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

I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

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

  • #61
    Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    LOL! Some must have selective memories about Walsh. Let's take a stroll down memory lane the last # years of Walsh's leadership.

    Traded Artest for a "half year rental" of Peja.

    Traded Harrington for non-milk drinker Stephen Jackson. How did that workout?

    Morway turned the Hornet signing of Peja into a 7.5 TE, not Walsh. Walsh dropped the ball that Morway scored with.

    Brought back Harrington as a half year rental with the 7.5 TE from Peja.

    Traded the 07 pick to Atlanta in a separate deal to get Harrington back. In the same deal, they took James Edwards back then cut him with his 1 mil contract. All to get Harrington back who was a JO friend. Walsh envisioned them playing together, but they couldn't. You'd have thought Walsh would have known this from the 1st time Harrington was a Pacer!

    Walsh then trades Harrington and Jackson to GS for Murphy and Dunlevey with their albatross contracts that put the Pacers in cap hell for 3.5 years. That deal earned Chris Mullins Exec of the Year Award.

    With the Pacers in poor shape, Walsh bails to retire only to go to the Knicks.

    I'm not even going to go into the contracts Walsh gave Tinsley, Bender, or JO. Nor the trading AD for Bender.

    AND you wonder why some don't want to bring back Walsh? LOL!
    Its all true, but there were some historic circumstances in play for some of those things. I mean Ron for a half year of Peja, under those circumstances was a steal on the Pacers side, imo.

    I won't go line by line, but the guy built the 90s contending team and then rebuilt them to contender status, immediately afterwards, when has that ever happened?

    I'll say one of most under estimated/damaging things to happen was Murphleavy, it just perpectuates the ramifications of the brawl, but I understand you had to get guys out of town.

    Looking back, though, I understand almost every single move they made during that horrific period.


    Lastly, he did the very best you could with the Knicks and by most reports wanted to wait out Denver/Melo to get Melo there, Donnie wouldn't have had to give up all those guys in NY, that they really could have used.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

      Originally posted by Speed View Post

      Lastly, he did the very best you could with the Knicks and by most reports wanted to wait out Denver/Melo to get Melo there, Donnie wouldn't have had to give up all those guys in NY, that they really could have used.

      Jimmy Boy Dolan got antsy and couldn't wait. He decided to take charge of getting Melo himself. You are right he cost the Knicks numerous players doing so. If he had waited, he could have just signed Melo with the cap Walsh had acquired while in charge, but he had to be the one in charge. I loved the fact he got what he deserved by losing good players he wouldn't have had to lose.

      I've never understood why daddy Charles Dolan ever let him run the Knicks costing 100's of mil in Zeke buying out contracts alone. Sorry but my money would be more important to be than my sons vanity.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        Jimmy Boy Dolan got antsy and couldn't wait. He decided to take charge of getting Melo himself. You are right he cost the Knicks numerous players doing so. If he had waited, he could have just signed Melo with the cap Walsh had acquired while in charge, but he had to be the one in charge. I loved the fact he got what he deserved by losing good players he wouldn't have had to lose.

        I've never understood why daddy Charles Dolan ever let him run the Knicks costing 100's of mil in Zeke buying out contracts alone. Sorry but my money would be more important to be than my sons vanity.
        The buzz, too, was he wanted Zeke back involved, officially, but Stern wouldn't allow it while he was coaching FL Int'l, which I understand he got canned, I think, so wouldn't surprise me if he gets officially involved again. I say officially, cuz I think it was said Zeke was stilll pulling strings behind the scenes, even when DW was in charge. Good for the Pacers, imo. Let Dolan put Zeke in charge again. Only bad part of that was that Zeke didn't or wouldn't do any deals with the Pacers. The more dumb GMs running teams the better for the Blue and Gold.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

          Put me in the "what's the big deal" and "DW was a pretty outstanding GM" camp too.

          Boomer for Adults proves to be true because every single thing that might be questionable gets defended as not being his choice and everything that works out, even naturally, is part of his 3 year plan (with 2-3 bonus years thrown in).

          Donnie Walsh 100% did NOT hire JOB nor did he extend him. One of many examples. There were issues in the DW/LB era and we have been led to believe it was due to conflict between them, but let's be fair here, Bird didn't exact start hitting nothing but homeruns after DW left.

          The biggest accomplishments in the "3 year plan" (which took more than 3 years and year one of JOB was a pathetic attempt to fumble along to the playoffs rather than rebuilding right away) was LETTING BAD CONTRACTS GO. Just not taking on more salary, period. Major win. Trading Troy for DC and not resigning Dunleavy.

          In other words, the best moves were moves that undid previous moves that LB/DW made in the first place, and nothing suggests that the original choice was all DW (Jack/Al for Troy/Dun).


          Maybe Larry has been solid, making good moves at times, and maybe DW made errors, but this "oh s***, we are screwed view" is just ridiculous. Let's keep things in context just a little bit. Dude isn't even in a position of authority at this point, or any position as far as we know.


