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

Hollinger on today's trade:

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

    Hollinger on today's trade:

    Trade analysis: Pacers may hit home run in long run


    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...ohn&id=2734001

    Whoa ... Where'd that come from?
    Even the most brazen rumor-mongers were taken by surprise Wednesday when the Warriors and Pacers agreed on an eight-player trade that sends Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Ike Diogu and Keith McLeod to Indiana for Al Harrington, Stephen Jackson, Sarunas Jasikevicius and Josh Powell.
    On the surface, this looks like a classic "grass-is-greener" trade.
    Contrary to the expectations of many, Dunleavy and Murphy haven't meshed with new coach Don Nelson and his wide-open system, though Dunleavy has raised his level of play.
    Meanwhile, the mutterings about chemistry problems in Indiana long have centered on Jackson -- especially since his arrest on felony charges in October -- and Harrington has endured an unexpectedly bumpy ride in his first campaign since rejoining the Pacers.
    Look a little deeper, though, and you'll see this more as a Trojan Horse deal.

    Why? Because, while Jackson, Dunleavy, Murphy and Harrington are the four names in all the headlines, the guy who could make the trade a home run for the Pacers is Diogu.
    The 6-8 second-year forward has had trouble getting minutes in Nelson's perimeter-oriented, smallball-friendly system. But while he's averaged just 13.1 minutes a game in 17 appearances, Diogu has played brilliantly when given the chance.
    Ike Diogu
    Player Efficiency Rating
    18.80
    vs. NBA Avg: +3.80
    Per 40 minutes, his numbers jump off the page -- 22.2 points, 11.4 rebounds, and 2.0 blocks. He's shooting 53 percent from the floor and 79.6 percent from the line, with the last number particularly important because he draws so many fouls in the low post. Overall, his PER of 18.8 is easily the highest of any player in the trade.
    Based on his rookie season stats from a year ago, this season's numbers don't seem like a fluke. Diogu's rookie year PER of 15.8 also beats the 2006-07 rating of anyone else in the deal, as his percentages were nearly identical and his 40-minute numbers (18.8 points, 8.9 boards) weren't too far off.
    So why didn't Diogu play more? Nelson's system obviously had a lot to do with it, but so did Diogu's defense. He can block shots, but he's a bit short for a power forward and, like most other young players, he struggles at that end of the floor. Paired with another developing big man in Andris Biedrins, Diogu had nobody to cover for his mistakes, so it was easier in many cases to leave him on the pine.
    As a Pacer, however, he'll be paired with one of the best frontcourt defenders in the league in Jermaine O'Neal, and when O'Neal checks out another elite defender, Jeff Foster, will check in. As a result, Indiana should be much better positioned to mask his defensive shortcomings than Golden State was.
    Also, the Pacers' post-oriented attack is much more in keeping with Diogu's skill set than the freewheeling system Nellie ran in Golden State. So if anything, his already prodigious output may increase now that he's joining the Pacers, at least on a per-possession basis.
    There might be other dividends for Indy as well. With this deal, the Pacers have an even bigger logjam in the frontcourt, with O'Neal, Foster, Murphy, Diogu, Maceo Baston and David Harrison -- a trade of one of them for a wing player would be the obvious follow-up to this move.
    And if Murphy's jumper can find the net consistently, he may provide spacing for O'Neal to go to work down low.
    Golden State fans will point out they didn't come out of this empty-handed, either. For starters, Jackson and Harrington are better defenders than Murphy and Dunleavy -- the difference isn't huge, but it may prove important given how horrid the Warriors' defense has been of late.
    The Warriors also got themselves into better shape contract-wise. The deals that GM Chris Mullin handed out to Murphy and Dunleavy had become notorious albatrosses in Oakland, while the contracts of Harrington and Jackson expire a year earlier and are slightly less onerous.
    And Golden State upgraded the point guard position behind Baron Davis by getting Jasikevicius (to replace McLeod), an important consideration given how injury-prone Davis is.
    Nonetheless, it's shocking to see the Warriors include such a talented prospect as Diogu as a throw-in, especially considering a year earlier they wouldn't budge on putting him into a deal for Ron Artest.
    It's not like including him was necessary to balance the scales. Going by 2006-07 PER, the three highest-rated players in this deal all went to Indiana. In fact, Murphy has outrated Harrington in five of the past six seasons. And while Jackson is preferable to Dunleavy on talent, he is a huge question mark in the chemistry department -- not to mention a guy who has to stand trial in Indianapolis in February.
    So if you take Diogu and Josh Powell out of the trade, this deal starts looking a lot more reasonable -- Golden State upgrades the backcourt a bit, gets a slight improvement in the cap situation, takes on a bad apple in the locker room, and makes a slight downgrade from Murphy to Harrington. That seems fair.
    But to throw in Diogu on top of it? That's absurd. Or it's genius, if you're looking at it from Indiana's perspective.
    The other names are nice and all, but ten years from now I have a feeling that we'll be looking back on this deal as the Ike Diogu trade. And if you're a Warriors fan, you probably won't be looking back fondly.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

