Tweet
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
My position exactly! 
Originally posted by owl
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.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws
2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws
2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
See we know Golden State wants to get rid of Dunleavy and his contract.Originally posted by tadscout
If the Pacers take Dunleavy then the Pacers should push for a good
young player to go with that. Diogu. With that in mind the Pacers may then
have to give up something to help GS rebound and/or score. So maybe the
Pacers give up Harrison.
All guess work at this point but if the Pacers take Dunleavy they have
to get something good from GS. Pietrus does not equal that in my book.
owl{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
This is more rumor then anything....maybe a confirmation of other reported rumors...or even if this was reported here.....but I was watching the 11pm local SF Bay Area NBC11 news on Friday night...and there was a 10 second blurb by the local Sportsguy on that channel that said that Mullin was offering Pietrus+DunDun for Artest...unfortunately...he didn't elaborate on anything else. Since a straight up Pietrus+DunDun for Artest doesn't work....I don't know what the rest of the trade offer was on either side to make it work as he didn't elaborate.
The problem is that I don't know what filler we are talking about here to make salaries work...especially due to this "poison pill" thing....much less know who will be added on either side to make the values match up.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
If we look at straight up 2 for 2 player trade....the only scenario that works under Trade Checker is:
Pietrus
+
DunDunJr
for
Artest
+
AJ or Freddie
Nothing else that makes sense works for a straight up 2 for 2 ( Artest+Granger...but we know that won't happen and Artest+Foster works...but I don't think we will part with a serviceable Big Man and not get one in return ) .
If we look at straight up 3 for 3 player trades....the only "reasonable" scenarios of "likely players that the Pacers and Warriors will part with" that works under Trade Checker are ( assuming that the Pacers don't want to take on an "additional" huge contract like Murphy, Foyle, Fisher or the Warriors won't part with Diogu and/or take on huge contracts like Foster or Croshere )
Artest
+
AJ or Freddie
+
Gill or Harrison
for
DunDunJr
+
Pietrus
+
Biedrins or Cheaney or Taft or Zarko or Monte Ellis
If the Pacers are truly looking for the most salary relief from trading Artest....then the most "salary relieving" deal from these scenarios would be trading Artest+AJ+Gill or Harrison for DunDunJr+Pietrus+Cheaney deal. I'm not saying it makes sense at all ( if the ultimate goal is to get salary relief....as there are other deals with other teams that can probably get way more salary relief ), just that this deal appears to relieve the most salary as we shed AJs contract and after this season shed Cheaney's contract.
If the Pacers are looking to get some talent back....then IMHO...the best deal would be to ask for and to take back Biedrins or Taft. Both players have more upside and fill a greater need then the other choices. If we want to take a big chance while taking back a PF....then Taft would be the player I want. In the limited # of games he has played in....Taft.....the "potential 1st rounder that fell all the way to the 2nd round".....has shown some potential upside. If we want to take a safer route while taking back a PF...then Biedrins would be the choice. I would hope that Walsh is at least able to pry either Biedrins or Taft away from Mullin as I feel that neither is truly "unreasonable to part with" or even "untouchable" since the Warrior's frontcourt is already filled with Murphy, Diogu, Foyle and the remaining PFs that they have. With Zarko or Ellis...I wasn't impressed with either of them while watching the game.
Also....I would hope that if we do take back DunDunJr....then I hope that we get back a 1st round draft pick.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Not sure if this was worth starting a new thread, so i'll just post it here.
I just saw the Knicks boxscore and Jamal Crawford got the big DNP Coach's Decision. I don't know if he was injured or if something else is going on I just thought it was odd.
Only way I would send Ron to New York is if Channing Frye and Pick's were involvedComment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Seems he has a sprained left ankle.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Here's the latest from poster NDPacers over at the ClubLakers forum:
http://www.clublakers.com/forums/vie...c9d6e5b#987299
Gentleman,
Just a quick FYI. The Lakers are not out of the running. They have expressed what appears to be a sincere interest and at least a desire to delve deeper into the subject. Teams are just very leary of being used to leverage each other. The Pacers want a bidding frenzy, while the interested teams do not.
