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

Lockout News and Discussions thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

    Originally posted by billbradley View Post
    When did I say running a business is easy? I'm not going to get into the details of owning the Pacers and multiple properties surrounding the Pacers that has nothing to do with Pacers. And who said anything about giving away money? Remember your sympathy when the owners take their sights off the players and come to us taxpayers after the current CIB deal is up.
    I was asking why you feel we shouldn't be sympathetic to him. I guess I made the assumption you were saying that because he is rich. I must not have understood why you made the statement.

    Also, I'm not keen on him coming to the city and holding them over a barrel. I would really like for the city to be able to say, "Um yeah. You made more than enough money to cover arena expenses. Pay it yourself." So in effect I am being a little greedy personally in that regard.

    Comment


    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

      I thanked it more for the theory than the specifics, but Kstat how does the new tax stop New York from getting Chris Paul or Dwight Howard? Won't they have the cap space?

      Comment


      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

        http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1...to-save-season

        For hardliners on both sides, 96 hours left to save NBA season

        NEW YORK -- Before the 2011-12 NBA season gets flushed down the toilet in a fit of rage, stubbornness and emotion, imagine something for a moment.

        Imagine if Jeffrey Kessler had said nothing after the latest middle-of-the-night breakdown in NBA talks. And imagine if, instead of saying what he did, Derek Fisher had said this:

        "We're frustrated that the NBA owners still do not want to meet us in the middle and shake our hands on a deal that will ensure that thousands of people keep their jobs. We're disappointed that instead of continuing to negotiate, the owners have given us an ultimatum and told us they will effectively end negotiations Wednesday if we do not accept their terms.

        "But we are too close to give up now. We have come too far and there's too much at stake and too many people's jobs at risk. We as players are taking the high road. We say no to the NBA's proposal to end negotiations when we are so close to finishing this deal. We are not going to play Russian roulette with the emotion and livelihood of our fans and workers who support our game.

        "So we invite the owners to continue to negotiate with us all the way up to the artificial Wednesday deadline the commissioner imposed. We are prepared to finish this deal at any time, in any place, for as long as it takes. We hope the owners and the league accept our invitation, because if they do not, their actions will speak louder than any words we can say about their intentions of negotiating a fair deal and saving the season."

        See? What a difference. Instead of allowing spin master David Stern to pile the blame onto the players' laps, the players could've lobbed it right back -- schmack at him. And then the owners who are unwilling to give Stern the authority to extend the olive branch needed to close the deal would've been called to account for needlessly blowing up an entire basketball season simply to prove a point.

        But what happened instead? The players and union officials took the bait Stern had so cleverly planted on the end of a hook early Sunday. Instead, a defeated Fisher acknowledged the inevitable and Kessler, the union's flame-throwing attorney, served a pile of red meat for the hardline agents and star players who are fed up with this charade to devour on their path to the mutually assured destruction of union decertification.

        And if the season gets blown up in the aftermath of these ultimatums, threats and tantrums, it will be the players' doing.

        This didn't have to be. And it still doesn't.

        Beginning Monday morning, there are three full business days for someone -- anyone -- with a shred of reason to pick up the phone and connect the dots between the differences that remain. Anybody can see it: After 2½ years of cutthroat negotiations, a 20 percentage point economic difference between the two sides has been shaved to 1 percent -- $40 million in the first year of a new CBA and $262 million over six years, a fraction of the $800 million that already has been squandered by sacrificing a mere month of games with this idiocy.

        After months upon months of butting heads over a hard team salary cap, and then an NHL-style flex cap, and then an ultra-punitive luxury tax, there are essentially three issues that remain to be negotiated: sign-and-trades for luxury-tax-paying teams; the size, length and frequency of mid-level deals for tax payers; and the tax structure for teams that choose to pay a luxury tax for three out of any five seasons.

        The last issue is especially maddening, considering the two sides are 50 cents apart on the first $10 million of spending over the tax threshold and -- get this -- have identical, $1-per-dollar-over proposals for those repeat offenders who spend beyond that $10 million tax threshold.

        If I were a player reading all this, I'd be asking myself: What are we fighting over? Why am I going to give up a year of income -- for some players, 15-25 percent of their career earnings -- so that lawyers can raise their voices, spew venom, stomp their feet and play right into the owners' hands?

        "We don't even know who Kessler is," one agent said Sunday. "We don't have any access to this guy whatsoever. Who is this guy? Now he's saying whether or not the deal is a fraud?"

        And if I were a player, I'd be asking myself this, too: Who is leading us down this path? It surely isn't Fisher, who appeared on the verge of exhaustion and tears during his somber news conference Sunday morning and who, according to one person familiar with the union president's position, "Obviously wants to make a deal." But as clearly conveyed by his solo news conference appearance, he looks to be going it alone in that effort -- with little cooperation from his negotiating adversaries across the table or from some segments of the union leadership.

