Granger Trade Played Role in George's Decision to Leave

[pacers33granger]

Personally I am more than over PG. I believe he let his people handle it and they screwed it up and he's the one who looks bad. Definitely not a fan of him mailing it in so much, but some guys just do that.

The person who deserves the hate is Mintz. He created the same bad situation with Reggie Jackson in OKC and clearly was doing some underhanded stuff. It wasn't PG who told other teams to back off, it was Mintz. It wasn't PG who was possibly speaking to the Lakers about things he shouldn't be, it was Mintz. And I'm nearly certain it was Mintz who leaked the trade request so PG didn't get sent to a bottom dweller or gutted team.

[Miller4ever]

^^I'm not sure anyone deserves hate, even if some agents exacerbate the issue.

The whole "loyalty" deserves some consideration. When front offices are displaying no loyalty, why is it fair for players to be expected to display it without question? In no other job are workers held to such a weird standard of unconditional "loyalty." It's bull, quite frankly. If I worked somewhere that treated me well but fired all of my friends (who were better at their jobs than their replacements) and the best manager I've ever had, and then I get blamed for not trying hard enough when the company's performance dips, no one would blame me for wanting out, especially if other companies were offering me better deals.

[pacers33granger]

^^I'm not sure anyone deserves hate, even if some agents exacerbate the issue.

The whole "loyalty" deserves some consideration. When front offices are displaying no loyalty, why is it fair for players to be expected to display it without question? In no other job are workers held to such a weird standard of unconditional "loyalty." It's bull, quite frankly. If I worked somewhere that treated me well but fired all of my friends (who were better at their jobs than their replacements) and the best manager I've ever had, and then I get blamed for not trying hard enough when the company's performance dips, no one would blame me for wanting out, especially if other companies were offering me better deals.

I totally agree with the loyalty part. PG is well within his rights to walk if he wants to and the past year especially has shown us that most teams are less loyal than the players. I disagree, to a point, about the firing friends part as PG was quite vocal about needing more help and those guys simply weren't cutting it and we needed to move on. You can't have it both ways. PG is also well known for not trying hard enough during the regular season and we saw a ton of plays where he wasn't even involved due to complaining or lollygagging.

But I do think Mintz deserves some hate. I think PG's comments were genuine when he said he didn't expect Indy to trade him as he had a year left on his deal and was just letting them know he's not sticking around. Mintz is the one who messed with PG performing on that last year he was obligated to. There are other agents who do slimy things as well so it's not just him, but I see this whole saga as him trying to make a power move (he really doesn't have many clients and few big name ones) and show players that he can get them where they want to be by whatever means possible. But PG is the one whose name is getting dragged through the mud when he's probably responsible for like 20% of it.

[winter_mute_13]

But I do think Mintz deserves some hate. I think PG's comments were genuine when he said he didn't expect Indy to trade him as he had a year left on his deal and was just letting them know he's not sticking around. Mintz is the one who messed with PG performing on that last year he was obligated to. There are other agents who do slimy things as well so it's not just him, but I see this whole saga as him trying to make a power move (he really doesn't have many clients and few big name ones) and show players that he can get them where they want to be by whatever means possible. But PG is the one whose name is getting dragged through the mud when he's probably responsible for like 20% of it.

I agree with the other parts of your post, but I'm not sure I am as convinced as you are that PG's agent was behind all the maneuvering.

It seems just as possible that immaturity on PG's part caused him to force a showdown (shades of Dwight Howard here). We won't really know I guess unless the Pacers leak out all the dirty laundry. Interesting thing, we heard stuff about JO and Granger after they were traded, but nothing on PG so far.

[HurricaneDij25]

Personally I am more than over PG. I believe he let his people handle it and they screwed it up and he's the one who looks bad. Definitely not a fan of him mailing it in so much, but some guys just do that.

