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

GET BEN SIMMONS PRITCHARD !!!!

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

  • youOk
    replied
    could be nothing but apparently, Sabonis started following Simmons on Instagram.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/pacers/comm...g_ben_simmons/

    Leave a comment:


  • Really?
    replied
    To want McCollum but say Brogdon isn't high level enough seems odd!

    Leave a comment:


  • OneMoreYear
    replied
    Originally posted by granger4mvp View Post
    Obviously pacers aren’t getting Simmons considering what those meat whistles are asking and It looks like Brogdan and Levert isn’t even something they want. Move on and sign lance he will at least shoot the ball.
    Right, forget them. I don't even like to think about what all the trade speculation may be doing to team morale and chemistry.

    Philly wants to be this way let them. We're taking about the organization responsible for The Process, where they made an embarassment of themselves and the league as well. They deserve the karma that's coming their way and it'd be fitting for all involved if this stalemate goes a while year, trashing another Sixers season in which the fans were to be rewarded for sitting through all that intentional losing.

    If the Cavs give up say Sexton, Garland, Okoro & a bunch of picks then they're fools. Simmons is not worth anywhere NEAR that.

    Reports are that they had plenty of warning before drafting Simmons that he was a malcontent. So it's their own fault.
    Last edited by OneMoreYear; 10-09-2021, 08:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ozys Nepimpis
    replied
    On Kyrie Irving, Ben Simmons, Damian Lillard and Bradley Beal: Trade scenarios and insight from our insiders

    https://theathletic.com/2876529/2021/10/08/on-kyrie-irving-ben-simmons-damian-lillard-and-bradley-beal-trade-scenarios-and-insight-from-our-insiders/


    Amick: DA, I think that discussion about shared incentive to make a move — or lack thereof — is where the Simmons situation stands alone among these four. His camp grew frustrated with this staring contest quite some time ago, as they left the August meeting with Sixers brass with the belief that a deal would likely go down by the time the June 23 draft came and went. To review, that was the day when Simmons, who was with Sixers managing partner Josh Harris, Morey, general manager Elton Brand and his Klutch Sports agent, Rich Paul, at Paul’s Los Angeles home, made it clear to all of them that he wanted out.

    “They didn’t expect him to do that,” one source with knowledge of the meeting said. “But they felt it, and they knew it was genuine.”

    But here’s the thing: Morey has made it clear, both then and now, that he has extremely high expectations for the eventual return on a Simmons deal. I get it, for sure, as we’re talking about a three-time All-Star and one-time All-NBA player.

    But as you both know, and has been said and written about plenty of times, the Lillard-for-Simmons swap with Portland that is widely seen as Morey’s dream scenario just isn’t realistic. Not yet, anyway.

    “You’re waiting on a prayer,” the source said of the Lillard scenario.

    And in the absence of that, no one can seem to figure out what sort of trade gets this sticky situation resolved. Meanwhile, we’ve officially reached the point where Simmons is paying dearly for staying away — reportedly $360,000 per preseason game missed, with the money coming out of the $8.25 million that was withheld from him recently and placed in an escrow account from which fines will be deducted.

    It remains to be seen whether he gives in and shows up at some point, but it was made clear to me in the reporting for this Sept. 28 piece that all hope of reconciliation is gone.

    “Even if (Simmons) shows up, I think there’s no chance of him ever mentally being back in Philly,” the source said.

    So, John, are you hearing about any non-Lillard scenarios here that might work?

    Hollinger: Other than the idea of Brooklyn and Philly swapping headaches in a Simmons-Irving swap? We know several teams called to at least kick the tires, but Philly’s win-now situation impacts the type of trade it can do with another team. Getting a bunch of “assets” from San Antonio, for instance, isn’t helping the title chase unless the Sixers can immediately parlay them into another player.

    It’s much better for Philly to acquire that piece right away, and there are two scenarios that seem at least quasi-realistic for accomplishing that. The first would be the oft-discussed Minnesota scenario, where the Wolves send DeAngelo Russell and some to-be-determined amount of draft equity (multiple firsts, surely) to Philadelphia in return for Simmons.

    Is Russell the Sixers’ ideal target? Absolutely not. Is he good enough to get them through some of the season, or perhaps even all of it, until their ideal target (coughLillardcough) becomes available? Possibly. And once that target comes available, Russell makes enough money that he checks the box for the offsetting contract in the deal … along with all the draft picks from Minnesota and perhaps some other stuff from the Sixers. Think of it as a delayed three-way trade.

    Of course, Philadelphia would rather do that three-way trade all at once, which is why the Sixers are likely to keep their options open for a while rather than settle for what the Wolves can do.

