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

Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

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

  • Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

    As I was re-watching Winning Time for the first time since it aired, I took notice that Reggie's and Starks' rivalry was one of legend. Yes, it was one that escalated to semi-"violent" measures, but the fact that two players could get so heated from some trash talk was inspiring. You don't see players doing this kind of thing anymore.

    I understand that the league is stricter on players with technical and flagrant fouls these days. And players can't talk a little smack to each other without getting in the other's face and acting like a tough guy. Starks ignored Reggie's taunts for a while, before he finally 'snapped'. Nowadays, dudes get physical quickly and try to best each other in aggression.

    The closest sliver of a player rivalry I've seen is Danny Granger and LeBron James. They've consistently gone back and forth in series, but that's mostly Danny Granger showing he won't back down. LBJ and Wade had somewhat of a rivalry, then they joined forces (lame as ****). Then you have LeBron and Kevin Durant, arguably the top two small forwards in the league, who not only battled in the locked-out offseason, but met in the recent NBA Finals. But there doesn't seem to be any kind of literal rivalry between the two.

    Now I'm not saying players should get out on the court and act immaturely with other players. Playful jabs, a little shaking-up for the sake of hyping the team and such. Nothing violent, but everything usually tends to escalate to flagrantly fouling for the sake of "revenge".

    Even team rivalries these days are lacking. Pistons-Pacers? I'm still not over it, these players should at least hold some kind of grudge. Pacers-Bulls? There was no pent-up aggression this season after we fought back in our first-in-a-while playoff appearance. Now, we're the team that beat the Magic without Dwight Howard, and gave the Heat a run for their money... briefly... and without Chris Bosh.

    But in that sense, every team in the league is a rival of the Heat. Superteams moreso than others, but we did a lot without the help of multiple (or any) superstars. Even interstate teams aren't as rivaled as they could be. Miami-Orlando? Lakers-Clippers? Kings-Warriors? Knicks-Nets? I would imagine teams would fight harder, hold grudges, turn into different players when matching up against a rival such as those. But the storylines have gone missing. The only hype surrounding these games are those placed by the media (of course, where else will they come from?).

    When Michael Jordan left the association to play in the league, it was apparent that the East was up for grabs. Back then, without Jordan dominating the game, the Knicks and Pacers were respective favorites to do some damage in the playoffs. This past season, the Sixers beat the Rose-less Bulls. The Pacers stumped the Howard-less Magic. Teams still had a chance to compete against former high-seed teams that were missing their stars, their MVPs, the players who MAKE the team. But it seems like these storylines weren't even as remotely prominent as Jordan's drama back in the day.

    Nowadays, the biggest storylines are "Where is [superstar] going to decide to sign in 6 months?" or "[Superstar] declines to comment on firing of head coach and GM". They're pointless stories, about where the highest-paid players in basketball are going to go, or decide to go, or get traded. Not about how a seven-year rebuild for the Pacers led them to two back-to-back playoff appearances (getting better the latter year), and playing better than anyone (thus far) against the Heat. Not about how a young and built OKC team, led by an underage scoring title-holding MVP candidate, was the leading competitor against a purchased veteran team with three (count 'em, THREE) 'superstars', one of which is a reigning MVP and best-player-in-NBA candidate with no rings.

    Gregg Popovich and the Spurs got all the attention they deserved; an incredible veteran franchise, built well, on a run for one last title before the ol' knees give out once and for all. Popovich deserved his Coach of the Year award.

    Regardless of this, LeBron and the Heat, Kobe and the Lakers, superteams, trade and re-signing drama, the league, and the media that surrounds it, are truly focusing on the same four stories that they can re-pitch and re-tell and re-update us on, just because they think they're selling to and writing for the same four markets. Oh wait, then you have some unbelievable storyline that comes out of nowhere and turns a nobody into a multi-millionaire over one season (Jeremy Lin's debauchery). I'm not trying to imply he's a bad player, but not enough to be paid that much for what he does. But that's all it takes for a storyline to pop up: some mysterious Bermuda Triangle-esque phenomenon happens in New York City, and the whole world knows about it.

