Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

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

    ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...26id%3d2749303

    The 30 best never to win The Big One

    By John Hollinger
    ESPN Insider

    The trading deadline is coming up, which means not only is trade rumor season upon us, but also trade demand season. This is usually the time when frustrated stars let it be known that they'd like to be playing for a championship instead of golfing every April.

    Take Kevin Garnett, for instance. For a dozen years he's toiled in Minnesota, and yet hasn't come close to winning a championship. He's been one of the league's five best players for about a decade now, but his only taste of a playoff run came in 2003-04 when the Timberwolves made the conference finals.

    In a league with 30 teams, it's hard for every good player to win a ring. Inevitably a few, such as Garnett perhaps, will see their entire careers pass without a victory parade.

    In fact, KG's in quite esteemed company. In looking at this, I was surprised to realize just how many great players have failed to win the game's ultimate prize.

    With all-time greats like Garnett and Steve Nash on a quest for the elusive ring, let's look at the 30 best players never to win a championship, and how they managed to fall short.

    A few notes before we begin. First, I didn't consider anybody younger than 30 for this list -- players such as Dirk Nowitzki, LeBron James and Gilbert Arenas still have plenty of time left to win a ring. Second, for those players who are still active, I considered their place on the list as though they retired today -- we can't assume future accomplishments.

    Finally, because statistical data from the NBA's early days is less complete, I leaned heavily on more generic measures -- All-Star berths, All-NBA selections and MVP awards.

    Keep in mind that the point of this list isn't to determine whether George Gervin was better than Dominique Wilkins; it's to point out that both fell short of the ultimate prize, much like Garnett has to date.

    That said, here's one man's ranking of the 30 best never to win The Big One:


    1. Karl Malone (1985-2004)
    Thank you, Michael Jordan. Malone's Utah Jazz teams won the conference title twice, but couldn't knock Jordan off his pedestal and weren't quite ready to seize the day during Jordan's two-year retirement. Then the Mailman got hurt during the 2004 Finals with the Lakers. So the greatest power forward of all time has no bling to show for it.

    2. Charles Barkley (1984-2000)
    It's ironic to hear him repeat over and over that the Phoenix Suns won't win the title this year because they aren't committed to defense. He should know -- his 1993 Phoenix Suns didn't win the title because they weren't committed to defense. That was Chuck's only trip to the Finals.

    3. Kevin Garnett (1995-present)
    Sometimes you get only one shot. Garnett's Wolves fell short against L.A. when Sam Cassell's body broke down in 2004 and were never heard from before or since. Not since the Cincinnati Royals of the 1960s (with Oscar Robertson) has a franchise managed to get an All-Era caliber player and still be this mediocre.


    Top 10 under 30 without a ring
    (in terms of career accomplishments, not current ability)

    1. Dirk Nowitzki (1998-present)
    2. LeBron James (2003-present)
    3. Tracy McGrady (1997-present)
    4. Elton Brand (1999-present)
    5. Yao Ming (2002-present)
    6. Jermaine O'Neal (1996-present)
    7. Shawn Marion (1999-present)
    8. Amare Stoudemire ('02-present)
    9. Gilbert Arenas (2001-present)
    10. Carlos Boozer (2002-present)

    4. Elgin Baylor (1958-1972)
    The first truly great player to retire ringless, Baylor hung up his sneaks early in the 1971-72 season, only to see the Lakers rip off 33 straight and take their first L.A.-era crown. Baylor played in eight NBA Finals and lost all of them, including three Game 7 losses to the Celtics.

    5. John Stockton (1984-2003)
    Jazz legend Stockton had the same problem Malone did -- the dude wearing No. 23 for the Bulls. Little-known fact -- it was he, not Jordan, who took the final shot in the memorable 1998 series that served as the (first) farewell of His Airness.

    6. Patrick Ewing (1985-2002)
    It was "this is our year" every year for the Knicks' big man, but he was another one who couldn't navigate his way past the Jordannaires. Unfortunately, when Jordan briefly retired, Ewing had John "2-for-18" Starks as his wingman. In 1999, the Knicks made a Finals run with Ewing sidelined.

    7. Allen Iverson (1996-present)
    The Answer made the Finals once but was steamrolled in five by a Shaq attack. At least he's got one more shot at it, as the Nuggets seem poised to make a run at the crown -- with the biggest push likely coming a year from now.

    8. Steve Nash (1996-present)
    Has come up with the short end of the stick in three conference finals with two different teams, but I have a feeling he'll be off this list by the end of June.

    9. George Gervin (1972-1986)
    The Ice Man couldn't finger-roll past the Bullets when his team was in the East, and couldn't beat the Lakers when they moved to the West. Biggest letdown was probably in '79, when the Spurs blew a 3-1 lead in the Eastern Conference finals, dropping the clinching game by two.

    10. Dominique Wilkins (1982-1999)
    Couldn't get past Larry Bird as a young man, or his own team's management as an older one. The Hawks won East-best 57 games in 1993-94, but inexcusably traded 'Nique for Danny Manning at midseason and limped to a second-round defeat in playoffs.

