Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 342

Thread: An answer for Fortaz......

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,718

    Default An answer for Fortaz......

    In the Paul Pierce thread he asked me:

    peck....i respect u...and thats why i ask this question....

    when u speak of artest....its like u become someone other than urself....

    u dont speak of opponents players the way you do of artest...in fact u never speak like u do when u discuss artest....its just so, so far out of character for u....

    why?....theres a fine line between love and hate, i know....but its almost like the sheer mention of artest seems to just hit a button and u become some other person....the obvious negative emotion u feel towards him just seems to be so out of character....

    and i cant understand, why...these types of emotions are usually only reserved for very personal relationships....its almost like u react like a woman scorned would....but im assuming thats far from the truth....

    so, again, im curious....why is it so personal with u where ron is concerned versus ur typical take on all other players and issues-a usually fairly unbiased and rational approach....im just very intriqued how a basketball player of any kind can evoke such a dramatic, somewhat irrational response from someone that appears to be just the opposite....

    so again, i ask with all due respect....why?


    I've actually started to answer this three differant times & each time I had to erase for differant reasons. But I don't want you to think I'm ignoring you so I will attempt to hammer this out right now.

    Issue # 1

    A lot & I mean a LOT of my stuff about Artest comes on the heels of one of his fans making excuses for him. Or better yet justifying his actions because they are fans of his.

    Look there is nothing wrong with fan worship, God knows I am an idiot when it comes to Dale Davis (no comments about me being an idiot all of the time from the peanut gallery) but I have always felt that if Dale did something I was ashamed of on the court I would call him out on it. I know a certain someone is about to get on here & berate me for not chastizing Dale for fighting, but I always look at it like this that Dale goes face to face with his man & not hit him from behind or act like he wants to do something he really doesn't want to do.... But that's all besides the point.

    Your new here so I won't bore you with all of the old stuff on here but I will say this. There is a segment on here who thinks just because Ron is a great basketball player he can do no wrong.

    When I see wrong I can't just close my eyes & put my hands over my ears & go "la la la" I have a bad habit of calling it out.

    Some of Ron Artest antics are just wrong. There is no other way to put it.

    Breaking things, cheap shoting players & breaking plays does not mean you are more competative.

    That is the one that gets me almost every time. Ron will do some boneheaded stunt & his fans will chime in with "Ronnie just hates to lose so bad"

    In scholastic sporting events they would call this being a poor sport & in some cases where they actually cared about character they would remove the player from the situation for a time & if he didn't change they would remove him from the team.

    In public life we would call it criminal activity.

    Let me use this as an example & trust me with Ron it's almost always the play I come back to.

    Andre Kirlenko has been toasting him all game & Ron is getting very frustrated with him so since he can't beat him on the court he intentionally steps behind AK47 & hits him in the back of the head as the guy is driving the lane & going up for a basket.

    Now translate that to real life & use this example. You are a widget salesman & you are pretty good at it. Then another widget salesman comes to your area & starts selling about the same as you do & then one day he goes ahead of you in the block & starts selling more. You wait as he is coming out of a house after a sale & you run up & wack him over the back of the head. Do you think you could claim to the Police officer responding that you just hated losing sales so bad that you just couldn't control yourself? I'm guessing it's not gonna fly.

    I'm not trying to compare the two btw, I'm just trying to point out that being competative does not give you an excuse for bad behavior.

    Ok, I've gone off track here. Let me see if I can save some of this.

    A lot of my problem with Ron isn't always Ron. It's fans who under normal circumstances would rebuke a player like him if he were on another team.

    If it's wrong for Rasheed Wallace to do something doesn't mean that if Rasheed Wallace became a Pacer it would make it ok for him to do the same thing. Right & wrong does not change with a uniform color.

    He has a fanatical fan base on here & on the internet in general & sometimes it's like you have assulted the Pope if you make a comment about him that does not portray Ron as either a hero or a victim.

    Ok that takes care of a lot of that, on here anyway, I sometimes try & compensate for the over abundance of praise for him. I'm not just being contrarian for no reason however because I truely am not a fan of his.

