PDA

View Full Version : Coming real close to WANTING Artest back!



PacerMan
04-18-2005, 09:45 PM
(and that's saying ALLOT)

I'm REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY getting sick and tired of us getting treated liked thugs.

ALMOST might as well give in and give them what they want.

And kick some serious *** in the process.

'Course they'd never let that happen.

Unclebuck
04-18-2005, 09:51 PM
Do you mean only now you are wanting Artest back.

SoupIsGood
04-18-2005, 09:53 PM
We couldn't be any further apart on this. About a week ago, I was slowly becoming more open to welcoming Artest back.

But now, with every loss, a little voice is my head is gradually becoming more pronounced.


Trade Artest for Matt Harpring.

Trade Artest for Matt Harpring.

Trade Artest for Matt Harpring.

Trade Artest for ANYBODY!

indytoad
04-18-2005, 09:55 PM
Probably a good idea Soup, since at about this time next year Artest is going to be contributing just as much as he is now.

IndyToad
Build your own action figure

Unclebuck
04-18-2005, 09:57 PM
Bad ideza as Artest leads the pacers to 65 wins next season and a 16-3 playoff record

SoupIsGood
04-18-2005, 09:59 PM
Bad ideza as Artest leads the pacers to 65 wins next season and a 16-3 playoff record

Just like he was supposed to this year, eh?





That post was strangely un-UB like, I wonder if there is some hidden joke or sarcasm I am missing here.

Suaveness
04-18-2005, 10:01 PM
Artest will help us next year and lead us through the playoffs. I firmly believe that

Harmonica
04-18-2005, 10:03 PM
You guys are bringing me down.

Jermaniac
04-18-2005, 10:05 PM
Artest will help us next year and lead us through the playoffs. I firmly believe thatIts good there is a few people left who are positive on this board and belive in this team.

NorCal_Pacerfan
04-18-2005, 10:11 PM
We'll want Artest around now that Reggie is gone.

Anthem
04-18-2005, 11:03 PM
Reggie's not gone yet, and I still want Artest back.

Jermaniac
04-18-2005, 11:04 PM
When Paul Pierce starts lighting our asses up, you will see how much we need Ronnie.

PacerFan31
04-18-2005, 11:06 PM
When Paul Pierce starts lighting our asses up, you will see how much we need Ronnie.

and thats the sad sad truth (no pun intended) :(

PacerMan
04-18-2005, 11:40 PM
Do you mean only now you are wanting Artest back.

Yes, and the post was sarcastic, as in " I'm SO frustrated that I'd almost want Artest back". :)

(not frustrated by our play, by how we are treated by other teams, the league, the press)

Still MUCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHh rather trade him. :)

Unclebuck
04-18-2005, 11:40 PM
Just like he was supposed to this year, eh?





That post was strangely un-UB like, I wonder if there is some hidden joke or sarcasm I am missing here.



No hidden joke or sarcasm. Just using a little hyperbole, although my effort was about as bad as the pacers in the game tonight

SoupIsGood
04-18-2005, 11:42 PM
When Paul Pierce starts lighting our asses up, you will see how much we need Ronnie.

What he's done to us this year has made me realize how much we don't need him.

Arcadian
04-18-2005, 11:49 PM
What he's done to us this year has made me realize how much we don't need him.

After this season I know we need something else. I am proud of what the team has done this season but it is not a contender as is.

Suaveness
04-18-2005, 11:59 PM
We're one of the best teams in the league with Jamaal, JO and Ron. Thats all we need

Suaveness
04-19-2005, 12:02 AM
If they played the Championship game on the first day of the season, we'd be set then...

No doubt :devil:

Suaveness
04-19-2005, 12:44 AM
I should add a caveat:

We'd be set, assuming the Ron's music production business doesn't have a release scheduled within 3 months of that first day...

Lets hope he learns his lesson about how great his first album sold...

Kstat
04-19-2005, 12:45 AM
....maybe he'll forray into country music.....

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 01:02 AM
What he's done to us this year has made me realize how much we don't need him.

Oh balderdash! I'm not in the mood to hear this kind of nonsense tonight! Ron went into the stands after a guy who threw beer on him. Most people that weren't afraid would have done the same thing.

What did he do when he was there? He made the awful mistake of grabbing the wrong person. Did he beat on him, or kick him? No! Guys started hitting him and he hit them back. Then he got out of the stands and was confronted by thugs, so he hit them too.

Ron Artest gets a beer thrown on him and grabs the wrong man and is fined $5 million dollars for it. Ron didn't do anything to us. He didn't over react, David Stern did!

Anthem
04-19-2005, 01:38 AM
Agreed, Will.

If anything, I'm MORE convinced that we need Ron. Trade him for "anybody"? You've got to be kidding me! We'd be toast.

I wish he was back RIGHT NOW.

Jose Slaughter
04-19-2005, 01:47 AM
Oh balderdash! I'm not in the mood to hear this kind of nonsense tonight! Ron went into the stands after a guy who threw beer on him. Most people that weren't afraid would have done the same thing.

What did he do when he was there? He made the awful mistake of grabbing the wrong person. Did he beat on him, or kick him? No! Guys started hitting him and he hit them back. Then he got out of the stands and was confronted by thugs, so he hit them too.

Ron Artest gets a beer thrown on him and grabs the wrong man and is fined $5 million dollars for it. Ron didn't do anything to us. He didn't over react, David Stern did!

Perfect

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 01:49 AM
Oh balderdash! I'm not in the mood to hear this kind of nonsense tonight! Ron went into the stands after a guy who threw beer on him. Most people that weren't afraid would have done the same thing.

What did he do when he was there? He made the awful mistake of grabbing the wrong person. Did he beat on him, or kick him? No! Guys started hitting him and he hit them back. Then he got out of the stands and was confronted by thugs, so he hit them too.

Ron Artest gets a beer thrown on him and grabs the wrong man and is fined $5 million dollars for it. Ron didn't do anything to us. He didn't over react, David Stern did!

You can rationalize and blame others all you want, but in the end, Ron's actions earned him a year-long suspension.

That's how I see it, and considering it's not the first time he's been so utterly stupid, my patience with him has really worn thin.

Anthem
04-19-2005, 02:18 AM
You can rationalize and blame others all you want, but in the end, Ron's actions earned him a year-long suspension.

That's how I see it, and considering it's not the first time he's been so utterly stupid, my patience with him has really worn thin.

Just now? Why did this just come up? He's been gone for six months!

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 02:22 AM
You can rationalize and blame others all you want . . .


That's right! While you are irrationally blaming Ron for the Pacer's bad season when he's way down the list of people to blame.

There's Wallace.
There's the fan that threw the beer.
There's David Stern who almost everyone thinks overreacted.

Peck
04-19-2005, 02:38 AM
That's right! While you are irrationally blaming Ron for the Pacer's bad season when he's way down the list of people to blame.

There's Wallace.
There's the fan that threw the beer.
There's David Stern who almost everyone thinks overreacted.


Bad season? Bad Season????? What the hell are you talking bad season?

We have won more games than we lost, we are in the playoffs, our local hero is retiring & going down like a warrior born, our prodigal son has returned & helped lead the way. We've had adversity & turmoil & it may not be the high standard of wins you had hoped for but a Bad season?

No way.

With everything that has happened with all of the reasons in the world to give in we did not.

No matter who we play in the playoffs, no matter what the result, IMO we are already winners.

BTW, let's not get carried away. Not everybody thinks that Stern overreacted.

I can think of one person in particular who agreed with him on that & that person was kind of important. Roger Kaplan the arbitrator agreed with him & that is kind of all that matters isn't it?

Bball
04-19-2005, 02:48 AM
Roger Kaplan the arbitrator agreed with him & that is kind of all that matters isn't it?

He's a hater! :devil:

;)
-Bball

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 03:29 AM
Bad season? Bad Season????? What the hell are you talking bad season?


Ah . . . Peck, let me capsulize whats been said.

Soupisgood, writing about Artest wrote, "What he's done to us this year has made me realize how much we don't need him."

Now if he had been talking about a good year he wouldn't have put it that way. So from his stand point this has been a bad season. So if you want to argue with him about whether this has been a good or bad season, be my guest.

However, in arguing if this season is good or bad it really depends on your point of view. How many games did we win last year? How many games did we expect to win this year? If you argue from that perspective, yes it's been a bad season.

If you want to argue that this has been a good season because of what we've overcome . . . well I won't argue with that either.


BTW, let's not get carried away. Not everybody thinks that Stern overreacted.

I can think of one person in particular who agreed with him on that & that person was kind of important. Roger Kaplan the arbitrator agreed with him & that is kind of all that matters isn't it?

Stern either overreacted, or he settled on a punishment that did not fit the crime! And that Roger Kapland or any arbitrator agreed with him I find ludicrous. How one arbitrator can let a guy come back after choking his coach, and another says a year's punisnment is okay for grabbing someone . . . well it's beyond me.

As for the arbitrator agreeing with Stern being all that matters. Well I disagree. It still matters to me and sundry other Pacer fans. And it wasn't even the last word. Stern could have reinstated Ron even after that but chose not to.

What really yanks my chain about the whole thing is Stern indicating over All Star weekend that Ron might be reinstated. But no, like any lawyer he wants to split hairs when he knows people will take hope from his words.

My opinion is Stern overreacted. He later realized it, but decided not to do anything about it.

able
04-19-2005, 05:40 AM
Well we're back to THE discussion.

