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

2nd update: Raptors sign Jack for 4 years, $20mm (see page 9); Pacers have 7 days to match

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

  • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

    Originally posted by count55 View Post
    Here's my position: I would be fine if we matched any offer for Jack, but that is strictly an emotional reaction. I'm going to be upset when we don't match.

    I think that matching that much ties our hands too much, particularly over the next two years, and so, while I'll be concerned and upset, I can't fault a decision not to match a full MLE type contract.
    Exactly how I feel. I'm not sure if I should be pissed or happy with Travis extending his player option. That's what this really boils down to for this season, but his extension may help the Pacers make a better financial decision if Jack is offered what I think he'll get.

    Originally posted by Hicks
    Who in FA this summer are we likely to get that's better? That's not my sole reason for advocating matching because I like Jack, btw (before anyone not named you wants to think that's where I'm coming from, when it's not).
    I am terrified because I'm afraid we'll still use the $ on someone. Someone that is not worthy.

    Best case scenario (imo): We use as little $ as possible to fill the roster.
    2nd Best: We wait out the summer, then sign someone to a 1 year deal @ $3.5 mil (if we think it can help us trade that expiring along with a couple of other pieces to get a real significant piece).

    Comment


    • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

      Originally posted by tadscout View Post
      I just wish that Mike Wells or Doug Smith will find out the contract details and post the details in their blogs...
      You should be wishing that Toronto just go ahead and make the official offer, which is why we don't have details.

      Comment


      • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        My point is THOSE are bad contracts, but this doesn't come close to them. I'm disagreeing that it's a bad contract. To me a bad contract goes beyond simply paying someone more than you'd like. It reaches a new stage where it goes from "we paid to much" to "Jesus Christ this is terrible, what were we thinking?!"

        I'm sure there's some gray area in between as well. But when a contract is 4 years long, it's not impossible to deal with. When the worst it gets is about $7,000,000 on the final year, it's also not impossible to deal with.
        If you think hes maybe the third best player on your team, then maybe so. If Jack is the third best player on your team, you arent going to be very good. On a good team hes a backup. On a marginal team he can be a starter. But if you are going to pay him 7million a year, then your payroll is gonna be hell, because theres going to be too many guys on the team that are better than him making more than 7 million.

        You simply cant pay a guy thats at that level that much and not have payroll problems.
        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Furthermore:



        TJ Ford being overpaid shouldn't be a reason NOT to sign Jack. Diener getting what he gets doesn't really matter either since it's an expiring deal.

        As for Tinsley, the reason that contract was a mistake is for reasons and issues that have nothing do with with Jarrett Jack. He does not have JT's issues, and this is a much small contract than JT anyway.

        Maybe I'll get it on the page I haven't had a chance to read yet, but so far I'm still waiting to read why $25/4y for Jack is a big mistake beyond the upcoming LT concerns. I get that. I don't see what else. I particularly don't see it when discussing Jack himself. For what he brings, and the lack of issues he has, I don't see the big deal. ?
        But thats just it. Its all about the money. Thats all this discussion is. How much is too much. And you simply cannot close your eyes to the whole financial picture. Thats exactly how we got into such a bad financial situation in the first place.
        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Where are these comparable contracts to what you want him to make that other PGs have that you feel are no worse than him? Maybe that's it? Maybe I just think Jack's a better player than some of you do and you'll cite players that I think are worse than him?
        You could start with the guy he couldnt supplant in Portland-Steve Blake. Hes making a little less than 5. And more importantly with the new financial outlook you now have everyone taking less. Artest signed for the MLE. Is Jack at that level? Obviously not. Ariza-same thing. With what Kidd and Bibby just recently took. Andre Miller cant get a deal-its looking like he might have to settle for the MLE. Most would say Jack isnt at his level. Grant Hill just signed for like 3 million per. Its kinda ironic, but we are almost skewed in our view of contracts because we have had so many very bad ones for so long. And its because a couple of poor decisions were made regarding this very subject and then it spirals out of control.
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          I guess you can count me among the pessimistic in that regard. At least for the next season. Past that it might be different, but then again, at that point, TJ Ford is an expiring contract, Diener's gone, and suddenly Jack would be a very nice bacup to Mr. Wonderful (whomever it ends up being) when he gets here.

          Who in FA this summer are we likely to get that's better? That's not my sole reason for advocating matching because I like Jack, btw (before anyone not named you wants to think that's where I'm coming from, when it's not).
          Exactly, and I'm not sure when/from where Mr. Wonderful is gonna come. Wrest him in a trade during the coming season? Name him. (M Conley, Jr??) Pluck him from next year's draft? Check out the dearth of prospects -- youngins at that.

