Tweet
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Only 10 more hours until we can officially put this thing to rest.
Only 10 more hours until we can officially put this thing to rest.
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
-
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Yep, it's dead. I'm disappointed, Bynum will not only be more dominant than Mr. 44% Jermaine O'Neal, but he's 10 years younger and still on a rookie contract.
Oh well. GM's who are too scared to take gambles and/or are mentally challenged (Larry Bird) are destined for mediocrity, at best.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
I'll add another:Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
JO - 19ppg/9rpg/2bpg
Bynum - 8ppg/6rpg/1.6bpg
Potentially, Bynum can double his #s and put up 16ppg/12rpg/3.2bpg in the upcoming season...but potentially, JONeal can go through an entire season injury free.
I know...the latter is stretch....but long term...I agree with you....Bynum can be a very solid Center of the future. Admittedly, Laker fans know his game more then I do...so it's entirely possible that he does significantly improve his game in the long run. But short term...simply based off of the #s that he put up last season....I don't see him making that big of a leap in the immediate future.
BTW...this doesn't mean that he doesn't have any value or that he isn't going to be a good player...it just means ( for now ) that I'm not going to base my entire opinion on him based off of "potential"...I have to see him sustain and improve on that performance over the course of a season. Until I see it happen ( I'm speaking metaphorically...not literally )...he will be a 8ppg/6rpg/1.6bpg Center with definite long-term potential.
If you go on this assumption.....then there is no player out there that the Lakers can get to help Kobe out. There is no guarantee that any player...JONeal, Gasol or even KG....can be the answer to the Lakers woes. If that's the case...then why try at all?Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
Taking on any player while giving up something is a gamble for both teams....that's the risk that any GM has to take. The only way that it wouldn't be a risk is if the trade favored the Lakers....and honestly....where are the Lakers ( much less any team ) going to find any trade that clearly favors their team but not the other? The answer is no where.
The closest answer that I can come up with is if the Lakers were to get that All-Star level player while not giving up Bynum ( which wouldn't happen with the Pacers and...I'm guessing....couldn't happen with the Grizzlies for Gasol ) while keeping Odom.
From my standpoint..the best that Laker fans can hope for is to get the best player available for Kwame and Farmar ( since they don't want to give up Odom, Bynum or Crittenton ). Maybe Drew Gooden+filler for Kwame+Farmar+future 1st?
I am sure that the Lakers can make at trade that centered around Kwame's Expiring Contract for a player....but I just don't think that the level of player that they can get for that type of offer will significantly improve the team.
BTW....regardless of any All-Star that the Lakers can get....he is gonna have a huge long-term contract. From a salary POV...no All-Star level player has a cheap, short-term contract. Even if you got Gasol and somehow...it doesn't work out and Kobe opts out....you would be stuck with his long-term contract.Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
The same could be said for the Lakers.....don't act like the Pacers must make a trade just to make a trade and accept any offers the Lakers throw at them.Originally posted by Purple & Gold View PostAsh from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
There is nothing that is going to change from last season to this season...the pressure cooker that is the LA Lakers is gonna be the same...the playoff push is gonna still be there....and all this Kobe drama is just the topping on top of all this. I have little doubt that he will one day become the player that we all think he will be. But for the very reasons that you sight....I just don't think that it will happen overnight...or at least over the course of a single summer workout.Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
Unless a player has God-given talent like Lebron or Kobe and was able to hit the ground running the second he came out of high-school and hit the NBA floor.....then it's gonna simply take time for Bynum to develop.
BTW...I respectfully disagree that the Lakers FO has the luxury of time to simply let him develop....I really think that the window of opportunity for the Lakers to make a serious playoff push with Kobe is smaller then you think. Maybe they have some breathing room this season....but IMHO, after this season...assuming that the Lakers don't make some serious waves....I can't see how Kobe ( even if he has another year after that to simply opt out ) can keep his huge mouth and ego in check.Last edited by CableKC; 08-03-2007, 02:18 PM.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Barring major injuries Kobe will be an effective player for the next 10 years. He will be able to play at his prime level for the next 4-5 years, but it's not like he's going to fade into oblivion afterwards. He will still be able to hit his shots and contribute.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Actually it's a very smart argument. Only a fool doesn't think it's a legit argument.Originally posted by indy0731 View PostComment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Oliver Milleresque?? Please it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about. Unless you consider Yao early on Oliver Milleresque. Fact is he already has improved his conditioning. It will be a non issue soon enough.Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View PostComment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Why? Because we kept a guy putting up 22/10/3?Originally posted by Bynum Brigade View PostP.S. I will be back during the season to rub it in your face when Bynum is putting up 15/10/3
=============
I'm quite content with keeping our best player. I'd be okay with trading him if we receive "we're trading for your franchise player" compensation.
Bynum could be Jon Bender 2.0 for all we know. That's a helluva risk when trading a six-time all-star that is only 28 years old.Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
"I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
My brain done broken after readin' this here thread.Narf!Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Darn since Andrew Bynum won't be putting up 15/10/3 numbers this season , I guess if true to his word Bynum Brigade is gone for good.
