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

What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

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

  • #46
    Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

    I don't think we can package Tinsley and Foster. That would be $11 Milion combined and none of the point guards we could get back anywhere near that amount.

    Looks like Marcus Banks is available. I love his defense, but nothing else in his game is worth much. But I'll tell you, I'd take him over JT right now. That is how I feel about Jamaal right now.

    http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatES...339&print=true

    Chris Sheridan: Greetings from Motown, where the clock is ticking down toward the return of Ron Artest to the Palace for the first time since the brawl. I'll be there to cover it tomorrow night, and I'm expecting Eric Musselman to be there, too, but with the way the Kings are free-falling, you never know. Lots to chat about in the Association this week, from the GS-Indiana trade to the beatdown the Mavs put on the Lakers last night to Larry Miller's critical comments today regarding Andrei Kirilenko, so off we go ...




    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jon (Salt Lake City, Utah): What have you heard about the Jazz making a move for a two guard? I would love to see Morris Peterson in a Jazz uniform.

    Chris Sheridan: I covered the jazz wednesday night against the Pistons and spend some time talking with assistant coach Phil Johnson and beat writer Tim Buckley about the state of the team, and the reading I got was that they were more determined to get AK's head on straight than they were in pulling off a trade for a two-guard. I brought up the possibility of an AK-Ray Allen trade, and the queston I kept hearing in return was: Would that move make them good enough to get past Dallas, Phoenix or San Antonio? Maybe, but that would be a heck of a long-term risk to take. There's a surprisingly crowded field of teams trying to find two-guards and combo guards (Detroit, Indiana, to name two), and that complicates the Jazz's ability to find someone for their backcourt.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mike (Detroit): Chris -- Sorry you had to experience the "Wrath of 'Sheed" yesterday from Rasheed Wallace. As a Pistons fan, I think it is time for Rasheed to go while he still has value. The ESPN Trade Machine verified that a trade of Rasheed Wallace, Nazr Mohammed, Antonio McDyess, and Carlos Delfino to Minnesota for Kevin Garnett and Marko Jaric would be approved. Is a reunion of KG and Flip in Motown a possibility? The Wolves need Big Men, The Pistons need a final piece, and the NBA needs for Garnett to win a ring. Agreed?

    Chris Sheridan: All in a day's work, Mike. Lots of questions about that episode in the queue, so I'll encourage y'all to read my blog entry from last night, which focuses on the topic. \As for your trade idea, again, it'll come down to whether Kevin wants to leave, and I don;t seee him leaning that way until AFTER this season especially with the way the Wolves have been playing lately.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    mike (toledo ohio): So why are the cavs so inconsistent. I honestly thought that they may pull off a 5-2 roadtrip but now it seems unlikely that they finish the road trip above .500? And do you see them (the cavs) making any moves??

    Chris Sheridan: asking the cavs to go 5-2 on that trip is asking an awful lot of a still immature team that's stll a long way from being a powerhouse. As for their trade possibilities, their lack of a No. 1 pick (they still owe it for the Jiri Welsch deal, I blv) is making it extra difficult to get anything done. expect Danny Ferry to try to buy low on someone at the deadline as he did last year in getting flip Murray for Mike Wilks. Heck, he can even get Murray again if he wants. The Pistons would probably give them Flip and Dale Davis for Varajao and a cap throw-in.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mike (Tempe): Do you see the Suns making a trade now that Kurt Thomas is out for 4-6 weeks? And are any teams so desparate for a guard that they'll take Marcus Banks off our hands? Thanks.

    Chris Sheridan: The Suns are actively shopping Banks, who has to be considered the worst free agent signing of the offseason. If phonix wanted another point guard that bad, why didn;t they just keep Rajon Rondo when they drafted him? He's certainly a heck of a lot cheaper than Banks.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Kyle (minneapolis): Puh-lease, sorry Mike in detroit, that is possibly the worst deal the twolves could make. Why trade KG for a malcontent, an aging role player with bad knees, a bench player, and carlos delfino? Ha, ridiculous!

