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

An answer for Fortaz......

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Can't speak for Peck but what it really boils down to, IMO, is, "Can he handle the pressure of the playoffs."
    • vs. NJ - hard to tell, he wasn't one of our main players yet.
    • vs. Boston in 2003 - no. But in hindsight, it might've solved a few of our problems if Mel Daniels had just given him a thorough asskicking in the tunnel for everyone to see.
    • vs. Boston in 2004 - yes, but it was a cakewalk.
    • vs. Miami in 2004 - he played well, feasting on JO's tablescraps because Miami put all thier defensive effort into shutting down JO and let Ron do whatever he wanted; but he had to be forced onto the team plane after one loss. One could argue that Miami's gameplan kicked Ron's ego into overdrive - he appeared to be playing at a high level since Miami didn't focus on him and then when Detroit played JO straight-up in the next series, things didn't go well for the Ron.
    • vs. Detroit in 2004 - his play was up-and-down, and we've all spent a lot of time harping on his meltdowns before and during Game #6.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: An answer for Fortaz......

      Originally posted by Suaveness
      Out of curiousity, would this be for any player, or just Ron? For example, say like Rasheed came here and pulled consistantly all of his antics from Portland. If he says he would quit, would you still hold the same standard you do for Ron, or is Ron just that bad of a case for you?
      I'm not sure I get your question.

      I've generally liked 'Sheed more than many of you. I'll acknowledge, of course, that he has had major problems with referrees and was in a bad situation in Portland. But when I think of 'Sheed, I still think of the Rasheed Wallace from about 1998 - 2000 in Portland, playing with Brian Grant and Arvyddas Sabonas. Man, I loved that three-man rotation in the frontcourt. It really wasn't an insult to JO that he couldn't get any minutes, that was real depth. At that time, I felt that - even though he got a lot of technicals - that it didn't usually hurt his game and his teammates still believed in him. But that situation admittedly continued to get worse over time.

      I've always thought that the Rasheed that many of you ***** about was a byproduct of a bad environment, and a franchise that enabled him to get out of control in the early 2000s.

      But I've also always thought the Sprewell incident was very specific to a toxic relationship between PJ and Spree. Those of us that were already Spree fans saw something bad coming - Spree was desparate to get out and was openly begging opposing GMs and coaches to trade for him during games. He'd walk up to the oppenent's bench during FTs and beg them to trade for him just to get away from PJ. Sure he still says and does some stupid stuff, but this was also a guy that did everything JVG ever asked him to do and was generally highly regarded by his Knicks' teammates.

      So its not like I don't have any tolerance for *occasional* flareups or "bad boys."

      So I guess the answer to your question is that I see Ron's problems as being far worse than other notorious players like 'Sheed and Spree. I don't think 'Sheed, Spree, or other notorious all-star caliber players have ever been benched for "conduct detrimental to winning." - Rick's words, not mine.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: An answer for Fortaz......

        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
        So I guess the answer to your question is that I see Ron's problems as being far worse than other notorious players like 'Sheed and Spree. I don't think 'Sheed, Spree, or other notorious all-star caliber players have ever been benched for "conduct detrimental to winning." - Rick's words, not mine.

        Are you sure it wasn't "to the team?" To add on to that, what was the word that he said he didn't know the meaning of, and that he was going to ask his dad?
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: An answer for Fortaz......

          What about Sheed going after the referree in the parking garage after a game and threatening to kill him. Isn't that worse than anything Ron has done since he's been a member of the Pacers.

          Does Artest not get any credit for working on his game. His improvement since his Bulls days or even since his first year or so as a Pacer has been nothing short of remarkable. He has made himself a star player. What does that show us about his character. Many of you seem to be saying well yes Ron is a great talent, but he was always a great talent, No he wasn't.

          Now I'm going to stop right now, because I'm starting to get fired up.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: An answer for Fortaz......

            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
            I'm not sure I get your question.