If nothing transpires in the next day or two, dont be totally distraught. This could very well go to the deadline. And the Pacers have a couple of reasons why they would actually prefer to wait til then to do a deal.
Regards,
NDTeams are very leary right now of putting forth a truly 'best offer' scenario, because the Pacers have made it clear they have no deadline. Therefore, they feel it would only be used to leverage up the asking price and this thing could continue on to the deadline. In short, while a handful of teams seem serious about their interest, they havent gotten as serious about what they would actually be willing to do. That could change at any moment, but the closer the deadline becomes, the more likely the teams will be to get serious.
There are other issues. The more time the Pacers management gets to watch the current team, the better feel they will have for what they might prefer to do. With all the injuries, this has been a problem.
The Pacers feel like a couple of players that arent currently available might come available nearer the deadline. Either way, there figures to be more activity then and it very well could behoove them to still be involved then.
A number of the interested teams will have been cleared off the Pacers schedule by then-something that isnt unappealing to them.
The longer this drags on, the fewer games that Ron would play in the other uniform this year. This is of special interest if he would stay in the Eastern Conference.
The Pacers feel like there will be teams that will be interested that havent expressed an interest currently. The more interested teams, the better their chances to get what theyre seeking. And while its possible one of the interested teams could make a move in another direction, it seems any move they would make would not be as impactful, and therefore they would be apt to wait.
There are a few players from other teams that could be involved that are currently injured. The Pacers would prefer to see those players come back and play. For those that wont likely return this season, it still would allow for another 1.5 months to monitor their progress from afar.
In short, the only real way the Pacers make a deal right now, is if they feel confident that they wont get a better one by waiting. And when you have teams relunctant to get serious when it comes to what they would be willing to offer-then it makes that scenario unlikely. Now that could change at any moment. But thats really in the hands of the interested teams and not the Pacers.
Regards,
ND"I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
That says it all! I really will be surprised if we do a deal much before the deadline.Originally posted by blanketComment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports...14885611c.html
Scot Pollard could barely move the other night at Golden State.
Low on sleep with not much of a diet and even on fumes with the quips, the Indiana Pacers center went from game-time decision to no-way-in-heck, sitting out Thursday's game with lingering flu-like symptoms.
The ex-King was back in uniform and back in those familiar game-ready pigtails Sunday at Arco Arena, hopeful that he can remain in Indianapolis for at least the remainder of the season. With the ongoing Ron Artest trade vibes, Pollard said any number of Pacers could be shipped to make a deal work.
"They need to get the deal done because I think that will help our team morale," Pollard said. "It needs to get done so the players that are here know they're here."
Pollard, who turns 31 next month, is in the final year of his contract. He'd like to keep playing next season, now that his back doesn't make him feel as if he's 60. He labored through back pains when he was with the Kings, a stress fracture "that's created a lot of scar tissue."
"It's taken a lot of time to heal, but I'm the healthiest I've been as a Pacer," said Pollard, who had four points and four rebounds. "If you asked me a year ago if I wanted to keep playing, I probably would have said no. As long as I keep up with the back therapy, I can keep playing."
Pollard said he was touched by the rousing ovation he received.
"I was trying to scowl or not smile, but it really did mean a lot," he said.
Artest and Kings? Nada
Here's to debunking any Artest-for-Peja Stojakovic deals once and for all.
Despite league-wide media reports, particularly last month, that the Kings and Pacers have talked about swapping forwards, Pacers president Donnie Walsh shot all of it down. He said he is indeed talking to Western Conference teams, just not the Kings.
"I've never talked to (Kings executive) Geoff Petrie about that," Walsh said by phone. "I still haven't. I've never given much credibility to some of those media reports. They're not talking to me or the parties involved. I don't know where a lot of that information comes from."
