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

On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

    OK, it's a lockout.

    Still life goes on and at some point there will be resolution. As long as that's before the season is lost, eventually there will be a free agency period and a trade deadline.

    The rules may change but all we have today is what we know already.

    So with that said, which players will be on the trade block once the NBA resumes?

    Andre Iguodala (Marreese Speights & Elton Brand) - The Philadelphia 76ers are putting together a nice young core of players but Iguodala has just been around too long. He's paid like a star but in Philadelphia he's just a strong second or third guy.

    He'd like to move. The Sixers know this and they'd like to oblige but it's just a matter of finding the right return. It's not just salary relief they're looking for but another piece to go with players like Jrue Holiday, Evan Turner and Thaddeus Young (a restricted free agent they intend to keep).

    The problem is they don't have much size even with draftee Nikola Vucevic and Spencer Hawes (also restricted).

    Lamar Odom, Chris Kaman and Monta Ellis have been linked to the Sixers for Iguodala.

    Also available, based on age and salary, would be Elton Brand but Philadelphia may wait a year when Elton will be an $18.1 million expiring contract.

    Marresse Speights has yet to develop into a two-way player and can be had as well.

    Lamar Odom (Luke Walton & Steve Blake) - The Lakers don't feel like they have to make a move but they'll explore options for Odom. The team is committed to the Andrew Bynum/Pau Gasol tandem. It's a lot easier to find a reserve big man or two than an impact player on the perimeter (if they can find one for Lamar).

    Iguodala makes a lot of sense as a defender and play-maker.

    With Darius Morris dropping to the second round, the Lakers may sit with the point guards they have in Derek Fisher, Steve Blake and Morris.

    Odom is coming off of one of his best seasons as Sixth Man of the Year. At $8.2 million for the coming season and only $2.4 million of his $8.2 million guaranteed the next year, this may be the best time to get value for him.

    Luke Walton, albeit with a 7.5% trade kicker, is someone the Lakers wouldn't mind including in a deal. If a point guard comes back, Steve Blake's contract might need to go out.

    Of course L.A. may want to save the Odom contract as part of any significant trade that may come up, should a superstar try to force his way out West (like how Carmelo Anthony got himself to the New York Knicks). The new CBA may impact the Lakers' chances in a positive or negative way.

    Chris Kaman (Ryan Gomes) - The Los Angeles Clippers are looking for another piece to help Blake Griffin and Eric Gordon lead the team to the playoffs. If they can land a true star, they'll deal their unprotected 2012 Minnesota pick but barring that, Kaman may be their best bait.

    Kaman as the core piece, given his injury history this past season, wasn't enough to entice the Sixers pre-lockout.

    The team is happy with Mo Williams and expects to bring back DeAndre Jordan, but that small forward spot is wide open.

    It was just a couple of years ago Chris was an All-Star. He's on the last year of his deal at $12.7 million.

    Kaman may start the season with the Clippers but don't be surprised if he's moved before the deadline (if we get that far).

    Gomes is the expendable piece L.A. would offer out as contract filler if need be.

    Monta Ellis (Andris Biedrins, David Lee & Charlie Bell) - New ownership and management, especially Jerry West, opens the door to just about anything with the Warriors.

    New head coach Mark Jackson insists the team can win with the smaller, slighter backcourt of Stephen Curry and Ellis. Nonetheless, Ellis has been shopped and will continue to be shopped once player movement opens back up. Don't look for Monta to go in any sort of salary dump. The Warriors want quality and size back (even if that's size on the perimeter).

    Also available is Biedrins who is coming off a terrible year but Golden State doesn't want to just take back junk in return.

    Bell is an easy piece to throw into a deal with his expiring $4.1 million contract. It wouldn't be a shocker if Lee became available although his contract might scare off prospective suitors.

    If Golden State was hesitant in the past to make drastic decisions, West will willingly step into that role.

