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

I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

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

  • #16
    Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

    Originally posted by 3ptmiller
    And Reggie was kind enough to deffer to him alot last years... and there we lost all our hopes that Reggie had nothing left... that he was old... etc. Then he prooved everybody wrong and made us look like jackasses and we suddenly started winning games and had huge effort & performance from every player on there... then JO came back from suspension & injury and Reggie started defering again and if im gona be honest, everything went downwards from there...
    I'll be honest with ya, I was one of those people that said Reggie was washed up, had nothing left, and should have retired 3 years ago. But Reggie proved me wrong. He made me feel like the fool I was for all the aweful things I said about him. And on this night, I shed a tear for Reggie. Partly because his legacy is over without him having a ring, and partly because of the ignorant things I had said about him.

    The chemistry we developed with Reggie and Jack before JO came back was really good. I kinda thought we would have beaten Boston better if we were still using that game plan. But when JO came back, the offense shifted back to him, and Reggie began passing up shots. JO said he wouldn't change the offense, but he couldn't help it. He got the ball down low and Reggie's unbelievable play went back to him being in the backlight.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

      Originally posted by SoupIsGood
      Come on now. After THAT post, you are telling US to respond with 'substance, not slander'? Not only is your logic absurd, in which you use a few choice examples to to represent Jermaine's overall game, but you are incredibly biased and hateful towards Jermaine (assclown?). Unless you come up with something that is more reasonable, and less bull-headed, I don't blame anyone for deeming your post 'lame'.
      Touche', harsh criticism deserving another.

      If I say Jermaine is an immature crotch pheasant, he won't be sending me a message calling me a dirty douche bag. You standing up for him and calling my post 'lame', is being slanderous to me, and thus prevoking me to defend my own rights. I love this site, and don't want this to become something I don't want it to be, so I'll say, I'm sorry for the absurdness in my post, my rant became a little to testy, in which I never intended to offend anyone, just simply spark a debate.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

        Right after being eliminated it is hard for me to talk objectively about subjects like this. I disagree with your premise and will only say for now all team leaders on contenders are doubted until they win a championship or retire.
        "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


        • #19
          Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

          Originally posted by Arcadian
          Right after being eliminated it is hard for me to talk objectively about subjects like this. I disagree with your premise and will only say for now all team leaders on contenders are doubted until they win a championship or retire.
          Well said. And maybe if we're all lucky, next year, I'll look like the idiot I am for saying all these nasty horrible things about JO, when the Pacers bring home the trophy.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

            Originally posted by Fig Newton
            Touche', harsh criticism deserving another.

            If I say Jermaine is an immature crotch pheasant, he won't be sending me a message calling me a dirty douche bag. You standing up for him and calling my post 'lame', is being slanderous to me, and thus prevoking me to defend my own rights. I love this site, and don't want this to become something I don't want it to be, so I'll say, I'm sorry for the absurdness in my post, my rant became a little to testy, in which I never intended to offend anyone, just simply spark a debate.
            It's all good, I think we are all a bit testy after that game. Sorry for being a bit harsh there.


            Although, I will say I don't consider saying someone's post is lame to be slanderous. Not tactful, obviously, but I think slander would be more like "That was lame, you are stupider than my pet gerbil."

            But I'm probably wrong here.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

              Originally posted by pacerwaala
              Dude, atleast on Reggie's last gamenight, post like Reggie went out, with some class. Give JO some credit, the guy is injured. He needs to improve on a lot of things but things take time. The Detroit team that you see now took time to assemble. You have to be patient and just not point fingers. JO, Jamal and Sjax have made mistakes during the series and they will learn from it.
              Class means nothing if u aint honest, then its only a lie...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                It's all good, I think we are all a bit testy after that game. Sorry for being a bit harsh there.


                Although, I will say I don't consider saying someone's post is lame to be slanderous. Not tactful, obviously, but I think slander would be more like "That was lame, you are stupider than my pet gerbil."

                But I'm probably wrong here.
                It's probably me being to sensitive. My own emotions have gotten me in trouble in the past and so I've been trying to not take things said to seriously. We, the internet community, tend to take things out of proportion to often. Just as my wording on a few things in my original post have, sometimes we word things wrong, and sometimes we take things wrong. My goal was never to make anyone mad at me, but our emotions are all running wild after tonight, and my timing for such a post was pretty bad. My apologies about it all, but I do thank you for being cool about it and accepting my flaws.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                  My how quickly we forget.