    Even Gerald Green looked good playing for a team that would soon move to Brooklyn. Not to downsize him, either, because I love the guy. But it's unfortunate seeing that there are no prominent storylines, or player/team rivalries, that really stand out from the same stories that keep getting regurgitated. "Can LeBron carry his team?" "Will Kobe share the ball with Nash?" "Is Deron Williams wetting the bed because the Nets couldn't land Dwight?" "Has anyone seen Ben Wallace lately?" It's just ridiculous. I can't wait to see what "unknown underdog" will get thrown into the hype machine next season and get shot out like a cannon into a multi-million dollar guaranteed contract. I'd like to see James White benefit from the New York media. Or maybe Miles Plumlee will be raved as the "best pick to come out of the draft" due to his fixation on playing moderately similar to Blake Griffin, but being white.

    I'm going to stop while I'm on the border of conspiracy theory, but I just have to finish by saying that the lack of substance in the media world when it comes to the NBA these days is just sickening. I generally have no problem with sports journalists, commentators, or analysts. But their Linability to be original and discover the true between-the-lines underdog stories;

    ...the tales of the More-Than-Corn Pacers, who were expected to be 5-6th in the East, but rose to the 3rd seed, and beat the Heat more times than anyone else before them (so to speak).
    How about the Washington Wizards, who got considerably better this offseason, and could fight for the 7th seed in the East?
    I would even listen to speculation of how the Bobcats are going to get turned around by the play of future-ROY Michael Kidd-Gilchrist.
    I would PAY to see a write-up about Anthony Davis and Austin Rivers that had not a single mention of the words "his father, Doc" or "unibrow".

    No more articles about "Can LeBron repeat with D-Wade's help?", or "Howard follows Shaq's footsteps from Orlando to LA, also will start acting", or "Are the Boston Celtics on their last leg?", or "NASH, KOBE, DWIGHT: We don't even need a headline for this Hollywood Wet Dream!".

    I can only hope that the Indiana Pacers draw some attention to themselves this season, so that people will start truly taking us seriously. Let's make some storylines. Let's get some rivalries started. Bynum vs. Hibbert for best center in the East. Something with substance. Something that hasn't been done before. Something real.
    witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

    Originally posted by Day-V
    In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
    Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.



  • #2
    Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

    Don't really agree with what you're saying here. Heat-Celtics is a great rivalry, and I expect OKC-LA to be intense. Team rivalries have less shelf life because players change teams more these days but there are still some great rivalries in the league.

    As for the media story lines, you complain that there's not enough Pacers, Bobcats, Hornets, Wizards press but all those teams have at least one full time blog (often featured on ESPN.com) updated at multiple times a day throughout the season, along with team message boards and beat reporters from the local papers. There is more press coverage of small market NBA teams than there has been in the history of the league.

    The big market, big story teams get most of the ESPN pub but truthfully who cares? The Pacers get a ton of press relative to just about every other sports franchise on planet earth.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

      Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
      Don't really agree with what you're saying here. Heat-Celtics is a great rivalry, and I expect OKC-LA to be intense. Team rivalries have less shelf life because players change teams more these days but there are still some great rivalries in the league.
      This is true. Heat-Celtics and OKC-LAL are good rivalries. And most of the same players remain season to season. But there still seems to be less intensity when it comes to team rivalries, simply because of the lopsided nature of the NBA.

      Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
      As for the media story lines, you complain that there's not enough Pacers, Bobcats, Hornets, Wizards press but all those teams have at least one full time blog (often featured on ESPN.com) updated at multiple times a day throughout the season, along with team message boards and beat reporters from the local papers. There is more press coverage of small market NBA teams than there has been in the history of the league.

      The big market, big story teams get most of the ESPN pub but truthfully who cares? The Pacers get a ton of press relative to just about every other sports franchise on planet earth.
      Again, my issue this isn't totally with the publicity of specific teams and whatnot. It's more directed at the lack of original storylines, the ones that shake up the NBA. Pops leading the Spurs to the #1 seed last season was a good storyline. The underdog Pacers go to the playoffs with the #3 seed in the East, only beat out by the two biggest teams in the East (obviously) would be a great one, if it was featured on the front page or something. I can't think of many others, simply because all that comes to mind are how injuries can totally re-shape the playoffs, and even then, you're still talking about LeBron and Wade not needing Bosh against certain teams. I'm not entirely sure how to define my exact point in this area, but again, it's not about news on specific teams. Rather, it's about focusing on how history will remember certain parts of this past season (ultimately, LeBron's journey to his first ring, Durant's leadership in the finals, etc.).
      witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

      Originally posted by Day-V
      In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
      Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
      Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


      Comment


      • #4
        I still ****ING HATE the Bulls, and last time I checked, they aren't fond of me either.