            I've generally liked 'Sheed more than many of you. I'll acknowledge, of course, that he has had major problems with referrees and was in a bad situation in Portland. But when I think of 'Sheed, I still think of the Rasheed Wallace from about 1998 - 2000 in Portland, playing with Brian Grant and Arvyddas Sabonas. Man, I loved that three-man rotation in the frontcourt. It really wasn't an insult to JO that he couldn't get any minutes, that was real depth. At that time, I felt that - even though he got a lot of technicals - that it didn't usually hurt his game and his teammates still believed in him. But that situation admittedly continued to get worse over time.

            I've always thought that the Rasheed that many of you ***** about was a byproduct of a bad environment, and a franchise that enabled him to get out of control in the early 2000s.

            But I've also always thought the Sprewell incident was very specific to a toxic relationship between PJ and Spree. Those of us that were already Spree fans saw something bad coming - Spree was desparate to get out and was openly begging opposing GMs and coaches to trade for him during games. He'd walk up to the oppenent's bench during FTs and beg them to trade for him just to get away from PJ. Sure he still says and does some stupid stuff, but this was also a guy that did everything JVG ever asked him to do and was generally highly regarded by his Knicks' teammates.

            So its not like I don't have any tolerance for *occasional* flareups or "bad boys."

            So I guess the answer to your question is that I see Ron's problems as being far worse than other notorious players like 'Sheed and Spree. I don't think 'Sheed, Spree, or other notorious all-star caliber players have ever been benched for "conduct detrimental to winning." - Rick's words, not mine.
            Sorry that question was a bit confusing, but you answered it anyway. The thing I was trying to figure out was whether it was just Ron that made you unhappy, or if anyone else, put into a similar situation as Ron has been put into, would make you feel a little better/worse about a situation.

            For instance, I think that some of the stuff other people do are far worse than what Ron has done, and had they done something of the sort here in Indiana, I would be far more upset. Such as drugs, assult, and all the other crap that goes on in the league (actually, the things going on with the 2 Colts players). Had someone had done something like this on our team, would that still be not as bad as Ron? I guess you might consider it an "occasional flareup", but to me, that is more serious than the things that Ron has done.
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: An answer for Fortaz......

              Originally posted by Since86
              Are you sure it wasn't "to the team?" To add on to that, what was the word that he said he didn't know the meaning of, and that he was going to ask his dad?
              Nope, here's the AP article:

              http://www.usatoday.com/sports/score...IANA---0nr.htm
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204


                Well you know when I read that article, I think to myself, "Ron wins another game for the Pacers" Or maybe that was what Rick said to the media

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                  UncleBuck, Suaveness,

                  How do I say this...

                  Some of these guys do criminal things, or they take drugs, or they are punks. I don't like it but it happens and fortunately the Simons and DW have not subjected us to very many of these punks. But I don't know any of these guys personally so I don't care what they do to make a mess out of thier own personal life. What I care about is "the Pacers" and I do get pissed off when they make a mess out of their team.

                  Said another way,

                  When a guy that breaks the trust of his team... that really bothers me because basketball is about the best *team*, not the best collection of individual players.

                  From a "what's bad for society" viewpoint, clearly those things are worse. From a "what's bad for the Pacers" viewpoint, I think Ron's crap is worse.





                  Late EDIT - I'm not saying that the Rasheed/ officials incident and the Spree/ PJ incident are acceptable, just pointing out some differences. And while I spoke favorably of Rasheed, I don't condone his role in the decline of the Blazers.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section204

                    I was thinking it was this year's issue when he asked for time off.......
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck
                      Well you know when I read that article, I think to myself, "Ron wins another game for the Pacers" Or maybe that was what Rick said to the media
                      That was also about the time that Rick allowed Tinsley off the end of the bench, so I think it was because of Tinsley.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                        Originally posted by Since86
                        I was thinking it was this year's issue when he asked for time off.......
                        Well, Ron seems to slip a "conduct detrimental to x" into every season, doesn't he??

                        Sorry, my smartass altar ego is on a roll.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                          Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                          I'm not sure I get your question.

