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

Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

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

  • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

    I was willing to give this roster and Coach some time to mesh to see how it can perform ( cuz I was impressed by how Bird was able to re-tool the Team in the course of 1 summer ). But I've already reached the conclusion that the way this Team is built is flawed and the Coaching is inconsistent.

    Unfortunately, given our Salary Cap situation going into next season....I don't think that there are too many moves that Bird can make that would fix the roster....which means that we are potentially stuck with more of the same going into the last season under PG13. This is why I was expecting that Bird ( after dangling the 1st ) would have made a "Hail Mary" pass to figure out some way to hide the flaws in the roster or ( if he didn't feel that there was a move ) look for trade opportunities that can help the Team for the long term ( see the Noel trade or even making a run at Okafor with the 1st ). I was surprised that he wasn't able to make any type of move that at least made some sense involving the 1st+Expiring.

    Either way....it is what it is....but I feel that it's simply time to move on. Bird has made some good moves and made some bad moves. The problem is that I think that he has made more "bad" moves than "good" as of late and all the "bad" since the end of the GH/PG13/Lance/West/Hibbert era has led us to this point....and all of it falls on Bird's head.
    Last edited by CableKC; 02-24-2017, 02:38 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

      Yes.

      - The Danny Granger trade. (This could be a 5,000 word essay in and of itself.)

      - Signing vets to long, expensive contracts who used to be difference makers 4-5 years ago, but now are liabilities.

      - Abrasive personality style that frankly doesn't mesh well with the young men in the modern NBA. Examples being the whole "Well Paul don't make the decisions around here" type comments. Yeah, OK, he has a valid point (although there are two sides to every coin). But is that *really* the way to handle that? PUBLICLY? You also have him trashing Roy during that end of year presser. Again, not that Roy's play wasn't deserving of criticism. But when you have a "man's man" type vet like David West saying it bothered him... That should be a sign that you handled that poorly. When D West is airing dirty laundry, that's telling.

      - The Frank Vogel "Firing" - This was an absolute JOKE and completely unforgivable in my book. If Larry and the ownership really wanted to move on from Frank... OK. I can't do anything about that, even though I disagreed with the decision vehemently, and I'll leave it at that to avoid yet another 5,000 word essay. But instead, Larry let Frank walk, and proceeded to crap on him in a press conference basically telling the entire world that Frank begged him for his job over the phone just a few minutes earlier... Now, what actually was said? Who knows. But that was the most appalling, ridiculously unprofessional and cruel move he could have possibly chosen to pull. I think Vlade handled his comments about DMC getting traded better than Larry did about Frank's departure. So OK, fine, now the HC who brought us out of basketball purgatory is gone. What's the next move, Larry? You think it's really important we get a "New Voice(tm)" in here, right?

      - The Coaching "Search" and hiring of Nate McMillan - What even needs to be said? We need a "New Voice(tm)" so lets hire a guy who has been our Associate HC for several years who has a track record of coaching very mediocre teams who play the opposite style of basketball that Larry says he wants us to play. Didn't even make much (any?!) effort to look for other options on the coaching market. Ettore Messina (from the Pop tree) could have been a fascinating hire. There were others out there as well that weren't merely coaching carousel guys. We could have looked at younger, hungry coaches who could have given us at least a chance of modernizing after Frank. But... Nope...

      There's other stuff too, but for me these are the main reasons.

      I am forever grateful to Larry for what he has done for the Pacers. Truly, I wish him no ill will at *all* - He helped Reggie get to the Finals, he had a lot of success drafting for us (Yes, a couple big misses. But also quite a few BIG home runs.) - He made some shrewd trades, and he made some not so good trades. No GM is perfect.

      He just simply isn't the right fit with this franchise any longer, in my opinion as a closely watching outside observer.

      The Walsh/Bird era of the Pacers has had a LOT of awesome memories. Those two are Pacers royalty and we need to accept the bad along with the good.

      We also need to know when it is time to move on, and I think that's now (and has been for a while.)

      I'd give consideration to Pritchard (*EDIT* - Actually... He's been here during lots of these bad decisions - Without knowing for certain what his role was or wasn't, and if he pushed back against the bad ones - I'd be very cautious), but honestly I am more inclined to go with a younger, more eager to adapt and take risks type guy.

