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

Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

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

  • #31
    Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

    Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
    Too many variables. Our expirings may jump in value, they may crash. What's going to determine this? You have an arms race in the league, teams trying to keep up with everyone, adding more pieces....being as competitive as possible.

    Not all of these teams are going to work out. Some teams think they'll have a good year and go belly up early - be it bad chemistry, injuries, whatever. They may be interested in freeing up cap room for flexibility at the trade deadline. There may be a player up for grabs that we can snag for one of our expirings.

    Another possible situation is that there are 4 or so teams at the top of each conference, clearly better than the rest but not obviously better than each other. Depending on how our expirings play, they may wish to mortgage the future by trading some players/prospects for a player that adds something to their team - say Troy Murphy or TJ Ford.

    Yet another is the injury factor. What if a point guard goes down on a play off team and someone feels like they can use TJ Ford, if not to start, as backup insurance to whoever takes over. A team may be inclined to send something our way in order to keep their "now" alive.

    And then finally there are malcontents. Players that for whatever reason want out of their town. Maybe they still have a few years on their contract, whatever. A potentially solid player could be netted by tossing an expiring like Troy Murphy with a draft pick or a prospect for said player.

    There are a lot of factors going into this season that will determine the value of our expirings. They have value for a variety of reasons. To get out of a contract, or that most of them are actually solid rotation players, or maybe something in their game adds a dimension another team lacks. The value of our contacts as of today is probably close to Okafor/Brand exchange talent/contract-wise. It will likely change as the season gets going and as teams begin to see what they're working with.

    None of this means we'll get a deal to our liking, but it does mean that the Pacers could very well have some opportunities through the season to upgrade their talent level, trade prospects for production. That kind of thing.
    This is what I was trying to get at with my question.....it's easy to throw a blanket statement out there that suggests that our Expiring Contracts are worthless now...but given the number of variables that exist out there....we don't know what the true value of our Expiring Contracts are until the 2010-2011 Trade Deadline.

    I'm very cautious when it comes to Salary Cap flexibility, so if it comes down to making a move that doesn't make sense for the long-term that will significantly impact our long term SalaryCap/Financial flexibility and letting the majority of our Expiring Contracts expire....I'd choose to do nothing because I know that there is benefits to having flexibility over having none.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

      Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
      What's the salary floor this season? 40mil?
      ITs 43.5 million which is why I am not sure Minny needs salary cap relief. At the end of the day they have to meet that number.

      Just figure Kahn doing something out of left field and you will probably be right.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

        I never quite got the fascination with Sessions.

        Awful defender, one of the worst defensive PGs in the league, only comparable to the likes of Mike Bibby, Mo Williams, Anthony Johnson, etc. Maybe a bottom 5 defensive PG among all starters and backups + can't shoot at all, not even that good of a finisher, pedestrian efficiency as a scorer + allows defenders to overplay his right + very ball dominant, keeps the ball on his hands for 20 consecutive seconds too often, limited game (pick'n'roll and drive'n'dish) + doesn't play off-ball. Good rebounder and creative making plays off the pick'n'roll, excellent body control to draw fouls but hasnt' improved much in the past 2 seasons and he needs to offer more to be a NBA starter.

        Always thought Hammond was making the right decision by letting him go last off-season. Jennings is a much larger talent and Ridnour is a better player now, more well-rounded.

        I wasn't opposed to Kahn getting him last season either. He had the playing time to offer to Sessions and try to develop him. Didn't work out and now he needs to get rid of him and find a better player to pair with Flynn, who's a future backup himself. Sessions is now entering his 4th season, 24 years old... he needs to show improvement right away, because he's clearly going the Arroyo way.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

          Originally posted by cordobes View Post

          Awful defender, one of the worst defensive PGs in the league, only comparable to the likes of Mike Bibby, Mo Williams, Anthony Johnson, etc.
          This is not accurate in the least. He is more of a physical body-up defender than most, and he will struggle against quicker PGs. He would instantly be the best defensive PG on the Pacers roster, because he is an NBA-average defender. He is an above average passer and not a great perimeter shooter.

          He would not be the answer, but he might be the bridge to the answer and help us escape the lottery for an change. But we don't seem to have what they want in return, so I'm not sure that it matters.
          Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 07-19-2010, 03:02 PM.
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            Sorry, he signed with Minny well after they were drafted.

            http://everyjoe.com/sports/ramon-ses...ta-offersheet/
            Sorry? For what? For missing the point?