The person who deserves the hate is Mintz. He created the same bad situation with Reggie Jackson in OKC and clearly was doing some underhanded stuff. It wasn't PG who told other teams to back off, it was Mintz. It wasn't PG who was possibly speaking to the Lakers about things he shouldn't be, it was Mintz. And I'm nearly certain it was Mintz who leaked the trade request so PG didn't get sent to a bottom dweller or gutted team.

Several rumors had come out even before the whole Mintz thing, though. To me, George showed his true colors this past season when he had all but quit on this team. Living much closer to Chicago than I do Indianapolis as I do with a bit of an outside view, I can honestly say that some Pacers fans have a little naiveness to them.

For me, I have little respect for southern California residents for their entitled, snobby, general attitiudes. I've dealt with these types constantly during my time dating back to my days on the CBSSports message boards over ten years ago. I had started to lose respect for George when all the Lakers rumors had come out during the spring, and the whole Mintz thing happened to be the final straw for me.

[Grang33r]

I don't buy it.

What will he use as an excuse when he dumps OKC for the LAL as everyone assumes? Granger was a injured 30 year old player. Pacers made a move to better position themselves for a title run and i can't find it right now but didn't Paul George praise the trade at the time saying he's happy the organization is committed to winning a title?

[Miller4ever]

For me, I have little respect for southern California residents for their entitled, snobby, general attitiudes.

I hope you're only referring to the vocal sports fans and not making a blanket statement about the population

[HurricaneDij25]

For me, I have little respect for southern California residents for their entitled, snobby, general attitiudes.

I hope you're only referring to the vocal sports fans and not making a blanket statement about the population

Whatever it is, the guy has always loved Kobe. And yes, based on my message board experiences all these years, 90% of residents in this region all think the same. In George's case, the guy grew up in southern California and wasn't even a Lakers fan growing up...He was a Clippers fan. What does that tell you?

When it came to his Laker desires, the pull of living in Kobe's shadow had everything to do with everything.

[Miller4ever]

And yes, based on my message board experiences all these years, 90% of residents in this region all think the same. In George's case, the guy grew up in southern California and wasn't even a Lakers fan growing up...He was a Clippers fan. What does that tell you?

When it came to his Laker desires, the pull of living in Kobe's shadow had everything to do with everything.

I would encourage you to broaden your intake and maybe spend less time on vitriolic message board.

Reggie Miller was born in SoCal, played college ball in SoCal, and is still in SoCal. People from my high school met him in person and that was the only reason I have a Reggie Miller autograph.

I was born in Indiana where my parents had gone to Notre Dame and encourage everyone around me to not think of the state as a state of hicks and rednecks, and give them the benefit of the doubt. Likewise, I would recommend giving the residents of SoCal the benefit of the doubt. I don't want discussions of Paul George to turn into some indictment of people who happen to live in a region that he prefers. If you personally have something against us, I invite you to swing by and I'll show you around. The characteristics of a region come from the people, and I am one of those people. It's okay to feel strongly about sports, but it's not constructive to take criticism of players, front offices, and coaches, and turn it on fans, even if they think stupid things. Many men wiser than me have said to treat others the way you wish to be treated.

Since Indiana doesn't have a baseball team, I have become partial to the Dodgers (in fact, both of my Pacer buddies out here are fans, too). That makes me an LA sports fan to some extent. I don't want people to assume that I'm entitled and snobby just because it's a big market team with money (and world series favorites). It's a way for me to spend time with my family and friends, and if you hate the vitriol that you see on message boards coming from the idiotic minority, then don't read it, or rise above it.

[Nuntius]

^^I'm not sure anyone deserves hate, even if some agents exacerbate the issue.

The whole "loyalty" deserves some consideration. When front offices are displaying no loyalty, why is it fair for players to be expected to display it without question? In no other job are workers held to such a weird standard of unconditional "loyalty." It's bull, quite frankly. If I worked somewhere that treated me well but fired all of my friends (who were better at their jobs than their replacements) and the best manager I've ever had, and then I get blamed for not trying hard enough when the company's performance dips, no one would blame me for wanting out, especially if other companies were offering me better deals.

