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

Where do you stand?

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

  • #16
    Re: Where do you stand?

    Originally posted by Kstat
    .....and if we win another title with the same core group, guess what- I'll STILL want to make no changes. If you can bring back the SAME core group that just won you a championship, why wouldn't you?

    If we lose at some point, then I'll find out why we lost and see if I can't do some tweaking.

    The burden is on everyone else to catch the champ. It is NOT the job of the champ to break up a proven winner and give everyone else a chance to catch up to them
    That's not what you said though. You said "I'm just from the school that says you should never be satisfied with your current roster, unless you're on top of the mountain looking down at everyone else." From what I get from your recent posts I've come to the opinion that you think you are on that mounatin, therefore not needing any changes.

    Maybe you don't think you are on top, but you sure don't portray that.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Where do you stand?

      Originally posted by Since86
      No, I wouldn't have a problem with it because he doesn't have a track record of being smug about winning.
      I rest my case. Your problem isn't with anythign I said, its with me. Congratulations.

      Next time he throws out a "oh well. another game, another win" then it'll be a little more problematic for me.
      Sorry, its not my job to be impressed with every team that wants to knock us of. If Miami wants to earn my respect, they should make me fear them. I dont OWE them anything, they haven't proven crap. Until then, they're just another team we need to play in order to reach the finals.

      Maybe you don't think you are on top, but you sure don't portray that.
      um, newsflash: we ARE on top. We've been on top for the last 12 months. We've got the trophy, and someone has to take it from us. Call it arrogance, I call it the truth.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Where do you stand?

        Originally posted by vapacersfan
        Ok, I see now

        Well, its all a matter of perception. I saw it as him stating the Pistons are the NBA champs, and can look down at the rest of the league (including us since this is a Pacers forum) because of that fact.

        But maybe I just read it differently then you did...................
        I guess it's just the competitive drive in me, and the addition of a crappy past two days. I believe that no one is on top when the next season rolls around. Just because you won last year, doesn't mean squat. Anyone to sit there and say they're the best so they don't need to make changes just rubs me the wrong way. I can't stand it when people look down at others, sports wise, or attitude wise.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Where do you stand?

          Originally posted by Since86
          When you start handing out quotes like "Another game, another win" that gives the vision that you think you're team is so superior to everyone elses. So to me, you're saying that they are on the mountain and therefore don't currently need to make the changes.

          rest easy my friend....wont be long till hes not on top the mountain anymore...hell be back in the trenches with the rest of us trying to win a title next year instead of defending one....only difference between us and detroit this year is they get a shorter offseason...

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Where do you stand?

            I believe that no one is on top when the next season rolls around. Just because you won last year, doesn't mean squat.
            Championship experience is the most improtant thing toa basketball team. More important than ANYTHING else. There's a difference between believing you can beat anybody, and KNOWING you can beat anybody. Eventually, you'll figure that out. If you want a prime example, check game 6.

            . Anyone to sit there and say they're the best so they don't need to make changes just rubs me the wrong way.
            Again, why should the defending champ want to make changes? Do you know how hard it is to build that kind of team? What would be the purpose of breaking it up?

            I can't stand it when people look down at others, sports wise, or attitude wise.
            You better hope the Pacers never win a championship then, because you don't get there (and stay there) WITHOUT being arrogant.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Where do you stand?

              Originally posted by Kstat
              I rest my case. Your problem isn't with anythign I said, its with me. Congratulations.
              Personally, I have no problem with you, just a problem with some of your quotes after Detroit wins. I think they're winning goes to your head. Obviously others do too, hence the meter.

              Originally posted by Kstat
              Sorry, its not my job to be impressed with every team that wants to knock us of. If Miami wants to earn my respect, they should make me fear them. I dont OWE them anything, they haven't proven crap. Until then, they're just another team we need to play in order to reach the finals.
              There inlies the problem. They do deserve respect. They deserve respect for their very position. You may not have to give them respect each and every individual, but to think that the Miami Heat as a team isn't worthy of your respect is just hubris at it's fullest. Good thing for you that your team doesn't think like you do.

              Originally posted by Kstat
              um, newsflash: we ARE on top. We've been on top for the last 12 months. We've got the trophy, and someone has to take it from us. Call it arrogance, I call it the truth.
              Take your trophy? You'll always have the 2004 championship trophy. No one will EVER take it from you. This is 2005. Your name isn't on that tropy, nor is anyone elses. Your team is 25% of the field, not 100%. The Pistons are just as high up that mountain this year than the Spurs, and only a hair higher than Miami and the Suns.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Where do you stand?

                Originally posted by Kstat
                You better hope the Pacers never win a championship then, because you don't get there (and stay there) WITHOUT being arrogant.
                though the fans in detroit did definitely affect the outcome of this season...im not sure how the arrogance of fans helps the team stay at the top....especially when the arrogance of the fans far exceeds that of the team...

                if ben wallace was exhorting his team to just shut up and play...i wonder what he would tell fans that tend to run their mouth a bit too much as well....

                shuddup and watch???

