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

The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

    Nothing new here, even as he admits. But somebody has to post it.

    My only real disagreement is that whatever we do will be a start over. The fact is that we have been stuck in neutral for the better part of several years now. Whatever we can get for O'Neal and Tinsley is better than what we are getting from them right now.

    Other than die hard Jamaal & Jermaine fans I think most of us understand that there is no "when J.O. & J.T. get 100% we will have a good team".

    No matter what you think of them as people or even as players the fact is that now for the past 3 years at least these two have missed almost half of the games and probably 3/4 of the practices.

    Even if we don't get fair value in return, it is still better than what they have produced in the past month assuming the new players can play at all.

    But I digress, take it away Bob.



    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...TS15/803090395

    So Herb Simon has spoken. And that's a good thing, a necessary thing, because even as a hands-off owner of the Pacers, he needed to get his hands on a once-proud franchise that is in deep crisis on the floor and off.


    The question, though, remains: Will Simon tell team CEO and president Donnie Walsh and president Larry Bird that they absolutely, positively must clean house and begin the tough and oftentimes uncomfortable process of rebuilding this franchise?
    Because that's what he must tell them, with no reservations. Blow it up. Start over. Bite the bullet, swallow hard and move this thing in an entirely new direction. (This is a recording. I started writing about this, what, three years ago?)
    If Walsh and Bird are willing to spend this next summer cleaning house, then give them ample time to get the job done. Two years, three, whatever.
    If Walsh and Bird are unwilling or unable to do the necessary dirty work, then send them along and bring in a new architect, somebody like Kiki Vandeweghe, who rescued the Denver Nuggets after years of abject futility.
    Simon must make it clear. No more tinkering. No more working around the edges in the hope of winning 38 games and earning a bogus playoff spot in the Eastern Conference. The fans aren't buying what the Pacers are selling. Seven years after an NBA Finals run, the Pacers are dead last in the league in attendance. Imagine, here in Indiana, where the soul of basketball resides, where Conseco Fieldhouse is an absolute jewel of a facility, the Pacers can't give away their tickets.
    It's time to start over.
    Get rid of Jermaine O'Neal. He has been a solid citizen and an All-Star when healthy, but he's the one player who has semi-significant value on the open market.
    Get rid of Jamaal Tinsley. He's always hurt and he's always in trouble, or at least trouble always seems to find him. As long as he is part of this franchise, fans will stay away, just on principle.
    Get rid of David Harrison. Not at the end of the season, but now. This minute. If the Players Association wants to fight it, fine. But Harrison has blown his last chance. Understand, I like the guy and hope he gets his act together, but his presence gives Pacers fans another excuse for staying home.
    Get rid of Marquis Daniels. Another guy who can't steer clear of trouble. The legal system may eventually determine that he's not guilty of any wrongdoing these past two years, but his continued presence will serve as a perpetual reminder to fans why they can't stand this team.
    Get rid of Shawne Williams. I keep hearing he's a really good kid. I keep hearing that he's been reticent about turning his back on some of the neighborhood friends who helped him survive West Memphis. I understand that. But he got a public mulligan the first time he was found hanging around with the wrong folks. This is the second time. In the same season. With a guy who's involved in a murder case. If he hasn't gotten it by now, he never will.
    Understand, there are building blocks here. Not great building blocks, mind you, but there are players here who have remained professional, played hard and represented the franchise with grace. There's Danny Granger. There's Mike Dunleavy. There's Jeff Foster. There's Stephen Graham. There's Travis Diener. There's Kareem Rush. There's even Troy Murphy, who's come around nicely the past month.
    It's a start.
    But only a start.
    Now Simon, who is paying two team presidents and getting very little in return, has to decide who is best suited to do the dirty work of cleaning up this franchise.
    Understandably, there's been a lot of screaming about Bird's job performance, and I would quickly agree that he has not covered himself in glory. He was the one who coveted Sarunas Jasikevicius, who flamed out. He was the one who wanted Williams in the first round, then moved up and took James White in the second, gave White a two-year guaranteed contract, then cut him before the season.
    The problem, though, is it's hard to know which moves belong to Walsh and which ones belong to Bird -- and which ones belong to both. It's readily accepted that this is Bird's first full year of autonomy, but his voice was heard during his years as Walsh's apprentice, so he bears some responsibility for this mess.
    In Bird's defense, there was no way he could move the injured O'Neal or the injured Tinsley before this trading deadline. Who wants a player who can't help them get over the hump this postseason? They had zero value. It made more sense to wait until the summer.
    So now it's up to Simon, who, despite his vast wealth, is not in any business to lose money. If he's as smart about basketball as he is about malls, he will hear the voice of the public and act accordingly.
    Tell Donnie and Larry it's time to start over.
    Or say goodbye.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