    Josh Smith (Marvin Williams) - The Hawks have been competitive the past few years with Smith a big part of why but he'd welcome a change.

    The Hawks can move Al Horford to his more natural position at four if they can land a five with more size. Smith only has a couple of seasons left at $12.5 million and $13.3 million.

    There may not be a compelling reason just yet for the Hawks to do it but Smith can be a bit prickly. If the right opportunity comes along, Atlanta will shake it up.

    Jameer Nelson (Gilbert Arenas, Hedo Turkoglu, J.J. Redick, Brandon Bass, Chris Duhon, Quentin Richardson, Ryan Anderson, etc.) - Basically anyone but Dwight Howard.

    The time may come when the Magic may lose Howard but before they embrace that notion, they'll do whatever they can to put a team around him.

    Nelson is probably the most attractive piece at just $7.8 million this coming season and next (player option on the last year).

    Bass is a low-paid power forward with some post game. Anderson is a cheap stretch four.

    The Magic might want to trade Arenas or Turkoglu to get out of those contracts but that might be difficult because of those same contracts.

    Michael Beasley (Martell Webster, Darko Milicic, Nikola Pekovic, Luke Ridnour, Brad Miller, Anthony Randolph, etc.) - Basically at this point, anyone but Kevin Love, Ricky Rubio, Wesley Johnson and Derrick Williams. Beasley was shopped, along with the #2 pick before it became Williams heading into the draft.

    The Wolves won 17 games last year. They don't have a first-round pick in 2012. The Rubio era must be a hit for General Manager David Kahn to survive his post.

    This is a GM and a team willing to deal.

    Boris Diaw (Corey Maggette, DeSagana Diop, Matt Carroll, Eduardo Najera & D.J. Augustin) - The Bobcats are another team that needs a serious overhaul.

    Draft picks Kemba Walker and Bismack Biyombo were nice gets but there's really not much on the roster to play with.

    Diaw is in the last year of his deal at $9 million.

    O.J. Mayo - The Grizzlies tried to trade Mayo at the deadline but didn't get the deal into the league in time. When Rudy Gay went down with a season-ending shoulder injury, Mayo stepped in and helped Memphis make a surprising playoff run. O.J. will make $5.6 million this season before hitting restricted free agency (barring changes to the system).

    The Grizzlies don't really have anyone to dump with Mayo, so they'd be looking for value back in return.

    The bigger question will be Gay. Once the team retains Marc Gasol (restricted) as they expect, will the budget allow for Zach Randolph, Mike Conley, Gasol and Gay?

    The team did pretty well without him. Some NBA executives believe Gay will eventually end up on the block.

    Brandon Rush (James Posey & Dahntay Jones) - The Pacers are buyers with cap room and a roster they believe is improving. A number of teams would love to get Danny Granger but the word out of Indiana is he won't be dealt.
    Rush is a decent, still-young player who has shown flashes on both sides of the ball but has yet to put it together night after night. Posey is a $7.6 million expiring contract and Jones is a cheap $2.7 and $2.9 million the next two.

    There have been some whispers Roy Hibbert is available for the right price but the Pacers deny that.

    If the team can add David West in free agency and make another move via trade, that's a solid group in the East with Granger, Hibbert, Tyler Hansbrough Darren Collison, Paul George and the recently acquired George Hill.

    Rashard Lewis (Andray Blatche) - Lewis makes too much and isn't part of Washington's future. Some believe the Wizards have buyer's remorse on the extension they gave Blatche.

    Rip Hamilton (Jason Maxiell, Ben Gordon & Charlie Villanueva) - "Please take Rip," signed the Pistons.

    Maxiell is definitely available as well. With Gordon and Villanueva, the signings have yet to bear real fruit.

    Vince Carter (Robin Lopez, Hakim Warrick, Mickael Pietrus, Josh Childress) - Carter's $18.3 million is only $4 million guaranteed. The Suns and Vince agreed to wait on the decision until right before the start of the season. That gives Phoenix the chance to try and trade him.