      We'll see - For now, I just hope and pray we can finish this regular season off strong and be in a position to give ourselves the best possible chance at making some type of noise in the playoffs.

      Last edited by TMJ31; 02-24-2017, 03:27 PM. Reason: Minor correction RE: Pritchard

      Comment


      • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

        TMJ summed it up pretty well. I do have to wonder about Simon's checkbook though as well. To me the hiring of McMillan screamed of the team being cheap. Vogel would have been more expensive, as would pretty much any other coach. Going back to the Lance deal, we offered right up to the LT, but honestly looking back at it all, we should have tried harder to keep the guy. And now Simon is entertaining trading PG right when he is in line to get paid.

        I think Larry has made some serious missteps in FA especially. I think his "straight shooter" attitude is really just being a dick. I think it wears on players.

        To me its clear. Its time for a FO change. And I'm not convinced Pritchard should be promoted. Bring in a new FO, say goodbye to Nate, get PG's opinion on it all. And pray Myles is balling out like crazy next year. Then we can keep PG.

        Comment


        • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

          I'm more nuanced than the plain Yes/No would allow, but I believe that - barring a miracle ECF appearance - Larry should be let go this off season.

          I believe the game has passed him by in two ways - the way players are trained and thus how teams and schemes should be put together, and how players expect communications to take place in an era of near 24x7 availability.

          The former is seen in Bird's lack of understanding of whether players actually ARE motivated to play the way he did and improve the way he did. He is pretty fixated on getting guys with potential and then blaming them if they fail to develop themselves.

          The latter is seen in the number of times he is called out for simply not bothering to make a quick contact. In his day, you waited until things were don to contact someone because for the most part there was no guarantee you'd get hold of them and there was no point wasting a lot of time trying to hunt someone down to tell them nothing was happening. Now, though, a quick text is expected and takes no time at all.

          I was willing to acknowledge when the game passed Donnie by. Bird's time has come.
          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


          • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

            Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
            Yes.

            - The Danny Granger trade. (This could be a 5,000 word essay in and of itself.)

            - Signing vets to long, expensive contracts who used to be difference makers 4-5 years ago, but now are liabilities.

            - Abrasive personality style that frankly doesn't mesh well with the young men in the modern NBA. Examples being the whole "Well Paul don't make the decisions around here" type comments. Yeah, OK, he has a valid point (although there are two sides to every coin). But is that *really* the way to handle that? PUBLICLY? You also have him trashing Roy during that end of year presser. Again, not that Roy's play wasn't deserving of criticism. But when you have a "man's man" type vet like David West saying it bothered him... That should be a sign that you handled that poorly. When D West is airing dirty laundry, that's telling.

            - The Frank Vogel "Firing" - This was an absolute JOKE and completely unforgivable in my book. If Larry and the ownership really wanted to move on from Frank... OK. I can't do anything about that, even though I disagreed with the decision vehemently, and I'll leave it at that to avoid yet another 5,000 word essay. But instead, Larry let Frank walk, and proceeded to crap on him in a press conference basically telling the entire world that Frank begged him for his job over the phone just a few minutes earlier... Now, what actually was said? Who knows. But that was the most appalling, ridiculously unprofessional and cruel move he could have possibly chosen to pull. I think Vlade handled his comments about DMC getting traded better than Larry did about Frank's departure. So OK, fine, now the HC who brought us out of basketball purgatory is gone. What's the next move, Larry? You think it's really important we get a "New Voice(tm)" in here, right?

            - The Coaching "Search" and hiring of Nate McMillan - What even needs to be said? We need a "New Voice(tm)" so lets hire a guy who has been our Associate HC for several years who has a track record of coaching very mediocre teams who play the opposite style of basketball that Larry says he wants us to play. Didn't even make much (any?!) effort to look for other options on the coaching market. Ettore Messina (from the Pop tree) could have been a fascinating hire. There were others out there as well that weren't merely coaching carousel guys. We could have looked at younger, hungry coaches who could have given us at least a chance of modernizing after Frank. But... Nope...

            There's other stuff too, but for me these are the main reasons.