            The point was he handled the situation quite well. Just because they drafted the rookies doesn't mean he expected to not be starting, and to be a backup. I knew the draft was before free agency. None of that changes how he handled the situation.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

              Draft scouting report, which for the most part still applies:

              Positives: Quick, darting point guard with the speed and stamina to execute the fast break and move up and down the court with ease...Physical perimeter defender with very good court vision and basketball IQ, firing off crisp passes to his forwards on pick-and-rolls...Unselfish player who is always looking for the open scoring outlet...Shows good patience rather than trying to force the ball in double-team situations and knows how to slow the tempo down before the game gets too out of control...Very creative in generating scoring opportunities for his teammates...Solid decision-maker who might not have the long-range shooting skills, but does a nice job of forcing the opponent out of the box to defend him on the perimeter...When the defense gives him room, he will capitalize by pulling up and firing off his jumper...Shows a steady hand bringing the ball downcourt and has developed a nice floater as his go-to shot...His decision-making ability will make him a nice catalyst in leading a pro team one day, but might be better served spending another year in college to refine weak areas in his shot selection...Quick getting into the lanes on the pick-and-roll, showing deft passing ability to funnel the ball outside when the road to the basket is crowded.


              Negatives: Needs to do a better job of creating his own shot, as he seems to prefer to feed his frontcourt teammates over slashing to the basket...Does not seem confident in his perimeter shooting, attempting only 80 3-pointers (made 25) in his three seasons at the school...Better defender on the perimeter, but must be more aggressive in getting position in front of his man...Must add bulk and strength to his frame, as he gets pushed around quite a bit by the bigger opponents...Has improved his range, but is still too inconsistent in that area from more than 10-feet out...Must show better elevation and improve his strength to make more of his shots and draw contact attacking the paint.


              http://www.cbssports.com/nba/players/draft/1229863
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                ITs 43.5 million which is why I am not sure Minny needs salary cap relief. At the end of the day they have to meet that number.

                Just figure Kahn doing something out of left field and you will probably be right.
                Yeah...no kidding.......when it come to Kahn....we'll be lucky if we figure out what's he trying to do. The closest thing I can think of is that he wants to a mass a platoon of PGs while waiting for deperate Teams ( like us ) to get to the point where those Teams will pay a premium to acquire one.

                I don't want Sessions in any way and would much rather sign Rafer, Diener or Watson to a 1 year deal and continue our long search for a PG somewhere else....but if we little choice and TPTB are dead set on finding a PG....I really hope that we do not pay more then an Expiring Contract ( like Foster or Murphy ) for him. Including Assets like Prospects and/or Draft picks is too much IMHO. Sessions may have a cheap $3.5 to 4.5 mil a year Contract....but when we have to include "sweetner"....the cost to acquire him is too much.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                  He had 24 assists in a game - I bet pwee starts talking s*** about him.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                    He would not be the answer, but he might be the bridge to the answer and help us escape the lottery for an change. But we don't seem to have what they want in return, so I'm not sure that it matters.
                    If Sessions had a shorter contract.....he maybe considered a better "bridge" to the PG answer....but with a guaranteed $3.5 to 4.5 mil a year / 3 year contract.....that bridge is too long as he would likely replace AJ or Lance at the backup PG spot ( if we find the answer at PG ) for the next 2 seasons.

                    The best "Bridge" would be a stop-gap solution at the PG for a single season....heck...half a season until AJ gets better. But a guaranteed 3 year deal would become a smaller "albatross" version of Tinsley around our necks for the next couple of seasons. I know that $3.5 to 4.5 mil a season may not seem like much to add to the roster.....but that's the difference between a 7th/8th rotational Player over the next couple of seasons for any Team. Having that $$$ tied up when we have players like AJ or Lance waiting in the wings as likely replacements for a backup PG is not a luxury we can afford.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                      Uh-oh... he was good when he played in summer league!

                      http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Ramon-Sessions-466/

                      His REAL 20 point, 24 assist, 8 rebound actual NBA game: http://www.emptythebench.com/2008/04...bucks-history/
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post

                        Needs to do a better job of creating his own shot, as he seems to prefer to feed his frontcourt teammates

                        Yeah, it's best to pass on a PG who prefers to feed his teammates. That unselfish son of a gun. Who wants someone that can't drive to the basket and jump up to throw the ball to the opposition after he can't get his own shot? The last thing the Pacers need is a PG that dishes out assists, doesn't shoot the 3 well, and who is paid a measley 4 mil a year.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                          Justin, I know you love Sessions. I liked him a lot coming out as a productive backup/borderline starter like so many PGs are. I have always liked his passing. Not because he had a 24 assist game, but its the way he feeds the other players. He finds a crease in the defense and passes out of the open area once the opportunity presents itself. He tends to pass in a timely manner, which makes his passes more effective, which is something TJ doesn't understand or else he wouldn't have lost his starting job so many times.