    Lopez is a decent big coming off of a down season. Pietrus is $5.3 million in the last year of his contract.

    Childress was a mistake and his contract still has $27 million on it. Warrick can be had as well.

    Antawn Jamison & Baron Davis (Ramon Sessions & Daniel Gibson) - The Cavs want to get the rebuild going and if Jamison's $15.1 million expiring contract can help, then so be it.

    Davis was acquired from the Clippers along with L.A's 2011 draft pick and that paid off well. Kyrie Irving makes Baron expendable if Cleveland can find a taker.

    Sessions is on the block as well and to a lesser extent, Gibson. The Cavs won't trade three point guards but they'd happily do one or two.

    Ray Allen - The Celtics traded Kendrick Perkins midseason to the surprise of many. They may keep the core together for one last try, minus Perkins but don't be surprised if Allen is the bait Boston uses to continue the youth movement.

    Brandon Jennings (Drew Gooden) - There was some buzz Jennings was available and that was before Milwaukee acquired Shaun Livingston, Beno Udrih and Stephen Jackson. If they do shop him, expect the price to be high and for the Bucks to try and pawn off Gooden in the deal.

    Carlos Boozer - The Chicago Bulls weren't overwhelmed with what Boozer brought them this past season but he's likely to be with the Bulls another year barring a tremendous offer.

    Jose Calderon (Leandro Barbosa) - The Raptors want to become a force defensively but neither Calderon nor Barbosa do much on that front. The trick is Toronto getting a starting caliber point guard to replace Calderon . . . not easy to do.

    Tony Parker (Richard Jefferson) - Given the Spurs traded George Hill, Parker may be off the block. If a team will take Jefferson with Tony with some quality youth coming back, San Antonio may be willing to talk as the post-Tim Duncan era is nearly upon them.

    Some other players teams aren't necessarily committed to: Brendan Haywood, Al Harrington, Travis Outlaw, Marcus Camby, Jason Thompson and Mike Miller.

    Also, keep an eye on the Houston Rockets who may be willing to deal Kevin Martin and pieces like Hasheem Thabeet, Goran Dragic & Jordan Hill.

    The Utah Jazz have a bit too much up front with Paul Millsap, Al Jefferson and Mehmet Okur. Okur is very available at $10.9 million on an expiring deal. Millsap would be appealing to a number of teams.

    The Jazz also have Derrick Favors and draft pick Enes Kanter. There's just not enough minutes to go around if the team can stay healthy.

    Devin Harris may also be available but Utah doesn't have much else at the point.

    Amnesty/Hard Cap

    One more note: if there's another amnesty clause that allows for teams to waive a player with luxury tax and/or salary cap considerations, some of the available players could end up free agents.

    If a hard or flex cap is agreed to in some form, the high payroll teams may need to start planning for payroll trimming. That too could impact who becomes available and for what.

    Perhaps Kwame Brown is an expiring somewhere, maybe the Lakers need to deal away Pau Gasol?

    Clearly that's in jest.

    Even through resolution is far away, a hard cap that severe is probably not something we'll see.
    Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?...#ixzz1RB8F08Fh
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

    Thanks for the post, it's nice to read.

    Although it's no surprise Brandon should be preparing to go.

    I personally can't wait for the day he's gone.
    Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

      I wonder how Rush would do if he played most of his minutes at the 3? I don't see why he couldn't do the same things he does now; he's long and seems to be pretty strong, so I don't think it would make much of a difference.

      My thinking is a guy who generally plays good D and can hit long shots is a useful roleplayer to have on one's bench, so why not keep him around since he's cheap and let him be Danny's backup, allowing the backup 2 to be shared between George Hill and Dahntay Jones?

