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

First six hours of the free agent period is now in the books, some quick thoughts

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

  • First six hours of the free agent period is now in the books, some quick thoughts

    I'm not 100% sure we have seen this kind of movement in one six hour time frame before but man where there ever a lot of trades. Some teams got a whole lot better some didn't improve much if at all and a couple probably took some backward steps and then there are the Knicks. God would I love to get some kind of post from Rimfire after all of these years.

    Anyway there is just so much going on around the league that its hard to pick winners and losers yet. Believe it or not I am not saying the Brooklyn was a winner. I really truly liked the team they had last year and they needed to make some additions but I think adding both KD who won't play this year and Irving who I think is overrated (except obviously when we play him). If they could have just added KD then next year they might be great but this is going to change their dynamics and adding DeAndre Jordan is going to take Jarrett Allen off of the floor a lot unless they play him at the four. I mean I could be totally wrong here but I'm curious what happens this season with the team out there.

    Utah had an impressive day. For a small market they were very active and probably made their franchise significantly better. I'm curious as to why Portland didn't try and go after Bojan.

    The Wizards have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they do not know what they are doing. They have traded away Oto Porter Jr., Kelly Oubrie and Austin Rivers and all they have to show for it is a top 36 protected second round pick.

    Now let's talk about the Pacers.

    So far out goes Bogdanovic, Collison, Young and I'm almost 100% certain Joseph

    In comes Warren, Brogdon, Lamb and Bitadze (so far) plus we are working on an extension for Sumners.

    What started out as a great fear of bringing in Rubio (not that I hate Rubio but he is another older pg who would have just been a place holder) has turned into the shocking and I do mean shocking signing of restricted free agent Malcolm Brogdon. Do we know when that first round pick we traded for him is and are there any protections on it? We then picked up Lamb who while maybe not the star we all wanted he might be a good reserve wing who we need.

    So let me just get this out of the way right up front.

    I was wrong. I was dead wrong about how I thought this off season would go and I have never been more happy to be wrong in my life.

    I was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that we were going to pull the "if only vic were healthy we were a top three seed" and come back with both everybody other than maybe CoJo or DC and then bring in another bum on 2 year deal.

    Fortunately KP and company played me and I fell hook line and sinker for it. His draft day statements about building through hitting a home run in the draft and then all of the lowered expectation talks on both the star and local radio had me convinced that what I thought I knew I knew. I didn't know.

    Now look before you all go patting yourselves on the back there are a couple of things to say here. One last summer was still a **** sandwhich but ultimately it didn't hurt this summer as much as I thought it might. Two while I like Brogdon a lot and Warren & Lamb for that matter, it still is not the killer signing that we could have made with all of this money or big time trade. But don't get me wrong it still good and I'm not complaining, far from it, in fact I'm pretty much thrilled considering where my expectations were.

    But and here is the rub for some of you, what we are going to be doing is taking a step back a little and we all need to just embrace it and learn to go with it. That's right I'm saying I don't think we will have the record next season we have had the two previous seasons but in the long term we will be better because of it. You won a lot of games over the past two seasons because DC, CoJo, Thad & Bogey were all veteran players who played with grit and veteran savvy. That will not be here with this group. Thad really was one of the better defenders at his position in the NBA and could guard LeBron & Giannis as well as anyone, so that is going to be missed.

    However what that group did was max itself out and honestly when real teams kicked it up a notch they could not run with them. This team will not have the savvy or the defense or the intangibles that the previous team had. But what it will have is youth, athleticism, shooting and growth potential.

    In fact I actually wrote about this very thing right after the season and to say that I am stunned the Pacers went this route would be an understatement.

    https://www.pacersdigest.com/forum/t...e-go-from-here

    But I don't want it to be said that I am shifting things, I am freely admitting that I was wrong about this off season and my thoughts on the team have done a 180 in less than the first four hours of the free agent period.

    I truly feel we are now actually building towards something instead of being maxed out and just doing the same old same old.

    Here is the odd thing for me. If we do this right and I'm still very hesitant about this but I feel better now than I did earlier today, there is a possibility that Domas & Myles might work together vs certain teams. There are some teams it just won't work but there are some it will. We now have enough shooters once Vic is back that the floor spacing might actually work. Defense will still be something to watch but hey if we can outscore them every game that is more important in todays NBA.

