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

Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

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

  • #16
    Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
    I'm pleased. This makes robertmto's question in the other current thread unnecessary. We don't need to choose between character and talent. We're going to get a team with both.

    We just need to reset the clock on our expectations and impatience. We need to forget that it is "three years later." This is Day One.
    Now, finally another fan gets it! I've been saying for the last 2-yrs now that the Pacers' fanbase needs to lower their expectations, specifically concerning certain players, i.e., JO. I like him. I just don't think he's capable of doing the things most fans "expect" of him. Again, this isn't a knock on JO. You just have to look at things realistically. And realistically, JO's just not a "take over the game" type of player. He will net you between 12-18 ppg, 2-3 asst, 2 blks, appx 7-8 rbds even on a bad leg. But he'll never be a "game winner" type player in clutch-time. It's just not who he is nor should it be. That job should be reserved for out Guards/Wings not our Center/PF. But that's just my opinion...

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      The article/thread title makes me wonder if Herb didn't also "suggest" that the Star get their act together regarding the intentional negative spin. Things have happened certainly, but as the Harrison story shows there are a lot of ways things can be handled. Still waiting on Daniels to be brought in for that alleged rape in his house.

      And even there it's not that it wasn't true, it's that one version takes the angle that Quis himself is part victim, that some criminal took action against one of his guests in his own home. And the other angle is "probably Quis friend attacking some lady". Honestly, does anyone at PD know if Quis was closer to the woman than the man? Did anyone even see that story having the angle that a friend of his was the victim?

      That's what I'm talking about. It was the same with Williams. It wasn't that his friend let this guy hang around or that some old buddy with a high intimidation factor (being a potential murder tends to bring that out) forced his way back into Shawne's life, it was that Williams himself was going out of his way to support violent criminals because he 100% supports that behavior.

      Same story, DRASTICALLY different skews. And I'm certain that ratings, readership and sensationalism never played into it. The Star has way too much integrity to allow that to go on.
      Very good points, Seth.

      The same could be said about Harrison's tiraide after the Suns' game where he allegedly "destroyed" the locker room. Granted, the emotionally explosive event couldn't have taken place at the worse time for him coming off the heals of a suspension for drug use, but did any of the local (or national) reports ever get to the heart of the matter, i.e., why Harrison went off? Was it that calls seemed to be going only one way the entire game - against Harrison - even when he was doing the exact same things as the player he was guarding? Nobody talked to him nor reported what he viewed as biasness against him. All they wanted to report was either "another Pacer gone wild" or "David Harrison's in trouble again".

      Okay, so I'm splitting hairs somewhat, but my point is it's easy for the media to just focus on what sells the storyline. They just forget sometimes that a story often times has two sides. To this day we've never gotten the barebones facts as to what set David off so bad that day. Perhaps because most viewed the incident as David merely losing his temper again, or that he still hadn't grasped the nauaences of the game or could be as simple as he just wasn't treated fairly by the refs but any negative words against officiated would only have warrented a further reprimand by the league?

      One small story in the grand scheme of things, but it just goes to illustrate how even the local media was out to paint the Pacers in the worse possible light as often as they could whenever they could. I mean, I had to go outside the local media just to find a feel-good story about them last year.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        The article/thread title makes me wonder if Herb didn't also "suggest" that the Star get their act together regarding the intentional negative spin. Things have happened certainly, but as the Harrison story shows there are a lot of ways things can be handled. Still waiting on Daniels to be brought in for that alleged rape in his house.

        And even there it's not that it wasn't true, it's that one version takes the angle that Quis himself is part victim, that some criminal took action against one of his guests in his own home. And the other angle is "probably Quis friend attacking some lady". Honestly, does anyone at PD know if Quis was closer to the woman than the man? Did anyone even see that story having the angle that a friend of his was the victim?

        That's what I'm talking about. It was the same with Williams. It wasn't that his friend let this guy hang around or that some old buddy with a high intimidation factor (being a potential murder tends to bring that out) forced his way back into Shawne's life, it was that Williams himself was going out of his way to support violent criminals because he 100% supports that behavior.