    Trade analysis: Pacers may hit home run in long run


    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...ohn&id=2734001

    Whoa ... Where'd that come from?

    Even the most brazen rumor-mongers were taken by surprise Wednesday when the Warriors and Pacers agreed on an eight-player trade that sends Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Ike Diogu and Keith McLeod to Indiana for Al Harrington, Stephen Jackson, Sarunas Jasikevicius and Josh Powell.
    On the surface, this looks like a classic "grass-is-greener" trade.

    Contrary to the expectations of many, Dunleavy and Murphy haven't meshed with new coach Don Nelson and his wide-open system, though Dunleavy has raised his level of play.

    Meanwhile, the mutterings about chemistry problems in Indiana long have centered on Jackson -- especially since his arrest on felony charges in October -- and Harrington has endured an unexpectedly bumpy ride in his first campaign since rejoining the Pacers.

    Look a little deeper, though, and you'll see this more as a Trojan Horse deal.

    Why? Because, while Jackson, Dunleavy, Murphy and Harrington are the four names in all the headlines, the guy who could make the trade a home run for the Pacers is Diogu.

    The 6-8 second-year forward has had trouble getting minutes in Nelson's perimeter-oriented, smallball-friendly system. But while he's averaged just 13.1 minutes a game in 17 appearances, Diogu has played brilliantly when given the chance.

    http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/nba/p...65x90/3935.jpg Ike Diogu
    Player Efficiency Rating
    18.80
    vs. NBA Avg: +3.80
    Warriors profiles
    Per 40 minutes, his numbers jump off the page -- 22.2 points, 11.4 rebounds, and 2.0 blocks. He's shooting 53 percent from the floor and 79.6 percent from the line, with the last number particularly important because he draws so many fouls in the low post. Overall, his PER of 18.8 is easily the highest of any player in the trade.

    Based on his rookie season stats from a year ago, this season's numbers don't seem like a fluke. Diogu's rookie year PER of 15.8 also beats the 2006-07 rating of anyone else in the deal, as his percentages were nearly identical and his 40-minute numbers (18.8 points, 8.9 boards) weren't too far off.

    So why didn't Diogu play more? Nelson's system obviously had a lot to do with it, but so did Diogu's defense. He can block shots, but he's a bit short for a power forward and, like most other young players, he struggles at that end of the floor. Paired with another developing big man in Andris Biedrins, Diogu had nobody to cover for his mistakes, so it was easier in many cases to leave him on the pine.

    As a Pacer, however, he'll be paired with one of the best frontcourt defenders in the league in Jermaine O'Neal, and when O'Neal checks out another elite defender, Jeff Foster, will check in. As a result, Indiana should be much better positioned to mask his defensive shortcomings than Golden State was.

