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

GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

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

    GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

    This was posted by a regular over on the Pacers' board on realgm. It's well-written, even-handed and insightful. And a quick read as well. Enjoy.


    It is time for us as Pacers fans to wake up from our dreams of an NBA championship and realize that without Ron Artest, we are not a good basketball team. We may not even get out of the first round without him. Since the All-Star break, we have struggled in every single game, even though we have played 4 games against bad teams and 2 games against a second-tier team, the Hornets. And both times we played the Hornets, we got blown out. If we can't consistently beat the dregs of the NBA, what will we do when we face an up-and-coming team like the Heat or the Cavaliers that has not been in the playoffs for years and will be playing its heart out?

    1. Jermaine O'Neal is being asked to do too much. We don't have anyone who can be consistently relied on as his second option. Some nights Reggie is that guy, some nights it's Al, but some nights no one else shows up. Without a second option, our offense can go on long dry spells. That's what happened last year against the Celtics in the playoffs.

    2. Jermaine O'Neal is taking too many jumpers and not playing effectively enough in the post on offense. In the playoffs, you need a consistent post game to wear down your opponents' big men. But Jermaine is looking a little worn out himself, probably because the burden of carrying this team on his back is a little much for him. So instead of being a banger, he is taking jumpers, and so his shooting percentage is way too low for a superstar power forward.

    3. We have no effective scorer off the bench. Without Artest, Al becomes a starter, but Al is the only one who has shown he is capable of putting up 15 points off the bench on any given night. Our second unit right now is horrible at scoring. Our best bench scorers right now are Jonathan Bender and Fred Jones and Austin Croshere. That is just not good enough to succeed in the playoffs.

    4. Jonathan Bender is still not ready to be an important part of our rotation. I know it's exciting to see him play after all this time, and he is showing flashes of stardom. Even his defense and his post game have improved. But he is also showing flashes of scrub-dom. At times he is a foul machine, a turnover machine, and a bricklayer all at once. You don't want to rely on that kind of inconsistent player in the playoffs, especially when you have a stubborn coach who won't change the rotation if a player is playing like crap.

    5. Al Harrington is not good enough to be a starter in the NBA. I've seen enough of this guy to determine that he is what he is, a good sixth man who gives you problems if he's starting for you. He can score very well at times, but he's a hopeless tweener, not quick or explosive enough to play small forward and not powerful enough to play power forward. At best he's a rich man's Maurice Taylor, and he's old enough that he won't get much better.

    6. Except for Freddie Jones, our perimeter defense sucks. All year I've been saying that Anthony Johnson can't guard a turnip, and Jamaal Tinsley and Reggie Miller aren't exactly studs themselves. Even Freddie has trouble guarding taller shooting guards, although he's quick enough to stay with anyone.

    7. Our post defense is still our strongest point, because Jermaine O'Neal and Jeff Foster are both pretty good at this, and so is Scot Pollard, but even our post defense isn't as good without Artest. Everyone knows Artest is the best man defender in the NBA, but he's underrated as a help defender, and he ventures into the post quite often if he needs to. Also, a key part of post defense is defensive rebounding, and we are being outrebounded even by teams like the Sixers who have horrible frontcourts. When we play strong teams like the Hornets, we get killed inside. Ron's rebounds are being sorely missed.

    8. We have no heart. Ron Artest is the emotional leader of this team, and the guys feed off him and play hard. In that regard, as an emotional leader, he's like Allen Iverson and Michael Jordan, his teammates just know it's unacceptable not to be giving it their all when he's on the court. He demands that you give 100 percent. But now, we have guys coming onto the court playing lazy ball and taking three or four minutes to get into their rhythm. Jermaine and Al are guilty of this quite often. They don't have the killer instinct to put teams away as soon as possible; Ron does.

    9. We are playing out of control. Our team has received at least one technical foul in every game since the All-Star break. Rick Carlisle has gotten a total of five, and our players have gotten some too. Instead of showing determination, we are standing around whining about calls. That is completely unacceptable and needs to change as soon as possible.

