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

Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

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

  • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

    Originally posted by kept View Post
    First job of a GM is to lie.

    O'Neal is backseat to Garnett. The Lakers aren't offering Bynum and Odom to the Pacers, regardless of how conditioned the fan base is to expect any two-team trade centered arond those two for O'Neal. Can try to make progress or continue the stalemate.
    Hehe, I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of a GM's mouth. Remember when Ainge said he was certain they were going to keep that #5 draft pick?

    A lot of you have been saying that we have no other options than JO, considering Garnett is unreachable and Gasol will most likely stay in Memphis. This is not true, we don't need to do a blockbuster deal to improve. Signing a decent player with the MLE and trying to go after a guy like Artest would immediately help the team. In the next off-season, providing Kobe stays, we can try and sign a bigtime FA.

    Of course the JO deal, without giving Odom, is still preferable. That will instantly make us one of the elite teams in the West, which is why most Laker fans are interested. Hopefully a compromise can be reached.

    Comment


    • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

      Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
      I'm going against the grain here let the Lakers keep Lamar Odom, he's owed 27 mil the next 2 years wants a 3 year extention 48 mil range to be happy here . Plus he had his 2nd shoulder surgery recently.

      I'll take Andrew Bynum , Kwame Brown (surgery on ankle and shoulder this off season) and his 9 mil expiring contract , a resigned Luke Walton 3.5 a mil range , Javaras Crittenden and a 2008 #1.

      Luke Walton is basicly to trade for a young sg either at time of trade or after mandatory waiting period. Brown's contract removes 9 mil in cap space from the roster.

      In Bynum and Crittenden you add 2 very young building pieces at center and point guard to the youth foundation. The draft pick adds another piece after the season.

      Bynum and Crittenden learn on the job . Bird can say we aren't rebuilding but we know even with JO this is not a conference finals team. With a new coach and system this team will take time to jell JO or no JO. If as O'Brien says he wants to run a quicker offense does JO even fit?

      Ike Diogu ,Troy Murphy, Jeff Foster, Andrew Bynum , Kwame Brown and David Harrison leaves you 6 bigs to play to play 48 minutes at the pf/c spots.

      Danny Granger, and Shawne Williams man the sf. Perhaps even Walton if you wait to trade him.

      Mike Dunleavy, Marquis Daniels , Kareem Rush ( if he makes the team) handle the sg spot

      Jamaal Tinsley , Javaras Crittenden , Daniels occassionally , and if resigned Darrell Armstrong handle the point.

      It may or may not be a play off team , but Bynum, Diogu, Granger , Williams and Crittenden are 5 young players to build around who gain valuable playing time to develop . In addition for the 2008 Draft you have 2 -#1's ours (perhaps lottery) and the Lakers to add 2 more young pieces.
      That is what all of us Lakers fan had been thinking. It is probably the best deal that Lakers can offer for JO. Although I like to keep Crittenden and let Farmar go, but he is not a deal breaker. The deal breaker is including LO AND BYNUM. If LO is exclude from the deal, anything can be discuss.

      Like someone mentioned, Indy fans need to realize the best thing to do now is rebuild. If you think your team has a realictic chance at competing for championship now, then good luck but keep dreaming.

      It is also the two biggest difference between both of these franchise. We have a bigger goal, to win it all or to lose it all. There is no in betwen.

      I ain't any of those other guys. So please stop insulting me. I am not dumb enough to say stuff like "the Pacers are ok with losing but not L.A." or many of the other stupid things these guys have said. These other guys should just keep there mouth shut because they no nothing about negotiating with out making it personel. Especialy the guy who has posted the most in this thread.
      Sorry, but excuse me Mr. Priest? You ain't fooling anyone here. You might say one thing, but in your damn mind, you wouldn't even giving up both Bynum/LO for JO. Don't act like you are the angel and we are the devil. We might have a different thought of how to improve our team, but at the end the day, our deal is the same. At least, I'm not scare to voice my true intention in this deal. It is either Indy takes our offer of potential, draft pick, and cap relief or else no deal, and they can trade JO to the Nets.

      I'm ready to rebuild if we can't get an impact player to add into Kobe/LO compo. Even if it meant to trade Kobe. And if we are rebuilding, it won't take that long knowing we have some advantage over other teams in the free agency market.