    Which bring me to issue # 2.

    There is a segment of us out there that turned against Ron a long time ago. The brawl in the Palace was not a suprise to many of us, it was fullfilment of prophecy that some of us had been saying for a long time.

    (in fairness I will admit that none of us would have ever dreamed possible the amount of damage that he was able to do to the franchise on that night but just weeks before it happened both Jay & myself were saying that he was going to tear the entire franchise down & boy did he ever)

    You see a lot of people are at the stage with Ron now that they say "well let's give him one more chance & if he screws up again I'm done with him". To me, I was at that over a year ago. So last season wasn't a "one more chance issue" it was just "one more thing".

    I'm pretty sure it was two seasons ago that I started getting to the point where I didn't care for him. When he hit AK47 that pretty much disgusted me but didn't put me over the edge, however I was very leary of him from that point on. But when I saw Mel Daniels litterally pushing & shoving him into the locker room after that loss in Boston I knew I was done with him. That was the second time I had seen him go after a fan, the first was at the fieldhouse when he went after our famos blond lady from the front row when he was with the Bulls.

    Ok, again I've gone off-track let me see if I can put this together.

    I was against Ron long before the brawl, in fact I spent the entire last summer doing two things.

    1. B*tching that Brad Miller was traded.
    2. B*tching that Ron Artest was not.

    I guess I just want you to know that because I don't want you to think I'm just pileing on after a bad incident.

    Issue # 3.

    He's a great talent. Hell he may be the best player the Pacers have ever had but, IMO, it doesn't matter how good you are if you & your team mates & coach's cannot get along.

    There is a lot of back story's that are well known on here (I'm not sure if you've heard them yet or not?) about Ron & Jermaine. But there are also story's of Ron & Rick that don't always get mentioned as much as they should.

    Before last season Jermaine made a comment in the Star about having to dedicate more time to Ron to make him feel part of the team (read: babysit Ron) & how differant team members were taking turns with Ron. I'm sorry but the guy brings the team down when it becomes necassary to do that. I don't care who the player is. If it was Jordan or if it was Magic, nobody would be worth the entire team trying to make sure they were happy & content.

    Anytime Ron doesn't get his way he either goes public with his thoughts about how he doesn't know if he wants to play here or not (like he did on two occasions Carlisle first season) or he somehow gets a migraine.

    Well the star fessed up about covering up for Ron during last seasons playoffs when Kravits outed Montieth for this & I'm not sure that isn't why Mark doesn't cover the Pacers on the beat anymore. I'm not saying it is but it wouldn't suprise me either.

    I digress.

    Ron has faked issues before about headaches when he doesn't feel as though the offense goes through him enough.

    Issue # 4

    He's a great player however he is not the single best player to ever play kind of player. Yea, I know this should go under issue # 1 again but I'm gonna put it here.

    Ron Artest can contribute to a title or to a great team, but he is not the end all be all of a team. If we cannot win a title without Ron Artest then there are serious flaws to our team. As has been pointed out by other posters, teams have won titles without Ron Artest being a member of that team.

    Issue # 5

    This is an on the court issue btw, but in tense games when discipline is called for I don't trust him. I don't for a min. beleive he won't break a play & call his own # when the play is clearly called for someone else.

    If a player out plays him I am always afraid how he will react & I don't mean physical either. I'm talking about shooting dumber shots or making worse choices. Take last seasons game 6 vs. the Pistons. Ron just was being abused by Prince yet he kept forcing it. Eventually as the game ran down he totally abandoned the play sets & ran whatever he wanted to.


    Issue # 6

    This one is controversial & I know that there are going to be some who come shouting at me on this one, but I'll say it anyway.

    Ron Artest is a typical bully, IMO.

    Have you ever seen Ron Artest do somthing to somebody who was his own size or someone who would go back at him? If your gonna say Ben Wallace your gonna have to guess again. He had a chance at Big Ben & he chose a differant path.