1. This team as it is this year, though warriors and fearless, is not a contender. (fairy tales have to happen before I believe)
2. Trading Ron and becoming a contender with that move "because we dump Ron" is as nonsensical as me claiming to be able to play for the P's next season.
3. With Reggie retiring we need "help" on this team without Ron like you've never seen before.
4. If we "dump" Ron, we might as well start rebuilding, because the entire "build" of the team is dead, and there is no "perfect" Ron out there to replace our current sample with.

Now some addendums:

1. I read about 2 pages of the "arbitrator" report and what I read was the worst piece of arbitration I have ever read and trust me; I read a few over the years.
2. It is "strange" to say the least in this day and age, that the full report is still nowhere to be found, not public anywhere, accept perhaps for those living close enough to the court where the case was heard, it should be part of the records, but is certainly not available online and the press releases of it are not shared with the public, despite my particular polite asking for a copy.
3. Not everyone, but certainly an outrageously big majority agrees on the certainty that Stern over-reacted and/or sentenced for his own profit one way or the other.
4. Ron did not cause this team to become "bad" or "good" one way or the other, besides being responsible for goin into the crowd where he did far less then anyone else, he did not start a riot, he did not have lackadaisy security (yes Kstat, security in the Palace on that evening was the worst in the NBA without a shadow of a doubt) he did not throw things on himself, he did not let BW stay onthe court after being tossed, he did not ask BW to throw things on him, and yes he showed he was human and did what most people would have done, he blew up and by now more then enough players/people/reporters have said they "most likely" would have done the same.
Forget the words of the "just" that say they would never do something like that, they either have no knowledge of themselves/never seen a situation where they were "attacked" and in iminent danger/would look on to see their family killed; because interfering would make matters worse.

This discussion has lost all proportion of sanity over the year, and it has gotten so black and white that it is a disgrace for sanity to read remarks that are so closely related to outright hate instead of common sense.
I have now gotten the name of the biggest Ron defender, yet no one acn show me one post where I agree with what he did, which is just because I never did, I only and still do object to the way the matter was handled and the lobsided punishment towards the Pacers and Ron in particular in question.

Ron did not "earn" the punishment he got, it was handed to him for self-gain by an enormous self-centered person with a definite God-complex.
There was no justice involved, no reason, no jury of peers, no nothing with no option for appeal. Please do not tell me the arbitrator was "the appeal" because A. the league never agreed to that according to them (they went to court over that, lost and pondered appeal there, but seeing the impact and counterlawsuits (more important then the win or lose in this matter, no one ever mentioned, but what lawsuits would the P's and JO have against the league if an appeal was lost by the league?) decided not to go there) and arbitration is anything but an appeal, it is far closer to "mediation" then to appealing a case, basically totally different standards are used.

No we are not the victim of a conspiracy, no we are not sorry for ourselves, but reason and sane judgement should be used when thinking about this case, personal pet peeves, hatred of "other things he did" and so on are not really baring any merits on the case in question, the fact that the idiot who handed out the sentence was doing so does not justify "normal sane people" to do the same.

Strangely enough more and more press reports appear where Ron is called either the best or the second best player on this team and one of the best in the league, yet we still want to dump him (well some) for a bag of peanuts without realizing that there is no trade option to improve this team for the near future or even get back something that would bring us back to the level we were at last year.

I have seen posts where Ron was painted an lunatic, a menace to society and whats more, one would think he was a convicted murderer instead of a basketball player whos emotions got the best of him.

We all worship the ABA (because the P's ruled) but forget tht fights were on the daily menu in those days, players had guns in the locker room, were knocking each others teeth out regularly and fought with the crowd when it pleased them and all that happened was that play was resumed when everyone was back on the court.
And in those days the NBA was hardly any better, yet today we judge that as a great period where heart was part of the game, and now ?

We can not compare Vernon Maxwell, who went into the stand because someone was heckling him about his family and knocked the (right) person in the teeth, to someone who went into the stands because he was physically attacked with a cup full of liquid and had other things pelted on him, grabbed the (wrong) person (who was taunting him quite clearly) and asked if it was him, then being beaten over the head while being held and from behind knocks the (right) person on the head and leaves the stands because ???
The Maxwell cas resulted in 10 games, let me make it more clear: Clear physical violence was used in answer to insulting remarks; punishment 10 games.
Threatening violence was used in answer to a direct attack; punishment 77 games and counting.

So we "justify" this all by saying "history". Well that is absolute hogwash, nothing what he did in the past was comparable, more then one player tosses stuff around when he is pissed off, without us hearing about it, but then they are not "Ron Artest; headcase" and he was punished for all he did in full, therefore paid for those "sins" in full. some influence it may have, but not 800% worth of influence.

Instead of griping over the prevert treatment of justice in the land of the free no less, where justice and democracy are such important pilars, we sit down, believe the 180 the press did and blame our own player, who always leaves his heart on the court for ruining our season, which is still going on and we are still competing in the playoffs.
He is now also responsible for; JO's injuries, Mel's injuries, Reggie's and AJ's injuries, the suspending of Jax (who did go into the crowd on his own account and started throwing haymakers) and JO, who never went into the crowd, but helped out AJ when he thought AJ was attacked on the court, by people walking ont he court in a fighting stance, even the police/prosecution judged in Ron's case that his hitting one of them was self defense, and the injuries of Polly, Cro, Fred and Jeff.

With Ron the season might have been a lot better, but with the same injuries occuring and there is no reason to say they would not, we would still have been suffering, be it mildly less.

Would we be a contender without Mel? without JO? no, so face it, we were 500 when JO and Jax came back, anything that happened after that most certainly had nothing to do with Ron.

This is just a bad karma year, it will improve, we have all the pieces to be a major contender next year and enjoy the ride we have now, let's see where it goes and stop "hating" people for being who they are, if we all let people be who they are this world would be most likely a lot better place.

Mourning
04-19-2005, 06:49 AM
:amen:

Harmonica
04-19-2005, 07:16 AM
Blah, blah, blah. I haven't seen anyone change their mind on this issue one way or another. It comes down to two mindsets really: Those who believe in and embrace the idea of a blameless society (it's always someone else's fault) and those who believe people should be held accountable for their actions. I know how I was raised and no amount of "Yeah buts..." ever got me out of trouble or off the hook for my actions, regardless of what others did.


"Yeah, but he threw a beer at me first, mom.

"That doesn't excuse what you did—going into the stands and grabbing the first person you could get your hands on. What were you thinking?"

"Charles Barkley said he would've done the same thing."

"If Charles Barkley jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you?"

"No. But the guy threw a beer at me, mom!"

"I don't care what he did. Two wrongs don't make a right (remember that one Will and able?). What if you had trampled over a small child on your way to grabbing the wrong person and seriously hurt or killed them?"

"But I didn't."

"But you could've. You should consider yourself lucky you got off with a season-long suspension and a $5 million fine versus spending the next 10 years of your life in jail."

Long pause.

"The problem is you don't think before you act."

"But—"

"But nothing. I don't wanna hear about what Ben did. I don't wanna hear about what that beer-chucking moron did. I don't care. I only care what you did. And what you did was wrong."

"Yes ma'am."


— or —


"It's just too damn bad you didn't get ahold of the right guy so you could beat the crap out of him. But did you see the look on that guy's face when you grabbed him?"

"Not really mom, it all happened so fast."

"Well, I've played that tape a million times and I laugh everytime I see the look on that guy's face when you grab him."

"But you really think I did good when I didn't go after Ben?"

"Well, I wish you woulda beat the crap outa him, too, but hindsight's always 20/20, dear. I'll tell you who needs a good *** kicking."

"Who?"

"That ******* David Stern."

"You know, mom, now I realize why I'm so ****ed up."

RWB
04-19-2005, 07:53 AM
I'll keep it simple....I want Artest back.

indygeezer
04-19-2005, 08:03 AM
Harmonica...that is classic.! Oh and there was the....If you think the Principal gave you a whupping just wait'll your dad gets home!!
++++++++++++++++++++

I'm not a wordsmith. I can't write long tomes or orate about the wrongs that were foisted on the team. I'll just say this.

David Stern's punishment was way outta line. By being so harsh he made Ron a hero, both in Ron's eyes and in the eyes of his posse. He instantly became the victim and Stern the villian.

David Stern screwed the Pacer's over bigtime with his carrot in front of the mule act. Holding out hope and yanking it away is criminal, but it is the behind the scenes Simons who will make him pay for that (somehow/someday).

There is an adage in basketball that you never let yourself get into the position of allowing a bad call cost you the game. Stay out in front far enough that one lousy call or even two cannot affect outcome of the game. Ron's actions allowed Stern to screw our season with a blown call. Had Ron not reacted as he did David Stern would not have had the opportunity to make sucn an overreactive ruling. Had he kept a level head, there would have been no need for a ruling by Stern.

By not controlling his actions Ron set it up so that someone else was in control of Ron's destiny, a destiny that ultimately destroyed a championship run for Reggie and the rest of the TEAM.

---------------------

Do I think we're better off trading Ron? Talent wise no...Ron is irreplaceable. Mentally? Yes...we MUST trade Ron. The players will ALWAYS have to keep their eyes on Ron and that will AlWAYS weigh heavy on them mentally. Ron's tantrums have always been waived off as being frustration in losing....not anymore. Ron has now shown that he is fully capable of going gonzo at the drop of the hat...even while leading by 14 points with less than a minute to go. Ron has shown that no situation is so safe as to be free from his willfulness. Even if he goes multi-season without flair-ups, it will always be with his teamates that he did it before.

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 08:07 AM
Great, Great post, Able.

You expressed my feeling exactly. I am so tired of hearing the same BS about Ron and the always negative remarks about him and the Pacer team.

I have several posters on my ignore list just because of that very thing.

Again, great post.