      Comment


      • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post

        Here is what Bird thinks about Rebuilding
        ( this response is towards the bottom )



        While some of us disagree with this ( hence many responses in this thread just to get Bynum and whatever else the Lakers can give a lowly team like the Pacers ), some of us also suspect that the reason why the Pacers want Odom is becaues they want to remain competitive so that they can make a run for the Playoffs. Honestly, I don't know how far Odom can get us in any Playoff run ( which probably isn't far )....but I know that if Bird has decided that he wants to "retool" instead of "rebuild".....Odom will give us a better chance at getting to the Playoffs then Kwame. Getting Bynum also helps us reach that goal ( especially in a weak Eastern Conference ) while giving us a better chance to rebuild for the long term. You have to keep in mind that the Pacer's mantra of "simply making the Playoffs" is the guiding light that the Pacers have been following for the last couple of seasons. I believe that TPTB think that once we get to the Playoffs....anything can happen...whether you're an 8th seed...or the top seed.

        BTW....I'm with Eindar....the reason that I want Odom isn't because I agree with Bird and his "retooling" plans....it's because I want to get the most value out of trading JONeal. Whether we let him go for nothing or move him for players to fit our needs....like it or not......whether he fits in with the Pacers long-term goals or not.....Odom has more value then Kwame does. That's the bottomline....getting the most value in return out of trading our Franchise player.
        Don't believe what most GMs say. Our great GM Mitch Kupcake said he would trade the pick to get veteran help, well turned out, we acquired 3 young players. Thanks god!

        It is also depend on what direction Indy wants to go. If they think retool is better now, then go retool and definitely avoid our offer. I like to think of it this way, we are offering Indy a chance to rebuild for the future and the Nets offering a chance to get deep in the playoff. So ask yourself, which direction do you guys want? Do you want your team to get bounce around in the playoff or a chance to start over and add youth and potential and hope one day it all pan out and Indy becomes the new dynasty?

        Comment


        • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

          Personally I'd be all over that Bynum, Crittendon, and a Pick idea. I have never been sold on the idea of Odom. (+ Kwami for cap reasons)

          As far as the Nets offer, it's garbage. I don't want a bloated SF contract, Collins is a waste, and Krstic is only a little better known commodity than Bynum, and none of them shoot FT's well. But I can see why NJ wants it for just a year or two, it would be Carter....JO....Kidd. Entertaining huh?...well for about 1/2 a season anyway.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment


          • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

            Who is this Crittendon fellow, and why do people think he's better than Tinsley?

            Comment


            • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

              Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
              Who is this Crittendon fellow, and why do people think he's better than Tinsley?
              Because they haven't seen him play. He's so street he makes Tinsley look like John Stockton.

              The more I read this thread, the less I want to trade with LA. I never even considered helping the Lakers as a downside, but I'm reminded of what Los Angeles (the poster) is always talking about out there.

              Vecsey threw out today that if NJ included Marcus Williams, JO would be a Net right now. It's a good bet he got that from Donnie. Let's see if getting that out in the public discourse helps move it along.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                Because they haven't seen him play. He's so street he makes Tinsley look like John Stockton.

                The more I read this thread, the less I want to trade with LA. I never even considered helping the Lakers as a downside, but I'm reminded of what Los Angeles (the poster) is always talking about out there.

                Vecsey threw out today that if NJ included Marcus Williams, JO would be a Net right now. It's a good bet he got that from Donnie. Let's see if getting that out in the public discourse helps move it along.
                The Nets are in a weird position right now.

                On one hand, there Title window is closing along with JKidd's knees. We're talking probably three years max on that.

                Secondly, they have the Brooklyn move in 2009. So they need to stay competitive to drum up interest and attract new fans. Remember, most of BK are already Knick fans (and plenty don't even want the team/arena in their borough), so this is gonna be somewhat of a challenge.

                They also can't leave the cupboard completely bare, because no one's gonna care about the team if they're horrible. Maybe they think the 2010 versions of Vince Carter and JO along with a on-his-final-swansong JKidd will be enough. But I'm guessing Marcus Williams is they're main Plan B.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:

                @8pts9secs

                Comment


                • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                  It's Crittenton with a 3 T's. He was the 19th overall pick in the draft. A 6'5" 200 lb. 19 year old point guard out of Georgia Tech with a ton of....gulp....potential. He only played one season, same as Mike Conley, and here is how their production compares...



                  Pretty fair comparison. Javaris has much better size and is a much better shooter and scorer. Conley takes better care of the basketball. They were both projected to go about the same point (late lottery) before people suddenly became convinced Mike Conley was the second coming of Chris Paul and Atlanta decided to go with the much more NBA ready Acie Law at #11.