    Now I don't want this to break down into a whole brawl debate again, I just am pointing out that once again when Ron raised a fist it was over a person who was really smaller than him.

    I will always go back to the Derrik Coleman issue. If Ron ever had justification to get up & take out somebody it was when Coleman litterally knocked out Ron's front teeth. But all he did was hold his mouth.

    However little Quinten Richardson offends him by dunking on him he gets an elbow to the face.

    Yes, yes I know he did the right thing with Ben. I'm not denying that, it's just funny that everytime I see him going after a fan in the stands it is to scare them into what? I guess into being better fans or something.

    Now to wrap this up let me say this.

    By all rights this guy should be my favorite Pacer, hell maybe of all-time. However I just can't get past the crap to apprecaite the talent he has all of the time.

    Now also having said all of that I want it known that I know he will be here next year & so whether I like it or not I have no choice but to root for him to do good.

    Ok, I'm prepared for the flaming I'm about to receive, so have at it.


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

  2. #2
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,741

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ok, I'm prepared for the flaming I'm about to receive, so have at it.
    None from me... I have a short attention span. That post is too long for my taste. If it was new material, then maybe. But a brief scan shows it's stuff we've been over again and again and again and again (ad infinitum, ad nauseum).

    Maybe in the morning. I read the conclusion, though, and I can go along with that.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  3. #3
    Tree People to the Core! indygeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cumberland
    Posts
    15,312
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    I read every word...and agreed with every word, exactly as written.
    If you get to thinkiní youíre a person of some influence, try orderiní somebody elseís dog around..

  4. #4
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,051

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Peck was asked for his opinion. I don't see a reason to make this thread another debate about Ron. Everyone already knows how everyone else feels and thinks.

    If not, you can check out the 87 threads (by last count) already about him.

  5. #5
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    im thinking and digesting....i know what some of my initial responses are....but i want to think and ponder a bit....but i appreciate u taking the time to respond....and as i think about it....i now anticipate ur response to my response even more....

    thx again

  6. #6
    Member Alabama-Redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lake Guntersville, Alabama
    Age
    73
    Posts
    1,702

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    No flames from me either.

    I read the first two paragraphs and did not have to go any further as I am sure it is the same as numerous other posts you have made.

    It is your opinion and I respect that. I do not agree with all of it but that is my opinion.

    I'm looking forward to next season probably more than any season in a long time.

    I would rather be the hammer than the nail

  7. #7
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,893

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    I'll try to keep this about Peck's analysis so it doesn't become Yet Another Artest Thread (and, for the record, I agree with the idea of having a sticky RonRon thread so it doesn't keep getting re-hashed).

    No one should challenge someone else's feelings about a player other than to stand up and say "I disagree and this is why." We feel the way we do about players on a mostly emotional level, and that's why incidents (particularly those with multiple subjective viewpoints) don't affect people the same way. Peck has stated many times how he feels about Ron, and for perfectly justifiable reasons.

    I debated whether or not to post this, because I don't want to disrespect anyone. I decided to post because these observations might add to the overall discussion about posting styles that sometimes bogs down into superficial "look and feel" rather than content.

    1) One issue I sometimes have with Peck's views is that they have tended to be black-and-white, "if ya ain't fer me, yer agin me" kind of things. I have run afoul of this in the past as someone who is generally in favor of Donnie Walsh. If Peck is against a player or action, then anyone who points out points in favor is often lumped in with the opposition, even if they also support the points Peck is making. There is no fence-sitting in Peck's world of the Forums.

    It is difficult to figure out who gets lumped into Ron's "fanatical fan base" - it sometimes seems like anyone who doesn't advocate trading Ron for a stale potato chip and a used jock strap is clearly unwilling to listen to reason.

    Over the years, I've rather gotten used to the fact that I will usually be lumped into the "anti-Peck" camp. That doesn't stop me from respecting him and his posts, and certainly doesn't prevent the occasional apocalyptic moment where we actually agree, but there it is.

    So the point of this observation (if there is one, I guess), is that learning a poster's style will help immensely in understanding what reactions you will receive and whether that person's views are likely to change.