Exactly. 100% correct. No Pacer fan can play the loyalty card after the BS that Bird pulled on DG, Roy, West and Frank.

I'm just glad that Bird is no longer running the team. That's honestly one of the main reasons why I'm optimistic for the future.

[Nuntius]

For me, I have little respect for southern California residents for their entitled, snobby, general attitiudes.

I hope you're only referring to the vocal sports fans and not making a blanket statement about the population

It's pretty clear that he's making a blanket statement about the population.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Lumping any group of people all together as the same exact person is pretty ignorant I think.

There are some ****ty ass Pacer fans out there too.

[Pacersike]

^^I'm not sure anyone deserves hate, even if some agents exacerbate the issue.

The whole "loyalty" deserves some consideration. When front offices are displaying no loyalty, why is it fair for players to be expected to display it without question? In no other job are workers held to such a weird standard of unconditional "loyalty." It's bull, quite frankly. If I worked somewhere that treated me well but fired all of my friends (who were better at their jobs than their replacements) and the best manager I've ever had, and then I get blamed for not trying hard enough when the company's performance dips, no one would blame me for wanting out, especially if other companies were offering me better deals.

Exactly. 100% correct. No Pacer fan can play the loyalty card after the BS that Bird pulled on DG, Roy, West and Frank.

I'm just glad that Bird is no longer running the team. That's honestly one of the main reasons why I'm optimistic for the future.

I don't see why I can not. Just because someone did a lot of unloyal stuff, doesn't mean others can't be judged on their loyalty.
Bird was already gone when Paul demanded to be traded.
Paul had plenty of occassions to walk into Bird's office and work out a plan that could keep him in Indiana. The fact our front office had no clue whatsoever Paul wasn't happy, tells us how serious he was when he was saying he wanted to win everything as a Pacer.

When you are in a relationship and you are experiencing troubles and you want to get out of those troubles together, you talk with eachother. Paul apparently didn't talk at all. That could be an indication that he was always thinking about playing in LA and that he could use things like the Granger trade as an excuse to leave.

People are being loyal after their partner has been unloyal, all the time. Because they love their partner and want to stay together. Paul didn't love Indiana enough to try to make it work, to try to build a new road on Bird's myway. This isn't a story of one person pulling bull on another person. This is a story of 2 people with 2 big egos who clashed and jeopardized Paul's future in Indiana, with on one side a GM who is too old school to deal with modern star players and on the other side a star player whos heart was telling him that he doesn't like to be the leader of a team and dreams about playing in California.

Me too I'm glad Bird passed the torch but I'm also glad Paul is gone and we have players now who are happy (enough) to be playing for the Pacers.

[HurricaneDij25]

And yes, based on my message board experiences all these years, 90% of residents in this region all think the same. In George's case, the guy grew up in southern California and wasn't even a Lakers fan growing up...He was a Clippers fan. What does that tell you?

When it came to his Laker desires, the pull of living in Kobe's shadow had everything to do with everything.

I would encourage you to broaden your intake and maybe spend less time on vitriolic message board.

Reggie Miller was born in SoCal, played college ball in SoCal, and is still in SoCal. People from my high school met him in person and that was the only reason I have a Reggie Miller autograph.

I was born in Indiana where my parents had gone to Notre Dame and encourage everyone around me to not think of the state as a state of hicks and rednecks, and give them the benefit of the doubt. Likewise, I would recommend giving the residents of SoCal the benefit of the doubt. I don't want discussions of Paul George to turn into some indictment of people who happen to live in a region that he prefers. If you personally have something against us, I invite you to swing by and I'll show you around. The characteristics of a region come from the people, and I am one of those people. It's okay to feel strongly about sports, but it's not constructive to take criticism of players, front offices, and coaches, and turn it on fans, even if they think stupid things. Many men wiser than me have said to treat others the way you wish to be treated.