    Chris Sheridan: Agreed, Kyle. and with the Bulls willing to part with one of their good young players in a potential KG deal, the Pistons wouldn;t be able to compete.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Joe (Houston): So just how old is Dikembe? And will an edict from David Stern really quiet the rumors?

    Chris Sheridan: You have no idea how hard it is for me to stifle my one-liner on this, but out of respect for Dikembe I'll be Quiet Chris on this one. when it comes to dikembe, we should all be talking more about how agelessly he's been playing, and about the significance of what he did by building a $15 million hospital in the Congo. There are sick 10-year-olds in Africa who are going to be cured at that hospital and will go on to live long, long lives, during which they can joke about Mutombo's age if they choose once they reach 40, too. By then, Dik probably won\'t mind.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Billy (phoenix): Do you see any possibilities of the suns trading to get a player like mike miller to boost their roster even more

    Chris Sheridan: Well, the handcuffs are off Jerry West now that the sale of the Grizzlies has fallen through, and Mike is in high demand. But if you think The logo will give him up for anything less than a lottery pick AND a young player, you'd be mistaken. That being said, the Suns actually have the assets (three first-rounders, including Atlanta's) to do such a trade, but with James Jones playing so much better lately since the leather ball came back, I don;t think the suns would feel that sacraficing one of those picks would be worth the price.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Oliver (NY): Would Ray Allen for AK-47 get Utah to contend ?!?!?! Was that a serious question ? That move undoubtedly gives them a shot for the title, Allen is a veteran, with a deadly stroke who would spread the floor and make Boozer, deron and Okur that much harder to guard. A no brainer. BTW, why is Pierce not headed to the Bulls yet for Thomas, Knicks 1st rounder, P.J. and if they are lucky Gordon ??

    Chris Sheridan: To your first point, do you really think that would make them a title contender? They're not very deep, and they have very little interior defense now, even with AK. If they dealt him, they'd have even less. Now, if they could do a Ray allen-AK deal simultaneuos to a Nazr Mohammed-Gordan Giricek trade, that might change things. On Pierce, his foot's still in a cast. You don't trade for guys with their foot in a cast until that cast comes off and you see if the guy can still play. Plus your price is way too high.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jerry(LA): Chris, What do you think the Lakers can do to catch Phoenix and Dallas and possibly challenge for a title? Do they need a better rebounder, or will the return of L.O and Kwame make the difference?

    Chris Sheridan: I donlt think it's a question of catching Phoenix for the Lakers, because that appears less and less likely as the suns keep piling up wins. It's more a matter of do they have enough to beat Phoenix or dallas in a seven-game series, and they actually might if Kwame Brown and lamar Odom are healthy when the playoffs arrive. I see them standing pat at the deadline,


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Josh (Irvine, CA): Why is no one mentioning that the LAKERS were playing the Mavs IN DALLAS the night after beating the Spurs IN SAN ANTONIO? Does the media really have that short of a memory? How many teams in this league could have even managed a split without 2 members of their starting front court? Also, what team in the league would've beaten a rested Mavs team on the 2nd of a back-to-back period?

    Chris Sheridan: This will be my weekly "I'll let this post speak for itself" post.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    charlie (chi): pistons lookin for any more trades?

    Chris Sheridan: Yes, dale Davis and Nazr Mohammed are being activel shopped. Check out my piece on the Pistons going up this afternoon on the site. I talked at length yesterday with Joe Dumars about that topic and various others, as he was gracious enough to let me second-guess him on several of his recent moves.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dwayne (SF): Chris, what are folks around the league saying about the GS/Indiana trade? Are the W's a playoff team now?

    Chris Sheridan: There's a lot of shock that Indiana gave up Harrington. Go check out Bob Hill's comments in today's Seattle papers. He was flabbergasted.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ian: (Toronto, ON): With Toronto creeping towards .500, and Jones getting no playing time. Wouldn't it make sense to try and deal him, instead of Mo Pete, or is there absolutely no market value for him.

