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

Pacer/Laker trade nears?

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

  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    If Foster is possibly included........the following trade would work from a Salary/Contract POV.

    JONeal+Foster+(Tinsley or Marquis )
    Outgoing 2007-2008 salary for Pacers - $31.71 mil

    for

    Kwame+Bynum+Odom+19+(Sasha or Farmar)
    Outgoing 2007-2008 salary for Lakers - $26.30 mil ( if Farmar is included ) or $27.07 mil ( if Sasha is included )

    I am hoping that IF any iteration of this trade happens...I would much rather send Tinsley ( obviously ) over Marquis. But I would guess that the Lakers would want Marquis instead of Tinsley and Foster.
    I could deal with this trade if it was Farmar and not Sasha. Even though foster is the man we'd be getting a good budding true PG in Farmar, young talent Bynum, a 19th overall, a decent Vet for this Young team, and Kwame who isn't all that bad. Honestly we would be lucky to get this because, you never get what you are suppose to for your All-Stars.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

      We need to stand our ground and get Bynum regardless.

      If trading JO does not result in rebuilding in earnest I would just assume to keep JO.
      Hulk - "I'm 5 for 5 from the line. I should shoot technicals now."

      Comment


      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

        Originally posted by BoomBaby31 View Post
        I could deal with this trade if it was Farmar and not Sasha. Even though foster is the man we'd be getting a good budding true PG in Farmar, young talent Bynum, a 19th overall, a decent Vet for this Young team, and Kwame who isn't all that bad. Honestly we would be lucky to get this because, you never get what you are suppose to for your All-Stars.
        I'm only guessing...but the JONeal+Foster+Tinsley deal is the best deal for us. But I have a feeling that it will be JONeal+Foster+Marquis. For the Lakers...this seems to be the most reasonable to accept IF they had to give up every trading asset that they have.

        Foster would fill whatever need to help their depleted Frontcourt and is much cheaper then Murphy.

        Marquis has a shorter contract then Tinsley ESPECIALLY if his 2009-2010 Team Option is not renewed. As some here on PD have suggested...its hard to believe that we can get a better PG then Tinsley on the Market. If that is the case....then in order to clear up the clutter at the SG/SF rotation that we have with Marquis/Granger/Dunleavy/Shawne.....I wonder if TPTB would decide to give up Marquis just to make the deal happen.

        That would leave us with:

        PG - Tinsley / Farmer or Sasha / McLeod
        SG - Dunleavy / 19th Pick / Greene
        SF - Granger / Shawne
        PF - Odom / Ike
        C - Bynum / Murphy / Harrison

        I would obviously prefer to keep Marquis....but I have a feeling that he's the one to go IF we insist on Kwame's Expiring contract.
        Last edited by CableKC; 06-12-2007, 02:12 AM.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

          Here is what the deal should be, makes the most sense for both teams IMO.

          Pacers Get:
          - Andrew Bynum
          - Kwame Brown
          - Aaron McKie (S&T to a non guaranteed contract, just for salary purposes)
          - Cash
          - 19th Pick

          Lakers Get:
          - Jermaine O"Neal

          We cut Mckie then hopefully draft a backcourt player at 19.

          We don't need Brian Cook, we would have plenty of frontcourt players with Bynum, Brown, Ike, Jeff, and David.

          I would think the Lakers want to win now if they want Jermaine, so keeping Lamar Odom over Bynum would make more sense for them IMHO.

          Kobe, Lamar, and Jermaine would be a very dangerous 1-2-3 punch. They need to add a big and a point but that can be done. It really wouldn't take much.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

            Originally posted by rommie View Post
            Here is what the deal should be, makes the most sense for both teams IMO.

            Pacers Get:
            - Andrew Bynum
            - Kwame Brown
            - Aaron McKie (S&T to a non guaranteed contract, just for salary purposes)
            - Cash
            - 19th Pick

            Lakers Get:
            - Jermaine O"Neal

            We cut Mckie then hopefully draft a backcourt player at 19.

            We don't need Brian Cook, we would have plenty of frontcourt players with Bynum, Brown, Ike, Jeff, and David.

            I would think the Lakers want to win now if they want Jermaine, so keeping Lamar Odom over Bynum would make more sense for them IMHO.