Since Indiana doesn't have a baseball team, I have become partial to the Dodgers (in fact, both of my Pacer buddies out here are fans, too). That makes me an LA sports fan to some extent. I don't want people to assume that I'm entitled and snobby just because it's a big market team with money (and world series favorites). It's a way for me to spend time with my family and friends, and if you hate the vitriol that you see on message boards coming from the idiotic minority, then don't read it, or rise above it.

Fair enough I suppose...

I'm still a Cubs fan though and will root against the Dodgers, and Paul George is still an excuse-maker who blames the world whenever he loses.

[Nuntius]

^^I'm not sure anyone deserves hate, even if some agents exacerbate the issue.

The whole "loyalty" deserves some consideration. When front offices are displaying no loyalty, why is it fair for players to be expected to display it without question? In no other job are workers held to such a weird standard of unconditional "loyalty." It's bull, quite frankly. If I worked somewhere that treated me well but fired all of my friends (who were better at their jobs than their replacements) and the best manager I've ever had, and then I get blamed for not trying hard enough when the company's performance dips, no one would blame me for wanting out, especially if other companies were offering me better deals.

Exactly. 100% correct. No Pacer fan can play the loyalty card after the BS that Bird pulled on DG, Roy, West and Frank.

I'm just glad that Bird is no longer running the team. That's honestly one of the main reasons why I'm optimistic for the future.

I don't see why I can not. Just because someone did a lot of unloyal stuff, doesn't mean others can't be judged on their loyalty.
Bird was already gone when Paul demanded to be traded.
Paul had plenty of occassions to walk into Bird's office and work out a plan that could keep him in Indiana. The fact our front office had no clue whatsoever Paul wasn't happy, tells us how serious he was when he was saying he wanted to win everything as a Pacer.

When you are in a relationship and you are experiencing troubles and you want to get out of those troubles together, you talk with eachother. Paul apparently didn't talk at all. That could be an indication that he was always thinking about playing in LA and that he could use things like the Granger trade as an excuse to leave.

People are being loyal after their partner has been unloyal, all the time. Because they love their partner and want to stay together. Paul didn't love Indiana enough to try to make it work, to try to build a new road on Bird's myway. This isn't a story of one person pulling bull on another person. This is a story of 2 people with 2 big egos who clashed and jeopardized Paul's future in Indiana, with on one side a GM who is too old school to deal with modern star players and on the other side a star player whos heart was telling him that he doesn't like to be the leader of a team and dreams about playing in California.

Me too I'm glad Bird passed the torch but I'm also glad Paul is gone and we have players now who are happy (enough) to be playing for the Pacers.

I feel that the comparison with a romantic relationship isn't apt here. That's not how the business side of the NBA operates. There's absolutely no sentimentality and the moment a player becomes expendable he is immediately discarded.

Unfortunately, the Pacers are no longer the franchise that would Jeff Foster 13 years. We aren't loyal anymore. Therefore, we don't really deserve any loyalty from our players. Bird, at least, didn't deserve any. Things could change with Pritch. It remains to be seen.

[Pacersike]

I feel that the comparison with a romantic relationship isn't apt here. That's not how the business side of the NBA operates. There's absolutely no sentimentality and the moment a player becomes expendable he is immediately discarded.

Unfortunately, the Pacers are no longer the franchise that would Jeff Foster 13 years. We aren't loyal anymore. Therefore, we don't really deserve any loyalty from our players. Bird, at least, didn't deserve any. Things could change with Pritch. It remains to be seen.

I don't know. Both a romantic relationship and a business relationship are created because both parties have similar needs and have something to gain when the relationship is working out really well. Wether it is love or kids or a championship or feeling home, the foundations of both relationships are similar IMO. You call it romantic but it all starts with 2 animals trying to get their needs fulfilled as best as they possible can. We create a lot of romance around it, but it sure has a business side to it as well.

