this process fix my problem? Has it been mostly successful? Not at all, I still have the flat front tire problem. Replacing the rear tire was at best a waste of time. Had it caused new problems it would have been a monster failure, both failing to fix the original problem and creating new problems too.

              The trade did not end or even slow down the bad press, and in fact it appears to have accelerated the attendance issues thanks to the fold-up job to end last season.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The trade almost one year later

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                No, I have a point right now.

                You make the trade to solve those problems. That trade didn't solve those problems. Therefore it failed.

                I have a flat front tire. I buy a new tire and put it on the back. This new tire is not flat, and in fact it's perfectly good. Did this process fix my problem? Has it been mostly successful? Not at all, I still have the flat front tire problem. Replacing the rear tire was at best a waste of time. Had it caused new problems it would have been a monster failure, both failing to fix the original problem and creating new problems too.

                The trade did not end or even slow down the bad press, and in fact it appears to have accelerated the attendance issues thanks to the fold-up job to end last season.

                Yes, your analogy works but so does this.

                I go to a car accident. I have a victim who is having arterial bleeding from an open laceration to the left forarm. However this same victim also has a tension pneumothorax of his left lung (look it up) and has massive internal bleeding from a ruptured spleen.

                Now let's say I stop the bleeding from the laceration with direct pressure and an ice pack and I even go so far as to decompress his pneumothorax with a 14 g angio.

                Have I saved this victims life if I stop there?

                Obviously the answer is no, he is still bleeding from the spleen and will die without surgical intervention.

                However by prioritizing his injurys and my treatments thereof have I effectively given him a better chance to live? Absolutely.

                The flaw with using your tire analogy is the fact that you assume that the front tire being flat was the only problem. However upon further inspection you have found that your entire drive shaft is broken and oh yea your brakes are down to the metal.

                Now changing your front tire may seem like the thing to do and in fact you do have to do that, however there are several other things that have to occur as well.

                What I am trying to say and have been trying to tell you for a long while now is that you keep having this misguided notion that the fans were only upset with Steven Jackson and wanted him gone.

                Yes, no doubt they wanted him gone, however just because he was gone does not mean they were going to just flock back to the field house.

                Management spent about 3 years of complete and total idiocy in the P.R. with that team and it will take at least that long to clean it up.

                Many of the fairweather fans (yes we can call them that because we here on the digest are hardcore) won't return until the Pacers make a deep playoff run.

                Does that mean that the Pacers still didn't have to move some of the players? No.

                The biggest problem that this team had locally was the fact that it had more than one knucklehead at a time.

                Any team and town can survive one knucklehead. A team with a very very very strong management and player leadership might be able to handle two.

                However in our case we had one certifiable loon in Artest, a hot head in Jackson, a moper in Jamaal, a coach who didn't seem to have any control and worst of all a management that seemed to be an enabler.

                I don't know many city's that are going to stand up and cheer for that unless they are perinial title winners.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The trade almost one year later

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  I don't know many city's that are going to stand up and cheer for that unless they are perinial title winners.
                  How about the Knicks ?

                  I would rather be the hammer than the nail

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The trade almost one year later

                    Originally posted by Phildog View Post
                    If Dun Dun were more aggressive, I have to think he'd be close to an All-Star.
                    And if a cat was a dog it would bark.

                    Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                    I disagree with this. I think this trade was based around the Pacers calling the Warriors to gauge their interest in Al, since they had been the other team in the running before he came here. I think it started with Al for Ike and both players had contracts/personalities that needed to go and those got swapped as well.

                    Obviously all speculation, but I think Larry and Donnie decided Al needed to go which just happened to open the door for Jack to be moved.
                    Disagree with this. I still believe it started with us looking for a taker for Jack.

