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

  • #76
    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

    Originally posted by pacertom View Post
    People tend to overestimate the reverence around the league for JO. He would have never sniffed any all-star game in recent years in the West. Crazy, you say? Assume you have 5 all-star slots on the 12-man roster for PFs & Cs, tell me who you take off the all-star team among Duncan, Yao, Amare, Garnett, and Nowitsky to make room for a 43.6% shooter? Jermaine probably would not even be next in line for an all-star slot in the West. Elton Brand is probably next in line, and Greg Oden figures to be also knocking on the door for one of those spots within a couple of years.
    .
    Which of these guys had as little help from the rest of the team as JO? Only Garnett. The rest of these stars had other shooters to take some of the heat off them. JO was pretty much a one man team this past year.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

      Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
      The Lakers cannot trade both the 19th and Farmar. Their guards would be invisible. I would give you one or the other, your choice. They would deal 2007, 2008 or 09 #1, as well as the #2 this year, because the Lakers have two number 2s.
      Seriously, if the Pacers are willing to concede and not take back Odom ( clearly a MAJOR concession from the Pacers ).....taking both the 19th and Farmar is a given for the Pacers....even if it leaves Odom as your starting PG.... this is a Laker problem...not the Pacers.

      I seriously doubt that the Lakers would be in a position to dictate who the Pacers can choose with the "filler" that is left IF they don't ask for Odom.

      I'm at the point where I would even add in a S&T of Walton to another team to get back a decent player for the Pacers along with the rest of the "tradeable assets" not named Kobe and Odom.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

        Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
        Walton would not agree to a sign and trade to Indi, and you guys probably would not want him anyway with all of your forwards.
        You have misread my post. I wasn't suggesting that we S&T Walton to Indy...I was suggesting that the Lakers S&T Walton ( the only other trading asset that the Lakers have ) to another team where the Pacers get back a player from that 3rd team.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

          The 19th and Farmar is tough for the Lakers because we have less backcourt depth than you, maybe even with Farmar. I believe the 2 picks this year, Bynum, and an 08 or 09 1, along with Evans and Kwame, is about the best the Lakers will offer. They will give you the choice of the 19th or Farmar. If the Pacers accepted, I see them taking the 19th pick over Farmar, but I could be wrong. It is not the best of situations, and ours is no picnic, but from an outside perspective I do think it is at least 50-50 that JO bolts at season's end, so I believe you should deal him. In a deal, I would want youth, particularly a young guy with size, as well as a young guard and possibly a draft pick or two. The Lakers can't give the guard directly, but can give you a Hibbert type of big man, along with either Farmar OR the 19th pick, the #2 pick this year(40 overall), and a future #1, and Mo and Kwame are actually quality players off the bench. I wish we could do a little better, but that is not bad. And, as I said, I would trade JO if I were you, and I think this deal would stack up favorably to other deals, but maybe I am wrong.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

            Cable KC,

            Walton would probably get ticked and just go sign with a team like Miami outright. Sign and trades involving free agents just get so complicated.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

              If JO played with Kobe, he'd back back up to prime numbers. Probably 48% and 22ppg. It would be the first time since Rose and Reggie's (slightly) younger days that he will have had a significant perimeter guy...Lakereric is right. However, because of Sheed's perimeter oriented nature, I'd say that JO would be far more valuable to the Lakers. With less pressure, we'd probably see the return of 75+ seasons. Kobe + JO means possible second round. Kobe + JO + Odom means contenders. That's why the Lakers will mortgage their future to keep Odom. I don't even think that what Lakereric is of necessarily lesser value. It's of lesser value for the Lakers, for sure. But for the pacers? Not necessarily. What would you rather have...Odom or two picks and Farmar ? Btw, AI was traded for two picks and Dre Miller.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                The 19th and Farmar is tough for the Lakers because we have less backcourt depth than you, maybe even with Farmar. I believe the 2 picks this year, Bynum, and an 08 or 09 1, along with Evans and Kwame, is about the best the Lakers will offer. They will give you the choice of the 19th or Farmar. If the Pacers accepted, I see them taking the 19th pick over Farmar, but I could be wrong. It is not the best of situations, and ours is no picnic, but from an outside perspective I do think it is at least 50-50 that JO bolts at season's end, so I believe you should deal him. In a deal, I would want youth, particularly a young guy with size, as well as a young guard and possibly a draft pick or two. The Lakers can't give the guard directly, but can give you a Hibbert type of big man, along with either Farmar OR the 19th pick, the #2 pick this year(40 overall), and a future #1, and Mo and Kwame are actually quality players off the bench. I wish we could do a little better, but that is not bad. And, as I said, I would trade JO if I were you, and I think this deal would stack up favorably to other deals, but maybe I am wrong.
                We'll take Farmar, the 19pick, and a future 1st and you can have your pick of McCleod, Greene, and Rawle Marshall...all fine serviceable, low-salary guards. Guard depth we can give you plenty of.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Seriously, if the Pacers are willing to concede and not take back Odom ( clearly a MAJOR concession from the Pacers ).....taking both the 19th and Farmar is a given for the Pacers....even if it leaves Odom as your starting PG.... this is a Laker problem...not the Pacers.