    2) I'm a bit concerned about the "whacking Kirlenko" being compared directly to a salesperson physically assaulting another salesperson.

    It's difficult to explain because there's a reason why the Kirlenko move was a flagrant foul - it is against the rules - but the rule was broken because it was an extreme form of contact that is increasingly becoming part of the game.

    The analogy breaks down because assault on another salesperson isn't part of sales, it's completely outside the game. It's more comparable to Ron going off the court, calling Kirlenko's agent, and convincing him to have Kirlenko demand a salary decrease - in other words, a retaliation that is completely outside the game.

    The interesting part about this issue is that there is a line being drawn between Ron's actions and what might be considered "valid" retaliation on the court. I suspect each person has a different place where this line was drawn - in my younger days, as a Hoosier high school student whose basketball team was miserably bad, I myself reacted favorably to the appearance of our teams ... er ... "enforcer" at times of great stress.

    The other interesting part is that this is another case (of many) where history can continue to be used year after year to justify current opinions. History is a guide but not a guarantee, and the thing about sports history in particular is that fans don't forget it. The draft lottery will always be seen to be rigged by some Indiana fans because of events in 1983 and 1985. Ron could go 5 seasons without a single incident and yet projections of his future actions will always be affected by the brawl. In these kind of discussions, the existence of an incident will be used forever.

    The point here (again, if there is one)? Analogies and historical data need to be in the proper context in order to be effective.



    Again, I have no desire to attack anyone (particularly Peck) personally. This just seemed like a good opportunity to take a posting style and analyze it a little bit, using someone who I hope won't me over it.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  8. #8
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'll try to keep this about Peck's analysis so it doesn't become Yet Another Artest Thread (and, for the record, I agree with the idea of having a sticky RonRon thread so it doesn't keep getting re-hashed).

    No one should challenge someone else's feelings about a player other than to stand up and say "I disagree and this is why." We feel the way we do about players on a mostly emotional level, and that's why incidents (particularly those with multiple subjective viewpoints) don't affect people the same way. Peck has stated many times how he feels about Ron, and for perfectly justifiable reasons.

    I debated whether or not to post this, because I don't want to disrespect anyone. I decided to post because these observations might add to the overall discussion about posting styles that sometimes bogs down into superficial "look and feel" rather than content.

    1) One issue I sometimes have with Peck's views is that they have tended to be black-and-white, "if ya ain't fer me, yer agin me" kind of things. I have run afoul of this in the past as someone who is generally in favor of Donnie Walsh. If Peck is against a player or action, then anyone who points out points in favor is often lumped in with the opposition, even if they also support the points Peck is making. There is no fence-sitting in Peck's world of the Forums.

    It is difficult to figure out who gets lumped into Ron's "fanatical fan base" - it sometimes seems like anyone who doesn't advocate trading Ron for a stale potato chip and a used jock strap is clearly unwilling to listen to reason.

    Over the years, I've rather gotten used to the fact that I will usually be lumped into the "anti-Peck" camp. That doesn't stop me from respecting him and his posts, and certainly doesn't prevent the occasional apocalyptic moment where we actually agree, but there it is.

    So the point of this observation (if there is one, I guess), is that learning a poster's style will help immensely in understanding what reactions you will receive and whether that person's views are likely to change.


    2) I'm a bit concerned about the "whacking Kirlenko" being compared directly to a salesperson physically assaulting another salesperson.

    It's difficult to explain because there's a reason why the Kirlenko move was a flagrant foul - it is against the rules - but the rule was broken because it was an extreme form of contact that is increasingly becoming part of the game.

    The analogy breaks down because assault on another salesperson isn't part of sales, it's completely outside the game. It's more comparable to Ron going off the court, calling Kirlenko's agent, and convincing him to have Kirlenko demand a salary decrease - in other words, a retaliation that is completely outside the game.