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    "Did we say we'd watch if you got rid of Jackson? No, we didn't mean that, we meant that if you got Garnett and Reggie came out of retirement and the team went 17-3 to start the year that THEN we'd show up.
                    Why do you keep insisting this? Nobody ever said that. No one ever promised to show up if Stephen Jackson was traded. Sure they didn't like him, but it wasn't anywhere close to the ultimatum situation you continually bring up when you complain about attendance. A better generalization of fan sentiment would be something like "I hate these players. And they suck. Fix it." Well, the team still isn't markedly better enough for casual teams to notice and instead of disliking all the players (now it's only some), they just simply don't know who these players are. So instead of the old situation, we're now at a point with fans where it's something similar to: "Who are these guys. They sorta suck. Fix it."

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth
                    Clearly by now it should be obvious that I'm extremely bitter about local fan support for any of the sports teams.
                    Clearly. And we're starting to add extremely irrational.

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Yes, your analogy works but so does this.

                    I go to a car accident. I have a victim who is having arterial bleeding from an open laceration to the left forarm. However this same victim also has a tension pneumothorax of his left lung (look it up) and has massive internal bleeding from a ruptured spleen.

                    Now let's say I stop the bleeding from the laceration with direct pressure and an ice pack and I even go so far as to decompress his pneumothorax with a 14 g angio.

                    Have I saved this victims life if I stop there?

                    Obviously the answer is no, he is still bleeding from the spleen and will die without surgical intervention.

                    However by prioritizing his injurys and my treatments thereof have I effectively given him a better chance to live? Absolutely.

                    The flaw with using your tire analogy is the fact that you assume that the front tire being flat was the only problem. However upon further inspection you have found that your entire drive shaft is broken and oh yea your brakes are down to the metal.

                    Now changing your front tire may seem like the thing to do and in fact you do have to do that, however there are several other things that have to occur as well.

                    What I am trying to say and have been trying to tell you for a long while now is that you keep having this misguided notion that the fans were only upset with Steven Jackson and wanted him gone.

                    Yes, no doubt they wanted him gone, however just because he was gone does not mean they were going to just flock back to the field house.

                    Management spent about 3 years of complete and total idiocy in the P.R. with that team and it will take at least that long to clean it up.

                    Many of the fairweather fans (yes we can call them that because we here on the digest are hardcore) won't return until the Pacers make a deep playoff run.

                    Does that mean that the Pacers still didn't have to move some of the players? No.

                    The biggest problem that this team had locally was the fact that it had more than one knucklehead at a time.

                    Any team and town can survive one knucklehead. A team with a very very very strong management and player leadership might be able to handle two.

                    However in our case we had one certifiable loon in Artest, a hot head in Jackson, a moper in Jamaal, a coach who didn't seem to have any control and worst of all a management that seemed to be an enabler.

                    I don't know many city's that are going to stand up and cheer for that unless they are perinial title winners.
                    But since Peck put my argument much better than I ever could, I'll only add this: Winner, winner...Chicken dinner.
                    Last edited by JayRedd; 12-29-2007, 02:28 PM.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The trade almost one year later

                      Originally posted by Isaac View Post
                      I disagree with this. I think this trade was based around the Pacers calling the Warriors to gauge their interest in Al, since they had been the other team in the running before he came here. I think it started with Al for Ike and both players had contracts/personalities that needed to go and those got swapped as well.

                      Obviously all speculation, but I think Larry and Donnie decided Al needed to go which just happened to open the door for Jack to be moved.
                      So your telling me that you think the Pacers were ready to give up on Al 30 games into the season after forfeiting a #1 pick to get him back. No way. If they were convinced he wouldn't work in RC's offense with Jack and JO, then RC's head would have rolled first.

                      Jack was the main reason the trade went down, and it worked with the Warriors because they still wanted Al after losing out on him in the off season, and that was reason the trade worked with GS. Al and Ike were afterthoughts for Jack for DunDun.
                      Last edited by BoomBaby33; 12-29-2007, 07:29 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The trade almost one year later

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                        2) Al was a soft defender/rebounder that shot the 3. Troy is too. But at this point I have to still give Al the advantage. Whatever Al does poorly, he still does it better than Troy as far as I can tell.
                        I still think Troy is a better rebounder, but athleticism goes to Al.