Paul didn't pick the Pacers and he didn't pick his GM, so there are plenty of differences too. Bird isn't the Pacers and the Pacers aren't only Larry Bird. If Paul loves the Pacers so much, he should be able to separate them from eachother, but to him it didn't matter there was a new GM in town. Loyalty is fading everywhere. Teams, players, marriages. It's everywhere, not just our beloved Pacers.
The Nowitzki's off this world are a dying breed and read you more and more opinions that he should have signed for a contender.
What exactly have Dirk and Dallas gained by staying loyal to eachother? Lot's of missed opportunities for Dirk and a franchise that couldn't properly rebuild. For what? Romantic loyalty.

I don't blame Paul one bit for wanting out, I just disliked the way he did it, but the reason why he wanted out has to be found with Paul himself as much as with our front office. Bird made mistakes but not to a degree that we can say that he pulled bull on Paul.
All his moves can be explained that he was trying to do what he thought was right for this franchise. Granger wasn't producing for 2 years in a row, Hill and Vogel were sacrificed because the team couldn't take the next step with them. Paul should have tried playing the 4 if he was serious about doing whatever it takes to win games.

Bird failed to build a contender around Paul and keep him happy but the future will tell us how much blame Paul should get for that. Paul failed to be a good leader and that wasn't only because he wasn't happy I think. He also lacks the personality to take the lead. Which brings me to another reason why Paul was looking for the exit. He seems to be needing personalities like Westbrook, Anthony, Granger and West around him. His words/expressions tell me that and the Pacers results of the last 7 years tell me that.

Being loyal is a lot easier when things are going great. Do you see Tim Duncan staying a Sacramento King if was drafted by them?
I don't. Jeff Foster with all due respect is no Duncan or even a Paul George. I'm perfectly fine with loyalty fading as long as it is best for the team and we can admit that there are plenty examples of one way loyalties both from teams as from players.
I mean Kevin Durant left the team Paul George is raving about how they communicate a lot with their players. They traded Harden to pay him the money he wants. Loyalty is fading everywhere, I think we just have to accept that.

[Nuntius]

I feel that the comparison with a romantic relationship isn't apt here. That's not how the business side of the NBA operates. There's absolutely no sentimentality and the moment a player becomes expendable he is immediately discarded.

Unfortunately, the Pacers are no longer the franchise that would Jeff Foster 13 years. We aren't loyal anymore. Therefore, we don't really deserve any loyalty from our players. Bird, at least, didn't deserve any. Things could change with Pritch. It remains to be seen.

I don't know. Both a romantic relationship and a business relationship are created because both parties have similar needs and have something to gain when the relationship is working out really well. Wether it is love or kids or a championship or feeling home, the foundations of both relationships are similar IMO. You call it romantic but it all starts with 2 animals trying to get their needs fulfilled as best as they possible can. We create a lot of romance around it, but it sure has a business side to it as well.

Nope. I 100% disagree on that. Business relationships are completely different from any other kind of relationship (whether that relationship is romantic, familial or a friendship). Business relationships have a pretty clear financial motive while everything else doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't).

Paul didn't pick the Pacers and he didn't pick his GM, so there are plenty of differences too. Bird isn't the Pacers and the Pacers aren't only Larry Bird.

Larry Bird sure as hell loved to think that he WAS the Pacers, though. Remember the infamous "I'm the one making the decisions around here" comment? No star would ever sit around and take this kind of bullcrap.

If Paul loves the Pacers so much, he should be able to separate them from eachother, but to him it didn't matter there was a new GM in town.

I never said that Paul loved the Pacers. What I wrote had nothing to do with Paul and everything to do with Bird.

Loyalty is fading everywhere. Teams, players, marriages. It's everywhere, not just our beloved Pacers.

Yeah, that's too much of a generalization.

