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

JO on Sporting News Radio....

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

  • #61
    Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

    A few potential contenders (not previously mentioned):

    -- Dallas -- window of opportunity is closing and Cuban could pull the trigger on a deal. Would the Pacers want a Terry, Howard, Dampier or Stackhouse?

    -- Phoenix -- gambled and lost with Shaq. New ownership group and Nash isn't getting any younger. Suns would not deal Amare unless Pacers included Granger and we also took Diaw

    -- Golden State -- a ton of free agents for a 50+ win team, but Baron seems unhappy and you know JO would love to be back with Jax and Big Al. I don't think the Pacers would want Davis and a 3 way deal would have to be worked out.

    -- Denver has an interesting core with Iverson (whom JO is good friends with). I don't see us having a lot of interest in Camby, KMart or Nene. We're loaded at the 3 and would have to deal Granger or Dunleavy to make room for Carmelo. Now, Denver could be a potential 3 way partner, though.

    -- Houston -- T-mac and JO's contracts run the same length and right at about equal dollars. T-mac, like JO, has had his fair share of health problems.

    As far as teams in the East, you have the Wizards, Magic, Hawks, Nets and Raps. I don't know if one of those teams would want JO, honestly? Maybe the Nets would give us Carter and Swift or Hassell, but that's about it.

    I could see the Pacers dealing JO to the Knicks, Mavs or Bulls.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

      I just can't imagine some guys being willing to play here. I mean, we'd own their contract so I guess they'd have to, but I can see them slacking off hard pouting about it. Talking guys like Stackhouse, Baron, Shaq... Shaq especially would just shut it down every other game due to "injury" and collect his checks on the way to his retirement.

      I'm not sure what we can do about that, but it probably should be considered.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

        just to add, mike wells also weighs in on that sporting news interview

        http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...darn_misl.html

        Those darn misleading headlines
        Posted by Mike Wells

        I can see why athletes get upset over misleading headlines in newspapers or on the internet.

        I logged onto my computer to check my email Thursday evening and one of the messages I got had the subject line: "Jermaine O'Neal wants to be traded."

        The first thing that went through my head was, "Oh no, here we go," before I even opened the email.

        My thoughts quickly changed when I opened the email from a guy at Sporting News.

        O'Neal, who is in Las Vegas working out, did an interview with Sporting News Radio, but not once during the session did he say he wants to be traded. In fact, O'Neal just reiterated the same stuff he's told the local media the past year or so.

        --He prefers not to be part of a rebuilding project with the Pacers.
        --He thinks he'll be traded if the Pacers rebuild.
        --He talked about his knee problem.

        Sorry if you've heard or read about this before. I know I've written this in the past.

        It's no secret that the Pacers are going to look to trade O'Neal this summer. The rebuilding project - if they decide to go that way - can get started quicker by trading him because of his salary.

        I gave O'Neal a call after reading the interview. I told him what the subject line and the first thing he said was, "Come on, Mike, do you think I really said I wanted to be traded on the radio?" I said, "No," and we both got a laugh out of the situation.

        O'Neal said his knee feels good and he's working out on a regular basis at the Abunassar Impact Basketball academy in Las Vegas.

        Here's part of the transcript from O'Neal's interview with Sporting News Radio:

        O'Neal thinks he'll be traded if team rebuilds:

        "I really believe if it comes down to them totally rebuilding, I believe that they will move me. That's pretty much the consensus thought I got from the ownership and management before I left Indianapolis. I don't think it's going to come down to a situation where we got to go back and forth, back and forth for me to be moved on, because they've just totally rehauled the team. I think if they're going to rehaul the team, then they will move me, and move me to another team that has a chance of winning a championship. That was one thing that was said to me and really pleased me before I left Indianapolis."

        O'Neal thinks they're rebuilding and prefers not to go through it:

        "I think they are about to rebuild. I'm not sure; we're supposed to meet after the draft again. If that's the case, I would prefer to not go through a rebuilding stage."
        pretty much the same content that nuffsaid and smoothdave already posted. it seems though that tptb want to send j.o. to a contending team (as a sort of reward?)

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

          i wonder if j.o. would be willing to opt out if it facilitates his move to a contender. let's say tptb tells j.o.: "the mavs and rick carlisle really want you to go there and provide an inside presence. but your contract is so big that the mavs will be stripped if we do a matching trade. would you be willing to opt out and restructure your deal from 2 years $43m to 4 years $50m instead?"

          that would make j.o. easier to move but would cost him $$$ though

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

            Originally posted by count55 View Post
            Ummm...duh...isn't it basically a Mr. Obvious quote to say that if they really rebuild, they'll move JO? I mean isn't trading JO the basic definition of rebuilding the Pacers?
            Exactly.

            "Oh, Jermaine needs to stop shooting off his mouth and demanding" blah blah blah.