        Same story, DRASTICALLY different skews. And I'm certain that ratings, readership and sensationalism never played into it. The Star has way too much integrity to allow that to go on.
        Originally posted by Bob Kravitz on 5/7/08
        It's not that I'm giving the Indianapolis Colts a break because they won a Super Bowl, or because they have earned a reputation for having high-character players.

        It's not that I'm going easy on a potentially troubling and ultimately devastating story involving a fan favorite.

        It's not that I'm going soft (on Marvin Harrison) because The Star is pro-Colts and anti-Pacers, although I can assure you there are a lot of folks at Pacers Sports & Entertainment who are wondering where the outrage is.
        I find it interesting that Kravitz had to explain himself on why he wasn't tossing Marvin Harrison under the bus. I guess this is a far cry from RTV6 running an on-line pole on whether Jamaal Tinsley should have been "disciplined" by the team after being nearly murdered in the street.
        ...Still "flying casual"
        @roaminggnome74

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

          Ever since the brawl the Pacers players have been under a microscope. Do you think the Pacers players have gotten into THAT much more trouble than the players in other cities get away with? Not hardly. Players can get away with a lot more in New York, Miami, Oakland, LA, where there are more pressing needs of the police departments in those cities. I am sure the Indy police department is under a microscope too. Plus, other stories drown out what other teams' players do because the media has bigger and better stories than a basketball player failing a drug test.

          I am not making excuses for our players by any means, but to say that these things don't happen to other teams is ridiculous. Our organization thinks there is a problem with our players' actions and there is. We the fans, and especially the media just make a much bigger deal out of it, because its the same Pacers players that got in the brawl. The organization is frustrated with other problems, such as injuries, poor attendance, and NOT WINNING, and we make off-the court issues a primary objective in the outlook of our franchise. So, we need to change the culture, and in that, we mean until we start winning with a new generation of players, nobody on our roster will get the benefit of the doubt.

          I like Shawne Williams and understand a lot of where he came from. He is a young man who has learned the hard way just like a lot of people in this world. I think he has a tremendous future in the NBA if he can understand that a big component of growing up is understanding who brings you down as a human being and who does not. Its about surrounding yourself with decent people to make your life better and more rewarding. Get rid of the drug dealing, gun-toting step-cousins who are riding your coat tails. They will only bring you down with their sinking ship. I.E. Dude hiding out in your house when you are on a road trip because he just killed somebody. I highly doubt Shawne knew about the murder until everything went down.

          I think Mr. Simon's idea about harvesting a culture of being decent and professional basketball players is righteous and I believe that can be attained with a more hands on development program for many of these young men who are coming into this league at 19-23 years old. We can never understand the temptation that these guys have with the amount of money and fame they are all of a sudden are given. There is so much to take them away from the game and there needs to be a more disciplined approach (by management) in making clear to these young players what their expectations are and helping them attain that in any way possible. There seems to be a disconnect between management and the players on this team. I think it starts with the fact that there are not quality veterans on this team that lead by example.
          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

            PG2,

            The very issues you highlight are reasons David Stern imposed an age limit on players coming into the NBA through the draft. Maturing is what he was striving for along with more rounded players. I'm actually one of the few people who agree with the age limit and don't see it as a black or white thing but rather as a way to bring a better product onto the floor. Of course, there's no guarantee that a 2-4 yr college player will be of better stock than a HSG or a player who declares himself eligible after 1 yr of college, but you stand a better chance of getting a more well rounded player after 2-4 yrs college than you do from those who come into the NBA otherwise. As I've said before, there are only so many Kobe Bryant's and LeBron James' out there who would actually be able to keep their head on straight after turning pro.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

              Who's on the Star's editorial board? Anybody know?
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                Who's on the Star's editorial board?


                is their mascot.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                  The Star's position: Pacers’ leadership team working hard to turn around troubled franchise.