The Nowitzki's off this world are a dying breed and read you more and more opinions that he should have signed for a contender.
What exactly have Dirk and Dallas gained by staying loyal to eachother? Lot's of missed opportunities for Dirk and a franchise that couldn't properly rebuild. For what? Romantic loyalty.

Dirk and the Mavs have gotten a ring out of it. I'm sure that if you ask Dirk he has absolutely no regrets about it.

I don't blame Paul one bit for wanting out, I just disliked the way he did it, but the reason why he wanted out has to be found with Paul himself as much as with our front office. Bird made mistakes but not to a degree that we can say that he pulled bull on Paul.
All his moves can be explained that he was trying to do what he thought was right for this franchise. Granger wasn't producing for 2 years in a row, Hill and Vogel were sacrificed because the team couldn't take the next step with them. Paul should have tried playing the 4 if he was serious about doing whatever it takes to win games.

I disagree. Bird ruined any chances at a good team we could have after our ECF runs and he's directly responsible for PG leaving. Bird should have left the team 2 years ago. He stopped being good at his job in 2014. Unfortunately, our FO had zero accountability and so we had endure Bird for a lot more years than we had to.

Bird failed to build a contender around Paul and keep him happy but the future will tell us how much blame Paul should get for that. Paul failed to be a good leader and that wasn't only because he wasn't happy I think. He also lacks the personality to take the lead. Which brings me to another reason why Paul was looking for the exit. He seems to be needing personalities like Westbrook, Anthony, Granger and West around him. His words/expressions tell me that and the Pacers results of the last 7 years tell me that.

Once again, my comments aren't focused on Paul. He is no longer a Pacer. My comments are focused on Larry Bird because he's still part of the organization. Thankfully, he's in a much smaller role and he isn't making any decisions anymore. Words cannot describe how happy that makes me.

Being loyal is a lot easier when things are going great.

That goes without saying.

Do you see Tim Duncan staying a Sacramento King if was drafted by them? I don't. Jeff Foster with all due respect is no Duncan or even a Paul George. I'm perfectly fine with loyalty fading as long as it is best for the team and we can admit that there are plenty examples of one way loyalties both from teams as from players. I mean Kevin Durant left the team Paul George is raving about how they communicate a lot with their players. They traded Harden to pay him the money he wants. Loyalty is fading everywhere, I think we just have to accept that.

Then why hasn't loyalty faded from the Spurs? It's not just Duncan. Ginobili and Parker are Spurs lifers as well and they're both going to be in the Hall of Fame (their international accolades make them a lock). Yes, they are good and that makes it easier. But there's a reason why they're good. There's a reason why they've been so good for such a long time (seriously, I was born in 1990 and ever since then the Spurs have missed the playoffs only one time). They've managed all that because they're an amazingly-run organization.

We aren't an amazingly-run organization. We used to be close to that but Bird ruined it.

[Pacersike]

I feel that the comparison with a romantic relationship isn't apt here. That's not how the business side of the NBA operates. There's absolutely no sentimentality and the moment a player becomes expendable he is immediately discarded.

Unfortunately, the Pacers are no longer the franchise that would Jeff Foster 13 years. We aren't loyal anymore. Therefore, we don't really deserve any loyalty from our players. Bird, at least, didn't deserve any. Things could change with Pritch. It remains to be seen.

I don't know. Both a romantic relationship and a business relationship are created because both parties have similar needs and have something to gain when the relationship is working out really well. Wether it is love or kids or a championship or feeling home, the foundations of both relationships are similar IMO. You call it romantic but it all starts with 2 animals trying to get their needs fulfilled as best as they possible can. We create a lot of romance around it, but it sure has a business side to it as well.

Nope. I 100% disagree on that. Business relationships are completely different from any other kind of relationship (whether that relationship is romantic, familial or a friendship). Business relationships have a pretty clear financial motive while everything else doesn't (or, at least, shouldn't).