:cool:

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 08:09 AM
It comes down to two mindsets really: Those who believe in and embrace the idea of a blameless society (it's always someone else's fault) and those who believe people should be held accountable for their actions."


Gee, I don't really think you can sum things up that easy. In fact I don't think anybody has embraced that first position. Other people do try to embrace the position for them though.

Most pro Artest people believe the punishment didn't fit the crime. The other primary position seems to blame Artest for ruining the Pacer's season. There's other positions as well. For instant, the missionary position . . . oh wrong topic . . .

DisplacedKnick
04-19-2005, 08:17 AM
For those who are saying, "Most people think Stern overreacted by suspending Artest."

That's blatantly untrue unless you say, "Most people in Indianapolis."

Frex, a Fox poll asking "What do you think of Artest's season-long suspension." had the following results:

Not enough - 38%
Just right - 34%
Too long - 28%

Out of over 345,000 votes. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3182714

From ESPN: "What is your reaction to Ron Artest's season-long suspension?"

43.6% Just right
41.3% Too harsh
15.1% Too light

Out of nearly 194,000 votes. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?incomming=1&event_id=1011

So let's put this particular fabrication to rest.

indygeezer
04-19-2005, 08:30 AM
Great, Great post, Able.

You expressed my feeling exactly. I am so tired of hearing the same BS about Ron and the always negative remarks about him and the Pacer team.

I have several posters on my ignore list just because of that very thing.

Again, great post.

:cool:



uh, 'bama...can you read this post? Just wondering if I;m on that list. :buddies:

Harddrive7
04-19-2005, 08:35 AM
I can't wait til Ron comes back next year so we can get back to normalcy, whatever that is anymore.

RWB
04-19-2005, 08:39 AM
David Stern's punishment was way outta line. By being so harsh he made Ron a hero, both in Ron's eyes and in the eyes of his posse.

Howdy Geez my friend, just wondering who's Ron's posse? Every game I've went to you usually see Ron with his kids before the game.

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 08:51 AM
uh, 'bama...can you read this post? Just wondering if I;m on that list. :buddies:


I can't read it!

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 08:52 AM
Well, I tried to keep my answers short to avoid this kind of thing, but I've unraveled this same arguement again. Sorry people.

Perhaps I will jump into the foray later, but maybe not. I don't really have anything new to say.

Unclebuck
04-19-2005, 09:07 AM
I haven't seen anyone change their mind on this issue one way or another. It comes down to two mindsets really: Those who believe in and embrace the idea of a blameless society (it's always someone else's fault) and those who believe people should be held accountable for their actions. I know how I was raised and no amount of "Yeah buts..." ever got me out of trouble or off the hook for my actions, regardless of what others did.





OK, so if I think the suspension was too harsh, I believe in the blameless society. If I thought 30 games would have been fair, then you are saying that I still believe in the blameless society. Interesting.

Do you believe in 10 year prison sentences for speeding. Do you believe in 10 year prison sentences for stealing a pen from work. Oh you don't, well then welcome to the blameless society crowd.

owl
04-19-2005, 09:25 AM
For those who are saying, "Most people think Stern overreacted by suspending Artest."

That's blatantly untrue unless you say, "Most people in Indianapolis."

Frex, a Fox poll asking "What do you think of Artest's season-long suspension." had the following results:

Not enough - 38%
Just right - 34%
Too long - 28%

Out of over 345,000 votes. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3182714

From ESPN: "What is your reaction to Ron Artest's season-long suspension?"

43.6% Just right
41.3% Too harsh
15.1% Too light

Out of nearly 194,000 votes. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sport...1&event_id=1011

So let's put this particular fabrication to rest.
__________________


Lets see, 41%, thats 41% of people outside of Indiana think the suspension
was too harsh. PLus you factor in peoples natural tendency to over-react and give excessive penalties to "rich" athletes. Then you factor in the racial
aspects of the situation and I think these polls hardly puts any "fabrication"
to rest. Able has it right. Previous standards were not followed. This is strictly
Stern having made up his mind before the season began that he was going to
come down hard on the players if he could. Did you read Bird's meeting with
Stern early in the year? These polls prove if nothing else that Stern did over-react. Since when is justice decided by a poll. We all should be glad Stern
is not in charge of the crimminal justice system. Lets see, you murdered your
wife, lets take a survey. Surrrvvveeeyy saaayyys 5 years. Jaywalked?
Suuuurrrvveeyy saayyysss.....the chair for you my friend. Richard Dawson would be proud.


Okay I am done, sorry for the rant


owl

Suaveness
04-19-2005, 09:36 AM
Oh balderdash! I'm not in the mood to hear this kind of nonsense tonight! Ron went into the stands after a guy who threw beer on him. Most people that weren't afraid would have done the same thing.

What did he do when he was there? He made the awful mistake of grabbing the wrong person. Did he beat on him, or kick him? No! Guys started hitting him and he hit them back. Then he got out of the stands and was confronted by thugs, so he hit them too.

Ron Artest gets a beer thrown on him and grabs the wrong man and is fined $5 million dollars for it. Ron didn't do anything to us. He didn't over react, David Stern did!

I LOVE this post

DisplacedKnick
04-19-2005, 09:48 AM
For those who are saying, "Most people think Stern overreacted by suspending Artest."

That's blatantly untrue unless you say, "Most people in Indianapolis."

Frex, a Fox poll asking "What do you think of Artest's season-long suspension." had the following results:

Not enough - 38%
Just right - 34%
Too long - 28%

Out of over 345,000 votes. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3182714

From ESPN: "What is your reaction to Ron Artest's season-long suspension?"

43.6% Just right
41.3% Too harsh
15.1% Too light

Out of nearly 194,000 votes. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sport...1&event_id=1011

So let's put this particular fabrication to rest.
__________________


Lets see, 41%, thats 41% of people outside of Indiana think the suspension
was too harsh. PLus you factor in peoples natural tendency to over-react and give excessive penalties to "rich" athletes. Then you factor in the racial
aspects of the situation and I think these polls hardly puts any "fabrication"
to rest. Able has it right. Previous standards were not followed. This is strictly
Stern having made up his mind before the season began that he was going to
come down hard on the players if he could. Did you read Bird's meeting with
Stern early in the year? These polls prove if nothing else that Stern did over-react. Since when is justice decided by a poll. We all should be glad Stern
is not in charge of the crimminal justice system. Lets see, you murdered your
wife, lets take a survey. Surrrvvveeeyy saaayyys 5 years. Jaywalked?
Suuuurrrvveeyy saayyysss.....the chair for you my friend. Richard Dawson would be proud.


Okay I am done, sorry for the rant


owl

LOL! Good 0ne! I'm assuming this post is a joke - satire. But in case you were actually serious (I don't see how you could be) with this:

So you're saying the polls say that most people think Stern did overreact?

I think I'll save this post in my collection under, "Lengths people will go to in irrationally trying to twist evidence to suit their personal beliefs."

I believe it will go into the Hall of Fame.

Again, my apologies if this post is actually a joke mimicking irrational behavior. Didn't see any smilies though.

Peck
04-19-2005, 10:18 AM
Can anybody disagree with this statement?

None of this would have happened if Ron Artest had actually punched Ben Wallace square in the mouth.

Peck
04-19-2005, 10:20 AM
Gee, I don't really think you can sum things up that easy. In fact I don't think anybody has embraced that first position. Other people do try to embrace the position for them though.

Most pro Artest people believe the punishment didn't fit the crime. The other primary position seems to blame Artest for ruining the Pacer's season. There's other positions as well. For instant, the missionary position . . . oh wrong topic . . .

:spitout: :rotflmao:

indygeezer
04-19-2005, 10:22 AM
Howdy Geez my friend, just wondering who's Ron's posse? Every game I've went to you usually see Ron with his kids before the game.


I was using the term "Posse" to include his fans that follow him religiously, right or wrong. I actually didn't mean it in a derogatory way, just a shorthand term.



tell that Pr*k Galen that I can't read his posts either.

Doug
04-19-2005, 10:25 AM
Can anybody disagree with this statement?

None of this would have happened if Ron Artest had actually punched Ben Wallace square in the mouth.

I can. Too many variables. For all we know it would have then escalated between the players. Then the fans would have jumped in. And maybe something even worse would have happened.

Just trying to illustrate the problem with all of these "what if" scenarios. They are just a waste of time.


Besides, we all know the only way this wouldn't have happened was if Dale had been here then. :D

ChicagoJ
04-19-2005, 10:34 AM
:deadhorse

As long as he's traded as soon as he's reinstated, I'll welcome the nutcase back into the league and hopefully onto one of our rivals.

:plot:

I'll say this, the Pacers have never had a single player that was so good at splitting their fans against each other. He's just as good of a player as his fans say he is, and he's just as bad of a teammate as his detractors say he is. So for that, everyone's right.

To the best of my knowledge, all of his detractors admit the nutcase is one of the players in the league. But his fans don't tend to even admit that he's just as capable of destroying the Pacers from within as he is to dominate on the court. They always find excuses for him, and that's maddening. Own up it, and perhaps these conversations will stop. (note that we're all the way to the second page before I opened my mouth on this topic.)

So the question of "is he worth it" became clouded. No one's going to change thier mind. There's a long list of posters on here that are notoriously in the "one more chance" camp, but what they really mean is, "I'll always give him one more chance because I can make excuses and shift the blame for everything else he's done in the past."

Then they get on some twisted moral platform when challenged - "I didn't say he was right to go into the stands, but since the punishment was too harsh I'll still give him another chance."

Even if the suspension was only 30 or 40 games, I can't figure out why that isn't enough for more fans of the Pacers to say, "That's finally the last straw."