    Chris Sheridan: Colangelo's asking price on Mo P has been way too high (Maggette, McDyess) which is why he hasn't moved him. Mo will be a free agent over the summer, so nobody is going to give up very much when they know they'll have a shot at him in a couple of months for free. as for Jones, h hs less value than Mo P, so the raps are better off waiting on him and keeping him as an insurance policy behind Parker for now.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Cos (Sparta, NJ): Chris, I cant seem to get this question answered by anyone. If Oden decides not to go pro, can a team draft him anyway, like Red drafting Bird a year early? And if so, do you think a team would take the risk?

    Chris Sheridan: You cannot draft a player who is not draft eligible. They changed that rule a long time ago after Red pulled that one off.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Jeremy (Ottawa): What do the Nuggets need to be a contender? Is there anything available for them to get them there? Or is it possible for Nene to regain his form, for Camby to stay healthy, maybe for Kenyon Martin to come back for the playoffs, and then would they not need anything?

    Chris Sheridan: There's a guy named Carmelo on that team whose impending return will make them a whole different team. Throw out everything they've done since the Iverson trade. They're merely treading water until they get reasonably whole again.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chris (LA): Any possibility of a team with a top 2 pick in this upcoming draft trading it?

    Chris Sheridan: No. Absolutely no. In the Kevin Durant draft? You'd have to be crazy to give up a shot at him.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    tim(ny): Chris, do you see any of the following stars moved by the deadline : KG, JO, Gasol, Allen, Carter, Lewis, Bibby, Kidd ?

    Chris Sheridan: Some are certainly more possible than others, so let me rank your guys in terms of likelihood, highest to lowest: Lewis, Bibby, Carter, Allen, Kidd, Gasol, JO, KG.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    mike (ill): u said nazr and davis r being mentioned for trades, what would be an ideal trade with them?

    Chris Sheridan: Joe D is looking for a guard, and since it's rare to find a GM willing to move a big for a small, he'll be able to get something done.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ryan (NYC): In response to your "Ill let this post speak for itself" line.....the translation is I DON'T want to say anything good about this Lakers team because I don't want to have to compliment Kobe Bryant for the job he has done carry a team without LO and Kwame Brown

    Chris Sheridan: No, it's nothing like that, Ryan (kobe was my MVP pick in the preseason, BTW). Sometimes I just let posts speak for themselves because there's nothing really for me to add to what a poster says. There are hundreds and hundreds of posts in the queue, and a lot of posters make good points, and I'm in a position to facillitate those posts getting posted. So stop hating on Sheridan.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    JJ>PR: Why not trading McDyess instead of Mohamed.. Does he have some market left?

    Chris Sheridan: Joe told me he's not trading McDyess, Sheed, or Maxiell. If he wanted to trade McDyess, there would be no shortage of suitors.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mike (San Luis Obispo): Stop whining about back to backs,Faker fans. That 30 minute private plane ride from San Antonio to Dallas must have been real bad. Did I mention the Mavs are 9-0 in back to backs this year? Enough excuses.

    Chris Sheridan: Touche from the Mavs' side of the debate.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Travis (SLC): What are your thoughts on AK's game and Larry Millers comments about him yesterday? Is AK pouting or just in a slump?

    Chris Sheridan: AK is having a very hard time getting used to the fact that the Jazz do not need him to be the scorer he was the past couple of years when they stunk. and i take miller's comments to mean that he's peobably a lot more open to the idea of trading AK than he's ever been.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    fred(dc): Where do you see Gerald Wallace and Andres Nocioni playing next year ?

    Chris Sheridan: Wallace's injury is a killer to his market value, so that's a tough cal. Let's see what he does over the last couple months after he gets healthy. As for Nocioni, Paxson told me there's no way any team could make Nocioni an offer that he would not match. So I see him in Chicago long, long-term

    Chris Sheridan: That's a wrap for today, folks. We'll reconvene a week from now. A good weekend to all.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

      Not so much point guards but I think we should go after either Fransico Garcia, Quincy Douby (the person I wanted the pacers to draft originally), or Ronnie Price from Sacramento. All three can play the 2 and they seem to have a logjam there with Kevin Martin.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

        Originally posted by RWB View Post
        The big question is will Tins ever grow up? His ultimate downfall is that chip on his shoulder that messes with his thought process. Anytime he thinks the opposing guard is showing him up the Tinman has to retaliate by going one on one or some silly foul. He may not toss televisions, or throw punches in the stands, but he still has that passive anger that he can't control. No wonder many on here will not be happy until Tins and Harrison are gone.
        Exactly my feeling. Unfortunately the reality of the situation is that we'd be hard pressed to find a talent as good as Tinsley, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't/can't trade him. We survined the loss of talented, but goofy, Artest. We'll survive the loss of talented. but knuckleheaded Jackson and we can sure rebound from Temper Tantrum Tinsley. Chemistry is very underated. A heady mix produces better result that just having a talented guy.

