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

Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

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

  • Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

    Okay, I have been peeping over at your boards for awhile, and, while I have been a Laker fan since I say Fletch, I admire the passion over here. By the way, Hooosiers may be the best sports movie ever. Well, enough of that. We can do business, I think. First the Pacers. I see a team with a lot of bloated contracts. But I understand the need to cut the chord with Jackson and Ron, but taking back Murphy and MD Jr. is rough. Combined with Tinsley, Foster, and Daniels, and you guys are cap screwed for another 4 years. Probably, that is when you are hoping to have a team that is ready to win big. Granger is very good, on par with Prince in a year or two in my estimation. Williams and Diagu? I guess we will see. With JO having the ability to opt out after this season and with no picks, and with your GM saying he will not use the MLE, a trade is very possible.

    Which brings us to the Lakers. Kobe is great, even with his drama that would make Norman Dale role over in this grave except Hackman is still alive. Odom is a really good player, I would call him a number 3 player on a title team. On par with Shawn Marion, Richard Jefferson and Josh Howard. Kwame, Turiaf, Farmar, Sasha, Walton, are nice complementary pieces. But the Lakers will only go as far as Junior, or Andrew, takes them. I am being objective, but I would say that Bynum and Hibbert are identical in their talent. Bynum does certain things better, and vice versa, but they are about even. So, if I throw in Brown, McKie, the #40 pick in this draft, and a 2009 #1, then I would think a lot of you should be pleased. James Worthy and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar have said that they believe he will be an every year all-star by his 5th season. He does have definite talent. His shot-blocking talent is uncanny, as is his wingspan. He has decent touch around the rim and some pretty good finishing skills. Flaws? Stamina. He just could not hold us playing the minutes he did last year. He also can stand get a bit mentally tougher. He has sort of a Tim Duncan non-chalant attitude about himself, and Duncan is his idol, by the way. He is a good athlete, but he is not a great athlete. Good passer. No perimeter skills. Totally a back to the basket guy, and he has been schooled by the master, and a man your GM knows quite well. If Bird called Kareem, and Kareem told him what he thought about him, I think Bird would sign off.

    By the way, I fully acknowledge the creek the Lakers are under. I am a realist. They must trade Bynum or Kobe. And I just do not believe they are prepared to deal Kobe, even though a Deng, Gordon, and Sefelosha offer may be realistic and intrigues me. If the Lakers made that deal, they would have Gordon, Sefelosha, Deng, Odom, and Bynum, which, if Bynum becomes what some in the Laker circles think he CAN become, could be enough to set up the Lakers for quite awhile. But Buss will not trade Kobe. He won't. I threw out the trade because the Lakers will not trade Odom because they need him to have a real chance to compete with the elite, which is totally what that trade is about. The Lakers four year window starts now, while the Pacers will slowly improve and probably be peaking in four years, when the likes of Shaq, Duncan, Nash, Wade, Kobe, and others will be declined and in some of the Pistons' cases, gone. So I wanted to throw this out there to give you Pacer fans something to chew on. But I do like reading your opinions and look forward to the responses.

  • #2
    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

    I forgot to add the 2007 number one (19), this year. You get that as well.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

      To be honest, a part of me would just rather see Odom out of the deal because it just screws us salary wise and him not wanting to be here may or may not be true.

      I think that if Odom is not in the deal though I would want the 19th and maybe Sasha Vuijac although he has sucked he has some talent. A part of me wouldn't want Sasha though with Daniels and the 19th pick likely being a guard. I'd rather have a future pick.

      Something like Bynum, Brown, Mckie, 19th pick, Sasha or a pick and i'd be pretty happy with that.

      The Lakers would be pretty good then with Bryant, Jermaine, and Odom.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

        So what exactly is the trade you are proposing?

        I also wanted to point out that there is no way that Wade will be on the decline in four years. If anything, he will be just hitting his prime with savvy to go with talent and at least one title ring on his finger. He will be a decade-defining Hall-of-Famer at the peak of his powers.

        The rest was an interesting perspective. Thanks for taking the time.
        The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
        http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
        RSS Feed
        Subscribe via iTunes

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

          One mid 1st rounder, a second rounder, and a late future 1st. With an exiring contract and Old Man River? I request you go back to Hollywood son cause that is not going to land you an already perinnal all-star.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

            Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
            Okay, I have been peeping over at your boards for awhile, and, while I have been a Laker fan since I say Fletch, I admire the passion over here. By the way, Hooosiers may be the best sports movie ever. Well, enough of that. We can do business, I think. First the Pacers. I see a team with a lot of bloated contracts. But I understand the need to cut the chord with Jackson and Ron, but taking back Murphy and MD Jr. is rough. Combined with Tinsley, Foster, and Daniels, and you guys are cap screwed for another 4 years. Probably, that is when you are hoping to have a team that is ready to win big. Granger is very good, on par with Prince in a year or two in my estimation. Williams and Diagu? I guess we will see. With JO having the ability to opt out after this season and with no picks, and with your GM saying he will not use the MLE, a trade is very possible.