                  I seriously doubt that the Lakers would be in a position to dictate who the Pacers can choose with the "filler" that is left IF they don't ask for Odom.

                  I'm at the point where I would even add in a S&T of Walton to another team to get back a decent player for the Pacers along with the rest of the "tradeable assets" not named Kobe and Odom.
                  If the Lakers are only willing to part with Bynum, Brown's contract and projects for a proven all-star big man who can both score and defend at a high level...their offer will land in a stack of other offers and might not happen. Not saying it's a bad offer or that LA should give more. It's just that there will be other offers that might be more appealing. This is particularly true with the draft around the corner as it opens up many options.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                    Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                    Cable KC,
                    Walton would probably get ticked and just go sign with a team like Miami outright. Sign and trades involving free agents just get so complicated.
                    I really wonder how complicated it can be. The only reason I can see why a team would involve themselves in a 3 team trade ( INSTEAD of simply outright signing him ) would be any "incentive" that the Lakers can provide to get them involved in the first place.

                    We're talking about a player that will likely command a 2.5 to (maybe) 4 mil a year contract...not a player with a No-Trade clause. Besides, its not like he would be sent to a team that Walton doesn't want to go....any S&T of Walton would involve teams that are interested him in the first place.

                    The reason that I include Walton in this...to make things more "complicated"...is because IF Odom is not included in any deal for JONeal....I would want every asset that the Lakers have that they can add to the deal not named Odom or Kobe.

                    To me....in order.....that is:

                    1 ) Bynum
                    2 ) Kwame's Expiring Contract
                    3 ) rights to the 19th pick
                    4 ) Walton
                    5 ) Farmar
                    6 ) 2008 or 2009 1st round draft pick
                    7 ) MoEvan's Expiring Contract
                    8 ) $$$

                    Since we have no need for Walton...then I would expect the Lakers to get a player in a S&T that would satisfy the Pacers requirements. The way I look at it is that Walton is a Laker tradeable asset that holds value. I would want that "value" sent to the Pacers...either in the form of Walton himself ( which the Pacers have no need for ) or a player that is sent back from a 3rd team.

                    That's the key for me in trading JONeal to the Lakers...I want to get the most value in return for him. Preferably....the best value involves Odom+Bynum+19th pick for JONeal...but if that is not an option...then I would want everything else of value from the Lakers.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      If the Lakers are only willing to part with Bynum, Brown's contract and projects for a proven all-star big man who can both score and defend at a high level...their offer will land in a stack of other offers and might not happen. Not saying it's a bad offer or that LA should give more. It's just that there will be other offers that might be more appealing. This is particularly true with the draft around the corner as it opens up many options.
                      I agree. Assuming that there are trade offers that begin to surface as we get closer to Draft day.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 06-19-2007, 09:13 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                        Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                        The 19th and Farmar is tough for the Lakers because we have less backcourt depth than you, maybe even with Farmar. I believe the 2 picks this year, Bynum, and an 08 or 09 1, along with Evans and Kwame, is about the best the Lakers will offer. They will give you the choice of the 19th or Farmar.
                        If the Pacers do not take back Odom ( obviously a sticking point for the Pacers ), then I don't see how they can be in a position to tell the Pacers that they have ( AFTER conceding any overtures for Odom ) a choice between 19th or Farmar. If the Pacers wanted Farmar and the 19th pick...thus leaving the Lakers thin at the PG rotation...as I mentioned before....that's the Lakers' problem...not the Pacers. As far as I am concerned....that's the price the Lakers have to pay in order to keep Odom.