    11. Grant Hill (1994-present)
    Now that his career has turned into a Greek tragedy, it's easy to forget how good he was those first six years in Detroit. Unfortunately, his only contribution to a title was the sign-and-trade deal that gave the Pistons Ben Wallace. His teams have never won a playoff round.

    12. Chris Webber (1993-present)
    The ghost of whatcouldabeen haunts him as badly as anyone on this list -- the missed free throws and technical foul in the Kings' Game 7 OT loss to the Lakers in 2002 and the missed 3 at the buzzer in Game 7 against Minnesota in 2004. (And of course, that fateful timeout call against North Carolina.)

    13. Jason Kidd (1994-present)
    Made the Finals in consecutive years as a Net, but that was as much due to the weakness of the East as the team's own excellence, and neither club was quite ready for prime time. If he gets another shot at it, one doubts it will come as a Net.

    14. Alex English (1976-1991)
    His run-and-gun Denver teams were easy on the eyes, but were squashed in five by the Lakers in his one trip to the conference finals.

    15. Adrian Dantley (1976-1991)
    The tough-luck guy of the group, as the Lakers and Pistons both won championships right after trading him. He was a big part of the Pistons team that narrowly lost in seven to L.A. in 1988, but his best years were spent on a Utah team that never had a chance.

    16. Vince Carter (1998-present)
    The newest addition to the list -- he turned 30 five days ago -- current Net Carter has his diploma, yes, but never has advanced as far as the conference finals. Graduation Day 2001, with the miss at the buzzer against Philly in Game 7, was his best shot as a Raptor.

    17. Dikembe Mutombo (1991-present)
    The finger-wagging defensive ace made the Finals twice in his 30s -- once as a Sixer, once as a Net -- but Shaq and Duncan proved too much to overcome. His best playoff moment came earlier, in the Nuggets' improbable first-round upset of Seattle in 1994.

    18. Bernard King (1977-1993)
    King was impossible to cover, but you'd never know it from looking at his teams, most of which were well out of contention. The one exception was in '84, when his Knicks valiantly took eventual champ Boston to seven games before succumbing.

    19. Sidney Moncrief (1979-1991)
    The defensive ace was the best player on Don Nelson's Milwaukee teams that won six straight division titles, but he couldn't get past Boston and Philly in the crowded East. In three trips to conference finals, his Bucks won a total of two games.

    20. Ray Allen (1996-present)
    Big Dog's missed bunny in Game 5 of Eastern Conference finals in 2001 was probably Allen's best shot, but in truth that probably only saved his centerless Bucks a savage beating at the hands of Shaq in the Finals. His Sonics took the eventual champion Spurs to six tough games in 2005; otherwise he's never been close.

    21. Nate Thurmond (1963-1977)
    The shot-swatting giant made one trip to the Finals, in '67, and for his efforts he got to guard Wilt Chamberlain. Suffered a similar fate to Dantley at the end of his career, as Golden State traded him to Chicago and then immediately won it all in 1975.

    22. Dave Bing (1966-1978)
    This longtime Piston might have had the worst teams of anyone on this list -- in a dozen seasons he made the playoffs only five times, and only one of those came before age 30. His best shot came late, as a Bullet, but like Thurmond left a year before they won it all.

    23. Kevin Johnson (1987-2000)
    Barkley's teammate in Phoenix also suffered heartbreak pre-Charles. His Suns waxed the defending champion Lakers in five in 1990, only to lose the conference finals to Portland -- with the losses coming by 2, 1, 6 and 3.

    24. George Yardley (1953-1960)
    The 1950s scoring machine suffered heartbreak with Fort Wayne in the long-forgotten but incredibly intense 1955 Finals. The Pistons lost in seven to Syracuse, dropping Game 7 by one after blowing a 17-point lead and getting the short end of a controversial no-call at the end.

    25. Pete Maravich (1970-1980)
    Pistol played on just one good team in his prime, winning 46 games and taking Atlanta to the second round of the playoffs in 1973 before falling to the Celtics in six. He finished up with Boston, but left a year too early to collect a ring.

    26. Richie Guerin (1956-1970)
    Guerin was a mainstay on some of New York's worst-ever teams, never sporting a winning record from 1957 to 1964. Traded to the Hawks late in his career, he made two conference finals but lost in both.

    27. Jack Twyman (1955-1966)
    Ask a friend to name all the players to average 30 or more points a game in a season in the last half-century, and see how long it takes him or her to come up with "Jack Twyman." He did it as the Big O's sidekick in Cincy in 1960-61, but the Royals didn't make the playoffs that season … or most other years.

    28. Tim Hardaway (1989-2003)
    The knuckleball-shooting guard won four straight Atlantic Division titles with Miami -- and in that time, made it out of the first round of the playoffs once. His Heat got to the '97 conference finals before Jordan and Co. devoured them, but the loss that really stung was the first-round defeat to the eighth-seeded Knicks in '99.