    Unless we make another move it looks like Leaf or Johnson will get quality minutes at the backup 4 spot. Secretly I want it to be Alize but T.J. needs to sink or swim this year. I know it was just one game but damn did he look great in that Atlanta game. Yes I know it was a blowoff game for us but they were trying to win and he was going vs their starting unit and he was tearing them up.

    Aaron Holdiay, love ya buddy but you are now the third guard. Not a bad position to be in but I have a feeling he is going to want more so this might be a season where he is shopped around and if that is the case I am okay with it. Brogdon has the height and had the experience to make that starting job his. On the other hand if we can convince Aaron to embrace that role he could really be a Vinnie Johnson for us.

    At first I thought that they said we got Jeremy Linn and I nearly died, I was getting ready to text vnzla a photo of homer simpsons butt. But then I realized it was Lamb and got a lot happier. He' not a sexy signing per se but he will be effective. He would have been the best backup wing player we had last year and I suspect he will still hold that role this year. He's still youngish and I don't think he will grow or go down right away. So if he can give us double digits off of the bench then we should be good with it.

    Overall today was a good day. We didn't get any Jimmy Butlers or Kevin Durrants but we took a step in the direction of actually setting up to be better when Victor returns. Sadly he will return just before Durrant returns but we will jump off that bridge when we get to it.

    Last season's off season was an F, I'm sorry but it was.

    This season's off season so far is a Solid B+, only losing a future # 1 pick keeps me from calling it an A.

    But hey the off season is just beginning so let's see what else happens.

    So with all of that in mind

    P.S. Oh I forgot to say one of the great things about getting Brogdon is that I believe this hurts Milwaukee this season. So getting him is great, hurting a division rival and best team in league (by record) is even better.
    Last edited by Peck; 07-01-2019, 01:21 AM.

  • kent beckley
    replied
    I totally agree about Vic and Brogdon, that is a championship level backcourt in talent, but just as importantly, in intangibles. Find the right front court combination and it could get pretty interesting for the next 6 years or so.

    Leave a comment:


  • McKeyFan
    replied
    Where you been?

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    I popped back in here just to say RE: TJ Warren and defense, no one would have thought Bojan would turn into the defender he turned into during his time with the Pacers, but he did. Burke knows how to work with wing defenders and especially leverage around his high end defenders (Past couple years, Vic, Thad, Myles, this year Brogdon, Myles). I think Warren actually has a higher defensive ceiling than Bojan and at the same time is just as polished offensively. Bojan's confidence obviously had grown to sky high levels, being the featured piece on a semi-contending team for basically all of last season, and Warren won't have that, but I don't see why he can't get there after a season and he lines up better with Vic's window.

    Brogdon is a total home run in every sense. From a basketball perspective, you almost couldn't design a better backcourt mate for Victor Oladipo in today's NBA. Brogdon is also an extremely interesting ying to Oladipo's yang. I think they will bring great balance to the locker room. Vic is a Ferrari of energy, Brogdon is your reliable german lux sedan, but both have extremely high character and they come from similar backgrounds. Just an amazing move for the Pacers and it's wild it fell into our lap. I think he can be an all star level player averaging 20, 5, and 5 on insane shooting percentages and getting all defense type hype. Yes, I'm that high on him. The Bucks will massively regret maxing Middleton and letting Brogdon go, JMO. Don't forget that after Brogdon's rookie year, Milwaukee dangled him for Kyrie Irving and there was a non-small amount of NBA pundits who did not like that move for the Bucks.

    Lamb was quietly the only good player on the Hornets last year not named Kemba. Hopefully he doesn't get bitten by the Pacers bench curse, but assuming he stays on a current career trajectory I think he's a guy who will finish top 3 in sixth man of the year voting for a year or 2 at some point in his career.
    Last edited by Trader Joe; 08-02-2019, 10:45 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Originally posted by docpaul View Post
    https://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2...tj-warren-joke

    Lol:




    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    The funny thing is that there were rumors about Phoenix wanting to trade Warren and Jackson for at least a week, everybody knew Warren was available and nobody jumped on it, weird.