---------------------------
Is Pacer team morale really low because of the pending Artest trade?"I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...th.rumors.nba/
There are some limitations to what Warriors GM Chris Mullin is willing to do to acquire Ron Artest from the Pacers. Reportedly, Troy Murphy's agent was assured his client wouldn't be part of any deal. Additionally, Mullin confirmed to this paper on Sunday that Ike Diogu, who went from raw rookie to the starting lineup in five weeks, has reached untouchable status in the organization's estimation. -- Oakland Tribune
---------------------
Just in case there was still any doubt in anyone's minds..."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
As Mullin said earlier, he learned a lot from DW, so can we now see a trade tomorrow for Diogu ?
So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.
If you've done 6 impossible things today?
Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_15624.shtml
What’s Keeping Artest?: As the days tick past there is still very little changed in the status of Ron Artest – what has emerged from the discussions is apparently Denver does not have the kinds of players Indiana wants (young-low contract guys), Golden State refuses to include Ike Diogu in any discussions, and Minnesota is still not sold they can get Artest for what they have offered (Michael Olowokandi’s ending deal and Bracey Wright). Indiana according to sources close to the team; is in no hurry to make a bad deal, despite every reason in the world to trigger one. A lot of very attractive ideas have been floated by the media, most of which Pacers sources say were never offered to the team. Indiana has found the market for Ron to be pretty lame, and unless someone jumps up the bidding Ron may not be dealt until the deadline, and there is a strong chance Indiana may even pass then if the deals are not right."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Not really much here, but...
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_15625.shtml
Deal Ron now, or wait?
By Wes Gardner
for HOOPSWORLD.com
Jan 9, 2006, 01:45
Once again all the talk about the Pacers is Ron Artest. Until Ron is traded, this will be 99% of the talk surrounding Indiana. Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird have both said they will not jump into a bad deal just to get it done. They want to do what is right for the franchise. This could mean not dealing Artest this year, but is that what would be best for Indy? In many ways, yes, but it is always better to move on as quickly as possible. Also, does Ron in Golden State work for both teams? Once again, yes and no.
The biggest question from most people is, when are the Pacers gonna pull the trigger and let Ron go? It really does not seem like a trade will happen anytime soon unless someone offers a much more lucrative package towards the deadline. Teams are reluctant to give up their young pieces or any of their stars. While Ron is one of the best in the game, he can be poison to a team unfortunately and teams are weary of letting go one of their future stars. The Pacers don't seem to want to take veterans with expiring contracts, ie Antonio Davis. They want to help their team out more than just financially. If someone were to offer a veteran with an expiring contract, and an attractive rookie with maybe a pick in there, then I'd assume that Donnie would do it. However, teams want to keep their coveted rookies, Ike Diogu and Channing Frye for example. So unless someone makes an offer like that, or they offer another All-Star straight up, like Peja, Ron may not be dealt this season.
It seems that Golden State may be where Ron is headed for several reasons. Chris Mullin has a good relationship with Donnie Walsh, having played for the Pacers before, last year he made a similar deal for Baron Davis and it has paid off, the Warriors need a low post presence such as Ron, and they have young pieces that the Pacers might want. I personally believe that the only thing stopping this deal is that Ike Diogu has not been included. He is just what the Pacers want, a young prospect with huge upside and a rookie contract. If they were to get Mickael Pietrus as well, another young player who plays pretty good defense too, it is my belief that we would see Ronnie in a Warriors jersey. The Pacers do not want Troy Murphy and his big contract for good reason. They do not want to take on more money for one. Also, they already have Austin Croshere. They play basically the same way, but Austin has been with the Pacers since his rookie season and is well liked here. So Indy does not want Troy Murphy, and no one wants the disappointing Mike Dunleavey. I believe that Mike is a very good player who has the skill set to possibly even be an All Star, but he does not use it to his advantage. Until he does, he will stay in Golden State.