        For agents and players across the country who watched Sunday morning's latest fiasco, it did not go unnoticed that at the moment when the union reduced its request to 51 percent of BRI -- below the 52 percent line in the sand drawn by hardline agents -- union chief Billy Hunter was nowhere to be found. An NBPA official said Hunter, who just turned 69 and has a debilitating back condition, was feeling ill. But where were Fisher's fellow executive committee members?

        Where was superstar Chris Paul, who shows up at bargaining sessions when it's convenient and when he isn't busy dreaming of playing for the Knicks?

        Why was Fisher, team player on the court, going solo at the most important moment of the labor talks?

        "If 52 was the magic number, is he done?" one agent said of Hunter's absence. "Is that symbolic? That's what I thought: 'He's toast.' Everybody's saying the magic number is 52, and if it's under that, he'd be removed. So maybe he's been removed."

        But whatever authority has been stripped from Hunter, the same can be said of Stern, who must know at this late date that a 50-50 deal is all he can get past a unified contingent of rogue, hardline owners who are pushing not for a deal, but for annihilation.

        "The league has to give an olive branch," said a moderate agent who is not in the decertification camp. "But David Stern has to be in that room knowing it, and it has to kill him not to be able to give that little olive branch that, in the scheme of things, who cares?"

        Just as in geopolitics, in the absence of power that results from a coup, the vacuum is filled by extremists.

        "Honestly, I think [Stern] has lost control of this thing," said an agent who has long favored decertification. "There's no way in the world David Stern wants an NBA season blown up when the owners already have gotten as good a deal as he's gotten them."

        That's where we are. But it doesn't have to be.

        Even if 30 percent of the union membership delivered a signed petition to the National Labor Relations Board Monday morning seeking a decertification election, it wouldn't be worth the paper it's printed on. It would be utterly irrelevant as it relates to the far more important business at hand over the next 96 hours. Even forgetting that such a petition hardly guarantees that an election ever would be authorized; that an election, if authorized, wouldn't happen until January; and that half the players signing the petition wouldn't fully understand what they were getting themselves into, it's still irrelevant.

        "Decertification is not an option," said another agent who opposes it. "From a timing standpoint, the season's done [if players decertify]. This is the stupidest threat I've ever heard of in my life. ... David Stern recognizes all of this. He's got them right where he wants them. That's why he gave them the ultimatum. He knows they can't decertify."
        Said another agent: "The risk-reward of decertification just isn't worth it. For both sides."

        What has to happen independent of that before the close of business Wednesday is far more important, and here it is:

        • Federal mediator George Cohen must call both parties Monday and summon them to his Washington, D.C., office for around-the-clock talks aimed at exhausting every avenue for a deal before Stern's artificial deadline arrives. If either party declines, it must be prepared to explain to the public why. Regardless of any petition, any inflammatory speeches by Kessler or any sensationalized agendas of star players and their agents that drown out the priorities of the rank and file, the National Basketball Players Association is the only body currently authorized to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the NBA. Short of a disclaimer of interest on the part of union leadership, this is the case from now until Wednesday and beyond -- all the way to at least January, the time frame during which the season can still be saved.

        • While Fisher, Hunter, union attorneys, players on the executive committee, Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver face public accountability for this fiasco, the owners pushing the hardline negotiating strategy hide behind the commissioner-imposed gag order designed to protect them. Spurs owner Peter Holt, the chairman of the labor relations committee and, according to multiple sources, among the hardest of hardline owners, has spoken publicly about the negotiations exactly once. If the owners continue to resist the final push of compromise that would finish the deal, this amnesty from accountability can no longer be tolerated.

        Among the most intractable owners, according to sources -- Paul Allen, Dan Gilbert, Robert Sarver, Michael Heisley, Ted Leonsis, Mikhail Prokhorov (yes, him), and now we learn, Michael Jordan -- only Heisley has faced any kind of public backlash. The Grizzlies owner, who admitted last week he doesn't even know what's going on in the negotiations, has been the only one to face a potential challenge in the form of a possible lawsuit by the city of Memphis to recoup losses sustained by a prolonged lockout. Prokhorov, who according to sources is fine with a strategy that would blow up his mediocre team's last season in Newark, is lucky in that he doesn't really have a fan base to hold him accountable. But where are the city attorneys, district attorneys, attorneys general and editorial page writers in some of those other cities to ask who's going to refund taxpayer money that's funding empty basketball arenas during a canceled season?

        "The owners who are saying this isn't enough, stop hiding behind David Stern and stand in front of your communities and say why," one agent said. "If I hear one more person say they feel bad for parking lot attendants, I'm going to be sick. Do something. The parking lot attendant doesn't feel better when you say that. Stand up and take responsibility."

        If Jordan, the reported ringleader of the hardliners, took responsibility, it would be a first. His Don't-Care-Ness couldn't even muster the courage to speak more than a few words in the eight-hour bargaining session Saturday, according to multiple people in the meeting.