                        3) Contracts - still a hard loss for Indy
                        Ain't it the truth.


                        4) Ike - was the wild card then, still is the wild card now. The results with him on the court haven't been all that impressive. He still has size issues, passing issues, and mistake issues. He still gets great post position and has a real knack for scoring the ball.
                        You know, it may not be fair to Ike, but I get the feeling that he is going to end his career as a guy that everyone liked, but never really attained the level everyone hoped for. Some of it may be related to his size. Too big for a 3, too short for a 4 or 5.


                        I want to add that I do agree with Isaac regarding Al being the jump off point for this deal.
                        That would mean TPTB wanted Al gone more than Jackson. I just can't see that. I think TPTB took advantage of the Warriors' interest in Al, in order to move Jackson. In other words, if you want Al, you take Jackson.

                        Of course the Warriors replied, if you want A, you've got to take B.

                        Let's not get revisionist here. The fans may have hated Jackson, but the coach clearly loved him. How can I say that? Um, huge hug following their matchup post-trade when Jack went off, as well as continued playing time for Jack despite his volatile reactions to Rick when he was unhappy about something (usually being pulled from a game).

                        There were no signs of the frostiness that apparently ran between Tins and Rick. Does anyone see anything close to those 2 relationships being similar (Rick-Tins vs Rick-Jack)?
                        All I can say about that part is - Tinsley is still here, and he and JOB seem to have a mutual respect and trust. Carlisle and Jackson are both gone, and I REALLY think both moves needed to happen in the team's best interests.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The trade almost one year later

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          If you wanna play the "what if" game take this into consideration.

                          How would it have been had we not made the trade, but instead fired Carlisle and hired O'Brien at mid season last year.
                          Sort of a throw out the baby and keep the bathwater, huh?

                          I guess if the Pacers had done that, they would still have dirty bathwater.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The trade almost one year later

                            As the discussion of Ike Diogu has come up, and questions regarding his "black hole" reputation and what not, I have a question --- does anyone know what Ike's +/- throughout the year is?

                            I realize he's only been available for a limited number of games but I find it interesting that he had a -11 in the +/- tonight.... disappointing!
                            "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The trade almost one year later

                              i started out thinking that the trade was pretty even, but one year later it seems to me that the warriors are the clear winner on this one.

                              i agree with ub, jackson has been far and away the best player in the deal. diogu is the wildcard who could still turn things around, but honestly his basketball iq seems disturbingly low for a third year player who's had three years of college ball. and this coming from a diogu fan.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The trade almost one year later

                                From a purely basketball perspective, (not including off court behavior, fan frustration and all that BS, which is obviously important to any entertainment business, they don't call it Pacers Sports and Entertainment for nothing, eh?) we would be a much better team with Sjax instead of the 3 ex-warriors we have now.

                                Maybe Ike will turn out into something good? I'm not holding my breath. If the other teams 2nd string frontcourt is under 6'8" and no wingspan, yeah, Ike is the man... alas, that is about 1 or 2 teams in the NBA.

                                Murphy is ok, but so was Al (who we would still have), in fact, I'd rather have Al.

                                MDJr is playing really well so far this year... or he was untill the last few games, but Sjax is a better player, on both sides of the ball IMHO. Even if we say SJax and MDJr is a wash, we are still behind on the trade a year later.

                                I think with not doing the trade we would be up 5-10 games at the end of the season. I would have loved to have seen how those guys would have played with Obie. It woulda been fun.

                                I, too, also feel that winning will bring folks to the games regardless of any bad off court image. Not that having a good image is important, but winning is the best advertisement. You can bet your ***, if this team was on a roll like say Portland is, winning 10+ games in a row, people would start noticing, and all the other stuff would be long forgotten.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X