Would Ron work in Golden State though? He would. Think of a trio similar to the Nets VC, J Kidd, and RJ, but they are all young players who have yet to enter their primes. Add a serviceable big man in Adonal Foyle, and a great rebounder in Murphy (who by the way can also shoot the three quite well now). Their bench would be a little thin for now, assuming they trade Diogu and Pietrus for Artest, but they would still have Derek Fisher, a very young scorer in Monta Ellis, a big man they hope will develop in Andres Biedrins, another rookie in Chris Taft, and a veteran defender in Calbert Cheaney. Also maybe coming off the bench would help Dunleavey do better. So if you really think about it, their bench is not all that bad, but they are young and need to develop. Should the Warriors offer up Diogu and another player (Pietrus, Taft, etc) for Artest? If I were the Warriors, I would say yes because Ron would help them get into the postseason, and possibly go further in the coming years. While Diogu is a great prospect, you should be getting Jason Richardson and Baron Davis the help they need, and that is in the post.
I, being a Pacers fan, would absolutely love to see Diogu in Indy. Having three of the best rookies in the league (Diogu, Granger, and Sarunas who is technically a rookie), would be great to see. Once they develop, a front line of Granger, Diogu, and Jermaine in his prime, would be very dangerous. We may see it this year, we may see it next year, or we may never see it. But for now, hopefully Jermaine will come back tonight against the Kings and tear it up down low against their depleted front line."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Article Last Updated: 01/09/2006 02:59:35 AM
Is Mullin willing to trade youth?
GM has to decide if it's worth breaking up core group to acquire Artest
By Geoff Lepper, STAFF WRITER
Despite the miasma of Ron Artest-related questions that seems to have permanently enveloped the Warriors — there is one critical inquiry that has not yet been addressed:
Is any move, even one that brings a former NBA Defensive Player of the Year into the fold, really worth breaking up the young nucleus of players Golden State has carefully assembled over the past few years?
That's a conundrum that trumps all the other decisions facing the Warriors: If they're not willing to part with some of their top talent, there's next to no chance of making a deal of any consequence.
But the Artest-related questions keep coming — will Troy Murphy be part of a deal? What about Ike Diogu? Will a trade get done this week? next week? next month?
Chris Mullin, the man who brought in Diogu, Baron Davis, Derek Fisher and Andris Biedrins to go along with pre-existing Warriors Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Jason Richardson, Mickael Pietrus and Adonal Foyle, feels "absolutely" that this season's 17-16 team has made giant strides forward compared to the previous incarnation, which lost 40 games before winning its 17th.
That said, Mullin won't rule out the notion of shipping out one or more of his core players if the price is right.
"I do feel the need to get better, no question," Mullin said. "I always feel that way. How to do that, and when that day will come, are the variables."
There are some limitations, however, to what Mullin is willing to do. Reportedly, Murphy's agent, Dan Fegan, was assured his client wouldn't be part of any deal. Additionally, Mullin confirmed to this paper on Sunday that Diogu, who went from raw rookie to the startingfrom Sports 1
lineup in five weeks, has reached untouchable status inthe organization's estimation.
That hasn't stopped their names — or that of any other Warrior, it seems — from being dropped in speculation regarding Artest deals. The buzz has gotten so loud, TNT commentator Charles Barkley was moved to comment on it during halftime of Thursday's ugly loss to the Pacers.
"Golden State looks like a young team (whose players are) like, 'I might get traded,' and that is really affecting them," Barkley said. "You can see it in the way they're playing. They're distracted totally by the trade rumors."
Warriors coach Mike Montgomery couldn't dispute the assertion.
"I wouldn't disagree with that. I wouldn't say that it wasn't on people's minds," said Montgomery, who also pointed to the pregame release of rookie Aaron Miles as a disruption to the team's focus. "Yeah, I'm sure that was lodged in there somewhere. Should it have been that big a distraction? No."
According to several players, the near-daily rumors are neither a distraction nor a regular topic of discussion in the locker room. Besides, said Davis — whose name was bandied about
http://www.insidebayarea.com/sports/ci_3384742
Why Not Us ?
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Latest from Eric_Pincus/Emplay over at ClubLakers.com board:
Hey guys - Lakers are out at this point - cause they won't give up Bynum.
Things could change as this drags on - but Artest is MOST LIKELY not going to be a Laker."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
Comment