                Comment


                • #23
                  This thread has brought back memories of threads long past...

                  A blip from last summer's madness....

                  Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                  A good GM keeps a championship team together.

                  Joe D continues to screw with the roster.
                  In response...

                  Originally posted by Kstat
                  As opposed to all those GOOD championship GMs, who never changed ANYTHING after the first title......
                  You didn't really contradict yourself there, K, but you sure flirted with it...
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Where do you stand?

                    There inlies the problem. They do deserve respect. They deserve respect for their very position. You may not have to give them respect each and every individual, but to think that the Miami Heat as a team isn't worthy of your respect is just hubris at it's fullest. Good thing for you that your team doesn't think like you do.
                    I'm sure the pistons respect shaquille O'neal. Outside of that, no. I do not consider Miami a real threat. Beating New Jersey and Washington did not instill fear in me.

                    Take your trophy? You'll always have the 2004 championship trophy. No one will EVER take it from you. This is 2005. Your name isn't on that tropy, nor is anyone elses. Your team is 25% of the field, not 100%. The Pistons are just as high up that mountain this year than the Spurs, and only a hair higher than Miami and the Suns.
                    Ok, poor choice of words. I should have said "title", not "trophy."

                    And yes, there's a mental block that comes into play when you're inexperienced and aspiring, and you're playing the team that is holding the spot that you want to reach. The only other team that has that kind of mental edge is San Antonio, and thats why I respect the **** out of them. Neither Miami nor Phoenix looks like they'll be able to mentally cope when it matters.

                    Put it this way: if Miami wins games 1 and 2, Detroit knows they can win. Their confidence isn't affected. If Detroit wins games 1 and 2, there is some SERIOUS self-doubt on Miami, on wehter they are really championship material. Thats the benefit of having a group that knows they can win.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Where do you stand?

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      Championship experience is the most improtant thing toa basketball team. More important than ANYTHING else. EVentually, you'll figure that out.
                      No, talent is the most important thing to a basketball team. Without talent, you don't get championship experience, because you'll never get to the championship. If you even want to use that logic, then you're still not on top. The Spurs have two rings to your one, still above you.

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      Again, why should the defending champ want to make changes? Do you know how hard it is to build that kind of team? What would be the purpose of breaking it up?
                      Now which is it? Are you saying that they didn't need to make changes, or did need too? You've started out with one tune, changed it, now changed it back. Who said break up a team? Adding better role players hardly constitutes breaking up a team. Why sign Arroyo, if you're already the champs?



                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      You better hope the Pacers never win a championship then, because you don't get there (and stay there) WITHOUT being arrogant.
                      I already mentioned the Spurs. Duncan is anything but arrogant. The Pistons, the actual team and not you, are anything but arrogant. They still have the mentality that they are underdogs. Sheed just ripped the media for not giving them credit, and Rip said that they use that as motivation. Tell them they need to be arrogant. Not being like that gives them their edge.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Where do you stand?

                        I feel that the Pacers are nearly there and that Artest ( because of what he means offensively and defensively to the team and how that changes the way the team plays ) would make enough of a difference to make the Pacers far more competitive against the "elite" teams like the Pistons, Spurs and the Heat.

                        I don't feel that its a problem with mental toughness as the Pacer roster was able to outlast other teams and make it to the 2nd round of the Playoffs despite all the problems that they encountered this year. But unlike many other Pacer fans.....I do not feel that Artest ( assuming...and thats a BIG ASSUMPTION...that he doesn't make as much "noise" as this last season ) is the "root of all the evil" that resides woes of the Pacer Fans. We arecognize that the lack of durability and health of the Pacers roster at each of the position seems to catch up to us at the worst time each year....towards the end of the season and during the Playoffs.

                        The question is how we address the durability and overall health of the Pacers starters and backup players.

                        Either by becoming a "Catagory 1" follower by making internal changes ( such as working on better player conditioning ), coaching adjustments ( and make smarter adjustment in playing time and roster rotations ), and pray that this helps in the long run.

                        or

                        Follow the "Catagory 2" belief and get the players that the Pacer's organization feels would make the difference. But if that happens, it will likely mean that at least 2 of the "Big 4" of JONeal/Tinsley/Artest/SJax ( likely Artest and Tinsley ) along with solid backups like JJ/AJ/Foster/DDavis would have to be packaged to get the type of players that would change the team.

                        I am a "Catagory 1" Pacer fan with a helping of "Catagory 2" mixed in. I think we are nearly there....we just have to figure out a way to address the injury bug issue ( especially with JONeal and Tinsley ).

                        If a start HAD to be made ( in terms of roster change ) it should be made with Tinsley...either by figuring out a way to decrease his chances of getting injured ( either through conditioning and making adjustments to his playing time ) or by trading him ( along with others ) for another PG.