          I'm more concerned with how the MORWAY SITUATION is being handled.
          He's just not been around the team for 2 weeks. No official announcements or anything, just a stinking press leak? Not a lot of class and professionalism there, or something is cooking in the backdrop that we don't know about.
          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
          Wow. Lotta hate for a guy who was one of the most influential and beneficial people in this franchise's history.

          Why would you not want Walsh back; he's one of the best managerial minds in NBA history. His lone big mistake in Indy was bringing Isiah on board. Ironically, it was Isiah's mess in New York that was cleaned up by none other than Walsh, and that was no small mess.

          Why you guys wouldn't want him back in some consultant role is beyond me... but that's why y'all aren't runnin' the team.... lol.

          Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            I'm more concerned with how the MORWAY SITUATION is being handled. He's just not been around the team for 2 weeks. No official announcements or anything, just a stinking press leak? Not a lot of class and professionalism there, or something is cooking in the backdrop that we don't know about.
            Yes, very strange, unless it really is a done deal, its just not official. Even then, at the worst an injustice for Morway to be out there dangling, at best its not the way you should do things. Someone knows whats going on, its just not being reported, Morway has to be trying to find another job, there's a story there somewhere.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

              Traded Harrington for non-milk drinker Stephen Jackson. How did that workout?
              It actually worked out great if you mean which guy was more willing to support a perennial COY contender.

              Jack and Rick developed a very close relationship that plowed right through any in-game flare ups from Jack. Meanwhile Harrington complained about Rick the first time because of how he was used (ie, 6th man rather than "star"), and then pouted and had a meltdown so bad he didn't come back out after halftime a week before he was traded away the 2nd time.

              I strongly suspect due to the timing that the GSW trade was driven far more by the Harrington hates Rick situation than by fans booing Jackson.

              Harrington was a cry baby prima donna that made JO look mature. All Jack ever did was get too PO'd at refs and sometimes took bad shots. But at least he D'd up and showed that he gave a s***. (the 2 off-courts were overblown BS that he didn't start and wasn't the primary factor in)*

              Plus the trade for Jack/Al was SPECIFICALLY because the Pistons beat the Pacers by clogging the lane against Ron, JO and Al. With Reggie as the only deep threat the Pacers were too easy to defend, so inside Al was swapped for outside Jack.








              * Brawl, the crowd was already drunk and out of control, the guy he punched had just thrown a full beer in the face of a restrained Artest...prior to that he was all fired up but it was because a Piston took a cheap shot at his face in the scrum prior to the brawl

              Rio, he didn't start the fight and wasn't in the fight, he walked to his car, got his gun out, shot it in the air and everyone scrambled out of there right away - fight over...then as he turned and walked away two convicts (who had instigated the fight) hit him with their car

              Voice of reason - no, but I can understand an emotional reaction and these 2 moments were blips in the radar of who he is.
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-25-2012, 01:14 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                I don't pay much historical respect to the entire Al/SJax line of personel moves. They were Pacers, that's about all I can say about 'em.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  LOL! Some must have selective memories about Walsh. Let's take a stroll down memory lane the last # years of Walsh's leadership.

                  Traded Artest for a "half year rental" of Peja.

                  Traded Harrington for non-milk drinker Stephen Jackson. How did that workout?

                  Morway turned the Hornet signing of Peja into a 7.5 TE, not Walsh. Walsh dropped the ball that Morway scored with.

                  Brought back Harrington as a half year rental with the 7.5 TE from Peja.

                  Traded the 07 pick to Atlanta in a separate deal to get Harrington back. In the same deal, they took James Edwards back then cut him with his 1 mil contract. All to get Harrington back who was a JO friend. Walsh envisioned them playing together, but they couldn't. You'd have thought Walsh would have known this from the 1st time Harrington was a Pacer!

                  Walsh then trades Harrington and Jackson to GS for Murphy and Dunlevey with their albatross contracts that put the Pacers in cap hell for 3.5 years. That deal earned Chris Mullins Exec of the Year Award.

                  With the Pacers in poor shape, Walsh bails to retire only to go to the Knicks.

                  I'm not even going to go into the contracts Walsh gave Tinsley, Bender, or JO. Nor the trading AD for Bender.

                  AND you wonder why some don't want to bring back Walsh? LOL!
                  So are you saying he gets no credit for everything that happened prior to the fall of 2004? I assume you aren't suggesting that, so I will move on and discuss the things you have posted.


                  We had to trade Artest, we had no choice. His trade value was low, plus teams knew we had to trade him so he brought virtually nothingnin return. Peja was a decent trade. And whether Walsh is responsible or not for the trade exeption, he acquired Peja which led to the trade exception.


                  Jackson did not work out, but he was a pretty good pickup. Look what he did with the Spurs and look what he has done since. He's a very good player on a good team. if you have the right leadership around him he can be a winning player.


                  Who is James Edwards?

                  We then had to trade Jackson or we were going to lose a huge sponsor. And Dunleavy and Murph's contracts were each just 1 year longer than Jackson's and Al's. So 1 year difference is hardly cap hell.

                  JO contract was a good deal. He was that good of a player at that time. Tinsley's turned into a disaster. Benders was a short (at the time) 4 years, he hardly crippled the franchise with his contract. He had shown some real signs the year prior to signing the contract.