    Also, the Pacers' post-oriented attack is much more in keeping with Diogu's skill set than the freewheeling system Nellie ran in Golden State. So if anything, his already prodigious output may increase now that he's joining the Pacers, at least on a per-possession basis.

    There might be other dividends for Indy as well. With this deal, the Pacers have an even bigger logjam in the frontcourt, with O'Neal, Foster, Murphy, Diogu, Maceo Baston and David Harrison -- a trade of one of them for a wing player would be the obvious follow-up to this move.
    And if Murphy's jumper can find the net consistently, he may provide spacing for O'Neal to go to work down low.

    Golden State fans will point out they didn't come out of this empty-handed, either. For starters, Jackson and Harrington are better defenders than Murphy and Dunleavy -- the difference isn't huge, but it may prove important given how horrid the Warriors' defense has been of late.

    The Warriors also got themselves into better shape contract-wise. The deals that GM Chris Mullin handed out to Murphy and Dunleavy had become notorious albatrosses in Oakland, while the contracts of Harrington and Jackson expire a year earlier and are slightly less onerous.
    And Golden State upgraded the point guard position behind Baron Davis by getting Jasikevicius (to replace McLeod), an important consideration given how injury-prone Davis is.

    Nonetheless, it's shocking to see the Warriors include such a talented prospect as Diogu as a throw-in, especially considering a year earlier they wouldn't budge on putting him into a deal for Ron Artest.

    It's not like including him was necessary to balance the scales. Going by 2006-07 PER, the three highest-rated players in this deal all went to Indiana. In fact, Murphy has outrated Harrington in five of the past six seasons. And while Jackson is preferable to Dunleavy on talent, he is a huge question mark in the chemistry department -- not to mention a guy who has to stand trial in Indianapolis in February.

    So if you take Diogu and Josh Powell out of the trade, this deal starts looking a lot more reasonable -- Golden State upgrades the backcourt a bit, gets a slight improvement in the cap situation, takes on a bad apple in the locker room, and makes a slight downgrade from Murphy to Harrington. That seems fair.

    But to throw in Diogu on top of it? That's absurd. Or it's genius, if you're looking at it from Indiana's perspective.

    The other names are nice and all, but ten years from now I have a feeling that we'll be looking back on this deal as the Ike Diogu trade. And if you're a Warriors fan, you probably won't be looking back fondly.


    ____________________________________________

    For those that need paragraphs.

    Every Pacers fan and media type here in Indy needs to read this

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

      With this deal, the Pacers have an even bigger logjam in the frontcourt, with O'Neal, Foster, Murphy, Diogu, Maceo Baston and David Harrison -- a trade of one of them for a wing player would be the obvious follow-up to this move.
      I sure hope so.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

        Hollinger is right. We made a killing in this deal.


        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

          heres the thing... people called bird/walsh geniuses after the croshere/quis deal and the peja/harrington deal... but yet we're being praised for dumping harrington a few months after acquiring him. and quis hasn't lived up to the hype yet. so people calling this move genius for the pacers worries me quite a bit.
          This is the darkest timeline.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

            Stole the words right out of my mouth. I agree one thousand percent.

            I felt exactly the same way when we stole JO from Portland.
            The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
            http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
            RSS Feed
            Subscribe via iTunes

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

              So Jeff Foster is an elite defender and Biedrins hurt Diogu's D according to Hollinger?

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                Yes Jeff is an elite defender

                One thing that continues to bother me about the media reporting of this deal, I've heard many reports that don't even mention Diogu. They report that Al, Jax and Saras for Mike and Troy. This is the local media for the most part. It just makes me mad that people are so ignorant

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                  PTI Guys both say we made out better, but they seem to be under the impression that Jackson could go off on a moment's notice and shoot someone, so maybe its not the best perspective.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                    I always worry when made-up statboy says something good about us.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                      Foster is an elite defender?



