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

2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

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

  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    David West is not overpay this year 10mil is fine for him, I expect him to get way more than that next year making him overpay.



    Danny has been overpay for few years now, he is in the same category of overpay players like Iguadola, Deng and Gay, maybe not overpay by much when healthy (3/4mil) but overpay still.



    9.7 and 8 for a guy that is making 14mil a year for the next 4 years? I love Roy but he is becoming one of the must overpay players in the league, hopefully he gets better, and like I said before I think it was the right decision to overpay for him.



    I love Hill but the Pacers made a mistake in not letting the market set the price, guys like Felton, DJ, Hinrich and others were free agents, I think he is getting overpay for like 3mil, similar players(Felton, Hinrich, Jarret Jack) are making way less.



    I compare Ian's salary and productivity with other backups and my problem with Ian is not that he is making 4mil a year but that he is making them for the next 4 years, those 4 millions are going to hurt the Pacers when is time to resign Danny, West, Paul George and Lance, I guess I'm not a fan of paying a backup that kind of money if that backup doesn't bring an specialty, Ian to me is not the difference between winning a championship or not.



    Why no sign Barbosa for vet minimum instead of signing this guy? no only he is making 3 millions but he is making them for the next 3 years, the guy needs to be in the D league.



    4mil is a lot for Tyler and I love the guy.



    Overpay but thanks god is only for one year.



    My way to find out if a player is overpay or not is to compare them to similar players in the NBA, call it looking at "the green grass" or whatever, like I said before I believe that a team can have no more than 4 overpay players, an small market team doesn't have the luxury to overpay players, at this moment on the Pacers the only players that are producing over their salaries and are underpay in a way are West(this year), Paul George(rookie salary), Lance(second round contract), after that you look at the whole team and is hard to find a player that is over performing to his salary.




    Note that I'm looking to have a good conversation so those that feel the need to make smart a** comments please stay away, thanks.
    I actually agree with you on everyone but Danny. When everyone within the same category (Danny, Deng, Iggy, Gay, Johnson) are getting paid roughly the same, then that's prob market value for those guys.


    Everyone else you're pretty spot on. Kudos

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post



      I had forgotten he was still out there. Outta sight outta mind.

      They need some reb'g.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Yes that is what I'm trying to say, I believe that a team like Houston that loves to screw teams is going to come up with some crazy way to pay West leaving the Pacers with no other choice but to match and if that happens your guy Danny Granger is probably gone.

        I understand your statement about DWest. Not sure I totally agree. I was thinking about this last night. I feel if the Pacers do well in the playoffs DWest will sign a reasonable contract to stay feeling the Pacers have a good chance to win a ring. If the Pacers don't do well in the playoffs, I can see DWest moving on for money and a better opportunity to win a ring.

        What happens if DWest leaves? That means a major void at PF. A good quality PF will have to be acquired, but at what cost? Not to mention, the need for a new b/u PF, or the re-signing of Hansbro. If Hansbro is re-signed, it will prpbably be at an overpaid price. This isn't a scenario I even like to think about!

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
          I understand your statement about DWest. Not sure I totally agree. I was thinking about this last night. I feel if the Pacers do well in the playoffs DWest will sign a reasonable contract to stay feeling the Pacers have a good chance to win a ring. If the Pacers don't do well in the playoffs, I can see DWest moving on for money and a better opportunity to win a ring.

          What happens if DWest leaves? That means a major void at PF. A good quality PF will have to be acquired, but at what cost? Not to mention, the need for a new b/u PF, or the re-signing of Hansbro. If Hansbro is re-signed, it will prpbably be at an overpaid price. This isn't a scenario I even like to think about!
          I doubt we give Hansbrough his qualifier ($4M) and we could renounce our Bird rights to him, which leaves us about $10M in pure cap space without West. Assuming West leaves, which I don't think or hope happens, then that $10M "might" be enough to get a guy like Milsap on a starting salary. Jefferson and Smith will likely be getting $12M + starting. We would still have several exceptions to resign Hansbrough or get a backup afterwards. Absorbing salary is another option, but I doubt you find a PF as effective as West on a salary dump. Boozer is also a band aid option as I'm certain he will get amnestied (Chicago is over the tax next year w/ 8 players).