    The interesting part about this issue is that there is a line being drawn between Ron's actions and what might be considered "valid" retaliation on the court. I suspect each person has a different place where this line was drawn - in my younger days, as a Hoosier high school student whose basketball team was miserably bad, I myself reacted favorably to the appearance of our teams ... er ... "enforcer" at times of great stress.

    The other interesting part is that this is another case (of many) where history can continue to be used year after year to justify current opinions. History is a guide but not a guarantee, and the thing about sports history in particular is that fans don't forget it. The draft lottery will always be seen to be rigged by some Indiana fans because of events in 1983 and 1985. Ron could go 5 seasons without a single incident and yet projections of his future actions will always be affected by the brawl. In these kind of discussions, the existence of an incident will be used forever.

    The point here (again, if there is one)? Analogies and historical data need to be in the proper context in order to be effective.



    Again, I have no desire to attack anyone (particularly Peck) personally. This just seemed like a good opportunity to take a posting style and analyze it a little bit, using someone who I hope won't me over it.
    i think i agree with alot of what u say in this...im finding this thread very very thought provoking and can see it possibly going deeper than normal-which is a good thing in my eyes....

    i agree with the analogy issue regarding kirilenko and the salemen being a bit off-but i think i understood what he meant and think peck probably knows its not the most accurate and he even alluded to that as well...the fact that he makes the analogy is kinda more to my initial question and really my personal focus and that is why does it seem to be a bit out of character...but im still rereading and digesting and wanna make sure i have my thoughts completely in order before totally responding.....

    i do know this....my big thing is developing a mindset that seems set in stone and then rationalizing any and every event to validate that mindset while dismissing any forms of thoughts that might cause one to review that position....call it being closeminded or stubborn or whatever....and many are like that in the world....but some are not...and when one who appears to not be that way does appear to be that way on isolated issues-it intriques me and i want to know more....stay tuned

  9. #9
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,857

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Peck, I read your entire post. Good read.


    Not sure if I 've ever mentioned this. I like Ron a a player, I'm a big fan of his. I can't wait until he comes back

  10. #10
    Member Vicious Tyrant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bloomington
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,207

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Issue # 6

    This one is controversial & I know that there are going to be some who come shouting at me on this one, but I'll say it anyway.

    Ron Artest is a typical bully, IMO.

    Have you ever seen Ron Artest do somthing to somebody who was his own size or someone who would go back at him? If your gonna say Ben Wallace your gonna have to guess again. He had a chance at Big Ben & he chose a differant path.
    You know, this one has me thinking. I don't know what to think of it. I have typically thought of Ron as being sparked by apparently random things, but I never thought that they only happen when he can "beat up" the other person. What do others think?
    "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

  11. #11
    Member Knucklehead Warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    874

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Vicious Tyrant
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You know, this one has me thinking. I don't know what to think of it. I have typically thought of Ron as being sparked by apparently random things, but I never thought that they only happen when he can "beat up" the other person. What do others think?
    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There is a segment on here who thinks just because Ron is a great basketball player he can do no wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    A lot of my problem with Ron isn't always Ron. It's fans who under normal circumstances would rebuke a player like him if he were on another team.
    Why is this surprising? It's part of our Indiana basketball heritage. In fact it's been going on for at least 20 years. When it comes to basketball in OUR state, integrity and character often take a back seat as the end clearly justifies the means.

    Well, the jury is still out on whether the general is a human being.
    Yeah, but you can't argue with his results
    .

  12. #12
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,893

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Knucklehead Warrior
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why is this surprising? It's part of our Indiana basketball heritage. In fact it's been going on for at least 20 years. When it comes to basketball in OUR state, integrity and character often take a back seat as the end clearly justifies the means.

    .
    I'm sorry, I have to jump on this.

    I think (at a risk of inspiring flippant comments) that the definition of "integrity" and "character" (or, probably more to the point, the definition of a fatal flaw in integrity and character) is extremely important.

    Taking the example that I'm betting you wanted everyone to think about ...