            Kobe, Lamar, and Jermaine would be a very dangerous 1-2-3 punch. They need to add a big and a point but that can be done. It really wouldn't take much.
            IMHO....I respectfully disagree......it comes down to a matter of getting the most Trade value out of moving JONeal.

            Although Kwame's expiring Contract is worth something to TPTB....I would argue that Odom's contract ( that expires one year later ) is worth more...from a Player POV. If needed...we can get more for Odom...if he had to be moved.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              IMHO....I respectfully disagree......it comes down to a matter of getting the most Trade value out of moving JONeal.

              Although Kwame's expiring Contract is worth something to TPTB....I would argue that Odom's contract ( that expires one year later ) is worth more...from a Player POV. If needed...we can get more for Odom...if he had to be moved.
              Yeah I understand where you are coming from.

              But i'm not thinking of it as we can get more for Odom because in all honestly, I really don't want to keep on moving a bunch of players.

              For me, it comes down to Bynum or Odom and I would take Bynum. It's all about re building for us right now and I just think that Bynum has a chance to be really special.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                Originally posted by rommie View Post
                Yeah I understand where you are coming from.

                But i'm not thinking of it as we can get more for Odom because in all honestly, I really don't want to keep on moving a bunch of players.

                For me, it comes down to Bynum or Odom and I would take Bynum. It's all about re building for us right now and I just think that Bynum has a chance to be really special.
                I'm still going on the assumption that the best trade that the Lakers and Pacers can make involving Bynum and JONeal is

                JONeal for Odom+Bynum+19th+filler

                Since I have no problem moving or simply letting him expire.....the Pacers get the better player in return with Odom. Given Bird and JO'Bs comments about trying for the Playoffs...as opposed to rebuilding...I would think that they would want Odom for the short term. Kwame won't get us there....I just don't think that we will go into a "complete rebuild" mode...which is where we will be with getting Kwame...instead of Odom.

                The Lakers will still have Kwame to make a move for some other player....as to who they can get...I have no clue...but they should be able to get someone halfway decent. This doesn't even take into consideration that they can somehow get Grant Hill.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                  Here's a rumor off the Star board.
                  http://www2.indystar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=199053
                  Post #10

                  JBear1
                  Registered User

                  Join Date: May 2007
                  Posts: 15

                  Re: Whats the latest on the Pacers/Lakers deal?

                  Here's the Latest news from LA. According to KLAC radio (The guy reporting it isn't 100% reliable, but more reliable than Vecsey) sources have told them that the Lakers and Indy have agreed in principle on trading Odom and Bynum for O'Neal. What they're negotiating is the overall trade. Indy wants to expand it to include Kwame and Tinsley. They also want the #19 pick. Supposedly the Lakers have offered one or the other.

                  Either Odom, Bynum, Sasha, and #19 for JO.

                  Or Odom, Bynum, Kwame, and Sasha for JO and Tinsley. Supposedly Indy is deciding which way they'd rather go.

                  --------------------------------

                  It's all speculation, so one rumor is as good as another. According to this one we've agreed to Bynum and Odom. The choice is do we include Tinsley or not? That's a hard call!

                  Plus in the first trade we are trading 1 player for 4, whereas in the 2nd trade it's 2 players for 4.

                  If this rumor is true, then I think what we do would depend on who we could get with the 19th pick. And in this particular trade we wouldn't know until after the 19th pick is made.

                  I think we would do the 2nd choice if LA added their #40th pick.

                  One thing I haven't seen mentioned is Bird hates LA from his playing days, so does anyone really think he's going to make a trade that makes him look bad?

                  One other thing. A post always gets stickied before the draft that has all the latest rumors in it. So why not sticky this one?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                    Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                    Well then, if it is ALL RC's fault TPTB can bring Sarunas back and have the All-Star PG they thought they had.
                    Exactly my point, as in "why fire Rick when you admit you have a huge freaking roster mess that you created yourself".

                    JOB appears competent, though I think his defense-first, lots of chucking offense is going to end up putting up similar point totals to Rick's "through the post" version and make people just as nuts. I mean wasn't the 1500 attempts under RC a few years ago bad enough? At least at a 34% rate.