          Hopefully West realizes the winning opportunity here and takes 9-10M per year over 2-3 years. Even at that salary, and assuming PG gets maxed and Lance is at 4-5M starting, it will be tough to keep Granger unless he is willing to take 8-9M and we can dump Green. Getting of out of Green's contract must be a priority. With the emergence of Lance, he's a 4th wing on this team and 3.5M is too much.

          I expect the LT to be about 73M as of 14/15 season.

          Starters
          Hibbert - 14.9
          PG - 13.5
          West - 9
          Granger - 8
          Hill - 8

          Main Bench
          Lance -5
          Mahinmi - 4
          Backup PF - 4
          Backup PG - 3

          Players 10-15 -4

          Total - 73.4M

          We have to get out of Green's contract though to even have a shot at keeping the core together. Another savings opportunity is if we can hit gold on a draft pick this year or next and they take a primary bench spot at backup PG or PF. Those picks will only make $1M per year.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            David West is not overpay this year 10mil is fine for him, I expect him to get way more than that next year making him overpay.

            Danny has been overpay for few years now, he is in the same category of overpay players like Iguadola, Deng and Gay, maybe not overpay by much when healthy (3/4mil) but overpay still.

            9.7 and 8 for a guy that is making 14mil a year for the next 4 years? I love Roy but he is becoming one of the must overpay players in the league, hopefully he gets better, and like I said before I think it was the right decision to overpay for him.

            I love Hill but the Pacers made a mistake in not letting the market set the price, guys like Felton, DJ, Hinrich and others were free agents, I think he is getting overpay for like 3mil, similar players(Felton, Hinrich, Jarret Jack) are making way less.

            I compare Ian's salary and productivity with other backups and my problem with Ian is not that he is making 4mil a year but that he is making them for the next 4 years, those 4 millions are going to hurt the Pacers when is time to resign Danny, West, Paul George and Lance, I guess I'm not a fan of paying a backup that kind of money if that backup doesn't bring an specialty, Ian to me is not the difference between winning a championship or not.

            [Gerald Green] Why no sign Barbosa for vet minimum instead of signing this guy? no only he is making 3 millions but he is making them for the next 3 years, the guy needs to be in the D league.

            4mil is a lot for Tyler and I love the guy.

            [DJ Augustin] Overpay but thanks god is only for one year.

            My way to find out if a player is overpay or not is to compare them to similar players in the NBA, call it looking at "the green grass" or whatever, like I said before I believe that a team can have no more than 4 overpay players, an small market team doesn't have the luxury to overpay players, at this moment on the Pacers the only players that are producing over their salaries and are underpay in a way are West(this year), Paul George(rookie salary), Lance(second round contract), after that you look at the whole team and is hard to find a player that is over performing to his salary.
            So in fact you think seven (7) Pacers are overpaid.

            For purposes of this conversation then David West appears to be off the table.

            1. You say Danny has been overpaid for 'a few years' then you name other players you feel are overpaid, but you don't give any indication as to why Granger is overpaid.

            a. For the record, for this season, Danny Granger is making $13,058,606, while Andre Iguodala is making $14,968,250, Luol Deng is making $13,305,000, and Rudy Gay is making $16,460,538.
            b. This means that for this season Granger is making $1,909,644 less than Andre Iguodala, $246,394 less than Luol Deng, and $3,401,932 less than Rudy Gay.

            2. Roy is certainly the easiest to describe as overpaid, I think. I would argue that while he is overpaid, it's not as much as people might believe considering the variables in play:

            a. Rarity of quality true centers
            b. Even more rare, true centers who make an all-star team
            c. Yet more rare, a true center matching a. and b. while also being seen as a two way player, not a one-sided specialist (offense or defense).
            d. Again, rare to have a true center who plays defense as well as Roy was playing at the time
            e. He had never been this awful offensively last season and it was not expected to happen, and in the meantime he may yet bounce back this season or next
            f. He was seen as a guy who worked as hard as anybody to improve his body and game, with the implication being that he might keep doing so heading into this season (which, defensively, he has improved)

            3. I agree that we should have let the market set Hill's price, and I also suspect the market would have offered him a bit less. However that doesn't necessarily mean he is currently overpaid. He may not be UNDERpaid, but if you are happy with his production at the price he is being paid in general, then it is sensible to suggest he may just be paid appropriately.