                  For those who were convinced Shaun Livingston was the second coming of Christ, I don't see how you wouldn't like Javaris Crittenton. He has everything needed to become an All-Star point guard, he just has to learn to take better care of the basketball. Not to mention, even if he never works out at PG ( I think he will), then he has the skills to be a potentially great SG as well, something else we sorely need.
                  Last edited by Y2J; 07-01-2007, 11:26 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                    Something tells me that the Lakers are going to keep Crittenton and try and use Farmar as trade bait. Critt. has 4 years of triangle experience already, so he won't need as much time getting up to speed with our offense. He has amazing potential to be a legit PG in this league. The kid is relatively smart too, averaged a 3.5 GPA at college.

                    What's interesting is that I keep hearing conflicting reports that the Lakers simply refuse to offer Bynum as part of any deal. Indy dave is this true?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                      Originally posted by oneofthesedays View Post
                      .
                      What's interesting is that I keep hearing conflicting reports that the Lakers simply refuse to offer Bynum as part of any deal. Indy dave is this true?
                      IF that is true, then there will definately be no deal done. The only way a deal would be done w/o Odom is if TPTB actually bight on just Bynum and other crap. Bynum is the ONLY reason they are reasonably interested, they just want more pieces to compete and/or trade away.

                      Hip-Hop ,Guitar & Martial ArtsEnthusiast
                      Tony Jaa could beat you up with his pinky.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                        Walton to stay with Lakers
                        Free agent gets $30 million deal to stay in L.A.

                        BY ELLIOTT TEAFORD, Staff Writer
                        07/02/2007 12:00:00 AM PDT



                        Meanwhile, the search for further help continues as Kupchak attempts to upgrade the Lakers' roster after they went 42-40 last season and were eliminated from the playoffs in the first round by the Phoenix Suns.

                        The Lakers remain interested in a blockbuster deal that would bring them a marquee player to pacify disgruntled superstar guard Kobe Bryant.

                        Kupchak said during the draft Thursday that the Lakers were not interested in granting Bryant's wish to be traded. Kupchak also said anyone else on the roster might be available if the deal was right.

                        The Lakers entered the sweepstakes for Minnesota's Kevin Garnett and Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal and are said to be interested in trading a package of players, including Lamar Odom, to acquire Garnett or O'Neal.

                        When it comes to free agency, the Lakers are hamstrung because they can offer only the mid-level exception to the salary cap ($5.5 million per season).

                        It might be enough to land a point guard such as Steve Blake, Steve Francis or Mo Williams in order to replace Smush Parker, however. Parker will not be re-signed after two ineffective seasons alongside Bryant in the backcourt.

                        LA Daily News

                        Hurry up and wait..
                        Last edited by Frank Slade; 07-02-2007, 10:25 AM.

                        Why Not Us ?

                        Comment


                        • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                          I don't understand. It's said they won't give up Odom because then they won't be competitive, but then it's said they'll give up Odom and not Bynum?

                          I really hope Donnie and Larry told them not to call again until they get their heads out of their asses.
                          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                            I don't understand. It's said they won't give up Odom because then they won't be competitive, but then it's said they'll give up Odom and not Bynum?

                            I really hope Donnie and Larry told them not to call again until they get their heads out of their asses.
                            I really wonder if the sticking point of the trade is Bynum...and not Odom. It really makes sense from the Laker Front Office POV where certain members of the Buss family are holding on to him for dear life.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                              I don't understand. It's said they won't give up Odom because then they won't be competitive, but then it's said they'll give up Odom and not Bynum?

                              I really hope Donnie and Larry told them not to call again until they get their heads out of their asses.
                              Well the truth is the Laker's FO have never said they would give up Bynum for JO. It has been a fan based idea of keeping LO all along.

                              That said it looks like the Lakers will not make a move with the Pacers until the KG situation is resolved. They believe they have a decent shot at getting him. If you guys do not trade JO by the time KG is traded there is a chance a deal will be made. The sad part for everyone is that it will probably take the whole summer.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Is the Lakers trade talks dead.

                                One important thing to remember is that Odom really doesn't even want to come to Indy.

                                I would be perfectly fine getting Crittenton, Bynum, and Kwame for JO. We would have one of the best young rosters in the league. I went to a few Georgia Tech games this year and can definitely attest to how talented Crittenton is..but it could be quite some time before he lives up to his potential. He's definitely a scoring type of PG but did a decent job distributing at Georgia Tech. He doesn't really have point guard instincts at this point in time..but that's because he recently converted from a 2 guard.
                                Last edited by Moses; 07-02-2007, 02:52 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X