            Sounds like common sense to me. Jermaine sees the writing on the wall. Bird doesn't like him, he doesn't like Bird. He'd have to be an idiot not to know that Bird wants to move him.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
              i wonder if j.o. would be willing to opt out if it facilitates his move to a contender. let's say tptb tells j.o.: "the mavs and rick carlisle really want you to go there and provide an inside presence. but your contract is so big that the mavs will be stripped if we do a matching trade. would you be willing to opt out and restructure your deal from 2 years $43m to 4 years $50m instead?"

              that would make j.o. easier to move but would cost him $$$ though
              JO is smart enough to know that the money he will be paid over the next two years is far more money than he's likely ever to make again the rest of his life. I think he waits another year regardless.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                Larry Bird talks about getting Free Agents to help win. How Is That rebuilding the team? Look at the Lakers, they've made it to the finals with a young team.

                Everyone wants to go to a contender, but if your not San Antonio, the Lakers, Boston, Or Detroit, any other team you go to, your not winning any championship.
                R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                  I think JO thinks long and hard, if at all, before he opts out of the 2 years and 43 million he has left on his deal. From the interview, it sounds like he has no plans to opt out. I think JO believes that he will return to form like he was a few years ago and will get another 3-4 year deal at 8-15 million a year.

                  At the end of the day, JO cares about getting paid more than a ring. Yeah, he would prefer to go to a contender, but it takes 2 to tango and not a lot of teams can take that large of a salary on without gutting a team unless you're sending overpaid players or a player that no one wants.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    It necessarily does.

                    It can be a quick rebuild, but this team needs rebuilding.
                    I don't necessarily agree that getting the "right type of players that we can be proud about" necessarily means that we do rebuild. We can get some experienced players that are considered "milk drinkers" and still building an experienced Playoff team as opposed to completely rebuilding with young players.

                    Also....we all know that we should be rebuilding....but I don't get the sense that TPTB wants to do that....if they did...they would have done so years ago.
                    Last edited by CableKC; 05-31-2008, 12:29 AM.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                      Originally posted by travmil View Post
                      Championship contenders over the next few years

                      1. Lakers-They don't want Jermaine or they would have given up on Bynum, Besides they don't need him with Pau around anyway.
                      2. Celtics-The C's only have room for one PF who talks a big game and fails to come through in the clutch, and at least the one they have plays.
                      3. Hornets - Not likely. In order to get Jermaine, I'm sure the P's would insist on Chandler and I don't think that's gonna happen.
                      4. Pistons - I just threw up in my mouth a little.
                      5. Jazz - I can't think of anything they'd be willing to part with. AK and Okur maybe but it would take WAY more to match JO's salary.
                      6. Cavs - Good fit for JO but they'd try to dump Big Z on us. No thanks.
                      7. Spurs - I can't come up with any realistic scenarios. He'd immediately be the highest paid player on their team and most of them have 3 or more rings. Something doesn't seem right about that.

                      Nothing stands out. Who are the other contenders or close to contending. Orlando is pretty close. Portland will be tough to deal with soon.
                      I was thinking of the impact that adding Gasol to the Lakers has done has done for the team.

                      I think that JONeal could be that type of player that can do something similiar for a Playoff team looking to do something similiar to what the Lakers did.........specifically adding a player that was considered a "Franchise Level Player that isn't really a Franchise Player" to the roster as a 2nd Scoring Option ( what most of us think JONeal is way better suited to do ) and bumping their 2nd scoring option who maybe considered a "borderline All-Star down to the 2nd/3rd scoring option on the team.

                      IMHO....the only team that makes any sense, fit JONeals Half-Court game, and would be close to a Championship is the Cavs.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 05-31-2008, 12:32 AM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                        Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                        UH . . . he has to be on the floor to do that.

                        Even if he is recovered from his injury and still here, I don't think we will even see 1/2 the player earning $19M.
                        Of course, but he's not getting injured on purpose is he? I don't fault him for his injuries, they are out of his control. But, I would much rather gamble on JO's health and his return to all star status than deal him for Zach Randolph, Vince Carter or some of the other crap players that have been tossed around on here. The players being mentioned don't fix a single weakness on our team, they are just trades for the sake of it.

                        People who want to deal him openly state they think he has no value. He is extremely overpaid and injury prone, etc. And if that's true, then they want to deal the Pacers best player for basically nothing of significance. And they honestly think that is going to bring us closer to contending for anything other than one of the last few spots in the Eastern playoff race?

                        JO is 29 and has had NO SIGNIFICANT INJURIES! Why in the world couldn't he regain form? When he came back last year after sitting out for months he put up pretty good numbers in very limited minutes and was head and shoulders above any other big man on our team.
                        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                          "I think they are about to rebuild. I'm not sure; we're supposed to meet after the draft again. If that's the case, I would prefer to not go through a rebuilding stage."