    I guess if you say something enough, it will eventually become the right thing to say. It's like at DMB concerts where everybody's guessing what the next song is...I always guess "The Stone", and I'll be damned if I haven't been right occasionally.

    Anyway, I agree we should move Tinsley at any price and that we should probably get what we can for JO. I'd like to see us get out from under T-Murdaa's contract and cut ties with Daniels as well.

    Harrison is meaningless, and I'm still not on the bandwagon for dumping Williams.

    It's definitely time to start in a new direction, and regrettably, we've probably negated any chances of a "soft landing". It will be interesting to see how the Pacers survive the next 5 to 10 years now that they're going to be forced to use a "blow-it-up" strategy that has a near 100% short-term (5 year) failure rate.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

      I could say that he doesn't go far enough. ANYBODY with trade value should be in play.

      But I have always found myself in agreement whenever BK wrote this article.
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

        No mention of coaching. It's very difficult to get a representative read on O'Brien given what he's been given to work with. Still, I don't know that his philosophy will jibe with a true rebuild and the requisite playing of young, inexprienced guys.

        I definitely don't think he will lead us to big-time contention. I'm not sure he's even capable to lead us back to mediocrity. Like his serious approach and courtside intensity, but not his gimmick offense, wild substitution patterns, and employment of a defense that's way too complicated and challenging for our talent level.
        I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

        -Emiliano Zapata

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

          Bob is exactly right on the money.
          "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
          Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

            Originally posted by aceace View Post
            Bob is exactly right on the money.
            Just like a broken clock is right twice a day is right twice a year.
            Last edited by grace; 03-09-2008, 02:12 PM.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
              No mention of coaching. It's very difficult to get a representative read on O'Brien given what he's been given to work with. Still, I don't know that his philosophy will jibe with a true rebuild and the requisite playing of young, inexprienced guys.

              I definitely don't think he will lead us to big-time contention. I'm not sure he's even capable to lead us back to mediocrity. Like his serious approach and courtside intensity, but not his gimmick offense, wild substitution patterns, and employment of a defense that's way too complicated and challenging for our talent level.
              If we do rebuild, then I would think Obie's wide open run 'n gun approach works better with younger players, who are probably more adept at his style as opposed to an RC style slog offense. I dont think young players are as good in half court sets. I just wish we could get some guys and more of an offense that moves and sets screens more in the half court offense. We also need better overall team foot speed. We may be good at getting up and down the court, but our defensive standing still lateral first step is horrid, with a couple exception players (Rush, Graham, and Danny).

              I think that Obie would be a pretty good transition coach through the rebuild, because he has experience, and has been to the playoffs and knows what it takes to get there and be competitive.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                Let's look at who needs to go, if you want to wipe the slate clean regarding any off-court issues, or worn-out welcomes, et al.

                Jermaine O'Neal
                Jamaal Tinsley
                Shawne Williams
                David Harrison
                Marquis Daniels

                The rest are fine. Not in all ways or in all things, but for this conversation they're fine.

                Now, how to get rid of them:

                If you go in to "MUST BE DONE NOW" mode, here's my guess:

                You trade Jermaine O'Neal, Jamaal Tinsley, Shawne Williams, and Marquis Daniels to the highest bidder (and you don't take on a contract that is longer than theirs).

                I'm convinced JO would net something (x2 if he plays and looks healthy before the year is out).

                I'm less convinced about Tinsley. If nothing worth doing (at all, even a tiny bit) is out there, then you buy him out.

                I think Shawne William's youth and potential (not to mention that it seems perception is worse than reality on his resume) should get you at least something of interest.

                IF hoopshype is correct (no guarantee), Marquis Daniels is an expiring contract next year (he has a second year, but it's a TEAM option). That should make him tradeable.