            I am forever grateful to Larry for what he has done for the Pacers. Truly, I wish him no ill will at *all* - He helped Reggie get to the Finals, he had a lot of success drafting for us (Yes, a couple big misses. But also quite a few BIG home runs.) - He made some shrewd trades, and he made some not so good trades. No GM is perfect.

            He just simply isn't the right fit with this franchise any longer, in my opinion as a closely watching outside observer.

            The Walsh/Bird era of the Pacers has had a LOT of awesome memories. Those two are Pacers royalty and we need to accept the bad along with the good.

            We also need to know when it is time to move on, and I think that's now (and has been for a while.)

            I'd give consideration to Pritchard (*EDIT* - Actually... He's been here during lots of these bad decisions - Without knowing for certain what his role was or wasn't, and if he pushed back against the bad ones - I'd be very cautious), but honestly I am more inclined to go with a younger, more eager to adapt and take risks type guy.

            We'll see - For now, I just hope and pray we can finish this regular season off strong and be in a position to give ourselves the best possible chance at making some type of noise in the playoffs.



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

            Comment


            • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

              I voted no and I could see it either way.

              Fact is Bird has saved his butt in the draft and if PG is let go for draft picks then I would want him drafting the guys and not some analytic guy who never played the game. After the draft he can go and someone else can do the FA signings but Bird has hindered but also built something out of the debacle of the brawl. We may say he extended the rebuild but the fact of the matter is that it was rebuilt and ECF were once again expected of the Pacers.

              I am willing for him to take one last swing and see if he has any magic left. I sure hope he does but I understand those paying fans if they are soured on his poor communication skills and lack luster FA signings.

              Comment


              • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                How was he supposed to know Luck would have injury issues? Bad hand man, bad hand.

                The lacerated kidney wasn't his fault, but the ribs, shoulder, concussion, were all a byproduct of playing behind a poor pass protecting offensive line that he built.

                Comment


                • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                  Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                  I voted no and I could see it either way.

                  Fact is Bird has saved his butt in the draft and if PG is let go for draft picks then I would want him drafting the guys and not some analytic guy who never played the game. After the draft he can go and someone else can do the FA signings but Bird has hindered but also built something out of the debacle of the brawl. We may say he extended the rebuild but the fact of the matter is that it was rebuilt and ECF were once again expected of the Pacers.

                  I am willing for him to take one last swing and see if he has any magic left. I sure hope he does but I understand those paying fans if they are soured on his poor communication skills and lack luster FA signings.
                  We've gone through two "3 year" Plans already and it looks like we are about to head into another. The 1st time around with the GH/PG13/Lance/West/Hibbert/Vogel run was successful.....but after that ended ( mainly because of Lebron's run on the Heat ), we headed into another phase that ended with mixed results. We appear to be headed into a 3rd phase with Nate at the helm.

                  I'm at the point where I don't want to head into this "next phase" with someone that appears to be too rigid and not able to adapt to the new NBA.

                  As TMJ31 has eloquently put it......thanks for getting us through the Post-Brawl era and deep into the Playoffs, thanks for allowing us to see PG13 in a Pacer uniform, thanks for getting us Thad and Teague and other stuff that I probably forgot about.....but it's time to move on and see what a new vision can take us.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                    All the drama that is unfolding now is to me a direct outcome of one thing: Bird and Simon's decision to field as competitive a team as possible every season.

                    The assets that grease the wheels of these trades are high draft picks. Toronto was able to get Ibaka through Terrance Ross (8th pick) and will probably make a deal this summer with Valanciunas (5th pick). Marcus Smart (6th pick) gives Boston the versatility to trade Avery Bradley or other wing pieces. Go through and name a team in the drivers seat of trade talks and the leverage they have is through young players taken early in the draft.

                    By not tanking and not selling high on assets during losing seasons, Bird has none of those young players to offer. I'm sure it's a matter of pride and conviction for him, but it's also a competitive disadvantage.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                      Dumb question...

                      Has any reporter called out or attempted to make Paul George clarify the LA statements he supposedly said?


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                        Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                        All the drama that is unfolding now is to me a direct outcome of one thing: Bird and Simon's decision to field as competitive a team as possible every season.

                        The assets that grease the wheels of these trades are high draft picks. Toronto was able to get Ibaka through Terrance Ross (8th pick) and will probably make a deal this summer with Valanciunas (5th pick). Marcus Smart (6th pick) gives Boston the versatility to trade Avery Bradley or other wing pieces. Go through and name a team in the drivers seat of trade talks and the leverage they have is through young players taken early in the draft.