:whoknows:

Really, I'm more pissed off about the retirement episode ("promote my CD" - :rolleyes: ) or last spring's meltdown than the brawl. This guy is always part of the problem, not part of the solution.

PacerMan
04-19-2005, 11:00 AM
For those who are saying, "Most people think Stern overreacted by suspending Artest."

That's blatantly untrue unless you say, "Most people in Indianapolis."

Frex, a Fox poll asking "What do you think of Artest's season-long suspension." had the following results:

Not enough - 38%
Just right - 34%
Too long - 28%

Out of over 345,000 votes. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3182714

From ESPN: "What is your reaction to Ron Artest's season-long suspension?"

43.6% Just right
41.3% Too harsh
15.1% Too light

Out of nearly 194,000 votes. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sport...1&event_id=1011

So let's put this particular fabrication to rest.
__________________


Lets see, 41%, thats 41% of people outside of Indiana think the suspension
was too harsh. PLus you factor in peoples natural tendency to over-react and give excessive penalties to "rich" athletes. Then you factor in the racial
aspects of the situation and I think these polls hardly puts any "fabrication"
to rest. Able has it right. Previous standards were not followed. This is strictly
Stern having made up his mind before the season began that he was going to
come down hard on the players if he could. Did you read Bird's meeting with
Stern early in the year? These polls prove if nothing else that Stern did over-react. Since when is justice decided by a poll. We all should be glad Stern
is not in charge of the crimminal justice system. Lets see, you murdered your
wife, lets take a survey. Surrrvvveeeyy saaayyys 5 years. Jaywalked?
Suuuurrrvveeyy saayyysss.....the chair for you my friend. Richard Dawson would be proud.


Okay I am done, sorry for the rant


owl

WOW, guess I missed the math change! When did 41% become MORE than 1/2??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PacerMan
04-19-2005, 11:02 AM
This argument was never between those that think the punishment was too harsh or too lenient.
It's between those that think he's a menace to this team and those that think he's too good to get rid of, no matter what he does................

Harmonica
04-19-2005, 11:14 AM
:deadhorse

As long as he's traded as soon as he's reinstated, I'll welcome the nutcase back into the league and hopefully onto one of our rivals.

:plot:

I'll say this, the Pacers have never had a single player that was so good at splitting their fans against each other. He's just as good of a player as his fans say he is, and he's just as bad of a teammate as his detractors say he is. So for that, everyone's right.

To the best of my knowledge, all of his detractors admit the nutcase is one of the best players in the league. But his fans don't tend to even admit that he's just as capable of destroying the Pacers from within as he is to dominate on the court. They always find excuses for him, and that's maddening. Own up it, and perhaps these conversations will stop. (note that we're all the way to the second page before I opened my mouth on this topic.)

So the question of "is he worth it" became clouded. No one's going to change thier mind. There's a long list of posters on here that are notoriously in the "one more chance" camp, but what they really mean is, "I'll always give him one more chance because I can make excuses and shift the blame for everything else he's done in the past."

Then they get on some twisted moral platform when challenged - "I didn't say he was right to go into the stands, but since the punishment was too harsh I'll still give him another chance."

Even if the suspension was only 30 or 40 games, I can't figure out why that isn't enough for more fans of the Pacers to say, "That's finally the last straw."

:whoknows:

Really, I'm more pissed off about the retirement episode ("promote my CD" - :rolleyes: ) or last spring's meltdown than the brawl. This guy is always part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Brilliant!

able? Will? What say you?

Indyfan
04-19-2005, 11:21 AM
Thanks Able for taking the time to write that post, I agree completely so I won't go into it again.

We found out that we aren't that good without Ron, if we want to win it all we are going to need him and JO working together with our other guys healthy! If nothing else we have seen that we are a much better team with Ron and we will have to give him another chance if winning a championship is our #1 priority. He has been severly punished, maybe, just maybe it has really changed him. We will have the chance to find out next year, no way we dump him after seeing how mediocre we are without him! I do fear that something will happen but I am willing to give it another shot because frankly we don't win it all without him. If we don't win it all without him then we have to live with him.

beast23
04-19-2005, 11:27 AM
Bad ideza as Artest leads the pacers to 65 wins next season and a 16-3 playoff recordYou know, I've actually thought about that a lot.

Artest is getting some serious discussion from the ESPN and TNT guys regarding being the BEST player on the team, not just a key contributor.

So, what if Artest returns and the Pacers finish with 60 wins, or even 65?

I would think that those local fans who have come out so strongly against him will be stuck in a real dilemma when Artest begins getting a lot of votes for league MVP.

I doubt he could win it. But regardless of injuries or other player's suspensions, the Pacers just aren't playing anywhere near the level they were with Artest. And, then suddenly.... 60+ victories.

Ragnar
04-19-2005, 11:29 AM
Personaly I have been all over the map with Ron. A couple of years ago when :shudder:Isiah:shudder: was here I wanted him gone. I had a very strong love hate thing going with Ron. At times he was the best player on the floor and at other times he was the very worst. I think he made a lot of progress under Rick last year and I became of very big fan of his.

This year I was very upset with the CD thing but I can overlook it because he is just wired differently and probably does not think everything through. Then the brawl happened. If he would have gotten 10 games like Mad Max and then done something else stupid I would probably be done with him.

I am to the point now and have been for a while now that I cant imagine him not being changed by this. No person can go through all of that and not be. At this point I want to keep him. He is just too talented and we need him on the court to bad.

Harmonica
04-19-2005, 11:31 AM
For those who are saying, "Most people think Stern overreacted by suspending Artest."

That's blatantly untrue unless you say, "Most people in Indianapolis."

Frex, a Fox poll asking "What do you think of Artest's season-long suspension." had the following results:

Not enough - 38%
Just right - 34%
Too long - 28%

Out of over 345,000 votes. http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3182714

From ESPN: "What is your reaction to Ron Artest's season-long suspension?"

43.6% Just right
41.3% Too harsh
15.1% Too light

Out of nearly 194,000 votes. http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/polling?incomming=1&event_id=1011

So let's put this particular fabrication to rest.

Touché.

If I read these polls correctly (instead of twisting them), the first one indicates that a vast majority of people (72%) think the punishment was just right or not enough. I'd be really curious to know what those 38% thought would have been an appropriate punishment (a lifetime ban I imagine). In the second poll, 58.7% of respondents (I assume they're mostly sports fans since it's an ESPN poll) think Ron's punishment was just right or too light.

Unless able or Will can find polls to the contrary, I think this clearly dispels the notion that "a majority of people" think Stern's punishment was too harsh.

RWB
04-19-2005, 11:39 AM
Yes Ron Artest is the devil with all those embarassing moments. Too bad he is the only Pacer we have had to be ashamed of.

Wait, I do remember the man we're honoring this week had Larry Brown in a tizzy in what he considered poor taste during those choke and crotch grabbing days. Or Bird just loved MJax and that cute little jiggle. It's a good thing there were no cameras in the locker room when Slick Leonard went nuts and was going to beat the hell out of Neto with the hockey stick.

I know it's pretty sad I've become so jaded I'm willing to put up with Artest for a shot at a championship but like the bad boy Pistons of the 80s I wouldn't have a problem with people saying the Pacers are classless if we're raising that trophy.

RWB
04-19-2005, 11:43 AM
Unless able or Will can find polls to the contrary, I think this clearly dispels the notion that "a majority of people" think Stern's punishment was too harsh.

Make sure not to use the same pollsters that did the presidential election. :-p

Anthem
04-19-2005, 11:48 AM
Can anybody disagree with this statement?

None of this would have happened if Ron Artest had actually punched Ben Wallace square in the mouth.

Naw... X.Wallace was already inciting the crowd at that point. It easily could have gotten ugly. But if the fans rushed the court, it would have been Detroit's problem, not ours. Ron wouldn't have gotten a season-long suspension.

And it sure would have been a lot more satisfying to see Ben get knocked over.

Gyron
04-19-2005, 11:50 AM
Touché.

If I read these polls correctly (instead of twisting them), the first one indicates that a vast majority of people (72%) think the punishment was just right or not enough. I'd be really curious to know what those 38% thought would have been an appropriate punishment (a lifetime ban I imagine). In the second poll, 58.7% of respondents (I assume they're mostly sports fans since it's an ESPN poll) think Ron's punishment was just right or too light.

Unless able or Will can find polls to the contrary, I think this clearly dispels the notion that "a majority of people" think Stern's punishment was too harsh.

I would like to point out that an internet poll is far from being a representaitve sample of the "majority of people".

Internet polls can often be voted on multiple times, or even hacked. Not saying this is the case here, but it also doesn't provide you demographics so that you are getting a good even sample of the "majority of people"

Kstat
04-19-2005, 12:16 PM
for the love of god, make a new 11/19 forum......

wintermute
04-19-2005, 12:40 PM
for the love of god, make a new 11/19 forum......

on the plus side, no one's talking about that guy we traded to Sacto any more...

Harmonica
04-19-2005, 12:49 PM
on the plus side, no one's talking about that guy we traded to Sacto any more...

:spitout:

MagicRat
04-19-2005, 12:59 PM
:spitout:

Wow. Somebody figured out how to use smilies............:-p

Hicks
04-19-2005, 01:26 PM
OK, so if I think the suspension was too harsh, I believe in the blameless society. If I thought 30 games would have been fair, then you are saying that I still believe in the blameless society. Interesting.

Do you believe in 10 year prison sentences for speeding. Do you believe in 10 year prison sentences for stealing a pen from work. Oh you don't, well then welcome to the blameless society crowd.

*cups hands over mouth* Booooooooooo!

How dare you imply the world isn't basically black and white!