    But there’s one other one that keeps gnawing at me: Indiana. The Pacers are a good, solid team lacking in star power. The Sixers have a star but need a guard who can shoot and has some leadership qualities. Enter Malcolm Brogdon, erudite product of the nation’s finest university and a top-notch perimeter marksman. Other contracts would be involved — perhaps Jeremy Lamb’s expiring contract, or Justin Holiday or Caris LeVert — and surely there would be draft equity (or recent first-rounder Chris Duarte) headed to Philly as well.

    It’s not a perfect deal for either side. Brogdon is lower on the star totem pole than the Sixers are aiming. And a Pacers team with Simmons, Domantas Sabonis and Myles Turner playing together would probably need another trade to optimize its talent.

    Again, it seems to me Philly might prefer waiting to pull the trigger on something like that right now, but it might be the best “right now” move it can execute.

    Finally, I’ll note there are also 3-way variants that I can torture everybody with involving Philly, Minnesota and Indiana, but I can’t find one that ends in a better place than the two-team trades above.

    One other thought: Does it help or hurt Philly if it gets off to a slow start? On the one hand, it might increase the panic factor. But on the other … what better way to demonstrate Simmons’ value to other teams than if the Sixers struggle without him?

    Aldridge: Sam knows where I’m going. I just think Sacramento can make a better offer to Philly for Simmons than either Indy or Minnesota. The Kings have three point guards, all of whom are under 24. And I know they’re saying they can make it work between De’Aaron Fox, Tyrese Haliburton and Davion Mitchell. And one of Sac’s best five-man lineups last season, with a good sample size (400+ minutes), had Fox, Haliburton and Buddy Hield playing together with Harrison Barnes and Richaun Holmes – a net rating of 7.6, per NBA.com.

    But if the ball finds energy, as Mike D’Antoni likes to say, agents find minutes for guys looking to get paid. Fox already got his, but Haliburton and Mitchell will be looking for theirs pretty soon. Either of those two, with Hield – I think it’s safe to say Hield’s not looking to settle down in the 916 after being a nanosecond from going to the Lakers – would be a very fair return for Philly for Simmons.

    We all know what Hield does. He’s an elite shooter. He’s a mediocre at-best defender. (After being, essentially, a net ratings standoff two years ago, Hield sported an offensive rating per 100 possessions last season, per basketball-reference.com, of 109 – and a defensive rating per 100 of 119. Yikes.) Sac was ready to cut ties before the Lakers turned their attention to Westbrook. With Hield playing next to, say, Danny Green, and in front of Joel Embiid, I don’t think his defensive issues would be quite as acute. And, Lord, would he get some looks.

    I’ve written this on Simmons to Sac before, and the rationale still holds. Simmons is an elite defensive player. He’s an elite passer. He has four years left on his deal. (He would have no problem going to Sacramento, I’m told, so strong is his desire to get out of Philadelphia.) The Kings were historically bad defensively last season. Simmons wouldn’t be a savior, but with him and Fox and whichever one of Haliburton or Mitchell the Kings kept in this scenario, Sac would suddenly become a problem defensively, wildly switchable and able to get from defense to offense in a heartbeat. They wouldn’t shoot as good without Hield, but they had Hield last year and went 31-41. What are we talking about?

    Given his offensive limitations, Simmons won’t be a savior wherever he goes, including Sacramento. (Of course, he wouldn’t be on the block if he didn’t have those limitations.) But he’s the kind of talent the Kings would never have a chance of getting in free agency. It would be a chancy deal for a new front office to make, but it would be worth the risk, to me.

    Amick: Man, I knew I could count on you to bring that Kings fire, DA. If anyone missed it, our Hall of Famer made this spirited Sacramento argument when we last discussed the Simmons situation in early September. Yet as was the case then, sources tell me the Kings have been determined to see what this current group looks like early on this regular season and haven’t revisited the Simmons situation since the two teams spoke months ago.

    As I mentioned then, it’s worth highlighting the fascinating front office relationship dynamics that would be in play if the Kings ever change their stance: Second-year general manager Monte McNair was an understudy of Morey’s during their time together in Houston and still has a very good rapport with him. Ditto for Sachin Gupta, who — in addition to being credited as the creator of the aforementioned ESPN trade machine — recently took over the Timberwolves’ front office after the abrupt dismissal of Gersson Rosas last month. Gupta, who could conceivably improve his chances of keeping the job for the long haul by landing Simmons, headed Morey’s analytics team from 2006 to 2013.

    Like San Antonio, Cleveland is another team with known interest where — at least for now — the roster appears to lack the star power to get it done. Unless, that is, you’re willing to construct a deal centered on all of your young talent and first rounders.

    Say, Dejounte Murray, Lonnie Walker IV and a bevy of picks from the Spurs, or Colin Sexton, Darius Garland, Isaac Okoro and a bevy of picks from the Cavs? Then, maybe — just maybe — there’d be some traction there. There has been chatter around the league about a Trail Blazers possibility not involving Lillard — a CJ McCollum/Robert Covington/picks kind of thing — but that obviously hasn’t come to fruition either.