                        Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                        It is not the best of situations, and ours is no picnic, but from an outside perspective I do think it is at least 50-50 that JO bolts at season's end, so I believe you should deal him.
                        Obviously, we can agree to disagree. I don't think that JONeal will opt out of a deal that will pay him 40 mil in 2 years.

                        Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                        I wish we could do a little better, but that is not bad. And, as I said, I would trade JO if I were you, and I think this deal would stack up favorably to other deals, but maybe I am wrong.
                        Let me know how you will react to this type of response if the Bulls said the same to the Lakers about trading Kobe to the Bulls and the best player that the Lakers were getting was Ben Gordon ( with no Deng ), 9th pick, S&T of PJBrown and possibly S&T of Nocioni.

                        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                        We'll take Farmar, the 19pick, and a future 1st and you can have your pick of McCleod, Greene, and Rawle Marshall...all fine serviceable, low-salary guards. Guard depth we can give you plenty of.
                        Exactly. I fully expect that if Odom is not included...and if there was some agreement to move JONeal...that the Pacers should be in a position to dictate the remaining terms of what that remaining "filler" is.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                          The Lakers just can't trade both Farmar and the pick. By the way, Kuchak was quoted in the LA Times, when asked if any deals were going to happen, as saying, "these things can change on a hairpin, so you can never say that until a deal is done." That, knowing Kupchak, is an indicator that something may be brewing.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                            If the Bulls offered Nocioni, Gordon and the #9, that is respectable. I would insist on Deng, plus Nocioni is a free agent. I am just not a huge T. Thomas guy, so if the Bulls tried to substitute him I would laugh. The deal I would accept would be Gordon, Deng, Sefelosha for Kobe.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                              I should do what I set out to do, stay out of these kind of threads, but still.....

                              Pacertom; You seem to be forgetting the fact that Deng, no matter how much I like him, scores his points of handoffs and in single coverage, if you see him work double and triple coverage and still put up his recent numbers, then come back to compare, because for now there is no comparison, JO in single coverage and less needed to "clean up" on D (Chi has BW for that) would probably avg 35-15 if not more, I mean I know you don't like JO but he IS still one of the very best in this league.
                              And that brings me to something I never read when I go over all these threads dealing JO for peanuts to other teams because "we have to get rid of him" for whatever reason you come up with: DW & LB have stated clearly that they will ONLY trade JO IF IT IMPROVES the team.

                              Projects do no improve the team, so Odom & Bynum are integral part i.e. a key part of any trade possible with the Lakers, without at least those 2 and the pick there is no deal.

                              On top of all the "injury prone" talk (something that is used way to lightly and it seems no one really knows what injury prone means, it certainly doesn't mean getting ankle or knee injuries when playing 36+ minutes a night being the main focus on offense as well as defense. I put it to those who say JO is injury prone to prove to me that players of his caliber with NO relief of the bench, and NO help besides them have less injuries.
                              And don't even mention KG, he still has Blount besides him and some "decent" backups, who besides Jeff is standing tall besides JO?

                              Finally: There are a gazillion ppl (or at least they make it seem that much) that moan about "class" in the organization, players to be proud of, who "rep" Indy properly, tall me, who would do a better and more classy job then JO?

                              In short; the offer made to the Lakes (IF it's made) is the rock bottom of what is acceptable for JO, anything less and JO stays in Indiana, which IMO is a better idea anyway, give the man the same chance Reggie had, give him a team and allow him to retire here if he so desires.
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Lakers fan with a reasonable perspective here (long but good)...

                                Originally posted by LAKERERIC View Post
                                If the Bulls offered Nocioni, Gordon and the #9, that is respectable. I would insist on Deng, plus Nocioni is a free agent. I am just not a huge T. Thomas guy, so if the Bulls tried to substitute him I would laugh. The deal I would accept would be Gordon, Deng, Sefelosha for Kobe.
                                Let's try this in plain English: Kobe wants out.
                                Kobe has a "no trade" clause.

                                Kobe decides where he's going to, Lakers have to "accept" offers they get.
                                Lakers have NO bargaining powers whatsoever and beggars can't be choosers.

                                Or do you want to say that you got "fair value" for Shaq?

                                In actual fact they are in a worse position now then they were then.
                                So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                                If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                                Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X