:-p :D

Hicks
04-19-2005, 01:27 PM
Can anybody disagree with this statement?

None of this would have happened if Ron Artest had actually punched Ben Wallace square in the mouth.

God, if only.

Hicks
04-19-2005, 01:30 PM
This message is hidden because btowncolt is on your ignore list (profile.php?do=editlist).





















:D

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 01:50 PM
I have everyone who has ever expressed an opinion I disagree with in the slightest on my ignore list.

Makes for some lonely conversations, but I'LL BE DAMNED if I listen to someone who doesn't think exactly like I do.

I am really worried about my sanity now since I don't have you or Geezer on my ignore list. :D

:cool:

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 01:51 PM
*cups hands over mouth* Booooooooooo!

How dare you imply the world isn't basically black and white!

:-p :D


Wait a minute Hicks, are playing the race card ??? :D :laugh:


:cool:

Hicks
04-19-2005, 01:55 PM
Wait a minute Hicks, are playing the race card ??? :D :laugh:


:cool:

[Homer Simpson] What the!?! You did that on purpose!! [/Homer Simpson]

Since86
04-19-2005, 02:24 PM
I am to the point now and have been for a while now that I cant imagine him not being changed by this. No person can go through all of that and not be. At this point I want to keep him. He is just too talented and we need him on the court to bad.

DING DING DING! We have a winner.

PacerMan
04-19-2005, 02:28 PM
You know, I've actually thought about that a lot.

Artest is getting some serious discussion from the ESPN and TNT guys regarding being the BEST player on the team, not just a key contributor.

So, what if Artest returns and the Pacers finish with 60 wins, or even 65?

I would think that those local fans who have come out so strongly against him will be stuck in a real dilemma when Artest begins getting a lot of votes for league MVP.

I doubt he could win it. But regardless of injuries or other player's suspensions, the Pacers just aren't playing anywhere near the level they were with Artest. And, then suddenly.... 60+ victories.

Yep, Tinsley out - irrelevent, Jermaine out and hurt still - irrelevent, Bender out for the season, Harrington traded, Freddie hurt, ALL IRRELEVENT.
It's ALL ABOUT RONNIE. Myopic?

Since86
04-19-2005, 02:49 PM
Yep, Tinsley out - irrelevent, Jermaine out and hurt still - irrelevent, Bender out for the season, Harrington traded, Freddie hurt, ALL IRRELEVENT.
It's ALL ABOUT RONNIE. Myopic?

Bender is irrelevent, lets just get that out of the way.

Harrington is irrelevent as well, he was traded and that's part of the game if you use that we might as well talk about B. Miller as well.

Fred's injury hurts the team, but he was slotted as the 3rd string SG. This team was supposed to do well with him getting limited time anyways.

Look at the record from when JO went down. How many complained about when JO did play about the offense?

Tinsley is a good PG, but AJ is holding his own. It's not as big as a drop off as once thought.


Be realistic even if you don't like someone. He is the toughness of that D. Dale changes the post game, but RA locks people up. Don't be blinded by hatred(or dislike). I feel like I can say that due to my HATRED of the Patriots, but if given the chance I'd try to make a trade for almost anyone of them.

3ptmiller
04-19-2005, 04:18 PM
DING DING DING! We have a winner.

Damn i love your avatar :devil:

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 05:51 PM
Weird, I get the same message whenever I post too.


You have yourself on ignore! Priceless!


As for those challenging Able and I for saying most people think Stern overreacted. Well, maybe we were wrong. But I still don't think so. You have to take things in the context that they were meant. Being as there are billions of Chinese that couldn't care one way or other about the Pacers and Ron Artest, we clearly didn't mean everyone living, I know I meant those that actually knew what they were talking about. How many people have delved into the situation enough to know what they are talking about?

Watching the media play the worst clips they can find over and over and then asking people to vote on punishment hardly seems fair to me.

And I've yet to see a poll asking if David Stern overreacted. Displacedknicks polls didn't ask that question. Pollster's know that you can ask the same questions different ways and get different answers.

So if you informed people of what Vernon Maxwells punishment was for going into a crowd and punching a fan. (10 games) And what Sprewells punishment was for choking his coach. (Not a whole season) If you then asked people if David Stern overreacted in giving Ron Artest a full season off for going into the stands and grabbing a guy, how do you think they would vote in light of past punisments? I'm pretty sure the poll would say Stern overreacted.

So do I think most people who know whats going on think David Stern overreacted? Yes.

Do I think most people who watched the worst parts of the brawl over and over on television would say Artest got what was coming to him? Yes.

Do I think you have to explain an inordinate amount of what you meant on a forum? Yes again!

beast23
04-19-2005, 06:34 PM
The thing that really bothers me about what transpired is the amount of misreporting that has taken place since.

Like you Will, I've recognized that every time I see it replayed on TV, they seem to show only the clips that put the Pacers in the worst possible light. And, almost every article written by anyone outside of Indy states that Artest engaged in BEATING one or more fans... and even his detractors here would admit that isn't true. It's almost as though many columnists are guilty of just piling on, without ever having seen a full tape of the entire event.

But as much as I support Artest, I'm a little different in my opinions of his punishment than you guys are.

Do I think his punishment was extreme? Yes, I do. I probably would have stopped at 50 or 60 games.

But, although I think Stern is more than a little vindictive, I also can't really argue with the punishment that he handed down. To me, Stern is the CEO of a corporation.... No, actually Stern is the CEO of a PRIVATE corporation. As such, the corporation is entitled to discipline its own as long as the actions taken fall within the discretion of its charter and its bylaws (working agreements).

I think Stern adhered to his corporations bylaws, and whether I like it or not, I have to respect his authority to handle the situation in the manner he did.

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 06:52 PM
I think Stern adhered to his corporations bylaws, and whether I like it or not, I have to respect his authority to handle the situation in the manner he did.

You always have to respect someones authority. I just don't respect his decisions. I think he would have reinstated Ron if he didn't figure he would lose face.

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 07:34 PM
Hee hee. I was just checking to see if I was on yours....there's been a rumor or two that I don't like Ron Artest...


I respect your opinion and everyones personal opinion on Ron Artest. I do not like the constant negative approach to the Pacers that some posters have.

I am amazed that so many people dislike the management, coaching staff and many of the players but continue to say they are Pacer fans.

If I had to live my life with a constant negative attitude, I think I would have ended it long ago. I really feel sorry for people who's only purpose in life is to be critical of other people.

I guess the only way some people can try to look good, is to try to bring their competition down to their level.

What a waste and what a way to have to live.

:cool:

Unclebuck
04-19-2005, 07:39 PM
I respect your opinion and everyones personal opinion on Ron Artest. I do not like the constant negative approach to the Pacers that some posters have.

I am amazed that so many people dislike the management, coaching staff and many of the players but continue to say they are Pacer fans.

If I had to live my life with a constant negative attitude, I think I would have ended it long ago. I really feel sorry for people who's only purpose in life is to be critical of other people.

I guess the only way some people can try to look good, is to try to bring their competition down to their level.

What a waste and what a way to have to live.

:cool:


I don't know how to respond, but I just want you to know I read your post and found it very interesting

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 08:04 PM
I don't know how to respond, but I just want you to know I read your post and found it very interesting

I appreciate your response and I am just stating my feelings. That is the main reason I do not post as often as I did.

Most topics just turn into a discussion about something that most posters have zero control over and why get upset about something you cannot change.

I have followed the Pacers since their inception and will continue to be a fan, Win or Lose.

Being retired, I have ample time to read all posts and usually do. Some are very informative, some are funny and some are pretty ridiculous. I really appreciate the ignore list because, after a period of time, it becomes very apparent who's post have zero information.

Now, I will step down from my soapbox and continue watching the Nets beatup on the Wizards since I have spent way too much time explaining something no one really cares about either way.

:cool:

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 08:19 PM
Well we're back to THE discussion.

1. This team as it is this year, though warriors and fearless, is not a contender. (fairy tales have to happen before I believe)
2. Trading Ron and becoming a contender with that move "because we dump Ron" is as nonsensical as me claiming to be able to play for the P's next season.
3. With Reggie retiring we need "help" on this team without Ron like you've never seen before.
4. If we "dump" Ron, we might as well start rebuilding, because the entire "build" of the team is dead, and there is no "perfect" Ron out there to replace our current sample with.

You’re correct, there aren’t too many other player with Ron’s unique skill set. However, with a starting four as talented as Davis, O’Neal, Jackson, and Tinsley, it wouldn’t exactly be impossible to put together a good team. All that would be needed would be to trade Ron for a decent SF (whether it be a veteran or rookie) who will commit to the team game, defend well, hit the outside shot consistently, and play an overall smart, but perhaps not outstanding, game. If the other starters remain healthy, and our roster relatively unchanged, our talent, depth, and superior talent would make the Pacers quite the dangerous team.



3. Not everyone, but certainly an outrageously big majority agrees on the certainty that Stern over-reacted and/or sentenced for his own profit one way or the other.

The “big majority” portion of this statement has been proven to be flat-out wrong (unless better data is presented), and the other portion is simply speculation. I fail to see how Stern and the NBA could ever have profited from the Brawl and it’s fallout.



4. Ron did not cause this team to become "bad" or "good" one way or the other, besides being responsible for goin into the crowd where he did far less then anyone else, he did not start a riot, he did not have lackadaisy security (yes Kstat, security in the Palace on that evening was the worst in the NBA without a shadow of a doubt) he did not throw things on himself, he did not let BW stay onthe court after being tossed, he did not ask BW to throw things on him, and yes he showed he was human and did what most people would have done, he blew up and by now more then enough players/people/reporters have said they "most likely" would have done the same.