                    Will, that rumored choice makes the most sense I've heard yet. That's the kind of realistic negotiations I would expect. I'd take the 19 and keep Tins. Team is roster short and money short as it is so replacements aren't out there. Now of course if there was something else in mind to follow this then that would change the thinking obviously.
                    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-12-2007, 04:34 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                      Both those propositions sound pretty reasonable for both sides, Will. Thanks for passing it along .

                      Regards,

                      Mourning
                      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

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                        Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
                        these rumors are all stupid...in the end watch it be the original trade vescey reported...lol
                        You mean like Stan Van Gundy being the new Pacers head coach?

                        Obviously it appears that JO is gone for certain. I understand it and perhaps in some ways can agree with it, but honestly I also hate it. JO is one of the top Pacers ever. I know he couldn't be Reggie, but he as a guy that could score and defend in a combo as well as nearly any other Pacer we've seen.

                        If that era is truly ending, which it appears it is, then it sure bums me out.


                        Also, I'm with Hicks regarding Tinsley. Of course no surprise there because I didn't think it was worth dumping Jackson to get 2 players that NO ONE ELSE WANTS. Sheesh, at least Jack can still be traded right now.

                        You keep Tins if it means getting Bynum, and I'm not even sold that Bynum will become something special. But if you are starting over then you need to get players that MIGHT become something a lot more than you need to get rid of a MLE paid PG who happens to underachieve and flash instances of disinterest.

                        And the 19th pick....a guy like Rudy might fall into that area, that would be very interesting.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          You mean like Stan Van Gundy being the new Pacers head coach?

                          Obviously it appears that JO is gone for certain. I understand it and perhaps in some ways can agree with it, but honestly I also hate it. JO is one of the top Pacers ever. I know he couldn't be Reggie, but he as a guy that could score and defend in a combo as well as nearly any other Pacer we've seen.

                          If that era is truly ending, which it appears it is, then it sure bums me out.


                          Also, I'm with Hicks regarding Tinsley. Of course no surprise there because I didn't think it was worth dumping Jackson to get 2 players that NO ONE ELSE WANTS. Sheesh, at least Jack can still be traded right now.

                          You keep Tins if it means getting Bynum, and I'm not even sold that Bynum will become something special. But if you are starting over then you need to get players that MIGHT become something a lot more than you need to get rid of a MLE paid PG who happens to underachieve and flash instances of disinterest.

                          And the 19th pick....a guy like Rudy might fall into that area, that would be very interesting.
                          Wow! Could it be true that we actually completely aggree again!?




                          Regards,

                          Mourning
                          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

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post

                            Either Odom, Bynum, Sasha, and #19 for JO.

                            Or Odom, Bynum, Kwame, and Sasha for JO and Tinsley. Supposedly Indy is deciding which way they'd rather go.
                            Unless Sasha's a lot better than anything I've heard you about have to go with the first deal.

                            If it was just a choice between the two, I happen to think the Kwame salary savings is better than the 19 pick considering the Pacers situation, but you can't count on getting a PG who can come in and play big minutes right away at 19.

                            In either case, the one thing you have going for you is that Sasha can hit the 3. He's still only 23 - maybe he can turn into an NBA SG - at least a spot shooter off the bench.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post

                              Either Odom, Bynum, Sasha, and #19 for JO.

                              Or Odom, Bynum, Kwame, and Sasha for JO and Tinsley. Supposedly Indy is deciding which way they'd rather go.


                              The upside of doing the second deal is that Kwame's contract is 3 years shorter than Tinsley's. Kwame only has one year left. And you get Tinsley off the team.

                              The upside of the first deal is you get the 19th pick.

                              If I had to decide I'd take the second deal. Unless the Pacers really like who is available at 19.

                              if this "report" is true - then the trade won't go down until the draft and until the 19th pick is "on the clock" because the Pacers should wait to see who is there before deciding which trade to take.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacer/Laker trade nears?

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                if this "report" is true - then the trade won't go down until the draft and until the 19th pick is "on the clock" because the Pacers should wait to see who is there before deciding which trade to take.
                                Hard to wait on #19 if the Ps have their eyes on moving up in the draft.
                                You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X