Paul didn't pick the Pacers and he didn't pick his GM, so there are plenty of differences too. Bird isn't the Pacers and the Pacers aren't only Larry Bird.

Larry Bird sure as hell loved to think that he WAS the Pacers, though. Remember the infamous "I'm the one making the decisions around here" comment? No star would ever sit around and take this kind of bullcrap.

If Paul loves the Pacers so much, he should be able to separate them from eachother, but to him it didn't matter there was a new GM in town.

I never said that Paul loved the Pacers. What I wrote had nothing to do with Paul and everything to do with Bird.

Loyalty is fading everywhere. Teams, players, marriages. It's everywhere, not just our beloved Pacers.

Yeah, that's too much of a generalization.

The Nowitzki's off this world are a dying breed and read you more and more opinions that he should have signed for a contender.
What exactly have Dirk and Dallas gained by staying loyal to eachother? Lot's of missed opportunities for Dirk and a franchise that couldn't properly rebuild. For what? Romantic loyalty.

Dirk and the Mavs have gotten a ring out of it. I'm sure that if you ask Dirk he has absolutely no regrets about it.

I don't blame Paul one bit for wanting out, I just disliked the way he did it, but the reason why he wanted out has to be found with Paul himself as much as with our front office. Bird made mistakes but not to a degree that we can say that he pulled bull on Paul.
All his moves can be explained that he was trying to do what he thought was right for this franchise. Granger wasn't producing for 2 years in a row, Hill and Vogel were sacrificed because the team couldn't take the next step with them. Paul should have tried playing the 4 if he was serious about doing whatever it takes to win games.

I disagree. Bird ruined any chances at a good team we could have after our ECF runs and he's directly responsible for PG leaving. Bird should have left the team 2 years ago. He stopped being good at his job in 2014. Unfortunately, our FO had zero accountability and so we had endure Bird for a lot more years than we had to.

Bird failed to build a contender around Paul and keep him happy but the future will tell us how much blame Paul should get for that. Paul failed to be a good leader and that wasn't only because he wasn't happy I think. He also lacks the personality to take the lead. Which brings me to another reason why Paul was looking for the exit. He seems to be needing personalities like Westbrook, Anthony, Granger and West around him. His words/expressions tell me that and the Pacers results of the last 7 years tell me that.

Once again, my comments aren't focused on Paul. He is no longer a Pacer. My comments are focused on Larry Bird because he's still part of the organization. Thankfully, he's in a much smaller role and he isn't making any decisions anymore. Words cannot describe how happy that makes me.

Being loyal is a lot easier when things are going great.

That goes without saying.

Do you see Tim Duncan staying a Sacramento King if was drafted by them? I don't. Jeff Foster with all due respect is no Duncan or even a Paul George. I'm perfectly fine with loyalty fading as long as it is best for the team and we can admit that there are plenty examples of one way loyalties both from teams as from players. I mean Kevin Durant left the team Paul George is raving about how they communicate a lot with their players. They traded Harden to pay him the money he wants. Loyalty is fading everywhere, I think we just have to accept that.

Then why hasn't loyalty faded from the Spurs? It's not just Duncan. Ginobili and Parker are Spurs lifers as well and they're both going to be in the Hall of Fame (their international accolades make them a lock). Yes, they are good and that makes it easier. But there's a reason why they're good. There's a reason why they've been so good for such a long time (seriously, I was born in 1990 and ever since then the Spurs have missed the playoffs only one time). They've managed all that because they're an amazingly-run organization.

We aren't an amazingly-run organization. We used to be close to that but Bird ruined it.

Agree to disagree then

Good to have you back btw

Go Pacers

[Nuntius]

Agree to disagree then

Fair enough. I will have to admit that when it comes to Bird I'm pretty biased after all

Good to have you back btw

Go Pacers

I'm always lurking. I'm just not that active anymore. Still, good to be here

Go Pacers indeed