Ron did not cause this team to be bad or good, one way or another? Ron, in term of on-court talent, is quite possibly the best Pacers player. How can he being suspended for the year not make us worse?

Ron also didn’t commit murder that night, should he be commended for that, also? Pointing out what Ron didn’t do doesn’t justify what he did do, which was rush the stands. It was stupid, and he has paid, is paying, will continue to pay the consequences.

Also, just because you can argue what he did was human nature, doesn’t make it morally right. Some argue that human nature is inherently evil. Suppose I should commit a multitude of malicious acts tonight, I don’t think “Well it’s only human nature!” would go over very well with the authority.


Forget the words of the "just" that say they would never do something like that, they either have no knowledge of themselves/never seen a situation where they were "attacked" and in iminent danger/would look on to see their family killed; because interfering would make matters worse.

He was hit with a plastic cup! He nor his family were in imminent danger, and to say he had been attacked, while the word fits, it really is quite the connotative exaggeration. When one is struck with a plastic cup, some restraint is to be expected, especially given Ron’s situation.


This discussion has lost all proportion of sanity over the year, and it has gotten so black and white that it is a disgrace for sanity to read remarks that are so closely related to outright hate instead of common sense.
I have now gotten the name of the biggest Ron defender, yet no one acn show me one post where I agree with what he did, which is just because I never did, I only and still do object to the way the matter was handled and the lobsided punishment towards the Pacers and Ron in particular in question.

For someone who claims to not agree with what he did, you have taken quite the detour in lieu of excusing his actions.


Ron did not "earn" the punishment he got, it was handed to him for self-gain by an enormous self-centered person with a definite God-complex.

Either way you want to spin it, Ron’s punishment being “earned” or “handed” to him, it still doesn’t happen if he doesn’t step out of line in the first place.

Stern is merely doing his job, I really doubt he gets some strange satisfaction from crushing on of the NBA’s own franchises.



No we are not the victim of a conspiracy, no we are not sorry for ourselves, but reason and sane judgement should be used when thinking about this case, personal pet peeves, hatred of "other things he did" and so on are not really baring any merits on the case in question, the fact that the idiot who handed out the sentence was doing so does not justify "normal sane people" to do the same.

I see, this same “reason and sane judgement” which you are exhibiting had lead you to label David Stern idiotic, selfish, and pompous. Pretty strong accusations, considering what little evidence you have to work with.


Strangely enough more and more press reports appear where Ron is called either the best or the second best player on this team and one of the best in the league, yet we still want to dump him (well some) for a bag of peanuts without realizing that there is no trade option to improve this team for the near future or even get back something that would bring us back to the level we were at last year.

I would gladly trade Ron for just what his being gone would bring to the team: stability. We can’t begin to tweak and refine this team, unless we know what we are going to be getting out of each player every night, and know whether we can trust them. The tweaks and adjustment made just this last off-season, even without injuries, could never have been properly evaluated this season, thanks to Ron getting suspended. How many more years are we going to allow this man to set us back?


I have seen posts where Ron was painted an lunatic, a menace to society and whats more, one would think he was a convicted murderer instead of a basketball player whos emotions got the best of him.

I’ve seen a lot of posts that paint him to be some sort of saint. This means nothing.


We all worship the ABA (because the P's ruled) but forget tht fights were on the daily menu in those days, players had guns in the locker room, were knocking each others teeth out regularly and fought with the crowd when it pleased them and all that happened was that play was resumed when everyone was back on the court.
And in those days the NBA was hardly any better, yet today we judge that as a great period where heart was part of the game, and now ?

Playing the game with heart has nothing to do we the majority of what you just mentioned. Besides, that was the ABA, and has little relevance in this discussion.


We can not compare Vernon Maxwell, who went into the stand because someone was heckling him about his family and knocked the (right) person in the teeth, to someone who went into the stands because he was physically attacked with a cup full of liquid and had other things pelted on him, grabbed the (wrong) person (who was taunting him quite clearly) and asked if it was him, then being beaten over the head while being held and from behind knocks the (right) person on the head and leaves the stands because ???
The Maxwell cas resulted in 10 games, let me make it more clear: Clear physical violence was used in answer to insulting remarks; punishment 10 games.
Threatening violence was used in answer to a direct attack; punishment 77 games and counting.

So we "justify" this all by saying "history". Well that is absolute hogwash, nothing what he did in the past was comparable, more then one player tosses stuff around when he is pissed off, without us hearing about it, but then they are not "Ron Artest; headcase" and he was punished for all he did in full, therefore paid for those "sins" in full. some influence it may have, but not 800% worth of influence.

You do an excellent job of pointing out two similar instances that resulted in dissimilar punishments, but you overlook two points:

First, Ron’s actions were part of a riot. For playing a part in a riot, it only makes sense the punishment be increased.

Second, as I said, you did an apt job or pointing the two situations, but does this necessarily prove that Ron’s punishment was wrong? I think not. Who’s to say the Maxwell sentence wasn’t a bit light, and the NBA finally got it right with Artest?


Instead of griping over the prevert treatment of justice in the land of the free no less, where justice and democracy are such important pilars, we sit down, believe the 180 the press did and blame our own player, who always leaves his heart on the court for ruining our season, which is still going on and we are still competing in the playoffs.
He is now also responsible for; JO's injuries, Mel's injuries, Reggie's and AJ's injuries, the suspending of Jax (who did go into the crowd on his own account and started throwing haymakers) and JO, who never went into the crowd, but helped out AJ when he thought AJ was attacked on the court, by people walking ont he court in a fighting stance, even the police/prosecution judged in Ron's case that his hitting one of them was self defense, and the injuries of Polly, Cro, Fred and Jeff.

No one was claiming Ron was responsible for any injuries, but losing, arguably, your most talented player pretty effectively ruins your season.

I am repeating myself now… :shudder:




With Ron the season might have been a lot better, but with the same injuries occuring and there is no reason to say they would not, we would still have been suffering, be it mildly less.

Would we be a contender without Mel? without JO? no, so face it, we were 500 when JO and Jax came back, anything that happened after that most certainly had nothing to do with Ron.

This is just a bad karma year, it will improve, we have all the pieces to be a major contender next year and enjoy the ride we have now, let's see where it goes and stop "hating" people for being who they are, if we all let people be who they are this world would be most likely a lot better place.

I don’t see how you are so confident things will get better, when we have a player who has proven to be a persistent problem, and we aren’t likely to move him anytime soon. As Jay said, more often than not, Ron is part of the problem, not the solution.



Personally, I don’t see what is so wrong about wanting to dump Ron, when, after all, he was willing to do the same thing to us. In the fracas before the brawl, he quit on this team. I, then, have no problem in reciprocating that feeling.

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 08:19 PM
I wonder if 'Bama can see my words...

Tee Hee.

Suaveness
04-19-2005, 08:43 PM
Artest is a cancer we should trade him

Arcadian
04-19-2005, 08:48 PM
What does it mean when the playoffs are coming up and a person who hasn't played in five months is the main topic?

What I dislike most about Ron is his ability to distract.

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 08:51 PM
I respect your opinion and everyones personal opinion on Ron Artest. I do not like the constant negative approach to the Pacers that some posters have.

I am amazed that so many people dislike the management, coaching staff and many of the players but continue to say they are Pacer fans.

If I had to live my life with a constant negative attitude, I think I would have ended it long ago. I really feel sorry for people who's only purpose in life is to be critical of other people.

I guess the only way some people can try to look good, is to try to bring their competition down to their level.

What a waste and what a way to have to live.

:cool:

Some people are raised in a negative atmosphere and they find it hard to change. Some don't want to change because they don't feel at home in a positive atmostphere. Some don't think they need to change. That's just the way it is.

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 08:56 PM
Some people are raised in a negative atmosphere and they find it hard to change. Some don't want to change because they don't feel at home in a positive atmostphere. Some don't think they need to change. That's just the way it is.


Some people get really annoyed by some people who talk about others under the cloak of anonymity. Some people are also offended when some other people assume that just because one person may be negative when relating to their favorite sports team, that it means they relate to their entire life in the same fashion. Some people just realize that some people are very passionate about their lives and experience a wide range of emotions, and why not? Without passion some people would think some other people's lives were pretty dull.


;)

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 08:59 PM
Some people get really annoyed by some people who talk about others under the cloak of anonymity. ;)


Okay, I won't talk about others under the cloak of anonymity.

I think soupisgood

(giggle)

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 09:01 PM
Okay, I won't talk about others under the cloak of anonymity.

I think soupisgood

(giggle)

[Chuckle, Snort]




[Fart]

ChicagoJ
04-19-2005, 10:10 PM
I respect your opinion and everyones personal opinion on Ron Artest. I do not like the constant negative approach to the Pacers that some posters have.

I am amazed that so many people dislike the management, coaching staff and many of the players but continue to say they are Pacer fans.

If I had to live my life with a constant negative attitude, I think I would have ended it long ago. I really feel sorry for people who's only purpose in life is to be critical of other people.

I guess the only way some people can try to look good, is to try to bring their competition down to their level.

What a waste and what a way to have to live.

:cool:

Who are you talking to?

Toad? I just assume he's the "Trent Reznor" of PD, so I chuckle at his gloom-and-doom.

I can't think of any other poster that fits your description.

But I also get really irritated at Sassan-like suggestions of "what it takes to be a Pacers fan", that's always been a pet-peeve of mine and I'm certain I've never questioned the "fandom" of someone I didn't get along with or whose opinion I disagreed with. So perhaps I'm reading into this things that you aren't trying to say.

And I'm also not about to get into the irony of a post that criticizes people (e.g. posters) of being critical of other people.