    Leave a comment:


  • docpaul
    replied
    https://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2...tj-warren-joke

    Lol:

    If the value the Suns got in the T.J. Warren trade on draft night wasn’t questionable enough, ESPN’s Amin Elhassan painted the circumstances as even more damning for the Suns in a radio spot on 98.7 FM Arizona’s Sports Station on Tuesday afternoon.

    Elhassan certainly is not one to hold back in criticizing the Suns’ organization, but this information appeared to come from the Pacers’ side or from a third party who heard about the Suns’ negotiations to trade Warren.

    “What I heard was when Indiana got the call, ‘Hey we’ll give you T.J. and the 32nd pick,’ the Pacers thought it was a joke, they didn’t think this was a serious offer,” Elhassan said on The Burns & Gambo Show. “And when they realized it was, (Indiana said) ‘OK it has to get done now, because we’re not going to wait for you to figure out the mistake that you’re making here.’”

    A joke. Not a serious offer. The Pacers were just as surprised at the Suns’ eagerness to get off Warren’s salary as bystanders following along on Twitter. Warren is a fine player on a decent contract. Those guys don’t get dumped. Washed up veterans making two or three times Warren’s salary are the ones we see picks thrown in to dump.

    On draft night, it felt as if the Suns were desperate to either clear cap space or rid themselves of Warren for a reason not immediately obvious.

    Elhassan elaborated on those previous negotiations as well, indicating the Suns may have waited too long, perhaps believing Warren was on his way back from an ankle sprain.

    “A deal for T.J. Warren was available to them at an earlier date that did not include them giving a pick, but may have included them getting a pick for him,” Elhassan said, later mentioning that deal was there near the 2019 trade deadline.

    The circumstances surrounding Warren’s ankle sprain are where we have to fall back when considering what went wrong in this relationship. If Warren indeed was ready to come back sooner, as Jamal Crawford indicated during his end-of-season press conference, that’s a problem. If the Suns’ lack of clarity on Warren’s return hurt their ability to get a good return on him in a trade, that’s even worse.

    While it looks bad that the Pacers were so surprised by Phoenix’s offer, there’s reason to believe the negativity surrounding his relationship with the Suns may have impacted his trade value. The Suns did clear enough cap space to bring in Dario Saric and Aron Baynes later that night, who seem to fit their new identity better than Warren.

    Nevertheless, the most questionable move of the Suns’ offseason thus far appears even more suspect now.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

    Leave a comment:


  • Cubs231721
    replied
    Originally posted by BillS View Post

    And yet the Bucks themselves were penalized big time for having a verbal agreement to avoid being over the cap a few years ago.

    None of the signings can take place until the 6th. One of the hits on re-signing George Hill at the time was that it was done so quickly there was no chance to go after FAs. Same when Hibbert was re-signed.
    There was no more chance to go after amnestied players was the rub back then. And they weren't signed until I believe the 3rd day of free agency that year which was after the other signings that relied on their cap holds to do so, even though the Hill deal was announced first.

    I'm not sure about the Bucks incident, can you shed more light on that so I can find that?

    The Timberwolves got a major penalty, but they were doing something entirely different. They tried to make a secret deal where they would use a series of cheap 1 year deals to circumvent the salary cap only to promise to make it up on the back end with a massive extension once Bird rights kicked in. That's the sort of salary cap manipulation the league cares about, not the timing of deals in a single off-season.

    Leave a comment:


  • BillS
    replied
    Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

    That's absolutely not true at least in practice. We just saw it with Summer actually, they reached an agreement before free agency opened but it wouldn't be finalized until after free agency to maintain his tiny cap hold.

    Another example in Pacers history was the re-signing of George Hill. Hill agreed the first day or two of the moratorium, the deal and money was reported, but the contract wasn't signed until well after other deals that were agreed to later because they were keeping his cap hold for as long as possible.
    And yet the Bucks themselves were penalized big time for having a verbal agreement to avoid being over the cap a few years ago.

    None of the signings can take place until the 6th. One of the hits on re-signing George Hill at the time was that it was done so quickly there was no chance to go after FAs. Same when Hibbert was re-signed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cubs231721
    replied
    Originally posted by BillS View Post

    There's some real grey area in just how much you are allowed to have set in stone before a player is considered signed for cap purposes. You can't for example have a promise that you'll sign someone for X amount after other FAs are signed - that's an invalid circumvention of the salary cap. I'd think once the Pacers had an agreement with Bogie they would be required to raise the amount he counted toward the cap.
    That's absolutely not true at least in practice. We just saw it with Summer actually, they reached an agreement before free agency opened but it wouldn't be finalized until after free agency to maintain his tiny cap hold.