        "The reason you own an NBA team is because of what basketball has given to you," one of the agents said. "Just like you're allowed an opinion, I think the city of Charlotte is entitled to an explanation. One of greatest players of all time, who's made a fortune off the sport of basketball -- and now you're going to be responsible for destroying it?"

        • While it's unlikely a groundswell among players could gain enough momentum by Wednesday to bring the owners' proposal to a ratification vote, players who aren't comfortable with decertification or want more information about what the league is offering should speak out -- publicly, by name and on the record. Until then, the opinions and priorities of rank-and-file players will continue to be drowned out by superstar tweets about decertifying. It's the irony of social media: while players have more opportunity than ever to have their voices heard, the filter weeds out the ordinary and amplifies the stars.

        "Players are all across the board, but with one consistency -- they're all angry," one agent said. "They don't necessarily know if they should decertify or not decertify, but everyone's angry with this situation. It boils over. ... Rationality has totally left the building on both sides.

        "The only rational solution at this stage is, 'Why aren't you still in a room talking?' " he said. "Why aren't you still with George Cohen and negotiating?"

        That can still happen. Ninety-six hours to save the season. Ninety-six hours to save the NBA from the egos, foolishness and agendas that threaten to lead it down a dead end that only ends one way.

        Badly for everyone.
        Sittin on top of the world!

        Comment


        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          Yes. Every worker organization should protect its membership. That's what unions are for.
          I agree. If you go back to my post before that, that is what I was saying. They should already be doing this. Why bring it up in a CBA when it is fundamental issue they should have resolved. The owners should not be involved.

          I get the points about employer matching too, but that's not the nature of their relationship. The league sets aside a huge chunk of money for the union and probably doesn't need/want to be involved in all the details of how they appropriate it.
          Last edited by MnvrChvy; 11-07-2011, 01:42 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            count55 is making the case elsewhere that a hard(er) cap might actually be better than any tax. I'll let him explain in his own words: (Start at bottom and go up)
            Just to make the quote from count55 more readable, I reformatted it to make it easier to read:

            As written by Tim Donahue aka "count55":

            BTW...if structured properly, it would probably be better for both the players & the owners than the lux tax on the table.

            Depends on where you put the ceiling. A real, but high hard cap (say 65%) would allow for more freedom above $70mm.

            While it would prevent $90mm payrolls, and may remove the two or three teams willing to go there, it would open up many...more teams to the possibility of exceeding $70mm. A "Super tax" potentially becomes a hard cap for 24-28 teams at a lower...dollar figure than an actual high hard cap. At $4b, you're looking at a hard cap in the $83-85mm range.

            A super tax potentially (probably) takes more teams off the market in order to keep the NY/LA's available.

            A super tax poses a greater threat to a team like OKC than a high hard cap, because it makes teams more expensive faster.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

              I wonder how a 83-85 million dollar hard cap affects ticket prices. I guess the whole point of lower expenses for a team should some what stabilize fan cost as well. OF course I know if a team gets hot tickets get hotter but for an average team I would hope that the ticket prices don't get out of control with such a high cap. Just tryign to add a different perspective.
              Last edited by Gamble1; 11-07-2011, 01:52 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                Yep, this thing will be blown completely to hell Wednesday:

                http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/sp...atum.html?_r=2

                Comment


                • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Yep, this thing will be blown completely to hell Wednesday:

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/sp...atum.html?_r=2
                  Dear God, I feel so bad for the arena and team employees living off "normal" salaries, reading all the tweets and posts wondering if they will be able to feed their family

                  so depressing
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                    Glad the owners want the Melo rule that is a must.


                    Also the players *****ing about free agents not being a free agent look at the MLB. In MLB you have to be in the MLB for 6 years before you can hit free agency. Guys like Starlin Castro and such lose a lot of money like this because you can just renew his contract very cheapy for the first few years.


                    I dont know any sport where a free agent can go to any team he wants unless he takes a huge paycut I just think thats BS on the players part.
                    Last edited by pacer4ever; 11-07-2011, 02:15 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                      I wish I didn't feel like the NBA world as we know it was going to end at 5:01PM Wednesday, but......

                      It feels like I'm waiting for the nuclear warheads to launch at one another's country. Nuclear Winter.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        I wish I didn't feel like the NBA world as we know it was going to end at 5:01PM Wednesday, but......

                        It feels like I'm waiting for the nuclear warheads to launch at one another's country. Nuclear Winter.
                        Or we can all spend more time with family friends and possibly do something productive. Probably not.:

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                          Gosh dang it they better take the deal. I want Pacers basketball!
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                            Avatar updated...

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                              Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                              Or we can all spend more time with family friends and possibly do something productive. Probably not.:
                              It may mean instead of going to Pacer games with my wife I will have to go to "romantic comedy" movies.

                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lockout News and Discussions thread

                                The players need to take some advice from one Mick Jagger

                                "You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you might find you get what you need."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X