            a. The comparison to Kirk Hinrich, who is clearly statistically inferior, does not appear to hold any water.
            b. The comparison to Raymond Felton is statistically valid. However, Felton currently appears to be UNDERpaid because he was God awful the season prior to the offer of his contract. So I consider this to be an inappropriate comparison.
            c. The comparison to Jarrett Jack is also statistically valid. However, Jack is earning the 4th year of the $20m /4 year deal he was given by Toronto after playing a season in Indiana, and that contract reflects his value as of 2008-2009, which I think we can all agree was less than his current 2012-2013 perceived value, making him UNDERpaid, and so again as far as I'm concerned this is an inappropriate comparison.
            d. In general, someone else being UNDERpaid does not make our player automatically OVERpaid. He could, in fact, be getting paid quite appropriately. In the case of Hill, I would argue that is what is going on. It's very likely that the Pacers did miss an opportunity to pay him less, but that does not mean he is now overpaid.

            4. Ian Mahinmi, even you admit it's not a problem that he makes $4m a year, so I consider this point done and over with. Complaining about the length of the contract has nothing to do with whether or not he's being overpaid. It just means he's being paid fairly for longer than you would care to keep doing so.

            5. You say you feel that Gerald Green is the quality of a D League player, thus not worthy of being paid $3.5m per year to be in the NBA. Hard to disagree with this one. Thankfully it's still relatively tiny and as much as I dislike this signing I can't muster any fire or passion over it.

            6. Tyler is on a rookie scale contract and you like him as a player yet offer no specific reasons why he's overpaid. *shrug*

            7. You don't give any reasons for DJ Augustin being overpaid. Before his benching I would have automatically agreed with this. Now, I think it's more of an argument. Considering the fact that it's $3m and it won't matter either way in five months, I think we can mutually agree to let this one go as it is essentially inconsequential.

            So, from where I'm sitting, the meat of this entire topic with regards to allegedly overpaid players on the Indiana roster comes down to Danny Granger and Roy Hibbert. In each case, I'm skeptical of the argument for Granger but moderately in agreement at the moment so long as Roy continues to struggle this much offensively.

            Comment


            • FOR CRYING OUT LOUD OVERPAID, not overpay

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                Originally posted by shags View Post
                Watch them come back and win the game with Howard in the locker room.
                They weren't able to make up the 20 point deficit in time.... lol
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                  Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                  me too.
                  Clearly an embellishment. That's swerving off the road to avoid a falling mailbox lid.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                    Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                    a. For the record, for this season, Danny Granger is making $13,058,606, while Andre Iguodala is making $14,968,250, Luol Deng is making $13,305,000, and Rudy Gay is making $16,460,538.
                    b. This means that for this season Granger is making $1,909,644 less than Andre Iguodala, $246,394 less than Luol Deng, and $3,401,932 less than Rudy Gay.
                    When you look at these figures plus the contract of Joe Johnson ($19,752,645) you could easily say that Danny is paid market value, ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration that he averaged over 26 PPG in the season he signed his contract.

                    Edit: he averaged 25.1 the season after. Just 19 PPG the yr before
                    Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 01-21-2013, 11:33 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        When you look at these figures plus the contract of Joe Johnson ($19,752,645) you could easily say that Danny is paid market value, ESPECIALLY when you take into consideration that he averaged over 26 PPG in the season before he signed his contract.
                        I think all those guys are overpaid, Danny's injury and health issues makes him even more overpaid compared to the other players mentioned.

                        Danny signed the contract before his 26ppg season by the way, he was averaging 19ppg at the time he signed.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          I think all those guys are overpaid, Danny's injury and health issues makes him even more overpaid compared to the other players mentioned.

                          Danny signed the contract before his 26ppg season by the way, he was averaging 19ppg at the time he signed.
                          You're right here's the link http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3676045

                          But just bc DG is hurt; he's not not necessarily over paid. "You can't sign a contract and say, well you might get hurt in 3 yrs, so we're gonna sign you for less" lol it doesn't work that way

                          Comment


                          • If Lawrence frank could coach against the celtics 82 games a year, he'd be a happy man. He knows them like the back of his hand.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                              Will Bynum havin a nice run

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                                I've written this at least once a season for the last 6 or 7 years: Scott Hastings, the Nuggets color guy, is by far the worst announcer I've ever heard in any sport, at any level in my entire life.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X