                  Let's be fair to JO here for a second. Who remembers the stretch of play he put on between the time he came back from suspension on Dec 25th, and the time he got injured on March 3rd? I'll do the math for you. JO averaged 27 ppg during the 33 games in that span. Not only that he had several monster games in that stretch, going for 35+ several times, including his huge 55 pointer on Jan 4th. After coming back early from the injury, it was too much to expect the same type of production. When JO comes back healthy next season, I think then you can probably expect it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                    Was this thread started before or after the game?

                    Jermaine had a great game tonight.
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                      Fig,
                      I'm still inclined to agree with you more than disagree but this probably isn't the time for me to have this discussion. Tossing JO out with the trash probably isn't the answer but JO is at best a complimentary player at this point in his career. He can talk a good game but until he learns to share the ball, make quicker decisions, and keep his head in the game (all consistently) then I'm afraid I am going to have problems with him. This season the stars aligned for him to take his game to the next level and show that all this effort and growing pains of the past had indeed been worth it. It could truly be 'his' team. I don't think he showed that at all.

                      Let's not pretend JO before the injury was on a tear. He wasn't. He had some higher scoring games but he didn't necessarily shoot a good percentage to do it. More importantly, the team wasn't winning. More times than not he would shrink from the occassion. I know he's been injured but that injury just makes his refusal to pass out of double and triple teams, to force the ball, to shoot fadeaways all the more glaring as a deficit in his game. I don't think it is too much to ask that the face of the franchise circa 2005 make his teammates better and take pressure off of them. Did the JO we saw most games this season make his teammates better or take pressure off of them? I have to say 'no'.

                      Many times he was putting them behind the 8 ball by shooting woeful percentages and stalling the offense in the process. His lack of blocking out gave the other teams second chance opportunites. Few were the times where he got his teammates open looks by passing out of doubleteams to the open man. His 'highlight' defense was usually good (blocks) but his regular defense sometimes left things to be desired. It is not always the highlight reel plays that matter... it is most times the little things that really matter. And one of these days people will realize the little things aren't really so little. They matter. A lot.

                      OTOH, games like tonight show he can be effective... but we saw too little of that this season.

                      I know some are going to blame coach Carlisle for a lot of this. I have some thoughts on this as well but perhaps I should save them. As I said, tonight probably isn't the best time to get into some of this.

                      I'll just end by saying we have some Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde happening with this team and we will need to be getting that figured out and under control before we can hope to beat the Pistons in a best of 7 game playoff series.

                      -Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                        Originally posted by Bball
                        Fig,
                        I'm still inclined to agree with you more than disagree but this probably isn't the time for me to have this discussion. Tossing JO out with the trash probably isn't the answer but JO is at best a complimentary player at this point in his career. He can talk a good game but until he learns to share the ball, make quicker decisions, and keep his head in the game (all consistently) then I'm afraid I am going to have problems with him. This season the stars aligned for him to take his game to the next level and show that all this effort and growing pains of the past had indeed been worth it. It could truly be 'his' team. I don't think he showed that at all.

                        Let's not pretend JO before the injury was on a tear. He wasn't. He had some higher scoring games but he didn't necessarily shoot a good percentage to do it. More importantly, the team wasn't winning. More times than not he would shrink from the occassion. I know he's been injured but that injury just makes his refusal to pass out of double and triple teams, to force the ball, to shoot fadeaways all the more glaring as a deficit in his game. I don't think it is too much to ask that the face of the franchise circa 2005 make his teammates better and take pressure off of them. Did the JO we saw most games this season make his teammates better or take pressure off of them? I have to say 'no'.

                        Many times he was putting them behind the 8 ball by shooting woeful percentages and stalling the offense in the process. His lack of blocking out gave the other teams second chance opportunites. Few were the times where he got his teammates open looks by passing out of doubleteams to the open man. His 'highlight' defense was usually good (blocks) but his regular defense sometimes left things to be desired. It is not always the highlight reel plays that matter... it is most times the little things that really matter. And one of these days people will realize the little things aren't really so little. They matter. A lot.

                        OTOH, games like tonight show he can be effective... but we saw too little of that this season.

                        I know some are going to blame coach Carlisle for a lot of this. I have some thoughts on this as well but perhaps I should save them. As I said, tonight probably isn't the best time to get into some of this.

                        I'll just end by saying we have some Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde happening with this team and we will need to be getting that figured out and under control before we can hope to beat the Pistons in a best of 7 game playoff series.

                        -Bball
                        Great post.

                        My feeling is that I don't want Jermaine gone, because he is really talented and is a dominating offensive force when he's on his game. But it's the little things he doesn't do that make me wanna say, 'this guy can't be our franchise player'.