I think Bynum might put up 12/8/2 if he can stay out of foul trouble , but I think his minutes will be limited. Personally if the Pacers got Bynum thats about the max I'd expect from him this season too.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Let me say again 20 million dollars compared to a rookie contract. Something not to be overlooked.Originally posted by CableKC View PostI'll add another:
JO - 19ppg/9rpg/2bpg
Bynum - 8ppg/6rpg/1.6bpg
Potentially, Bynum can double his #s and put up 16ppg/12rpg/3.2bpg in the upcoming season...but potentially, JONeal can go through an entire season injury free.
Yes he still needs more seasoning and will not put up JO numbers next year, but at a rookie contract that's OK.I know...the latter is stretch....but long term...I agree with you....Bynum can be a very solid Center of the future. Admittedly, Laker fans know his game more then I do...so it's entirely possible that he does significantly improve his game in the long run. But short term...simply based off of the #s that he put up last season....I don't see him making that big of a leap in the immediate future.
Potential is an ugly word, but I like it much better than injury prone.BTW...this doesn't mean that he doesn't have any value or that he isn't going to be a good player...it just means ( for now ) that I'm not going to base my entire opinion on him based off of "potential"...I have to see him sustain and improve on that performance over the course of a season. Until I see it happen ( I'm speaking metaphorically...not literally )...he will be a 8ppg/6rpg/1.6bpg Center with definite long-term potential.
Well certain players are better risks than other ones and certain contracts are better than other ones. JO is a risk and has a horrible contract. Not as much KG or Gasol.If you go on this assumption.....then there is no player out there that the Lakers can get to help Kobe out. There is no guarantee that any player...JONeal, Gasol or even KG....can be the answer to the Lakers woes. If that's the case...then why try at all?
Exactly and that's why I don't think the Lakers and Pacers should make a trade. It's obvious you guys want way too much for your "franchise" player.Taking on any player while giving up something is a gamble for both teams....that's the risk that any GM has to take. The only way that it wouldn't be a risk is if the trade favored the Lakers....and honestly....where are the Lakers ( much less any team ) going to find any trade that clearly favors their team but not the other? The answer is no where.
Actually a trade based around Kwame/Farmar/Odom/picks should be able to fetch us a very nice player. Especially the closer we get to the trade deadline and the farther we get away from the perception that we must make a trade.The closest answer that I can come up with is if the Lakers were to get that All-Star level player while not giving up Bynum ( which wouldn't happen with the Pacers and...I'm guessing....couldn't happen with the Grizzlies for Gasol ) while keeping Odom.
From my standpoint..the best that Laker fans can hope for is to get the best player available for Kwame and Farmar ( since they don't want to give up Odom, Bynum or Crittenton ). Maybe Drew Gooden+filler for Kwame+Farmar+future 1st?
I am sure that the Lakers can make at trade that centered around Kwame's Expiring Contract for a player....but I just don't think that the level of player that they can get for that type of offer will significantly improve the team.
Well certain long-term contracts I wouldn't have a problem being stuck with. Gasol would be one of those.BTW....regardless of any All-Star that the Lakers can get....he is gonna have a huge long-term contract. From a salary POV...no All-Star level player has a cheap, short-term contract. Even if you got Gasol and somehow...it doesn't work out and Kobe opts out....you would be stuck with his long-term contract.
I agree, that's why I'm not here trying to sell you on a bad deal. I believe we are not good trade partners. You guys want "fair value" we don't want to give what you guys believe is "fair value". A trade IMO shouldn't be made between us. Unless of course you want that Odom/Kwame/extras deal.The same could be said for the Lakers.....don't act like the Pacers must make a trade just to make a trade and accept any offers the Lakers throw at them.
Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
Personally no Bynum -no trade. I want no part of Odom if Bynum isn't in the trade. I'd accept a Bynum , Crittenton, Brown , filler deal . But if our franchise big man is dealt we need at least a kid with potential to be a good big man in return.Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
You really think its a legit or lets say relevant argument to say that a guy who has played in two NBA seasons is not injury prone? I think thats silly at best. Jonathan Bender played in 78 games his third season in the NBA. Look at that iron man. JO who you call injury prone and I'm not even saying I disagree with that assessment played in 70 games his last season in Portland and 81 his first season in Indiana. These were his first two comparable seasons to Bynum's rookie and second year in terms of minutes played. (Remember JO played behind one of the best frontcourts in the West on Portland something Bynum clearly cannot say) You saying Bynum is not injury prone is about as relevant as me saying that Danny Granger is an iron man cause he's only missed 4 games in his first two seasons. Get back to me in I dunno 3-4 years. If Bynum is still posting 75+ games played a season then your argument will be legitamate until then its just speculation much like everything else about Andrew Bynum.Originally posted by Purple & Gold View Post
Comment
-
Re: The Official JO trade rumors/speculation/discussion thread
J.O. will be better next season, and probably the season after that. But beyond that, I'd bet any amount of money on Bynum. He's bigger than J.O., he's stronger than J.O., he's already shown glimpses of being both a better shot blocker and rebounder than J.O., and working with Kareem, his offensive game will eventually be better than J.O.'s, and he's already as good a shooting touch as J.O.
If we were any type of threat, I'd be fine with keeping J.O. But we're not, we're garbage, and we're garbage with a bunch of bad contracts and a declining franchise player. You people are either seriously lacking in foresight or are in complete denial of just how bad our team is.Last edited by Y2J; 08-03-2007, 03:05 PM.Comment
Comment