                          This part stands out to me like a red ruby in salt.

                          I wonder what it means by "about to rebuild"? I am sorry but Jamaal and Jermaine have not been part of the team for the past two seasons so I don't understand how just moving them is a rebuild.

                          Are they talking an even more drastic overhaul? How many losses are they going to be willing to take?

                          I just don't see trading J.O. as a rebuild because he hasn't been here for awhile. In fact if they get any player in return that plays 70 plus games I don't see how that would be a down grade at all.

                          I wonder if there is serious consideration to moving the vets. like Foster & Daniels?

                          I'm sorry but if J.O. is just thinking that moving him and J.T. is rebuilding I just don't agree.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            "I think they are about to rebuild. I'm not sure; we're supposed to meet after the draft again. If that's the case, I would prefer to not go through a rebuilding stage."

                            This part stands out to me like a red ruby in salt.

                            I wonder what it means by "about to rebuild"? I am sorry but Jamaal and Jermaine have not been part of the team for the past two seasons so I don't understand how just moving them is a rebuild.

                            Are they talking an even more drastic overhaul? How many losses are they going to be willing to take?

                            I just don't see trading J.O. as a rebuild because he hasn't been here for awhile. In fact if they get any player in return that plays 70 plus games I don't see how that would be a down grade at all.

                            I wonder if there is serious consideration to moving the vets. like Foster & Daniels?

                            I'm sorry but if J.O. is just thinking that moving him and J.T. is rebuilding I just don't agree.
                            Above, you note that Jamaal and Jermaine have not been part of the team for the past two seasons, but I believe this proposition is incorrect. In fact, I'm hard pressed to find two players who have been more instrumental or influential on the team over the last two seasons.

                            A team/franchise in the NBA has two basic aspects: (A) on the court and (B) on the books. While Aspect A ultimately determines whether or not they win the championship, Aspect B can absolutely prevent the franchise from making their Aspect A strong enough to win one.

                            The strongest argument for these two players "not being part of the team" comes in regard to Aspect A: on the court. The two missed a combined 83 player games this season, so they were clearly non-factors in the box score. However, that doesn't mean that they weren't huge factors over the past two season on the court.

                            First, JO and Jamaal played in 69 and 72 games respectively the season prior to this, accounting for 62% and 57% of the minutes played at their respective positions. Second, the structure of the team on the court was largely structured based on the idea that Jermaine would be the inside player and Jamaal would run the offense. The team was relatively open about the Golden State trade being an attempt to find players who fit better with JO, while O'Brien emphasized the role and opportunity JT would have in his offense.

                            They may not have contributed positively to the team, but they were certainly part of it, at least in terms of impacting the results on the floor. Regrettably, it was adversely due to their absence.

                            However, it is in Aspect B: on the books, that these two have, and will continue to have, the biggest role on the team. In this past season, their combined salaries of over $26mm accounted for just under 40% of the team's payroll. These two players alone chewed up 47% of the salary cap. In two years, their combined $30mm of pay may account for over 50% of the salary cap, depending on how that figure grows.

                            These two are the proverbial 800-lb gorilla in the room. While I think there are some decent pieces on the roster (Dunleavy, Granger, maybe Williams and Foster), there is nowhere near enough talent to propel a team committing that much money to these particular players anywhere beyond (at best) an early exit in the playoffs. No, their trade(s) would not signal the completion of a rebuild, but one cannot start until it happens.

                            Also, while it might be possible to deal Droopy without committing to rebuilding, I don't believe the same could be said of any deal involving Jermaine. If Jermaine gets moved, the team is locked into a course of rebuilding. To make a move like the rumored Cleveland deal, then stop would be, IMO, tantamount to saying you're not skydiving by refusing to pull the rip cord after you've already jumped out of the plane.

                            I guess what I was saying earlier was that there really is no way for Jermaine to be here and for there actually to be a rebuilding process at the same time. Therefore, his comments about not wanting to be a part of one are moot. His presence, at least over the next two seasons, prevents the act of rebuilding. His departure signals the beginning of one.
                            Last edited by count55; 05-31-2008, 09:32 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                              Count55-

                              Extremely well said and spot on.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: JO on Sporting News Radio....

                                Originally posted by Oneal07 View Post
                                Everyone wants to go to a contender, but if your not San Antonio, the Lakers, Boston, Or Detroit, any other team you go to, your not winning any championship.
                                On the other hand, think back to last year. Would you (then) have considered the Celtics or the Lakers as championship contenders?

                                Likely not.

                                Now look at this season. What teams are in a position similar to the Celts and Lakers of a year ago? Does adding an O'Neal to the mix do for them what adding Gasol did for LA?

                                I think you have to look at teams that are maybe not currently contenders, but, with the right addition(s), could be. For example, would O'Neal have helped get Atlanta past Boston? Could be.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X