            Which brings us to the Lakers. Kobe is great, even with his drama that would make Norman Dale role over in this grave except Hackman is still alive. Odom is a really good player, I would call him a number 3 player on a title team. On par with Shawn Marion, Richard Jefferson and Josh Howard. Kwame, Turiaf, Farmar, Sasha, Walton, are nice complementary pieces. But the Lakers will only go as far as Junior, or Andrew, takes them. I am being objective, but I would say that Bynum and Hibbert are identical in their talent. Bynum does certain things better, and vice versa, but they are about even. So, if I throw in Brown, McKie, the #40 pick in this draft, and a 2009 #1, then I would think a lot of you should be pleased. James Worthy and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar have said that they believe he will be an every year all-star by his 5th season. He does have definite talent. His shot-blocking talent is uncanny, as is his wingspan. He has decent touch around the rim and some pretty good finishing skills. Flaws? Stamina. He just could not hold us playing the minutes he did last year. He also can stand get a bit mentally tougher. He has sort of a Tim Duncan non-chalant attitude about himself, and Duncan is his idol, by the way. He is a good athlete, but he is not a great athlete. Good passer. No perimeter skills. Totally a back to the basket guy, and he has been schooled by the master, and a man your GM knows quite well. If Bird called Kareem, and Kareem told him what he thought about him, I think Bird would sign off.

            By the way, I fully acknowledge the creek the Lakers are under. I am a realist. They must trade Bynum or Kobe. And I just do not believe they are prepared to deal Kobe, even though a Deng, Gordon, and Sefelosha offer may be realistic and intrigues me. If the Lakers made that deal, they would have Gordon, Sefelosha, Deng, Odom, and Bynum, which, if Bynum becomes what some in the Laker circles think he CAN become, could be enough to set up the Lakers for quite awhile. But Buss will not trade Kobe. He won't. I threw out the trade because the Lakers will not trade Odom because they need him to have a real chance to compete with the elite, which is totally what that trade is about. The Lakers four year window starts now, while the Pacers will slowly improve and probably be peaking in four years, when the likes of Shaq, Duncan, Nash, Wade, Kobe, and others will be declined and in some of the Pistons' cases, gone. So I wanted to throw this out there to give you Pacer fans something to chew on. But I do like reading your opinions and look forward to the responses.
            Thanks for the comments. There seems to be several Buss family members that are involved in the overall decision making for the Lakers front office ( correct me if I am wrong ). For some reason, I thought that I read ( during the whole Artest to Lakers rumors a few years ago ) one of the Buss family members ( I think it was one of the brothers ) had effectively vetoed any trade involving Bynum despite Phil's recommendation.

            Is this still the case for the Lakers Front office?

            The reason I ask is that it appears....based off of your post.....that the front office is at a crossroads....stick with Kobe....or rebuild around Bynum. It's one or the other....not both.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

              Wade will not be getting old, correction. But with the fearless style he plays, I wonder how he will age as player. He will be fine. The trade would be:

              Bynum, Brown, Mckie (for cap purposes, which the Pacers would get back in from the Lakers in cash), Evans, 2007 #1(19), 2007 #2 (40), and 2009 #1. Honestly, I can't see a trade working out that is not similar to this. Or maybe you guys deal him to Boston or the Suns or keep him. But this may be your best best long term, and I am not just saying that because I am a Laker fan, because I would be fine if they traded Kobe for Deng, Sefelosha, and Gordon, which still gives the Bulls are starting five of Heinrich, Kobe, Nocioni, Thomas, Wallace, with Duhon, Sweetney, Griffin, the #9 pick, and the MLE for more depth. I would rather make the deal with the Pacers because I think that team would have a chance to challenge SA or the Suns, but would be underdogs to both, still. I promise you you won't be disappointed with Bynum. My educated guess, since I have been watching him closely the past 2 years, is that he will be a 17, 10, 3 block guy by his 5th season. I don't think he has enough to be a 22-24 point guy, but I could be wrong.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                One mid 1st rounder, a second rounder, and a late future 1st. With an exiring contract and Old Man River? I request you go back to Hollywood son cause that is not going to land you an already perinnal all-star.
                Well hes including Bynum as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                  I think the Lakers are going to get screwed one way or another. If I were the Bulls, Deng would be untouchable. Deng and Gordon is too high a price to pay to get Kobe. The Pacers are likely to demand atleast Bynum and Odom. Its debatable whether getting someone like Gasol would be enough to appease Kobe.

                  As a Lakers fan would you prefer to go with Kobe and JO or Gordon, Odom and Bynum?