                  So are you suggesting that Walsh distroyed the franchise and then was too cowardly to stay and turn it around? You can't be saying that. It was time for Bird to take over.

                  Walsh did a nice job turning the Knicks around.

                  I'm not suggesting I want Walsh back as the main guy now, but to say Walsh is anything but a an excellent GM, I think is absurd. Bottonline - he got a small market team to 5 eastern conference finals and 1 NBA finals. By any objective measure that indicates to me he did a great job here.
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-25-2012, 01:29 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                    Dealing with Walsh and of course the Walsh Warriors who will undoubtedly re-emerge is kind of like dealing with Elvis or the Beatles. Even if you acknowledge how good they were if you say anything at all contradictory to their greatness you are attacked as an apostate.

                    Simply put the man was in charge of the Pacers for 24 years, 24 four years is longer than a lot of our forum members have been alive.

                    He did some good things he did some bad things. Believe it or not I never really blamed him for the entire Artetst/O’Neal issue. In fact I went out of my way to not blame him for their behavior or for sticking with them because he was finally doing what he had not always done in the past and that is contend for a title and not just be a playoff team.

                    No, unlike a lot of you guys my problems with Donnie stem way back from the early days. Very few of you will remember his “give me five years” speech or the Ross Perot like press conference where we were presented with charts and graphs as to why we couldn’t compete with the big market teams due to salary structure but oh btw here is this massive new contract for Rik Smits (who at the time was not even the every day starter) and also while were here even though Charles Barkley has stated he would come to Indiana and we could have put together an equally good if not better trade than the Suns did we just can’t afford him (see Smits large contract extension) so here you go Pacer fans have Boomer the Pacers Panther instead.

                    I could go on but what would be the point.

                    I will say and have always said that Walsh is a good G.M. Where I differ from the Walsh Warriors is that I don’t consider him to be the greatest G.M. in the history of sports or that he never made any errors in the way he built the team.


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

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Who is James Edwards?

                      We then had to trade Jackson or we were going to lose a huge sponsor.
                      Really? Who?

                      Great post BTW

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        I will say and have always said that Walsh is a good G.M. Where I differ from the Walsh Warriors is that I don’t consider him to be the greatest G.M. in the history of sports or that he never made any errors in the way he built the team.
                        Duh! That is clearly Dan Snyder and Ernie Grunfeld!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                          I'm assuming James Edwards should be James White.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            I'm assuming James Edwards should be James White.

                            Granted I may have the name wrong, but the player I'm referring to was a prior Pacer. He was 7' tall end of the bench type player. When the Pacers did the deal with Atlanta, the Hawks held out for the Pacers to take back this player and his 1 mil contract. IIRC, when using a TE you can't add a player or a pick, so this player and the 07 pick were put in a separate deal. I was thinking the players name was Edwards. I could be wrong about the players name... I've slept once or twice since then.

                            Now, this is going to bug me until I can figure out this players name.

                            Ah ha, I looked in a stack of many years old Hoops team salaries I have, and found it!!!


                            JOHN EDWARDS

                            Maybe my memory isn't that bad after all!

                            Edit: John Edwards contract was 1,080,000 mil.
                            Last edited by Justin Tyme; 06-25-2012, 05:28 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              Granted I may have the name wrong, but the player I'm referring to was a prior Pacer. He was 7' tall end of the bench type player. When the Pacers did the deal with Atlanta, the Hawks held out for the Pacers to take back this player and his 1 mil contract. IIRC, when using a TE you can't add a player or a pick, so this player and the 07 pick were put in a separate deal. I was thinking the players name was Edwards. I could be wrong about the players name... I've slept once or twice since then.

                              Now, this is going to bug me until I can figure out this players name.

                              Ah ha, I looked in a stack of many years old Hoops team salaries I have, and found it!!!


                              JOHN EDWARDS

                              Maybe my memory isn't that bad after all!

                              Edit: John Edwards contract was 1,080,000 mil.

                              Yes I remember him, but I thought the Hawks signed him to the 1 mil contract afternh
                              left the Pcers


                              Edit - yes according to this he signed with hawks year after playing for pacers

                              http://www.nba.com/playerfile/john_edwards/bio.html

                              But you r correct he was traded back to us. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/john_edwards/bio.html
                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-25-2012, 08:43 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: I've got a really bad feeling about this (Walsh may be back to the Pacer per todays star)

                                BTW, I saw this on hoopshype (http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm), although when I click on the link now (several hours later), the page is not found:

                                "Ex-Knicks president Donnie Walsh, ousted by Garden chairman Jim Dolan last June after he was offered a 40% pay cut, is returning to the Indiana Pacers. Walsh, the long-time Indiana CEO before he came to New York to rebuild the Knicks, will be leading the Pacers in their efforts to land free agents starting when the period opens Sunday, league sources said Monday. The team's No. 1 priority is to re-sign point guard George Hill, a restricted free agent, and sources said Walsh will be spearheading the team's efforts to keep Hill."


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

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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X