      He may not be a "big piece" to the team's core, but that doesn't mean we necessarily need to punt on him, either. Not unless he 1) Gets in trouble for weed again or 2) Demands more money than he's worth once he's a free agent.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

        I can't think of a single better thing that could happen to the Pacers than someone offering us "the right price" for Hibbert.
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          I wonder how Rush would do if he played most of his minutes at the 3? I don't see why he couldn't do the same things he does now; he's long and seems to be pretty strong, so I don't think it would make much of a difference.
          Most nights it wouldn't be a big deal, but Rush can't guard big 3's in the post. Guys like Melo, Deng, Artest, etc. eat him alive down there.

          If we stick with our current wings, I'd really like to see Granger and George play all 48 minutes at the 3 with either Rush or Jones or Stephenson picking up the scrap minutes left at the 2.
          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

          - Salman Rushdie

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

            Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
            Most nights it wouldn't be a big deal, but Rush can't guard big 3's in the post. Guys like Melo, Deng, Artest, etc. eat him alive down there.
            But in this scenario he's only going to be the BACKUP 3, so do we really care that such a weakness exists? It's not like every rotation player has no holes in their game.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

              I don't get how we overpaid for DJ originally, but now he has a cheap contract.

              Also, I like Rush staying here, although it does not seem he will. It would be nice to get something back for him though.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                Originally posted by PurduePacer View Post
                I don't get how we overpaid for DJ originally, but now he has a cheap contract.

                Also, I like Rush staying here, although it does not seem he will. It would be nice to get something back for him though.
                If we messed up in the Jones contract, it would be the duration, not the price tag.
                "man, PG has been really good."

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                  Originally posted by PurduePacer View Post
                  I don't get how we overpaid for DJ originally, but now he has a cheap contract.
                  It's because we never overpaid him to begin with AFAIC.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                    Agreed on Rush. He's still a useful rotational player despite his shortcomings. I wouldn't just give him away.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                      I'm pretty convinced that Posey was only brought here to be trade bait at the deadline this year anyway(expiring contract). I expect to see his expiring deal shopped with a now expendable guard.

                      I'd rather see Jones go than Rush. Rush can be a great player, but its always seemed to me that he's had confidence issues in the NBA(J.O.B. maybe? I guess we will see this season).

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Just about every Laker fan wants Rush. I think we should try to ship him there and get as much out of him as possible if the Lakers management want him too.


                        Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
                        Senior at the University of Louisville.
                        Greenfield ---> The Ville

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                          Originally posted by Mikey85 View Post
                          I'm pretty convinced that Posey was only brought here to be trade bait at the deadline this year anyway(expiring contract). I expect to see his expiring deal shopped with a now expendable guard.

                          I'd rather see Jones go than Rush. Rush can be a great player, but its always seemed to me that he's had confidence issues in the NBA(J.O.B. maybe? I guess we will see this season).
                          Posey was brought here so NO would accept the trade and get cap relief. We didnt want Posey but he was the price to get DC2

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                            I am sorry, I think Hibbert is available. Much like what you guys have said about Rush, we wouldn't just give him away, but his rebounding and defense is not ideally what you want from a guy his size. He is also extremely inconsistent.

                            Hibbert has his positives, but he is FAR from untouchable IMO.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: On The Block: Who Should Be Ready to Move?

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              It's because we never overpaid him to begin with AFAIC.
                              This is what I was referring to:

                              Originally posted by flox View Post
                              http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/27361

                              Adam (St. Louis)
                              John -- Any thoughts on the Pacers' acquisition of Dahntay Jones? Nice addition but a little overpaid at 4yr 11mil?
                              John Hollinger
                              (3:10 PM)
                              Ridiculous contract, this year's Eduardo Najera. What makes it worse is Indy was already in danger of being a tax team next year, even before paying Jarret Jack, and the Pacers already had a stopper-in-training with Brandon Rush.
                              In the first Jones thread there were several posts such as these claiming we overpaid for him.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X