                        When I point to Ron Artest as our possible franchise player, I get ridiculed and no matter how many points I bring up, there are counter points and critics of all kind, so I'll plead the 5th for that right now. Save that one for another day.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                          i have a feeling alot of the negative jo talk wont go away till after the start of next season....people often feel compelled to blame someone, and hes an easy target...he signed a hundred million dollar contract and is the franchise player....this franchise just got eliminated from the playoffs so......guess whos on the hot seat....

                          but its really not an objective point of view....not when u look at a lot of the facts surrounding the season....

                          most fresh in everyones mind is the last 16 games jo played....and that appears to be pretty much what everyone is choosing to remember....and thats a bit harsh....considering the guy probably shouldnt have been playing-but if he didnt everyone would be questioning his heart....so he plays and gets dogged....yea, seems harsh....nevermind, that while he was out the team changed how they were playing offensively...which means there is gonna be adjustments-not just for jo but everyone-but jo is the one that gets looked at...the team had to make all these adjustments on the fly...not only on the fly but basically during the playoffs...to say this is less than ideal circumstances, well......

                          realize something, the projected starters for this team never took the floor together this year...the team played well prior to the brawl, because even though there were injuries, they had plenty of time to work on things...they had training camp and preseason....having a pretty good idea who would be out at the beginning of the season....and jo and ron looked nothing short of awesome prior up until the brawl....after that....pretty much all bets are off...

                          but jo had a very good run after he came back...someone said the team wasnt winning....well...remember jax wasnt back yet...they only played about 20 games together after the brawl....and with all the injuries of players coming in and out of the lineup...i mean cmon...but to say jo was the reason they werent winning is a bit crazy, to say he wasnt playing well is inaccurate...you cant just discount his great play because the team wasnt winning...there were many other reasons they were losing....really, in spite of jo's great play....

                          hes been here 5 years now....to judge him by the last 16 games when hes obviously hurt, seems irresponsible....especially when it was so obvious he wasnt himself....we ve seen enuff of him to know that....to somehow say that jo isnt the guy after this season-given all this seasons turmoil just doesnt seem very logical....

                          i have a feeling that once this team goes into camp....gets healthy....and begins to formulate what the teams identity is gonna be the upcoming years, you will see jo shine once again....hes a quality character....he cares a great deal about his team, the franchise, and the community....hes got what it takes to not only be a franchise player but be the new face of the franchise....it seems only his playing ability is being questioned...which seems a bit absurd based on his career, but understandable considering the emotion involved right now and his stretch of games since he returned from the injury...

                          do this...just remember him in those few games before the brawl....remember his individual performance after coming back from suspension....then picture an athletic team with him being the focal point....with artest (who will be on a mission next year and will simply be a monster on the court)as a number 2 option and jax as a number 3....seriously have any of u looked at the box scores from the pre brawl games just to remind urself of how good jo and artest were playing together??? u should....

                          jax will have been here a year...and not worried about what his role is or worried about fitting in....things will just be so much more defined....and therefore they should find it alot easier to focus on playing ball instead of all the bs that had to be dealt with from day one of this season...whether it was injuries or suspensions....

                          and i think we are all gonna really like that focused team and what they are gonna accomplish next season...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                            "If I have the ball, I will shoot it, you have to believe that," - Stephen Jackson

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                              Maybe the Pacers should follow the Pistons model. And compete with 4 or 5 players who are allstar caliber and who sacrifice and play well together. Maybe Ron, Jax, and J.O can help each other and that way none of the three have to be "franchise" players

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I'll say it, I DON'T think Jermaine is our franchise player

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck
                                Maybe the Pacers should follow the Pistons model. And compete with 4 or 5 players who are allstar caliber and who sacrifice and play well together. Maybe Ron, Jax, and J.O can help each other and that way none of the three have to be "franchise" players
                                Great point. I don't think they have any choice. None of the three are "Franchise" players right now. Artest, IMHO, is a little closer to it than JO is. Artest's problem is obvious, as is Jackson's. JO has a similar problem - it lies above his shoulders and sits on his neck. The guy doesn't seem to have the mental toughness needed or the ability to think before you speak. I thought he might gain it, but I'm beginning to think it's something you either have or you don't. He made strides after Thomas left as coach but now he is back in the whining, complaining phase he was in when he first got to Indy. I think Jackson and Artest have the mental toughness, they just have anger problems.

                                Next season will be very interesting. This team will either win 60+ games or they will struggle to win 40. Carlisle and his staff have their work cut out for them. What this team needs to do is hire a psychologist and put him on the staff.
                                "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                                - Benjamin Franklin

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X