                        But since it appears that it would be difficult to even slightly upgrade at the PG spot without losing either SJax, or Artest....I am in favor of keeping the roster as is ( if possible ) and see what happens. Just like I am willing to put another season on the line by keeping Artest, we should probably do the same for Tinsley. But just like Artest...if the right deal comes along for Tinsley ( or Artest for that matter ), the Pacers would be foolish not to make such a move.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Where do you stand?

                          Originally posted by Since86
                          No, talent is the most important thing to a basketball team. Without talent, you don't get championship experience, because you'll never get to the championship. If you even want to use that logic, then you're still not on top. The Spurs have two rings to your one, still above you.
                          The Spurs have a core, but they aren't the same team. David Robinson was the emotional leader of that group in 1999 and 2003. Heck, there's only one guy left from 1999. And besides that, I've already said I respect the spurs.

                          Now which is it? Are you saying that they didn't need to make changes, or did need too? You've started out with one tune, changed it, now changed it back. Who said break up a team? Adding better role players hardly constitutes breaking up a team. Why sign Arroyo, if you're already the champs?
                          We added Arroyo without changing the core of our team. There's a difference between core players and role players.

                          I already mentioned the Spurs. Duncan is anything but arrogant. The Pistons, the actual team and not you, are anything but arrogant. They still have the mentality that they are underdogs. Sheed just ripped the media for not giving them credit, and Rip said that they use that as motivation. Tell them they need to be arrogant. Not being like that gives them their edge.
                          Rasheed Wallace is arrogant. Billups is arrogant. Both of those guys have the belief that they're better than anybody that can guard them.

                          Manu is possibly the most arrogant player in the NBA. He'll take on anybody, anywhere. His attitude is the reason he's the all-star, and not tony parker.

                          Look at the Bulls. The Rockets. The Bad Boys. The Lakers. They all won multiple titles, and each team had the belief that nobody else could touch them if they played their best. They knew that no matter what anybody else did, they could impose their will on a game and beat anybody. Thats the attitude you HAVE to have in order to win a championship. You treat opponents with disdain.

                          Its also no conicidence that the most arrogant player of all time is Michael Jordan. He knew he was better than everyone else, and he wasn't afraid to show it, and go for the throat. Mercy meant NOTHING to him.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Where do you stand?

                            Originally posted by Kstat
                            The Spurs have a core, but they aren't the same team. David Robinson was the emotional leader of that group in 1999 and 2003. And I've already said I respect the spurs.



                            We added Arroyo without changing the core of our team. There's a difference between core players and role players.



                            Rasheed Wallace is arrogant. Billups is arrogant. Both of those guys have the belief that they're better than anybody that can guard them.

                            Manu is possibly the most arrogant player in the NBA. He'll take on anybody, anywhere. His attitude is the reason he's the all-star, and not tony parker.

                            Look at the Bulls. The Rockets. The Bad Boys. The Lakers. They all won multiple titles, and each team had the belief that nobody else could touch them if they played their best.

                            Its also no conicidence that the most arrogant player of all time is Michael Jordan. He knew he was better than everyone else, and he wasn't afraid to show it, and go for the throat. Mercy meant NOTHING to him.
                            sounds like someone has confidence confused with arrogance....big difference....appears the pistons are confident...appears some of their fans are arrogant...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Where do you stand?

                              Originally posted by foretaz
                              sounds like someone has confidence confused with arrogance....big difference....appears the pistons are confident...appears some of their fans are arrogant...
                              call it confident then, whatever. Though its extreme confidence.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Where do you stand?

                                Originally posted by Kstat
                                The Spurs have a core, but they aren't the same team. David Robinson was the emotional leader of that group in 1999 and 2003. And I've already said I respect the spurs..
                                Emotional leader? So the emotional leader makes things go? Hardly. Tim Duncan was the leader that mattered, and he's still there. What I'm starting to get out of you is that you respect the Spurs and Shaq. Is that all?

                                Originally posted by Kstat
                                We added Arroyo without changing the core of our team. There's a difference between core players and role players..
                                There's very little of people that think this team shoud be dismantled and rebuilt, but that's beside the point. Your statement was towards changes in general. Changes doesn't dictate the degree of changes, on that there are some. Quit backpeddling.


                                Originally posted by Kstat
                                Rasheed Wallace is arrogant. Billups is arrogant. Both of those guys have the belief that they're better than anybody that can guard them.

                                Manu is possibly the most arrogant player in the NBA. He'll take on anybody, anywhere. His attitude is the reason he's the all-star, and not tony parker.

                                Look at the Bulls. The Rockets. The Bad Boys. The Lakers. They all won multiple titles, and each team had the belief that nobody else could touch them if they played their best.

                                Its also no conicidence that the most arrogant player of all time is Michael Jordan. He knew he was better than everyone else, and he wasn't afraid to show it, and go for the throat. Mercy meant NOTHING to him.
                                No. They're confident. There's a fine line between confidence and arrogance, but the difference is huge. Arrogance is when you think you don't have anything to prove, that you are number one and everyone should understand that you're number one. Confidence is thinking that you're number one, but also believing that everyone else thinks they're above you. Confident players play with something to prove. Arrogant players play for themselves.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X