          Sunshiner spin: Perhaps Larry's & JOB's disparaging comments about the team's PG play were directed to the time before Jack settled into the role at the end. Perhaps, perhaps, their pleasant surprise with his ending play motivated Larry to utter his positive remarks. In line with JOB's wishes, Jack is pretty good size for a PG, after all.

          $20+/4 is rather rich for a backup, yes; but for a starter, it's quite reasonable.


          "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

          - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

          Comment


          • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

            These comments were all made after the season ended, so I think that's unlikely.

            Comment


            • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

              This is tough, I'm a fan of Jack.

              However, I think one year of Ford/Deiner/Price isn't really all that horrible.

              I know that this sounds really crazy right now, but I really think that drafting AJ Price may have changed things in Bird's mind when it comes to keeping Jack. Not to say that Price is better than Jack right now, no, absolutely not but I think TPTB may see him as at worst, a solid backup NBA PG, and thus seen him as very cost effective or our team right now, enough so that TPTB feel comfortable getting rid of Jack. If they did not, I have a feeling that they would not have signed Jones and would have kept all of that money free to sign Jack in the first place.

              Yeah, I realize this isn't probably a popular opinion right now but it might be true. Although keeping Jack is much "safer" option right now TPTB always have to think a few moves ahead and sometimes do so in a cost effective manner.

              Comment


              • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                Time to wheel out Tinsley? I heard he's available.

                Comment


                • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                  Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                  Exactly how I feel. I'm not sure if I should be pissed or happy with Travis extending his player option. That's what this really boils down to for this season, but his extension may help the Pacers make a better financial decision if Jack is offered what I think he'll get.



                  I am terrified because I'm afraid we'll still use the $ on someone. Someone that is not worthy.

                  Best case scenario (imo): We use as little $ as possible to fill the roster.
                  2nd Best: We wait out the summer, then sign someone to a 1 year deal @ $3.5 mil (if we think it can help us trade that expiring along with a couple of other pieces to get a real significant piece).
                  If they dont match, then the fear of using that money on someone not worthy should be pretty much gone. They are showing a determination when it comes to fiscal responsibility. Not matching Jack would only prove as further evidence to that fact.

                  My guess is you would just see them go with Ford, Diener and Price unless they could pick someone up on the cheap. They also could try to go after more of an upgrade at the pg, though they would have to trade Ford.

                  Or they could just play Tinsley. He is still, far and away the most talented pg on the roster

                  In all seriousness, I also think Bird has this idea about using Dunleavy at the point at some times through the game. Especially with having Jones now, who can defend the opposing pg.
                  The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                  Comment


                  • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                    I've been saying since last year I thought he would get a big contract offer.. I really hope they match anything up to 6m per, even if its a bit higher. Jack is so underrated on this board it seems. The guy is perfect for our team, he keeps his nose clean, hard worker, never misses games, and is a clutch player. What other PG out there in the 4-6m per year could be better for us?

                    Comment


                    • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                      Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                      This is tough, I'm a fan of Jack.

                      However, I think one year of Ford/Deiner/Price isn't really all that horrible.

                      I know that this sounds really crazy right now, but I really think that drafting AJ Price may have changed things in Bird's mind when it comes to keeping Jack. Not to say that Price is better than Jack right now, no, absolutely not but I think TPTB may see him as at worst, a solid backup NBA PG, and thus seen him as very cost effective or our team right now, enough so that TPTB feel comfortable getting rid of Jack. If they did not, I have a feeling that they would not have signed Jones and would have kept all of that money free to sign Jack in the first place.

                      Yeah, I realize this isn't probably a popular opinion right now but it might be true. Although keeping Jack is much "safer" option right now TPTB always have to think a few moves ahead and sometimes do so in a cost effective manner.
                      Agree... Although I'll take starting Jack over Ford every single time... sometimes you have to do the best thing for the long term for the franchise...

                      Remember next year we'll have a ton of expiring contracts that can be used to obtain the solid/ maybe even star PG we all desire...

                      I'm sure Larry and Morway has a plan laid out for all this, both mattering the needs for this year and our long term needs...
                      "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                      Comment


                      • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                        Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                        If you think hes maybe the third best player on your team, then maybe so. If Jack is the third best player on your team, you arent going to be very good. On a good team hes a backup. On a marginal team he can be a starter.
                        Why are you equating $25/4 to the third best player on a team? Where is this rule and I haven't read?