    In summary, Ron Artest is the leader of the Indiana Pacers in too many ways to count. There are very few guys in the NBA who are able to consistently put their teams on their back and will them to victory. I mean VERY few. Jermaine O'Neal is not one of those guys, neither is Shaq, neither is Tracy McGrady, neither are a lot of great players. Ron Artest is one of them. The journey that he has taken to get here is remarkable. From his experience growing up, to his anger management problems, to all the people back home who depend on him and that he comes through for (remember how he worked at Best Buy when he joined the NBA), for him to have the success he has had, it's the American Dream. It almost brings tears to my eyes to think about it. I don't understand how anyone can't like this kid. Guys like him are the reason I'm a sports fan, that's the truth.

    Ron Artest is SOOO important to our team that without him, we go from one of the best 3-4 teams in the NBA to maybe a little above average -- and I really do believe we're just a little above average right now.

    So guys, let's hope Ron Artest gets better. Our season depends on it.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

    I really miss Ron Artest.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

      Wow, that was really good.
      Sobering analysis.
      Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

        I agree that we would not go deep without Ron but I dont think we are facing that. I take solace in the fact that the two times we defeated the Hornets we had Ron the two losses he was either about to undergo surgery because he was already injured or was not in the game at all.

        Of course Al seems to be starting to adjust to the starters role now with his game tonight. So maybe the put down of Al was a little too soon

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

          Of course Al seems to be starting to adjust to the starters role now with his game tonight. So maybe the put down of Al was a little too soon

          Did you see it as a put down? I thought it was pretty objective. I think his post highlighed how well-balanced we were before Ron's departure. And it is just one game. It's not like we blew the Sixers out.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

            Did you see it as a put down? I thought it was pretty objective. And it is just one game. It's not like we blew the Sixers out.
            Not so much as a put down but he said that Al was not good enough to be a starter and I was just saying that tonight he looked a lot more into the flow of the game. He looked like a starter tonight.

            I think we didnt blow this out only because of the substitution pattern.

            Rick seems to like to play the second unit as long as possible and let other teams back into games. It really bothers me that as soon as we get a good lead the starters come out and the bench comes in and lets the other team back in.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

              Rick seems to like to play the second unit as long as possible and let other teams back into games. It really bothers me that as soon as we get a good lead the starters come out and the bench comes in and lets the other team back in.

              This is what is being said on both boards. It has to be apparent to Bird as well. Perhaps it's time for him to sit his young coach down and have a heart-to-heart.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                Rick seems to like to play the second unit as long as possible and let other teams back into games. It really bothers me that as soon as we get a good lead the starters come out and the bench comes in and lets the other team back in.

                This is what is being said on both boards. It has to be apparent to Bird as well. Perhaps it's time for him to sit his young coach down and have a heart-to-heart.
                Don't see why he would, Bird was the same way in the 90's.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                  This is what I don't get. Many people complain when we don't develop the young/bench guys. Well, the best way to do that is to build a big lead and stick them in there. I like that Rick is going deep into the bench. It helps develop the players and gives them alot of experience whether they lose the lead or not. Bottom line is we get the win AND give the bench some development. Best of both worlds if you ask me.

                  Now if the same type of thing (leaving the bench in too long) in the playoffs, then that may be a different matter. But for now, I think its a good thing.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                    This is what I don't get. Many people complain when we don't develop the young/bench guys. Well, the best way to do that is to build a big lead and stick them in there. I like that Rick is going deep into the bench. It helps develop the players and gives them alot of experience whether they lose the lead or not. Bottom line is we get the win AND give the bench some development. Best of both worlds if you ask me.

                    Now if the same type of thing (leaving the bench in too long) in the playoffs, then that may be a different matter. But for now, I think its a good thing.
                    Good point.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                      [quote="PacerMan"]
                      Even handed? Insightful? How about idiotic? Jump off fair weather bandwagonners. We don't need you or WANT you. BYE now!

                      I suspect people don't take you very seriously here.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                        Some of the points were good but parts were off.

                        He was being rough on Al and I think he is wrong about Al not being starter material. To say that Al at 23 won't get better because he has peaked is laughable.

                        He was quick to judge Bender too if what he was going by were the games played since Ron has been out.

                        Shaq can't carry a team?

                        Ron can carry a team? Lets see this team without JO for an extended period and see how true that is. Just a year ago Ron was a big part of this team falling apart.

                        By the way I really do like Ron but the point was overstated.
                        "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                        "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                          i'm getting mixed signals here.

                          sometimes i've read that the bench guys (bender, for instance) were hot and shouldn't have been pulled from the game. ergo, carlisle's sub pattern were bad.