                David Harrison you simply let walk.

                That's all you need to do to clean house. You don't have to blow up the rest.

                Sure, there'll still be a lot of work to do, but mercifully that will be purely in the basketball department, not the PR department. Other moves will be needed later, but not for the reasons spurring on this "BLOW IT UP NOW" talk.

                Truth is, it's been in the process of blowing up for a while, but the steel structure underneath is still there (O'Neal/Tinsley) and some siding hasn't fallen off yet (Williams, Daniels, Harrison).

                This isn't a "15 new players" situation.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                  Before moving JONeal....I would like to see what we can get on the market for some package involving Tinsley/Marquis/Shawne/Harrison and ( maybe ) Ike.

                  Now that we appear to be headed in the "clean house of all the bad PR players" direction.....players like Shawne, Marquis...both players that I think have some trade value....along with Ike ( who doesn't exactly fit into JO'Bs system )....we have more trading assets to use to make some moves. If we can move these "bad PR" players with the ultimate goal of "simply moving Tinsley"....which would be a good step in the right direction....then I wouldn't mind keeping JONeal...assuming that he would voluntarily stay here.

                  We could still continue to build around Granger as the main focus of the team while changing JONeal's role to fit what Dunleavy, Foster, Murphy and Diener are doing now.....basically becoming a important part of the "Supporting Cast".

                  Keep in mind....just because we keep JONeal doesn't necessarily mean that we have to keep him as the main focus of the team....much less run the offense through him. I'm really curious to see how Diener would do with JONeal in the lineup. Diener doesn't appear to be the type of PG that would automatically get the ball to JONeal ( like the way that Tinsley does )....he seems to get the ball to the right player....which may or may not be JONeal....while getting everyone involved in the offense.

                  I'm not suggesting that we don't trade JONeal....I'm just saying that the need to move him isn't as great as it was before. My hope is that if TPTB does decide to keep JONeal ( and that's a Big IF ), I would really hope that we get another Big Man that can come in to handle all of the Rebounding/Shotblocking/Big Man Defense that JONeal does now. Just like getting a perimeter defender in to help alleviate those tasks from Granger's plate so that he can focus on the offense....I think that if we get a Big Man to help out on the defensive end, it could help JONeal focus more on the offensive end.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                    I really wish would just go away. He's nothing more than a broken record who sits on his :highhorse: and and offers no real insight into anything. What a waste of time and .

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                      I think if Larry and Donnie go, the replacement(s) will send Jim O'Brien packing too. Personally I'd rather see Larry coach again (I wouldn't be opposed to Carlisle and Harter being at his side again), let Donnie walk, and bring in Kiki.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                        My favorite part about the article is how unique, insightful and fresh it is.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:
                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I'm not suggesting that we don't trade JONeal....I'm just saying that the need to move him isn't as great as it was before. My hope is that if TPTB does decide to keep JONeal ( and that's a Big IF ), I would really hope that we get another Big Man that can come in to handle all of the Rebounding/Shotblocking/Big Man Defense that JONeal does now. Just like getting a perimeter defender in to help alleviate those tasks from Granger's plate so that he can focus on the offense....I think that if we get a Big Man to help out on the defensive end, it could help JONeal focus more on the offensive end.
                          Every team in the league is looking for that type of bigman, even those that already have one. You guys have Foster and you're still looking for another one of him.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                            The problem is that they are not going anywhere.
                            JO and Tinsley. Nobody wants them or their contracts. Kravitz murders everything anyway. I sometimes wonder if this guy ever wants to move, so we came read something that is actually positive. This guy even bashes the Colts all the time. WE ARE STUCK. Rebuilding is impossible when your rich owner doesn't want to pay luxury tax to help get us out of this rut.
                            Kravitz is an insult to people who think.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: The bi-annual blow it up article from Kravitz

                              Another temper tantrum from little Bobby....I stand by my suggestions..

                              1. Get rid of the players that we need to get rid of: Harrison, Williams
                              2. Get rid of the people that the fans will never let alone regardless of what they do: Bird, Tinsley, Daniels.
                              3. Try to get a PG via the draft or FA.
                              4. TT to Slick to see who he would suggest for GM.
                              Go Pacers!

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X