                          One thing I really disliked about his game was how out of control he got at times when handling the ball. He gets himself in trouble because he doesn't finish particularly well and when things collapse before he can get a pass off it gets ugly for him. He forces too much sometimes, but differently than TJ because he actually sees defensive movement in relation to his passing lanes.

                          I am just ho-hum about him though, because he would come in and be a marginal starter taking up future cap space, which is not really something we really need, IMO. He would be our best option leaving training camp from a strictly basketball perspective at this point IMO. I just think we would rather have the extra cap space instead of giving up an asset to acquire a player similar to TJ Ford, although better overall, just not much of an upgrade for the price tag.
                          Last edited by pacergod2; 07-19-2010, 03:49 PM.
                          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            If Sessions had a shorter contract.....he maybe considered a better "bridge" to the PG answer....but with a guaranteed $3.5 to 4.5 mil a year / 3 year contract.....that bridge is too long as he would likely replace AJ or Lance at the backup PG spot ( if we find the answer at PG ) for the next 2 seasons.

                            The best "Bridge" would be a stop-gap solution at the PG for a single season....heck...half a season until AJ gets better. But a guaranteed 3 year deal would become a smaller "albatross" version of Tinsley around our necks for the next couple of seasons. I know that $3.5 to 4.5 mil a season may not seem like much to add to the roster.....but that's the difference between a 7th/8th rotational Player over the next couple of seasons for any Team. Having that $$$ tied up when we have players like AJ or Lance waiting in the wings as likely replacements for a backup PG is not a luxury we can afford.

                            What's the problem, you afraid Sessions might succeed and Price and Stephenson won't be able to be "the answer" to the Pacers PG situation? Who says Price is going to come back and be able to pick right up where he left off last year, or Stephenson can pick up the aspects of being able to be a contributing PG this season? You and others are pinning your hopes on an injured 1st year player and a rookie who has never played PG other in a few "summer league " games. You'd rather have another 1 year stop gap in Rafer or Diener! I've seen enough of those the last 5 years. I'd rather go for a young established player who could be a good starting PG for the next 2-3 season at less than half of Ford's salary.

                            I have to laugh at the idea of Sessions' contract as an albatross. Comparing his 4 mil contract to Tinsley's contract as albatross is ridiculous. Two thirds of the posters on this board think Foster's contract isn't an albatross, and he's being paid 2.6 mil more next year than Sessions would after only playing 20 or so game last season!

                            I have pointed out 3-4 times about the lockout will neutralize longer contracts of Hinrich, Sessions, etc. The lockout is an uninevitable fact, accept it. You think Herb Simon hasn't taken that fact into consideration in his decisions concerning the Pacers? I have to laugh at the idea of who is going to be a FA next year when a lockout is coming. What difference does it make when the 012-013 season will be in a lockout? Until a new CBA is hammered out, those FA can't be signed anyway! July 1, 2011 the CBA expires. FA can't be signed for a week or so after that, and a lockout will be underway.

                            I don't feel the Pacers have a snowballs chance in heck of getting Sessions, but I sure wish Bird could get Sessions. Sorry, but the prospects of Rafer, Travis, etc just don't thrill me, nor watching a rookie and 1 season injured player as starting PG.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                              I am just ho-hum about him though, because he would come in and be a marginal starter taking up future cap space, which is not really something we really need, IMO. He would be our best option leaving training camp from a strictly basketball perspective at this point IMO. I just think we would rather have the extra cap space instead of giving up an asset to acquire a player similar to TJ Ford, although better overall, just not much of an upgrade for the price tag.
                              IF you look at Sessions as a good NBA starter than he isn't much of an upgrade. IF you look at him as a good back up point guard then he is an upgrade.

                              Its not like 4 million is going to kill our cap flexibility next year and a backup pg is worth around 4 million IMO.

                              To me its all about options and its not like we are going to have infinite amount of options in 2011 with FA market. All you have to ask yourself is Session worth 4 million a year + what it takes to get him. The latter is what I think Bird is hung up on not the 4 million.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Cavs lead charge for Sessions, but Pacers inquire about him as well

                                It depends on what TPTB want and it seems like they want a stop gap, or someone who could be our starter for the long haul.
                                Is Sessions a stop gap? No, not for the 3 years left on his contract. Is he the sarter we all covet? Some wold like to think so. I have thought about it, but I am not sure. If he is the PG we are all looking for then why didn't he start last year? Why did the Bucks
                                If we could get him with just giving up some like D.Jones than I would do it. I would NOT give up a first round draft pick or something like that for him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X