                          sometimes i've read that the starters were doing a good job and shouldn't have been pulled from the game. ergo, carlisle's sub patterns were bad.

                          do we really want to go back to isiah thomas coaching here? because it seemed to me that was always what he did - he'd go with whoever is playing well, resulting in very unpredictable substitution patterns. as a result, the players - the young players especially - try to do too much when they get floor time.

                          rick carlisle's system is much more structured. it involves, among other things, regular substitution patterns. it means sticking with the plan. it becomes second nature to the players, which makes them more efficient. it might hurt during short term stretches, like when one player is hot, but overall it makes for a more successful team, as the results show so far.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                            I registered here so I could defend what I wrote. Thanks bulletproof for posting it here.

                            On Al Harrington:

                            First of all, he's 24, not 23. It may not seem like a big difference, but there's no reason to misrepresent a player's age to make him seem like he has more room for improvement than he does. The assumption that a player will keep getting better every year until he's 27 is an assumption that many 15-year-olds have made over the years, but eventually they realize it doesn't work that way. I have argued several times on other boards that players reach their potential at the age of 24, that the only exceptions are hard-nosed guys with an incredible work ethic. That does not describe Al, so I think he's in his prime now.

                            Besides, my reason for saying Al isn't starter material isn't that he's peaked, my reason for saying that is that he's a tweener. The problem with tweeners is that they really struggle with defensive assignments because they are too slow to guard small forwards or shooting guards and they are not bulky enough to guard power forwards. In the playoffs last year, Paul Pierce exploded when Al tried to guard him, and did pretty much nothing when Ron guarded him. When Al starts it will be too easy for the other team to create mismatches.

                            Given that Al has some great offensive skills, I think the fact that he's a tweener makes the role of first scorer off the bench the perfect role for him. He's not a well-rounded player, so when there are other scorers like JO in the game who dominate the ball, Al doesn't really do much for us. As bulletproof said, I wasn't putting Al down, I was just saying that the loss of Ron means we are not in a good position to utilize Al's talents. That's why he's been struggling, and he will continue to struggle until Ron gets back, I think.

                            On Jonathan Bender:

                            His game still has serious holes, anyone can see that. I think it's great that we have a guy on our roster with as much talent as he does, but when we are a championship contender it's stupid to worry about developing talent. We need to play the consistent performers who we know can step up, not the guys who sometimes look great and sometimes look awful because they're too young to be consistent. If we were an average team, I'd feel differently.

                            Remember that Jonathan Bender played the fourth quarter of Game 1 against the Celtics last year, and his atrocious performance probably cost us that game, which proved pivotal in the series. Do you want to repeat that? I don't.

                            On Ron Artest:

                            When I talk about putting a team on his back and willing it to victory, I'm talking about his attitude, not how many points he scores. Ron Artest cares about winning more than he cares about being alive. Guys feed off that kind of heart. There is a tiny handful of guys with that kind of heart, I'm talking about Artest, Allen Iverson, Ben Wallace, Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, Mike Bibby, and Kobe Bryant. They aren't all the best players in the league, but they're the guys you win championships with.

                            And Shaq? Please. That guy is an oaf who gets fat in the offseason and doesn't take care of his body. He has no heart at all. What a waste of talent.

                            On Rick Carlisle:

                            I was going to say something about the way you guys are criticizing his rotations, but then I saw that wintermute said exactly what I wanted to say. C'mon people, do you REALLY want Isiah Thomas again? Look at the standings, we lost an All-Star center and replaced him with a stiff, but we got much better. Time to fire the coach!

                            I've noticed that blaming the coach is one of the main things fans do when they can't accept that the players aren't as amazing as they think they are. Blaming the officials is another one.

                            And last but least,
                            On fair-weather fans

                            Dude, PacerMan, I'm not a fair-weather fan, you're just a fan who likes to pretend that there's fair weather when there isn't. I expect a lot from my team, and when I don't see it, I worry about it. I think I just care more about the Pacers than you do, because evidently when they get blown out of the gym twice by a second-tier team like the Hornets you think there's no problem. Maybe when your team loses in the playoffs, you can only be upset for 3 minutes and then get over it because you're sure they'll come back and win the championship next year. Sorry if it means a little more to me than that.

                            Thanks for the comments everyone!

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: GREAT CURRENT ANALYSIS OF TEAM

                              Thanks for stopping by Monkeydude; you should come by and post more often.
                              Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X