    Another example in Pacers history was the re-signing of George Hill. Hill agreed the first day or two of the moratorium, the deal and money was reported, but the contract wasn't signed until well after other deals that were agreed to later because they were keeping his cap hold for as long as possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • BillS
    replied
    Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

    I would have erred on the side of keeping him and paid up, but it’s definitely understandable and a totally defensible decision from KP and the FO.
    There's some real grey area in just how much you are allowed to have set in stone before a player is considered signed for cap purposes. You can't for example have a promise that you'll sign someone for X amount after other FAs are signed - that's an invalid circumvention of the salary cap. I'd think once the Pacers had an agreement with Bogie they would be required to raise the amount he counted toward the cap.

    Leave a comment:


  • DrFife
    replied
    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

    What if at the same time Pacers were trying to sign Bogey, the Bucks agreed to the sign and trade and we decided not to go all in on Bogey
    Interesting possibility, but that might have increased the urgency to re-sign Bogie, given our established ties to him, the "difficulty" in attracting quality free agents to a small market like Indiana, and therefore the attraction to being closer to contention with Bogie AND Brogdon.

    I guess we could look at incremental value. Brogdon (21M)/Rubio (14) > Bogie (18)/Warren (11)? Maybe so.

    Leave a comment:


  • SaintLouisan
    replied
    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

    I highly, highly, highly recommend subscribing to the Athletic -

    Here is the portion about Bog.

    https://theathletic.com/1059676/2019...did-just-fine/

    Well, there’s this: I think I speak for most Pacers observers here when I say it would have been nice to get Bogdanovic to stay in Indianapolis. It’s one thing to lose him to Los Angeles or Boston or some other major market, but Utah?

    According to a source, Bogdanovic actually agreed to a deal with the Pacers that would have included a partially guaranteed contract in the fourth year, but then the Jazz sweetened the pot, added the full fourth year, and Bogey was out the door. He was just too rich for the Pacers’ blood, especially at age 30. Understandable.
    I would have erred on the side of keeping him and paid up, but it’s definitely understandable and a totally defensible decision from KP and the FO.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unclebuck
    replied
    Originally posted by DrFife View Post

    Meh, something still smells a little. If both sides were sincere on "I'll sign if the money's close," then I'm surprised we didn't make one final counter-offer to narrow the gap. (Remember the "extra" money we gave Jeff Foster?)
    What if at the same time Pacers were trying to sign Bogey, the Bucks agreed to the sign and trade and we decided not to go all in on Bogey

    Leave a comment:


  • DrFife
    replied
    Originally posted by docpaul View Post

    According to a pay walled article on The Athletic from Kravitz, the FO and Bogie already had agreed to a partial salary in year 4 with Bogie and once Jazz matched with a full guarantee, Pacers backed out. That makes all of the sense in the world to me given that this time period is the true contention window.
    Meh, something still smells a little. If both sides were sincere on "I'll sign if the money's close," then I'm surprised we didn't make one final counter-offer to narrow the gap. (Remember the "extra" money we gave Jeff Foster?)

    Leave a comment:


  • Unclebuck
    replied
    Originally posted by docpaul View Post

    According to a pay walled article on The Athletic from Kravitz, the FO and Bogie already had agreed to a partial salary in year 4 with Bogie and once Jazz matched with a full guarantee, Pacers backed out. That makes all of the sense in the world to me given that this time period is the true contention window.
    I highly, highly, highly recommend subscribing to the Athletic -

    Here is the portion about Bog.

    https://theathletic.com/1059676/2019...did-just-fine/

    Well, there’s this: I think I speak for most Pacers observers here when I say it would have been nice to get Bogdanovic to stay in Indianapolis. It’s one thing to lose him to Los Angeles or Boston or some other major market, but Utah?

    According to a source, Bogdanovic actually agreed to a deal with the Pacers that would have included a partially guaranteed contract in the fourth year, but then the Jazz sweetened the pot, added the full fourth year, and Bogey was out the door. He was just too rich for the Pacers’ blood, especially at age 30. Understandable.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X