                  Kobe and JO if it worked could be better than what you have currently, but i doubt it would be enough to go deep in the West.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                    Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
                    Well hes including Bynum as well.
                    Oh
                    Sorry Lakereric. I would take that deal if I was the Pacers and also the Lakers. Maybe take the 2nd rounder and put in Sasha.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                      Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                      Wade will not be getting old, correction. But with the fearless style he plays, I wonder how he will age as player. He will be fine. The trade would be:

                      Bynum, Brown, Mckie (for cap purposes, which the Pacers would get back in from the Lakers in cash), Evans, 2007 #1(19), 2007 #2 (40), and 2009 #1. Honestly, I can't see a trade working out that is not similar to this. Or maybe you guys deal him to Boston or the Suns or keep him. But this may be your best best long term, and I am not just saying that because I am a Laker fan, because I would be fine if they traded Kobe for Deng, Sefelosha, and Gordon, which still gives the Bulls are starting five of Heinrich, Kobe, Nocioni, Thomas, Wallace, with Duhon, Sweetney, Griffin, the #9 pick, and the MLE for more depth. I would rather make the deal with the Pacers because I think that team would have a chance to challenge SA or the Suns, but would be underdogs to both, still. I promise you you won't be disappointed with Bynum. My educated guess, since I have been watching him closely the past 2 years, is that he will be a 17, 10, 3 block guy by his 5th season. I don't think he has enough to be a 22-24 point guy, but I could be wrong.
                      I would prefer this trade to any involving Odom, maybe I would like Famar but maybe thats asking too much. I really dont want Odom. I dont mind if the Pacers suck it up next year. Id rather them be bad without having to really tank a season than try to make the playoffs and end up with 30+ wins and fall short.
                      Hulk - "I'm 5 for 5 from the line. I should shoot technicals now."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                        Yes, they may get screwed. Certainly. The Lakers, if they trade Bynum and Odom for JO, in my opinion, would be mariginally better, assuming they keep the pick and sign a MLE. They would be a 5 seed and maybe get out of round 1. Not giving up the future for that. Did you see the Bulls starting lineup with that dea? Nice, and don't think the Bulls may not try to grab JO or KG for the MLE for one of them to win a ring. I am trying to be objective, but I would be 65 percent confident Paxson would deal Deng, Sefelosha, and Gordon for Kobe.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                          Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                          Wade will not be getting old, correction. But with the fearless style he plays, I wonder how he will age as player. He will be fine. The trade would be:

                          Bynum, Brown, Mckie (for cap purposes, which the Pacers would get back in from the Lakers in cash), Evans, 2007 #1(19), 2007 #2 (40), and 2009 #1. Honestly, I can't see a trade working out that is not similar to this. Or maybe you guys deal him to Boston or the Suns or keep him. But this may be your best best long term, and I am not just saying that because I am a Laker fan, because I would be fine if they traded Kobe for Deng, Sefelosha, and Gordon, which still gives the Bulls are starting five of Heinrich, Kobe, Nocioni, Thomas, Wallace, with Duhon, Sweetney, Griffin, the #9 pick, and the MLE for more depth. I would rather make the deal with the Pacers because I think that team would have a chance to challenge SA or the Suns, but would be underdogs to both, still. I promise you you won't be disappointed with Bynum. My educated guess, since I have been watching him closely the past 2 years, is that he will be a 17, 10, 3 block guy by his 5th season. I don't think he has enough to be a 22-24 point guy, but I could be wrong.
                          i would say if you're not going to give up bynum, keep #40 and evans toss in farmar. evans is fairly redundant for us with daniels.

                          you don't even want to trade odom for a 6 time allstar, why would we want to trade a 6 time allstar for one guy with potential and a couple of crap shoots (late first round picks)? give us two prospects (bynum, farmar), two firsts (#19, 2009 - because if you get JO and start contending for championships that first is gonna be really low first round) and then exps (brown, mckie)

                          LAKERS GET: O'Neal
                          PACERS GET: Bynum, Farmar, Brown, McKie, #19, 2009 1st

                          i could accept that deal... if you're not giving up odom, i think you should expect to include farmar. some celtic fans that i've discussed this with on realgm think a ratliff, west, green, szczerbiak, #5 deal for o'neal and tinsley is within reason. so to me, thats what you offer might be competing with.

                          btw, you've posted here before i see but welcome to the forum anyway!
                          This is the darkest timeline.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                            Well, I appreciate that you're trying to find a fair deal that doesn't involve Odom, instead of justing telling the Pacers to suck it. Truthfully, if we trade JO, we don't have much of a use for JO. It's just that w/o Odom, it feels like we're practically giving him away.

                            But let's look at this deal you suggest: Bynum, Brown, Mckie, Evans, 2007 #1(19), 2007 #2 (40), and 2009 #1

                            Two irrelevant players, one good young prospect, one expiring contract, and three nonlottery draft picks, with the highest likely being the #19. Is that worth giving JO up for? I'd say no, unless we really value the cap relief or something.
                            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                              The reason the Lakers cannot give Farmar is they have no guards! None. I like Farmar. In my view, he can be an above average starting PG if he hits hits jumpers consistently and plays consistent D. Good ball handler, passer, and pretty athletic, but very young. But I can't give him to you because he is all we have at the position.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X