    Leave a comment:


  • CJ Jones
    replied
    ^^^

    Leave a comment:


  • granger4mvp
    replied
    Obviously pacers aren’t getting Simmons considering what those meat whistles are asking and It looks like Brogdan and Levert isn’t even something they want. Move on and sign lance he will at least shoot the ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • CableKC
    replied
    Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post
    I sort of see why the Sixers don't want to rebuild, but on the other hand I think their window has closed for now.

    Hard to believe that just over two years ago, it took a circus shot from the eventual champions' MVP to put them away in Game 7 of the Conference Semis.

    They'd need a plague of injuries and covid-bans to even have a chance now.
    If they were to trade Simmons, they wouldn't be rebuilding. They'd get enough of a package to pick up where they left off last season. At worst, they won't be as good as they were this last season.....but they aren't going to be so bad that they are considered to be "slightly worse" compared to playing with Simmons. McCollum or Brogdon isn't "chop liver", they are high quality Non-ALL Star Starters that can contribute.

    Leave a comment:


  • SaintLouisan
    replied
    I sort of see why the Sixers don't want to rebuild, but on the other hand I think their window has closed for now.

    Hard to believe that just over two years ago, it took a circus shot from the eventual champions' MVP to put them away in Game 7 of the Conference Semis.

    They'd need a plague of injuries and covid-bans to even have a chance now.

    Leave a comment:


  • indyman37
    replied
    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post

    I don't think so, I think this has more to do with what the 76ers want out of the trade. They are not trying to rebuild, which pretty much eliminates less teams from the equation as they are mostly going to be look to pair Simmons with their current "star", and otherwise do not have the talent the 76ers would want back. Better teams may have the talent, but likely view it as too big of a risk. That just leaves teams like the Pacers, Portland, etc. Middle of the pack playoffs teams who do not have a clear way forward to becoming a championship team. They have the kind of talent the 76ers want, while also being willing to take a risk.
    Philly becomes even more of a laughing stock every time another report comes out that they’re still focused on working out a Simmons for Lillard trade

    Leave a comment:


  • indyman37
    replied
    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

    Embiid is such an Alpha personality. I can see the possibility of Simmons doing better here. We don't have an established leader right now, even as articulated by the front office.
    Not to mention the Indy media is much different than the Philly media…

    Leave a comment:


  • Eleazar
    replied
    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    Lots of rumors and articles out there about the Pacers and Simmons being a perfect fit and Indy being one of the only teams that can put together win now offer for Philly. Its kinda crazy because the Pacers have never before been in this kind of conversation. Is this Rick's doing? You wonder if he is greasing some wheels in the media and around the league to try and pressure the front office to make a move?
    I don't think so, I think this has more to do with what the 76ers want out of the trade. They are not trying to rebuild, which pretty much eliminates less teams from the equation as they are mostly going to be look to pair Simmons with their current "star", and otherwise do not have the talent the 76ers would want back. Better teams may have the talent, but likely view it as too big of a risk. That just leaves teams like the Pacers, Portland, etc. Middle of the pack playoffs teams who do not have a clear way forward to becoming a championship team. They have the kind of talent the 76ers want, while also being willing to take a risk.

    Leave a comment:


  • graphic-er
    replied
    Lots of rumors and articles out there about the Pacers and Simmons being a perfect fit and Indy being one of the only teams that can put together win now offer for Philly. Its kinda crazy because the Pacers have never before been in this kind of conversation. Is this Rick's doing? You wonder if he is greasing some wheels in the media and around the league to try and pressure the front office to make a move?

    Leave a comment:


  • BringJackBack
    replied
    You'd have to think that if Simmons had no interest in coming here, by now Clutch would have headlines all over Google by now indicating so (or at least spam headlines re-indicating that he wants to go to such-and-such beach city) .... so there's that

    Leave a comment:


  • Eleazar
    replied
    A team could ask the 76ers for permission to speak to Simmons, and permission can be given on a case-to-case basis. So they could allow the Pacers while blocking the Lakers if they so choose.

    Leave a comment:


  • 90'sNBARocked
    replied
    I think we have the best ability to put the best package together on a deal for Simmons however everything I've read about Morey and the way operates, is hes going to continue to ask for the sun moon and stars. There's no way in hell I'm giving up 2 of Brogdon, Carris, Warren, PLUS 3 1st round draft picks and the right to swap 3 future picks!!!!!! As long as Morey continues to be delusional I see not even a percentage chance of a deal happening!
    And with that reasoning I say screw Simmons and the sixers!
    Last edited by 90'sNBARocked; 10-08-2021, 02:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X