        Sent from #ColtsNation using Tapatalk
        Last edited by Steagles; 08-10-2012, 06:04 AM.
        Senior at the University of Louisville.
        Greenfield ---> The Ville

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

          On this forum some time back a poster pointed out that a rivalry has to go both ways, meaning both teams have to feel the pressure to win when they play one another. This means that when a team falls from grace, like the Pacers and Knicks have for example, their potential opponents aren't going to be quite so likely to maintain the rivalry.

          One could say the Bulls/Pacers rivalry was in the minds of Pacers fans, since seldom have the Pacers REALLY been a direct threat to either the Jordanaires or the Roses (and there was that period in there where Chicago's worst rivals were their own FO). Part of this was that even when the Pacers would have been competitive against the Bulls they only really played them in two series of meaningful games - one in 1998 and one in 2011, of which only 1998 would have really been considered a potential "rivalry" series.

          Rivalries are built through a history of teams playing one another and trading results, or from long memories of a disenchanting move (the Knicks and Heat will be considered a rivalry as long as Riley is around). They can be built on a foundation of amazing series but there has to be something laid on that foundation every year or so to keep it going. That's why Pacers/Knicks has faded - it had nothing really in the 21st century. Pacers/Pistons could have really taken off if the Pacers hadn't gotten the death penalty and crashed in the seasons subsequent to the brawl and last playoff exit at Detroit's hands.

          For most teams, team vs the Heat isn't a rivalry, it's going for the throat of the big dog.
          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


          • #6
            Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

            I get the sense that what you're really getting at, imb, is that the product on the floor these days doesn't compare to what it was in the 90s --- which I agree with. I think the problem starts at the top --- Mr. Stern. The dude needs to go.
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

              kevin love vs the Pacers?
              //

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                I get the sense that what you're really getting at, imb, is that the product on the floor these days doesn't compare to what it was in the 90s --- which I agree with. I think the problem starts at the top --- Mr. Stern. The dude needs to go.
                I have no disagreements here. I can't stand the man, and he's doing a lot to ruin the association. But he was in charge even back in the '90s, so all that has changed is his increasing desire for power and money. The man is a lunatic; he only cares about big market teams, and making them as great as possible to beat out the small market teams. It's insanity.
                witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

                Originally posted by Day-V
                In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
                Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                  Someone give me specific example of what Stern's done to destroy small market teams.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                    The only reason Pacer fans are saying the 90s NBA was a better product is because the Pacers were in the ECF 5 years and the NBA Finals once over a 7 year period.

                    I'd argue that Jordan saved the league from a complete and utter disaster during that time period.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                      Originally posted by imbtyler View Post
                      "Can LeBron carry his team?" "Will Kobe share the ball with Nash?" "Is Deron Williams wetting the bed because the Nets couldn't land Dwight?" "Has anyone seen Ben Wallace lately?" It's just ridiculous.
                      Wait, what?? When has Ben Wallace ever been the focus of the media?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                        Originally posted by shags View Post
                        The only reason Pacer fans are saying the 90s NBA was a better product is because the Pacers were in the ECF 5 years and the NBA Finals once over a 7 year period.

                        I'd argue that Jordan saved the league from a complete and utter disaster during that time period.
                        I wasn't even as big of a fan back then as I am now. So it has nothing to do with our Pacers being good "back in the day". It has to do with the lack of intensity between players that seem to help push teams to play better.
                        witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

                        Originally posted by Day-V
                        In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
                        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                        Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Player/Team Rivalries, Storylines Have Disappeared (historical observation)

                          I'll give you one point. How awesome would it be if Kevin Durant came out and said he thought he was a better player than Lebron James? That would make for some fun games.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X