                        By not tanking and not selling high on assets during losing seasons, Bird has none of those young players to offer. I'm sure it's a matter of pride and conviction for him, but it's also a competitive disadvantage.
                        I have no problem with Bird's approach. Always compete and field a Team to make the Playoffs and build upon that. I'd prefer that over tanking.

                        The moves that he made to get us Teague and Thad were IMHO very good moves. Getting Players like Monta and AlJeff look good.....ON PAPER. He ended up fielding a Team full of solid Veterans and remaking the entire core lineup in one season.

                        This team would really would compete in the early 2000s but not in today's NBA. And that's the problem is that he fielded a Team that isn't built for this NBA era and ultimately one that is simply too old to really compete on a regular basis. I would have been fine if he continued this push for the Playoffs ( instead of tanking ) and not calling for him to step down if he had simply made the right moves and pursued or signed Players that make sense while complementing each other ( IMHO, the Monta/Stuckey signings/re-signings was the iceberg that ultimately sunk the SS Bird ).
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I have no problem with Bird's approach. Always compete and field a Team to make the Playoffs and build upon that. I'd prefer that over tanking.

                          The moves that he made to get us Teague and Thad were IMHO very good moves. Getting Players like Monta and AlJeff look good.....ON PAPER. He ended up fielding a Team full of solid Veterans and remaking the entire core lineup in one season.

                          This team would really would compete in the early 2000s but not in today's NBA. And that's the problem is that he fielded a Team that isn't built for this NBA era and ultimately one that is simply too old to really compete on a regular basis. I would have been fine if he continued this push for the Playoffs ( instead of tanking ) and not calling for him to step down if he had simply made the right moves and pursued or signed Players that make sense while complementing each other ( IMHO, the Monta/Stuckey signings/re-signings was the iceberg that ultimately sunk the SS Bird ).
                          I didn't love the Monta/Jefferson signings but with our cap situation the last two seasons I don't remember there being much else out there besides bargain veterans. The guys I was interested in the last two years like Marvin Williams/Batum/DeMarre Carroll/Conley signed monster deals that we either couldn't or wouldn't want to match. I know there are some Kevin Durant truthers on this board who think we can sign anyone we want (not saying you're one of them).

                          Looking back at the last two off seasons are there great buys that we missed out on? I'm having trouble finding any.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                            Dumb question...

                            Has any reporter called out or attempted to make Paul George clarify the LA statements he supposedly said?
                            Paul George hasn't said anything other than that he wants to play in Indiana as long as we're contending. The LA comments are coming from his agents through the media.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                              Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                              I didn't love the Monta/Jefferson signings but with our cap situation the last two seasons I don't remember there being much else out there besides bargain veterans. The guys I was interested in the last two years like Marvin Williams/Batum/DeMarre Carroll/Conley signed monster deals that we either couldn't or wouldn't want to match. I know there are some Kevin Durant truthers on this board who think we can sign anyone we want (not saying you're one of them).

                              Looking back at the last two off seasons are there great buys that we missed out on? I'm having trouble finding any.
                              We didn't need to pursue top tier Starters that were getting $15+ mil a year. At that point, we didn't have the $$$ to go after a high end and expensive Starter.....we were just looking to fill out the bench with solid rotational Players. On paper, signing Monta and AlJeff at their respective prices looked good.

                              But even at that time....we knew that fit was going to be a concern. Knowing that 20/20 hindsight is always 100% clear......there were some FA signings that could have made some sense ( when it comes to fit ) for the same price ( if not less ) as what was paid for Monta and AlJeff as bench Players ( such as LouWill, Ed Davis or Aminu ).

                              I know...those names aren't glamorous.....but I'd easily have accepted those FA signings because they makes sense over Monta and AlJeff.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Should the Pacers fire Larry Bird?

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                As I look around the NBA. Bird has done a pretty good job. Not as good as many, but better than a lot. Pacers are in pretty good shape right now. I know most of you are too close to the situation to see it, but in pretty good shape. Cap is in good shape, have some real assets.
                                Rationality is frowned upon here.
                                Lifelong pacers fan

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X