        Admittedly, the picking are slim. If you look around the league as it stands right now, there's not a lot out there, but there IS something out there. I'll list them in likehood of happening, or fiscal feasibilty-

        :sonics:There have been rumors for quite some time now that Hill doesn't much care for Ridnour. That gives us a real foothold. We know for a fact that he doesn't like how green his centers are. He wants a veteran player to man the post. We're solid on bigs, BUT we could use a project guy, much as we did with Dampier, when we had the Davis boys and Smits taking the big's minutes. Fiscally, a trade of Tinsley for Ridnour/Wilkins/Sene, as it's core, works out. We'd probably have to throw in a low salary guy like Orien or Maceo to balance things out, but such a trade works financially and could be a possibility. You could replace Sene with Petro or Swift as a guy to develop for down the road.

        This one is obvious for me. There has been a bunch of interest in Maggette and rumors of him being shopped. Cassell doesn't like playing second fiddle. Magette/Cassell for Tinsley/Dunleavy works out perfectly, financially. In Cassell, we'd get a veteran PG who can both shoot the three, then change gears and distribute very well, but he's a strong defender. Is it a good long term fix. No. But for a 2-3 years window, I wouldn't have the least problem with it, if it meant getting rid of Tinsley. I know a lot of folks covet Cory on the forum, so it could be a popular trade for fans.

        The Lakers don't have a PG who's talent is comparable to the makeup of the team. Farmar is making great strides, but they could use a more consistant, veteran presence, since Odom, Walton and Kobe are peaking right now to take advantage of their window. Unfortunately, there is a big disparity in Jamaal's and Farmar's salaries. The easiest way to make it happen without a firesale on LA's part would be Tinsley/Harrison for Radmanovic/Framar. I think this is feasible, but not probable.

        Okay, this is really not likely to happen, but I think it needs to mentioned. There has been acknowledgement from TPTB in NJ, that Kidd is avaialble. They also are desperate for big men. The common thinking is that you have to give a superstar to GET a superstar. That being said, an arguement could be made that NJ could remake their team and maintain their talent level with a Kidd for Tinsley/Marquis/Murphy trade. Essentially what you would be doing is getting a hug upgrade at PG for us, while we could play a big line-up of Dunleavy at SG, Granger at SF, JO at PF & maintain a Foster/Harrison tandem at C. Works for NJ, too, with a lineup of Tinsley/Carter/Jefferson/Murphy/Nenad. A win-win trade for both teams, but not very likely. Too big of a trade on the heels of our recent blockbuster.

        :thepistonJust bears mentioning that Billups can opt out of his contract and become a free agent after this year. Would he...Could he...play for us given the past bad blood between our teams? Would we want him to? Right now, a straight up trade works financially. A sign and trade?

        :grizzlies The Grizz organization wants to make some moves. They're unhappy with their team's make-up, as were we and GS. When you look at their PG, you've got Stoudamire, Chucky Atkins and Kyle Lowry. to me, a push for Lowry woud be worth it. He's extremely quick. I guess i'd compare him to Sebastian Telfair, if I had to, but with much, much better D. I think he's a hidden gem. Grizz may not want to wait for him to develop and giev their other optiojns at PG, they may be amenable to a trade. Of course, it's the same situation as LA, where someone else needs to be thrown in. This situatin would be a step back in the short term for us, but I think it would pay off very shortly down the road. I find this one the most remote of possibilities.

        Most other teams, it would be too hard financially, or involve so many players, that it would turn into a crap shoot, or the other team may not want to make a move due, to being in a good place.