                        But if you are going to pay him 7million a year, then your payroll is gonna be hell, because theres going to be too many guys on the team that are better than him making more than 7 million.
                        And how are you getting $7 million a year from $25/4? If he got paid the same every year it'd be $6,250,000. Much closer to 6 than 7.

                        You simply cant pay a guy thats at that level that much and not have payroll problems.
                        I think it's a different rule book when you're talking about a guy who's either a PG or a big man, and said PG or big man can play an important leadership/attitude role on your team.

                        It'd be different if we were talking about a swingman or a swingman without the leadership angle.


                        But thats just it. Its all about the money. Thats all this discussion is. How much is too much. And you simply cannot close your eyes to the whole financial picture. Thats exactly how we got into such a bad financial situation in the first place.
                        So which is it? What you said first, or what you're saying now about the luxury tax?

                        I guess if it really focuses on the latter, then tell me how this deal puts us in eternal LT hell? Does the rest of the roster get cemented if we agree to this deal? Does Jack become untradable if we so choose down the road? I don't think the answer to either of those is yes.


                        You could start with the guy he couldnt supplant in Portland-Steve Blake. Hes making a little less than 5.
                        True, and that's the end of that contract. A good example to make because on paper he's a somewhat better PG when looking at AST and TO. I don't follow Blake so I can't really comment on his game very much.

                        Now tell me this: How much do you think he'd be worth if he were a FA this summer instead of next year?

                        And more importantly with the new financial outlook you now have everyone taking less. Artest signed for the MLE. Is Jack at that level?
                        Artest has several issues that lower his price tag, including his history, and he took a discount on top of all of that to sign with the reigning champs. A skewed comparison at least two different ways.

                        Obviously not. Ariza-same thing.
                        I guess this one depends on what you think of Ariza. I think that's about what he's worth. At best. From what I've seen of him. If he can produce big time without being behind Kobe and Co. then good on him and the Rockets.

                        With what Kidd and Bibby just recently took.
                        Kidd's getting $8m per year and he's old. Bibby got less than I think he could have gotten at $6m per year. That was a bargain for Atlanta.

                        Andre Miller cant get a deal-its looking like he might have to settle for the MLE.
                        I think we agree he's better than Jack and would be settling if he got the MLE.

                        Most would say Jack isnt at his level.
                        Clearly Miller is better.

                        Grant Hill just signed for like 3 million per.
                        Again, a very old player at the end of his career. And not a PG or a big man.

                        Its kinda ironic, but we are almost skewed in our view of contracts because we have had so many very bad ones for so long. And its because a couple of poor decisions were made regarding this very subject and then it spirals out of control.
                        I agree we've had some very bad contracts on our team. But I also think this offer for Jack, while overpaying him, doesn't come close to those bad deals.

                        I guess on a scale from 1 to 10, 1 being highway robbery, 10 being god awful, horrible, who would ever do that, just terrible contract, I'd put paying Jack $25/4y at no worse than a 6.5. Probably a 6.

                        So I'm not trying to argue that it's a deal or even fair price. I just don't think it's anywhere approaching outrageous.

                        Comment


                        • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                          Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                          Or they could just play Tinsley. He is still, far and away the most talented pg on the roster

                          In all seriousness, I also think Bird has this idea about using Dunleavy at the point at some times through the game. Especially with having Jones now, who can defend the opposing pg.

                          Your First comment- Hell would have to freeze over first...

                          Your Second comment- Yeah I could see that very much... as Dunleavy is our best passer/playmaker...
                          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                          Comment


                          • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                            Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                            I don't think it is, but we have people saying 4 yr/$11 mil for Jones is terrible.
                            Jack was our leader last year. Our toughness will be diminished as much losing him as we gained signing Psycho and Jones (if he is even a factor).

                            Jack is worth far more than Jones to us. If we don't get creative and arrange a way to match Toronto's offer, even up to the full amount of the MLE, we will be sliding back nearly as much as we have progressed thus far this off season, IMO.

                            Comment


                            • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                              does anybody knows what is raymond feltons offer sheet? we can maybe get him instead(in case toronto's offer is to much)
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: oh oh- Raptors close to signing Jarrett to offer sheet

                                Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                                Jack was our leader last year. Our toughness will be diminished as much losing him as we gained signing Psycho and Jones (if he is even a factor).

                                Jack is worth far more than Jones to us. If we don't get creative and arrange a way to match Toronto's offer, even up to the full amount of the MLE, we will be sliding back nearly as much as we have progressed thus far this off season, IMO.
                                I totally agree man, this would be a huge set back for the team. I think Jack is crucial to this teams success.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X