                      This move in no way detracts from the (obvious) move last summer of using the Peja trade exception on the best player available. That turned out to be a very important chip in the "next" move; a move that was not an alternative last summer.

                      Ron was traded for an expiring contract (flexilbility) who was in turn traded for trade exception (less flexible) which was in turn traded for a player that is still very much in demand throughout the league, even if he was duplicative here.

                      I don't understand the criticism, except that somewhere along the line we threw in a mid-round draft pick. But at this stage I'd rather have Dun and Troy than a mid-first rounder.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                        I'll put Stein's analysis here

                        http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog..._marc#20070117


                        Warriors could win this dealby: Marc Stein
                        posted: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry
                        filed under: NBA, Golden State Warriors, Indiana Pacers, Ike Diogu, Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, Keith McLeod, Stephen Jackson, Al Harrington, Sarunas Jasikevicius, Josh Powell

                        When Jermaine O'Neal unloaded his frustration with Indy's .500 (or thereabouts) season two weeks ago in Dallas, he openly wondered about the Pacers' roster mix.

                        "Are we a good fit for each other?" O'Neal asked aloud.



                        "Maybe, maybe not."



                        Or maybe this is the reality: O'Neal and his bosses already knew the answer.



                        I'm betting on the last of those maybes. It seems safe to presume that O'Neal wouldn't have publicly questioned Indiana's collective capabilities on Jan. 4 if he didn't have an inkling that Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird were actively looking to change the collective. Sooner rather than later.



                        It seems even safer to presume that the close relationship between Walsh and good friend Chris Mullin -- with a big-time nudge from agent Dan Fegan, who represents major players (Stephen Jackson and Troy Murphy) on both sides of Wednesday's eight-player swap -- sped up the process for two teams that were looking for serious shakeups and have decided to take on each other's problems.



                        A landscape-changing deal? No one's claiming that. You can't come close to making that argument for the team in either conference.



                        But this swap does allow Indiana and Golden State to at least say that they've shuffled vigorously, with just over half the season remaining in both cases to see if they can make the new parts work better.



                        • Each team gets a player in the exchange that it has coveted for months.



                        For Indiana that's Ike Diogu, who was repeatedly deemed off-limits by the Warriors during last winter's Ron Artest talks.

                        For Golden State that's Al Harrington, its top free-agent target last summer before and after Don Nelson was hired as coach.

                        The Pacers believe Diogu will develop into a worthy sidekick for O'Neal ... or perhaps even O'Neal's replacement if they wind up needing one at season's end.

                        The Warriors, meanwhile, see Harrington as the athletic combo forward they've been lacking and a natural fit for Nelson's system, even though Harrington's return to Indiana to play alongside his good buddy JO hasn't come close to living up to the widespread forecasts of grandeur.

                        • Each team is likewise shedding a player (or two) who has worn out his welcome.

                        Indy has unexpectedly found a taker for Jackson, who obviously needs a change of scenery after incidents on the floor (Detroit) and off (strip-club shooting) that the locals will never forget, making him the No. 1 scapegoat in Indy since Artest left town.

                        Golden State, in turn, has shed the contracts of two vets (Murphy and Mike Dunleavy) who were supposed to flourish under Nelson but who were more likely to absorb public broadsides in the paper from the new coach than play significant minutes for him. As with Jackson, public patience in Oakland with Murphy and especially Dunleavy was long gone.

                        • Each team, furthermore, believes it couldn't say no in spite of the obvious pitfalls.

                        The Warriors counter concerns about Jackson by pointing out that he's been a successful shooter for a championship team in San Antonio and that each of the Pacers they acquired -- including Josh Powell and my beloved Sarunas Jasikevicius -- is a multi-position player more suited to Nellie's faster tempos and unconventional lineups.