        Of course, I'm not expert, but that's about all I see out there in terms of trading a PG for a PG.
        Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

          No matter now much teams would want to move or dump their PGs...I really don't see them wanting Tinsley given his injury history ( which he really is trying to work on ) and his very long-term contract.

          The best time to have shipped him out would have been alongside Harrington and SJax.....but now that they are gone....I really do not see Tinsley being moved unless he is somehow shipped out with one of our other assets ( JONeal and Granger...which isn't going to happen anytime soon, Foster and Shawne...which I am reluctant to do ).
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

            I'd like to say a few words on Ridnour, Arroyo and Duhon.

            Firstly, Duhon is a career .380 shooter, .350 from 3pt range. This season he is shooting .390 and .315 from 3pt range. Why would anyone want him? Tinsley is a better shooter and that's all you need to know about Chris Duhon.

            Ridnour is a bit more intruiging, but he's another guy whose abilities aren't translating into stats for whatever reason. And that concerns me. He's certainly available, though.

            Carlos Arroyo is too inconsistent to be worth trading for at this point.


            Skaut, I too like Kyle Lowry, but if the P's go that route (developing PG) then Tinsley stays through the season because you can't just throw him into the starting rotation with no fallback.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

              Chris Duhon would be perfect but the salaries don't match. Delonte West if he's healthy is an upgrade defensively and offensively. I think Mike Miller would be a nice addition although he's not much better defensively.

              Anthony Johnson would've been a great PG to have now. He was pretty good offensively and defensively he wasn't perfect but he didn't get killed on screen and roll plays like Tinsley.

              It'll be interesting to see how Dunleavy fits in and whether he can fit into a point-forward type of role.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                I like any of these guys:

                Randy Foye (hasn't been mentioned yet)
                Chris Duhon
                Delonte West
                Luke Ridnour
                Kyle Lowry

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                  Who's up for getting back Sarunas Jasikevicius?
                  That'll do.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                    Delonte West. He and Marquis Daniels would make a pretty good back court.
                    "Remember the pain of my fist. That is my power!"

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                      Andre Miller
                      Jason Kidd (help him get away from his ex)

                      There's alot of other guys out there, but I don't know if they would be an immediate upgrade to Tinsley, who knows our system, and even plays in it 80% of the time.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                        Even just a few months after the draft I can confidently say that Shawne Williams was a much better pick than Rondo. Watching him plenty in Boston, it has become clear that he is a horrible shooter and ballhandler and is not at all what we need right now.

                        Also, like Hicks said, shoot and defend is key. I'm still holding out for Delonte West. The Celts are not nearly as high on him now as they were and the man can shoot and defend. He can also play basic PG. If you pair him Marquis or Dunleavy you have two capable ball handlers that are also fairly intelligent players.
                        Exactly trade Harrison for West and throw in someone else to match salaries. Tinsley and West would certainly get the job done. Also play Shawne more.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                          Jarrett Jack - Portland. I have always liked him!

                          Can someone check salaries on a Tins for Jack trade? I'd do it even if we had to include David!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                            The Blazers are not going to trade Jarrett Jack.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                              Originally posted by pig norton View Post
                              Who's up for getting back Sarunas Jasikevicius?
                              You know I wouldn't mind .....

                              But seriously, here are a few names:

                              Kirk Hinrich - pretty untouchable (is only going in a trade for JO?)
                              Mike James - tradeable (Minny needs a big, Tinsley/Foster for James/Jaric?)
                              Delonte West - tradeable (Celtics could use a big too, Tinsley/Foster/McLeod for West/Ratliff?
                              Andre Miller - pretty tradeable (Tinsley/Foster for Miller/Hunter?)

                              Maybe only James and West are possible options, but are they that much better than Tinsley to give up on Foster?
                              Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: What PG should we (realistically) pursue?

                                Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
                                The Blazers are not going to trade Jarrett Jack.
                                Why not, it looks like they could use a change, and maybe if we sweeten the deal with dunleavy and / or david?

                                Besides, if we are serious about getting a better point guard, he is one that will make us better. Alot of these other PG's that are being mentioned are a lateral move to Tins IMO.

                                I mean come on, we raked the blazers once, why not twice?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X