                  Herb Simon and Jim Morris want to deliver a message to Pacers fans: They get it.

                  In a meeting this week with The Star's Editorial Board, Simon, the Pacers' co-owner and new CEO, and Morris, in charge of the franchise's business operations, acknowledged how far out of favor the team has fallen with the community.

                  How bad is it? In a city and state filled with dedicated and knowledgeable basketball fans, the Pacers recorded the worst attendance in the NBA this season.

                  Morris, who not long ago was fighting the effects of famine and natural disasters as director of the United Nations' World Food Program, is now battling to restore the tarnished image of a team that he considers an important part of Central Indiana's social and business fabric.

                  The franchise's troubles began with the infamous Detroit brawl but have deepened in subsequent years as players became embroiled in several off-the-court scandals.

                  It's not surprising then that Morris calls character a paramount consideration in rebuilding the team's roster, including through this year's draft. He noted that when focus groups have been asked to pick between a player with great skills but questionable behavior and one with lesser talent but sound character, the fans chose character.

                  Not that winning isn't important in reconnecting with the community. After all, much of the good will the team built up with the city in seasons past grew out of the excitement generated by playoff battles with the Knicks, Bulls and Lakers.

                  But fans want a team they can be proud of for excellence on and off the court. To reach that goal, Morris promises to increase the team's involvement in the community and to improve the franchise's support services for young players who must learn to cope with wealth, fame and a multitude of readily available temptations.

                  As the team's co-owner, Simon has a personal and financial stake in turning around the franchise, which a few years ago was considered among the NBA's best. He hopes to see improvement on the court next season, but acknowledges that salary-cap constraints could require a three-year rebuilding process.

                  Simon also wants fans to understand that another community institution -- the WNBA's Fever -- is entering a period critical to its future. The organization has assembled a championship-caliber roster. Ticket prices are low. Yet attendance must grow if the franchise is to finally break even. Simon's ability to continue writing off the Fever's financial losses is no doubt constrained by the Pacers' problems.

                  Two teams. Two sets of challenges. And not much time for either to begin packing fans into the Fieldhouse.

                  .................................................. .................................................. ..

                  I can not tell you how much I totally disagree with this highlighted part.

                  The entire reason our franchise got into the shape it is in is because management did not face up to the fact that our house was not in order at least two full years before the brawl.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                    Originally posted by Peck
                    The entire reason our franchise got into the shape it is in is because management did not face up to the fact that our house was not in order at least two full years before the brawl.

                    I think I know the reasons, Peck, but would you elaborate on this?

                    Are you saying both sides of the trouble, both the high-salary, low-talent player situation and the cause of the current low support, predate the brawl?
                    And I won't be here to see the day
                    It all dries up and blows away
                    I'd hang around just to see
                    But they never had much use for me
                    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      The entire reason our franchise got into the shape it is in is because management did not face up to the fact that our house was not in order at least two full years before the brawl.
                      Umm... wow.

                      I know it is fashionable to dismiss the 61-win season as purely a fluke, a chance combination of luck and our opponents rolling over to lull us into a false sense of self-confidence, but do people really forget that the start of the season the brawl year was one of the best in franchise history?

                      I say again and will continue to say that keeping the ticking time bomb for a shot at a championship was EXACTLY the kind of risk people had been begging this franchise to take. It's only when it blew up in their face that suddenly we'd have been better off going safe by getting rid of such talented but unstable players.

                      Yeah, yeah, we can go back and re-hash letting Brad go and other moves or missed moves, but until the brawl it actually looked like it might work.
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        Umm... wow.

                        I know it is fashionable to dismiss the 61-win season as purely a fluke, a chance combination of luck and our opponents rolling over to lull us into a false sense of self-confidence, but do people really forget that the start of the season the brawl year was one of the best in franchise history?

                        I say again and will continue to say that keeping the ticking time bomb for a shot at a championship was EXACTLY the kind of risk people had been begging this franchise to take. It's only when it blew up in their face that suddenly we'd have been better off going safe by getting rid of such talented but unstable players.