    29. Bob Lanier (1970-1984)
    His Pistons teams in the '70s never had a shot, but late in his career he shared Moncrief's heartbreak as a member of Nellie's Bucks.

    30. Reggie Miller (1987-2005)
    A perennial bridesmaid despite several careers' worth of clutch shots, as his Pacers fell to L.A. in their one shot in the Finals. Perhaps the bigger heartache is the five conference finals they lost, including three Game 7s. In '98 his Pacers led Jordan's Bulls with five minutes to go before falling, and in '94 his club blew a double-digit second-half lead against New York.

    John Hollinger writes for ESPN Insider. To e-mail him, click here.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

    hollinger's a joke. that's all that needs to be said...

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
      hollinger's a joke. that's all that needs to be said...
      I think just the opposite. I'm a big fan of Hollinger.

      What, since Reggie isn't #1 it's a bad article?

      Edit: I do realize this a pretty crappy list. I don't think current players should be included in this list whatsoever.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

        Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
        I think just the opposite. I'm a big fan of Hollinger.

        What, since Reggie isn't #1 it's a bad article?
        No the fact that he has Mutumbo on that list is a reason why. When you think of an article like this I tend to think of stars who got close not just one time but many times and I consider ECF/WCF game 7's pretty close to winning it.I picture guys like Reggie,Malone,Ewing,Malone ect.I don't picture guys like Carter,R. Allen and especially not Mutumbo to be on that list.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

          Originally posted by mike_D View Post
          No the fact that he has Mutumbo on that list is a reason why. When you think of an article like this I tend to think of stars who got close not just one time but many times and I consider ECF/WCF game 7's pretty close to winning it.I picture guys like Reggie,Malone,Ewing,Malone ect.I don't picture guys like Carter,R. Allen and especially not Mutumbo to be on that list.
          No joke. People have been comparing Reggie's career to Dumars and he is 30?

          Ray Allen is on that list and I am pretty sure that Reggie is ahead of him in scoring and 3pt made. Plus Allen has never made it to the finals. To put Miller on the bottom of this list is ridiculous.

          Bing and King behind Kidd. that is dumb

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

            Yeah that's a horrible list... how is Grant Hill #11? Yeah its a great story but like the article says, he's never been out of the first round, while Reggie led a team to the finals. And how is Stockton 5th while Malone is #1?

            Players Reggie should be ahead of:

            George Gervin
            Grant Hill
            Chris Webber
            Jason Kidd
            Vince Carter
            Dikembe Mutombo
            Ray Allen
            Kevin Johnson...wtf
            Pete Maravich (entertaining player, but probably his biggest acheivment comes from being the all time NCAA scoring avg. leader)
            Richie Gueren
            Tim Hardaway
            "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

            ----------------- Reggie Miller

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

              Is Steve Nash really an All-Time great?

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                Is Steve Nash really an All-Time great?
                Two-time, and perhaps three-time, MVP. Hell yes.
                2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                  Originally posted by bulldog View Post
                  Two-time, and perhaps three-time, MVP. Hell yes.
                  It's too soon for me.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                    It really is a slap in the face to an NBA great. I hope he receives many angry e-mails.
                    You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                      Ray Allen ahead of Reggie? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thats rich.


                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                        Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                        Ray Allen ahead of Reggie? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Thats rich.

                        Seriously. I mean, he is a Reggie clone except a) not as good, and b) nowhere near as accomplished.

                        I can't think of a single reason why Allen could possibly be justified as a pick over Reggie. I mean, does Ray Allen even have a shot at the Hall of Fame?
                        The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                        http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                        RSS Feed
                        Subscribe via iTunes

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                          Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                          Yeah that's a horrible list... how is Grant Hill #11? Yeah its a great story but like the article says, he's never been out of the first round, while Reggie led a team to the finals. And how is Stockton 5th while Malone is #1?

                          Players Reggie should be ahead of:

                          George Gervin
                          Grant Hill
                          Chris Webber
                          Jason Kidd
                          Vince Carter
                          Dikembe Mutombo
                          Ray Allen
                          Kevin Johnson...wtf
                          Pete Maravich (entertaining player, but probably his biggest acheivment comes from being the all time NCAA scoring avg. leader)
                          Richie Gueren
                          Tim Hardaway
                          I think that you are underestimating the greatness of George Gervin. The rest I agree with.
                          Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                          http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                            Originally posted by tdubb03 View Post
                            I think just the opposite. I'm a big fan of Hollinger.

                            What, since Reggie isn't #1 it's a bad article?

                            Edit: I do realize this a pretty crappy list. I don't think current players should be included in this list whatsoever.
                            no, because his list is a joke from top to bottom.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN insider: The 30 best never to win The Big One

                              @ this list

                              That is all.















                              Oh, what the hell. I'll throw in a as well.

                              Comment

                              Previous template Next
                              Working...
                              X