Will Galen
04-19-2005, 10:24 PM
And I'm also not about to get into the irony of a post that criticizes people (e.g. posters) of being critical of other people.

It's kind of ironic that you would post this though. (grin)

ChicagoJ
04-19-2005, 10:30 PM
It's kind of ironic that you would post this though. (grin)

I knew somebody would get the "double irony" :laugh:

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 10:42 PM
And I'm also not about to get into the irony of a post that criticizes people (e.g. posters) of being critical of other people.


?

If you are referring to my post I was mainly defending myself. The wording was meant to be a bit ironic.

Alabama-Redneck
04-19-2005, 10:50 PM
Who are you talking to?

Toad? I just assume he's the "Trent Reznor" of PD, so I chuckle at his gloom-and-doom.

I can't think of any other poster that fits your description.

But I also get really irritated at Sassan-like suggestions of "what it takes to be a Pacers fan", that's always been a pet-peeve of mine and I'm certain I've never questioned the "fandom" of someone I didn't get along with or whose opinion I disagreed with. So perhaps I'm reading into this things that you aren't trying to say.

And I'm also not about to get into the irony of a post that criticizes people (e.g. posters) of being critical of other people.

There are several posters on this forum that take a negative stand on most everything. Most offer a reasonable approach to their opinion and inject some logic in their answers.

Some offer nothing but negativity with no logic but being against everything. Thus enters the ignore list and my option to have them on this list.

Posters do not have to conform to my thinking and I do not expect them to.

My stance on "fandom" and other facets of life is very simple. If you don't like something, don't do it.

If you don't like the food in a certain restuaurant, don't eat there.

If you don't like the management, coaches and some of the players on the Pacers, root for another team. Why be miserable unless that is your sole purpose in life is to be miserable.

I am not trying to be profound but I too have a "pet-peeve" and it is people that are always negative as well as ones that distort facts.

This is only my opinion, take it for what it is worth.

:cool:

SoupIsGood
04-19-2005, 10:58 PM
There are several posters on this forum that take a negative stand on most everything. Most offer a reasonable approach to their opinion and inject some logic in their answers.

Some offer nothing but negativity with no logic but being against everything. Thus enters the ignore list and my option to have them on this list.

Posters do not have to conform to my thinking and I do not expect them to.

My stance on "fandom" and other facets of life is very simple. If you don't like something, don't do it.

If you don't like the food in a certain restuaurant, don't eat there.

If you don't like the management, coaches and some of the players on the Pacers, root for another team. Why be miserable unless that is your sole purpose in life is to be miserable.

I am not trying to be profound but I too have a "pet-peeve" and it is people that are always negative as well as ones that distort facts.

This is only my opinion, take it for what it is worth.

:cool:

Besides Indytoad, who's act I think is a facade, I honestly can't think of someone who acts as you describe. I mean, aren't we all here because we like the Pacers? (Excluding KStat, etc., of course)

indygeezer
04-20-2005, 12:39 AM
Some people are raised in a negative atmosphere and they find it hard to change. Some don't want to change because they don't feel at home in a positive atmostphere. Some don't think they need to change. That's just the way it is.

I go to football games at the Uni of Michigan. There is a Dr. who has seats right behind me. I'm told that he lives in Pennsy or some such place and flies to EVERY GAME...home or away. But to hear him talk the Wolverines have NEVER made a good coaching decision, never executed a play well, or ever won a game with anything but luck. It is so bad that Geezerette started yapping at him about it once. HE actually shut up for that game (did I ever thank her for that???)
The point is, the guy is such a huge fan that he'll spend THOUSANDS to see them, and yet peyatch the whole time.
SOme people just don't know how to enjoy what they see. Then again, maybe that IS how he enjoys it. :confused:

Anthem
04-20-2005, 01:58 AM
Besides Indytoad, who's act I think is a facade, I honestly can't think of someone who acts as you describe. I mean, aren't we all here because we like the Pacers? (Excluding KStat, etc., of course)

Why should we exclude Kstat? He, Rimfire, and shags are all closet Pacer fans.

Although they've been less in the closet recently...

able
04-20-2005, 05:47 AM
You’re correct, there aren’t too many other player with Ron’s unique skill set. However, with a starting four as talented as Davis, O’Neal, Jackson, and Tinsley, it wouldn’t exactly be impossible to put together a good team. All that would be needed would be to trade Ron for a decent SF (whether it be a veteran or rookie) who will commit to the team game, defend well, hit the outside shot consistently, and play an overall smart, but perhaps not outstanding, game. If the other starters remain healthy, and our roster relatively unchanged, our talent, depth, and superior talent would make the Pacers quite the dangerous team.

There is a very big difference between a "good" team and a contender, good teams are usually the "ran to" team.
Davis has at the utmost 2 more years before he retires and he is at an age that the minutes he currently plays are to many, henceforth we need more then that, perhaps we have that already in talent, but it would make us wait longer and other things can then happen, in short; we would NOT be a contender soon.




The “big majority” portion of this statement has been proven to be flat-out wrong (unless better data is presented), and the other portion is simply speculation. I fail to see how Stern and the NBA could ever have profited from the Brawl and it’s fallout.

Shouting loud, quoting funky sites like ESPN and FOX, who's polls seemingly only count when they defend your point of view, but once they oppose all of a sudden become flakey, with polls that were taken with suggestive questions on the day and few days after the punishment was handed out, with the aggresive 180 ESPN did on their broadcast and opinions, on the internet, with no safeguards as to "honest" vote count and then saying that you have proven your point beyond doubt is not only pretencious but also wrong.
Reading the "general opinion" in the press nowadays I can far easier find statements from those that "agreed" in the beginning that say that it was overdone in retrospect, I decided from day one it was to much.
Furthermore does the world not end with Fox and ESPN, there is more over yonder horizon and the impression in Europe is that the penalties were "overdone"



Ron did not cause this team to be bad or good, one way or another? Ron, in term of on-court talent, is quite possibly the best Pacers player. How can he being suspended for the year not make us worse?

You just made a case two paragraphs up that the team would be "better off" without Ron and now you are claiming that it turns bad because he was suspended, please make up your ming, it is either one or the other.
This current team is not just a slight upgrade at the 3 away from being a "good team", certainly not with Reggie leaving, while he still is available at the moment you could make a case that Jax was that "reasonable skilled 3 with a decent outside shot that buys into the concept". Therefore we should have according to your previous standard a "good team" at this moment.
What we have is a group that is spirited, hurt, limping and fighting, but I would not call it "good" onr would I consider it a contender, no matter how nice a fairy tale we wish for.


Ron also didn’t commit murder that night, should he be commended for that, also? Pointing out what Ron didn’t do doesn’t justify what he did do, which was rush the stands. It was stupid, and he has paid, is paying, will continue to pay the consequences.
The correlation between what he did and didn't do is often forgotten, quotes in the illiterate press are usually about how Ron jumped into the stands and started beating on people, so bad I often think they are mistaking Ron for Jax or vice versa. Henceforth a pointer as to what he didn't do where others DID, puts a perspective on matters that is to oft forgotten.


Also, just because you can argue what he did was human nature, doesn’t make it morally right. Some argue that human nature is inherently evil. Suppose I should commit a multitude of malicious acts tonight, I don’t think “Well it’s only human nature!” would go over very well with the authority.

Surely you agree that this is nonsense and please do not start riding high moral horses untill you have learned what it means to fall off one.

You should never judge another person based on your morals, for all you know they (your morals) may be flawed or you are incapable of living up to them, leave room for error in life, those of us who've been around long enough know there are more pitfalls then there are "helpstations" to keep the moral high grounds.


He was hit with a plastic cup! He nor his family were in imminent danger, and to say he had been attacked, while the word fits, it really is quite the connotative exaggeration. When one is struck with a plastic cup, some restraint is to be expected, especially given Ron’s situation.

Let's see; Slick was hit with several things that were aimed at Ron, so was Mark, Ron was hit in the face/high chest/neck with a bottle/cup filled with liquid thrown from a distance with sufficient momentum to make an impact.
Add to that the shock effect of being hit with something that size, whether it is life threatening or not is not that important, you react.
What would your argument have been had it been a knife (Monica Seles,ever heard of her?) What you fail to see is that the throwing of the article that was thrown is the major thing in the first place. Showing restraint is saintly, morally right, effectively wrong. Shortly before Ron was hit, Slick was mentioning that he was sprayed with beer, and said: "At least it is not hot coffee as it was last year, that burned like hell!!"
To expect players to "not react" when things are thrown at them is like opening them up to torture and say it is part of the job, let's make one thing very clear, these guys are paid to play basketball, not to be the target of frustated idiots in a crowd, or as David Harrisson said: "If i wanted the public to throw stuff at me I would have joined a circus".

Finally; Legally it is assault to throw something at someone with the intent to hurt or insult.


For someone who claims to not agree with what he did, you have taken quite the detour in lieu of excusing his actions.

I have not made excuses, so don't put those words in my mouth, comprehending what I write might not always be obvious but explaining why it can be understandable does not mean it is excused, it is merely seeing the matter from more then one viewpoint, without morally judging what has happened.



Either way you want to spin it, Ron’s punishment being “earned” or “handed” to him, it still doesn’t happen if he doesn’t step out of line in the first place.

Stern is merely doing his job, I really doubt he gets some strange satisfaction from crushing on of the NBA’s own franchises.