                        Yeah, yeah, we can go back and re-hash letting Brad go and other moves or missed moves, but until the brawl it actually looked like it might work.
                        I don't know. If we'd known about Ron's "migraine" and JO and Ron slugging it out in the locker room how would we have felt back then.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          I don't know. If we'd known about Ron's "migraine" and JO and Ron slugging it out in the locker room how would we have felt back then.
                          Probably the same as now, since the only good risk is the risk you didn't take. Having taken a risk means TPTB screwed up, while not taking a risk means TPTB screwed up. The former risk is worse because you can prove it didn't work, while the latter risk was clearly the better choice since not taking it didn't work.

                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Umm... wow.

                            I know it is fashionable to dismiss the 61-win season as purely a fluke, a chance combination of luck and our opponents rolling over to lull us into a false sense of self-confidence, but do people really forget that the start of the season the brawl year was one of the best in franchise history?

                            I say again and will continue to say that keeping the ticking time bomb for a shot at a championship was EXACTLY the kind of risk people had been begging this franchise to take. It's only when it blew up in their face that suddenly we'd have been better off going safe by getting rid of such talented but unstable players.

                            Yeah, yeah, we can go back and re-hash letting Brad go and other moves or missed moves, but until the brawl it actually looked like it might work.

                            Is it too late to nominate this for post of the year. Great post BillS


                            Peck, I understand what you are saying, and yes the franchise was built on a foundation (Artest and JO) that was not stable. But the Pacers went for it they gambled and for that I will never fault TPTB for doing so. Sure it didn't work out - but they tried to make the very "championship moves" that so many Pacers fans wanted them to make.
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 05-13-2008, 10:04 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              Umm... wow.

                              I know it is fashionable to dismiss the 61-win season as purely a fluke, a chance combination of luck and our opponents rolling over to lull us into a false sense of self-confidence, but do people really forget that the start of the season the brawl year was one of the best in franchise history?

                              I say again and will continue to say that keeping the ticking time bomb for a shot at a championship was EXACTLY the kind of risk people had been begging this franchise to take. It's only when it blew up in their face that suddenly we'd have been better off going safe by getting rid of such talented but unstable players.

                              Yeah, yeah, we can go back and re-hash letting Brad go and other moves or missed moves, but until the brawl it actually looked like it might work.
                              I don't mind the position Peck takes. What I mind is taking THAT position at the same time as "TPTB don't want to win a championship" position. Sure looks either/or to me.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Herb Simon with the Star's editorial board

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                Is it too late to nominate this for post of the year. Great post BillS


                                Peck, I understand what you are saying, and yes the franchise was built on a foundation (Artest and JO) that was not stable. But the Pacers went for it they gambled and for that I will never fault TPTB for doing so. Sure it didn't work out - but they tried to make the very "championship moves" that so many Pacers fans wanted them to make...
                                ...and now in hindsight they're getting their noses rubbed in it.

                                I've said it before and I'll say it again, I was one who initially wanted TPTB to work things out w/Ron-Ron even after he spouted off a second time when Walsh gave him an open door to come talk to him about whatever problem he (and RC) were having. But once it came out that he was a big disturbance in the locker room, I'd had enough! It was time for the experiment to end. Little did any of us know, however, that the prolonged wait to be rid of him would add to and extend the agony that originated with the Brawl. Regardless, it was the right move to make on both sides of the coin.

                                The Pacers needed another tough-minded force on the team because for so long they played like a soft team. Artest's presence did put fear in the minds of nearly every team out there. No doubt about it! But his temperment was so out of control; you never knew what would set him off (ala, David Harrison which is one of the reason I don't think he'll be back next year, but that's another topic all together). Still, the reason Artest was ousted wasn't because of his on/off-court issues. Walsh traded him because he disrespected the franchise by insisting on being traded. And after investing so much in this guy and standing by him throughout all the chaos, there just was no way TPTB could standby him any longer. He had to go.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X