                        The Pacers likewise aren't fretting about O'Neal's inevitable disappointment to see Harrington go or the fact that they're potentially taking back nearly $33 million (no misprint) more than the Warriors in long-term salary obligations because they believe they've improved their team chemistry significantly with players who are more coachable than those outgoing and more suited to Rick Carlisle's possession style.

                        If I have to pick a team on the spot that did better here, I'll go with Golden State, mainly because they were able to move two albatross contracts (Dunleavy's ranking worse than Murphy's) without touching Baron Davis, Jason Richardson, Monta Ellis, Andris Biedrins, Mickael Pietrus or even Matt Barnes ... and selfishly because Nellie has a history of getting beaucoup production from guys named Sarunas (see: Marciulionis).

                        I could be swayed into tilting back Indiana's way if I knew how O'Neal's future will play out or if the Pacers could now move Dunleavy to the Clippers for Corey Maggette, but informed sources in L.A. insist that the Clips won't do that deal even if Mike Dunleavy Sr. keeps lobbying for it.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                          Here is Kiki's take. Very short but pretty informed. Although I disagree with him about Jackson being athletic

                          http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/...ash&id=2734217

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                            Here is another one from ESPN


                            http://proxy.espn.go.com/espn/print?...353&type=story

                            Breaking down the Warriors-Pacers trade

                            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            By Jeff Weltman
                            Scouts Inc.

                            An instant analysis of the big Warriors-Pacers trade:


                            GOLDEN STATE
                            With Troy Murphy and Mike Dunleavy out of Nellie's favor, Golden State has been looking to move its two forwards. If the trade is examined in this light alone, the Warriors scored -- they replaced two highly-paid players the coach didn't want with guys who figure to contribute to the cause. They also upgraded their athleticism and defense.

                            The cost was Ike Diogu, whom I was surprised to see in this deal.

                            Diogu may not develop into an All-Star, but I believe he will put up good offensive numbers as his opportunities grow, and build significant value as time moves on -- he might be a poor-man's Zach Randolph.

                            Like Murphy and Dunleavy, Diogu was clearly not a part of Nellie's plans, and it's hard to build value if you don't play. This was probably a tough call for the Warriors, but at the same time, by including Diogu, they moved a lot of money off the books and got some pieces they wanted.

                            The Warriors are now quite deep at the three perimeter positions and figure to play small with Harrington at the four. When Richardson returns, the question will be how to find minutes for all these guys, but Nellie is a master at upping the tempo and keeping his players happy. If things are too crowded, they now have a host of potential trade assets in their guards and wings.

                            Golden State did not address their primary weakness, which is their interior defense, but you can't build Rome in a day, even with an eight-player trade. They did, however, take a step in the right direction defensively, adding quickness, length and versatility for a coach who makes better use of versatile, interchangeable players than anyone else around.

                            INDIANA
                            Indiana got a player it clearly wanted in Diogu, so that's a plus. (More on him below.)

                            With the addition of Murphy and Dunleavy, Indiana improves its ability to space the floor around the team's focal point, Jermaine O'Neal, but the Pacers will struggle to guard opponents -- the players they picked up in this deal are non-athletic types who are challenged to contain quick players.

                            Luckily, Indiana has one of the best defensive coaches in the league in Rick Carlisle. I can't think of many people more capable of getting this group to play smart, hard-nosed D as a unit. They'll have to.

                            BOTTOM LINE
                            I don't see this deal making either a team to fear, but both are idling around the .500 mark and at least get a shot in the arm.

                            Diogu is the lone impact player -- or possible impact player -- in the deal who's yet to reach his potential. He could prove to be the most valuable player in the trade, especially given that he has two seasons remaining on his rookie deal after this one.

                            If Diogu can become a significant low-post scorer for Indiana, he could (alongside the likes of Danny Granger, David Harrison and Shawne Williams) become an important piece of the foundation for the next generation of Pacers basketball.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Hollinger on today's trade:

                              Jackson is athletic as much as Sarunas is athletic.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X