Ron works for a living, he plays basketball for which he earns a salary.
He is punished, it is handed down (the punishment) that he is not to make ANY salary this year, nor is he allowed to work (did you ever consider that in most civilized countries that is against the law, and in a lot even against the constitution?)
Stern in doing "merely his job" declared that the vote for this punishment (without hearing witnesses, without hearing the accused, without giving the accused the right to defend himself or be defended by a lawyer, without any rights for the defense) was a unanimous 1 - 0 in his favour.
If consider that "doing his job in the best interest of players and owners of the NBA then I must not know what that means.
"Stepping out of line" does generally get you slapped, but there is a difference between being slapped and being b*tch-slapped.
The actions of Stern were taken within his power, but that does not mean that it is correct.
Gain? plenty, enough to fill a seperate thread on, but also so well documented in previous posts by me that I suggest you go search for them.


I see, this same “reason and sane judgement” which you are exhibiting had lead you to label David Stern idiotic, selfish, and pompous. Pretty strong accusations, considering what little evidence you have to work with.
The statement about the vote, the neglect to allow defense, the actions and words spoken around the All Star break easily prove my case, I need not delve any deeper.



I would gladly trade Ron for just what his being gone would bring to the team: stability. We can’t begin to tweak and refine this team, unless we know what we are going to be getting out of each player every night, and know whether we can trust them. The tweaks and adjustment made just this last off-season, even without injuries, could never have been properly evaluated this season, thanks to Ron getting suspended. How many more years are we going to allow this man to set us back?

Consdidering that trading him to rid of him as you suggest should leave us with what we had this season minus Reggie, considering that we are hardly to be called "contenders" at this moment in time, I would think that the setback for doing so would be another 3 - 5 years. Our cap situation does not alllow us one way or the other to attract players that would fill the shoes needed to be filled without trading away other important parts of our roster, as the remaining ones are in trade-sense worthless.
Unless you think you can trade Cro or Bender for a McGrady type player you would have to work with talent which takes time, which might lead to others considering their efforst a waste et cetera.



I’ve seen a lot of posts that paint him to be some sort of saint. This means nothing.

Playing the game with heart has nothing to do we the majority of what you just mentioned. Besides, that was the ABA, and has little relevance in this discussion.

I have yet to see a post where Ron is painted a saint, but gladly await your links, please do not state things that are blatantly untrue, it does not contribute to a clean discussion on merits of a case.

As for the examples from the ABA, I also mentioned the NBA, and I am sorry to say for your benefit, but the ABA is what made the Indiana Pacers what they are, it is what made those shirts in the rafters a legacy, it is what made Bobby "Slick" Leonard what he is; an icon, it made the current Pacers, history is never something to be "shoved under the table" it is something you learn from, denying the importance of what happened is denying your heritage.
Fact was that Slick tried to beat up Neto with a hockey stick, fact is they ALL brought in guns to the locker, fact is that a rule was implemented that guns had to be checked after a shot went of in the lockerroom, fact is some players were known to beat up opponents just for the hell of it, fact is that riots/fights were on the daily menu throughout the ABA and the NBA.
It doesn't make it right, it just was that way.


You do an excellent job of pointing out two similar instances that resulted in dissimilar punishments, but you overlook two points:

First, Ron’s actions were part of a riot. For playing a part in a riot, it only makes sense the punishment be increased.

Ron was not a part of a riot, we can discuss the "origin of the riot" all we want, but that again would be a seperate thread and completely filled with suppositions. The riot took place, all you can discuss is whether Ron was THE lighter in the fuel or that there were others or that there were a plentitude of lighters setting fire.
Ron was no part of the riot to increase punishment, no riot broke out when Vern Maxwell went into the stands, no riot broke out in last weeks baseball game, where it was clear that in the latter case good security was the reason in the earlier case it was the common sense of the audience, both were obviously lacking here, first displayed by the throwing of things.
I did not forget that, I left it out because it is no part of the matter.


Second, as I said, you did an apt job or pointing the two situations, but does this necessarily prove that Ron’s punishment was wrong? I think not. Who’s to say the Maxwell sentence wasn’t a bit light, and the NBA finally got it right with Artest?
The disparity between the two is so big that even if either was true it remains outrageous. 800% increases do not find justification in earlier to "light".


No one was claiming Ron was responsible for any injuries, but losing, arguably, your most talented player pretty effectively ruins your season.

I am repeating myself now… :shudder:
yes you are and the argument does not get stronger, in fact again you are undermining you starting statement that trading Ron for a bag of crisps would improve this team, what you saw this season was a team with Reggie Miller still on it and effectively Ron traded for a bag of crisps, the outcome proves a lot of points.



I don’t see how you are so confident things will get better, when we have a player who has proven to be a persistent problem, and we aren’t likely to move him anytime soon. As Jay said, more often than not, Ron is part of the problem, not the solution.
To find your solution you must know the problem, eliminating the problem does not solve the problem, it merely gives relief.
As others said (I never expressed any confidence that things will get better, but I must say that I hope they will) liek Will; no one goes through all this and does not change, strangely enough there are others who have said the same and all have a certain age, where they made the mistakes and learned the lessons, Ron made it this far from something not really nice, he improved and yes his quiting on the team was bad, very bad, but only the sweet lord knows what went through him when he was thinking about that/saying he wanted.
Yet those kind of things have clearly been worked out, we can only hope they will not re-occur, don't forget that any player can do this, whether there is a higher likelyhood that one or the other does will remaining to be seen.




Personally, I don’t see what is so wrong about wanting to dump Ron, when, after all, he was willing to do the same thing to us. In the fracas before the brawl, he quit on this team. I, then, have no problem in reciprocating that feeling.

Riding the high horse of morallity, dumping the, or at least one of the, most talented players on your team, a player who if he stays in line will undoubtedly be a large part of making this team a contender as a form of reciprocation to a request made under circumstances you know nothing about, as nor do I, is a nice stance, but it also is one that admits you prefer mediocracy to winning.
I prefer to fly a banner in CFH, next to those that say ABA Champion, which says NBA World Champion.
And looking at games played by "the legend" and the team he was a part of, seeing the legacy that is the ABA Pacers, seeing all the other "champions" mentioned (Bad Boys for one) I prefer to have a lunatic around and win it all, to being morally right and go through yet another season of "ran to".

I am not saying keeping Ron is not a risk, I am not saying there should be no zero-tolerance, I am not saying all is well over yonder hilltops, all I am saying that it wont get any better without him soon, so we may as well take the risk.
And yes I am still saying that the entire matter was handled bad by the league, and considering the clear statements of the Simon's they are more in agreement with me then a few of you here.

PacerMan
04-20-2005, 02:01 PM
Sorry, but this team IS and will be good to very good WITHOUT RON ARTEST.

Guess you forget (already?) how well we were playing without him when Tinsley was healthy.

We will get something for him and we will be a top 5 team next year. Book it.

beast23
04-20-2005, 02:33 PM
We will still have him and be a top 2 team next year. Book it.

Unclebuck
04-20-2005, 02:54 PM
The team can be very good without Artest assuming everything falls in place. But very good does not win championships. It might get you 55 wins and an ECF berth, but nothing more. If you are satisfied with that and would rather not put up with Ron's nonsense, then that is your decsion.

But if you want a championship Ron is needed.

Will Galen
04-20-2005, 05:22 PM
If this team comes back as is next year, minus Reg of course and with a draft pick, it will roll though the NBA and challege Chicago's record of 70 wins.

SoupIsGood
04-20-2005, 05:40 PM
If this team comes back as is next year, minus Reg of course and with a draft pick, it will roll though the NBA and challege Chicago's record of 70 wins.

:sunshine:

Natston
04-20-2005, 05:44 PM
:sunshine:
:whistle: could finally stay healthy... :D

SoupIsGood
04-20-2005, 06:09 PM
high moral horses untill you have learned what it means to fall off one.

...

those of us who've been around long enough know there are more pitfalls then there are "helpstations" to keep the moral high grounds.

...

no one goes through all this and does not change, strangely enough there are others who have said the same and all have a certain age, where they made the mistakes and learned the lessons,


What in God's name is this? I really expected more out of you, Able. Apparently, the fact that I'm young means I don't know what it's like to learn from my own mistakes and my morals are absurd. Gee, thanks.

:rolleyes:

8.9_seconds
04-24-2005, 12:40 AM
Get rid of Ron?? You're crazy!! That is like the Red Sox trading Babe Ruth, adn we all know what happened after that up until last year. I have no doubt in my mind that Ron Artest is one of the main reasons the Pacers had the 61 wins last year, and correct me if I'm wrong, nobody would be saying this if all this 11/19 crap hadn't happened. I am soooooo sick of people turning on Artest he was the defensive backbone of the Pacers.

What would have happened if he would have pleaded temporary insanity?

any way that's not the point.

Ok, he did hit the wrong guy, but it wasn't him, it was the alcohol!!!

SoupIsGood
04-24-2005, 01:15 AM
Get rid of Ron?? You're crazy!! That is like the Red Sox trading Babe Ruth, adn we all know what happened after that up until last year. I have no doubt in my mind that Ron Artest is one of the main reasons the Pacers had the 61 wins last year, and correct me if I'm wrong, nobody would be saying this if all this 11/19 crap hadn't happened. I am soooooo sick of people turning on Artest he was the defensive backbone of the Pacers.

What would have happened if he would have pleaded temporary insanity?

any way that's not the point.

Ok, he did hit the wrong guy, but it wasn't him, it was the alcohol!!!


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y173/SoupIsGood/hi.jpg

8.9_seconds
04-24-2005, 01:27 AM
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y173/SoupIsGood/hi.jpg

check and mate, I get the point.

Harmonica
04-24-2005, 01:48 PM
QFT!!!!

If I ran the forums (thanks god I dont :devil: ) everytime RA name came up I would lock the thread and post the above comments as the last post in the thread.

What is QFT?