                          I've generally liked 'Sheed more than many of you. I'll acknowledge, of course, that he has had major problems with referrees and was in a bad situation in Portland. But when I think of 'Sheed, I still think of the Rasheed Wallace from about 1998 - 2000 in Portland, playing with Brian Grant and Arvyddas Sabonas. Man, I loved that three-man rotation in the frontcourt. It really wasn't an insult to JO that he couldn't get any minutes, that was real depth. At that time, I felt that - even though he got a lot of technicals - that it didn't usually hurt his game and his teammates still believed in him. But that situation admittedly continued to get worse over time.

                          I've always thought that the Rasheed that many of you ***** about was a byproduct of a bad environment, and a franchise that enabled him to get out of control in the early 2000s.

                          But I've also always thought the Sprewell incident was very specific to a toxic relationship between PJ and Spree. Those of us that were already Spree fans saw something bad coming - Spree was desparate to get out and was openly begging opposing GMs and coaches to trade for him during games. He'd walk up to the oppenent's bench during FTs and beg them to trade for him just to get away from PJ. Sure he still says and does some stupid stuff, but this was also a guy that did everything JVG ever asked him to do and was generally highly regarded by his Knicks' teammates.

                          So its not like I don't have any tolerance for *occasional* flareups or "bad boys."

                          So I guess the answer to your question is that I see Ron's problems as being far worse than other notorious players like 'Sheed and Spree. I don't think 'Sheed, Spree, or other notorious all-star caliber players have ever been benched for "conduct detrimental to winning." - Rick's words, not mine.
                          ummm....jay...tell the truth...do u have an artest file somewhere on ur computer that u use for quick reference??? cauuuuuuuse it sure seem so.... if so...can u email it to me??

                          as far as sheed and spree go....im not sure if ur trying to play a game of symantics to embellish a point or not...

                          sheed and spree have both been suspended and or fined for conduct detrimental to the team winning...

                          now as far as the exact wording and who said what...well...like i said...is this symantics, which case people are arguiing and debating just because they like it...or if its sincere....then sheed and spree definitely are bad examples...as they have been punished for the same sort of thing....

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                            Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                            Well, Ron seems to slip a "conduct detrimental to x" into every season, doesn't he??

                            Sorry, my smartass altar ego is on a roll.
                            Caught AGAIN!

                            I'm just going to have to place you on ignore.......
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                              UncleBuck, Suaveness,

                              How do I say this...

                              Some of these guys do criminal things, or they take drugs, or they are punks. I don't like it but it happens and fortunately the Simons and DW have not subjected us to very many of these punks. But I don't know any of these guys personally so I don't care what they do to make a mess out of thier own personal life. What I care about is "the Pacers" and I do get pissed off when they make a mess out of their team.

                              Said another way,

                              When a guy that breaks the trust of his team... that really bothers me because basketball is about the best *team*, not the best collection of individual players.

                              From a "what's bad for society" viewpoint, clearly those things are worse. From a "what's bad for the Pacers" viewpoint, I think Ron's crap is worse.


                              I don't disagree with you, I too care more about the effect a player has on the Pacers team. By that I mean the total effect a player has on the Pacers team.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: An answer for Fortaz......

                                Originally posted by foretaz
                                ummm....jay...tell the truth...do u have an artest file somewhere on ur computer that u use for quick reference??? cauuuuuuuse it sure seem so.... if so...can u email it to me??

                                as far as sheed and spree go....im not sure if ur trying to play a game of symantics to embellish a point or not...

                                sheed and spree have both been suspended and or fined for conduct detrimental to the team winning...

                                now as far as the exact wording and who said what...well...like i said...is this symantics, which case people are arguiing and debating just because they like it...or if its sincere....then sheed and spree definitely are bad examples...as they have been punished for the same sort of thing....
                                Well, Spree may have been suspended by the Wolves, I guess I should've disclaimed that I was referring to his time with the Knicks. He also had the goofy "drive across the country to training camp" incident but for some reason that didn't really bother JVG or his teammates, and I'll admit that one would've bothered me.

                                As for 'Sheed, I stopped watching the Blazers as much after we moved to Chicago in 2000. Since I now TiVo all the Pacers games and watch them later in the evening, I don't watch anywhere near as many WC games as I used to. So perhaps he was suspended for conduct detrimental to winning.

                                Anyway, even if you take that point out of my post, it doesn't weaken my position.
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X