    Knight's actions on the court and in practice, in the heat of competition or in the handling of team members, have been the areas in the spotlight. Similarly to Ron's actions, some have seen the on-court as "heat of the moment" issues that deserved punishment but then should be evaluated in terms of current behavior. Some have seen them as unacceptable, but when they become unacceptable was individually determined. The issues in practice - which were the final straw - stemmed from an approach to practice that worked or failed on a team-member-by-team-member basis. In Knight's case, once a final straw was reached the decision (controversial as it may have been) was made to cut him loose. So far, I haven't heard boo about his actions at TT, perhaps he has changed (or is that impossible ...)

    Also like Ron, there were lots of upsides that resulted in the extension of extra chances. Winning was not really one of them, except as it might have applied to the emotional connection the Knight Fanatics showed in his favor. Recall that Knight conducted his recruiting with unquestioned propriety. Remember what his graduation rate was. Do these count as part of a definition of character or integrity? Which would you rather have - a coach that behaves like a ****** in practice and on the court but emphasizes graduation, teamwork, and proper procedures? Or a coach that is perfect on the floor and in practice but cheats in recruiting and emphasizes basketball over education (and probably compiles a better record)?

    We can acknowledge the similarity of the situations but please don't make it so simplistic as to state that Indiana basketball fans subsume everything to winning.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  13. #13
    Member Knucklehead Warrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    874

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm sorry, I have to jump on this.

    I think (at a risk of inspiring flippant comments) that the definition of "integrity" and "character" (or, probably more to the point, the definition of a fatal flaw in integrity and character) is extremely important.

    Taking the example that I'm betting you wanted everyone to think about ...

    Knight's actions on the court and in practice, in the heat of competition or in the handling of team members, have been the areas in the spotlight. Similarly to Ron's actions, some have seen the on-court as "heat of the moment" issues that deserved punishment but then should be evaluated in terms of current behavior. Some have seen them as unacceptable, but when they become unacceptable was individually determined. The issues in practice - which were the final straw - stemmed from an approach to practice that worked or failed on a team-member-by-team-member basis. In Knight's case, once a final straw was reached the decision (controversial as it may have been) was made to cut him loose. So far, I haven't heard boo about his actions at TT, perhaps he has changed (or is that impossible ...)

    Also like Ron, there were lots of upsides that resulted in the extension of extra chances. Winning was not really one of them, except as it might have applied to the emotional connection the Knight Fanatics showed in his favor. Recall that Knight conducted his recruiting with unquestioned propriety. Remember what his graduation rate was. Do these count as part of a definition of character or integrity? Which would you rather have - a coach that behaves like a ****** in practice and on the court but emphasizes graduation, teamwork, and proper procedures? Or a coach that is perfect on the floor and in practice but cheats in recruiting and emphasizes basketball over education (and probably compiles a better record)?

    We can acknowledge the similarity of the situations but please don't make it so simplistic as to state that Indiana basketball fans subsume everything to winning.
    Bill, I think we're in agreement. I meant to emphasize not Knight's character or integrity, but the character and integrity of those who think the end justifies the means. It was meant as a dig to all those who "subsume everything to winning." Also to all those who think the nba is a microcosm of life. Of course it isn't. It's the difference between having youth and passion on the team at the expense of also having knuckleheads vs. having maturity and experience. It's the people who are OK with JO swaggering after a dunk vs the people who say "shut up and play."

    It's controlled vs. uncontrolled emotion. I wonder how many more championships IU and the Pacers could have with the controlled variety. It struck me last night as I watched the end of the ECF. We could have beaten both of those teams.

  14. #14
    White and Nerdy Anthem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    23,741

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Vicious Tyrant
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You know, this one has me thinking. I don't know what to think of it. I have typically thought of Ron as being sparked by apparently random things, but I never thought that they only happen when he can "beat up" the other person. What do others think?
    There's almost never "another person." As far as the AK-47 thing, Ron's got a pretty good record with this... I'd bet most NBA players have stories like this. These aren't the things that worry me about Ron. Nobody thought Jordan was mental for trying to take Reggie's eyes out.

    If Ron was scared of Ben, he wouldn't have fouled him going to the rack. He'd have let him score and walked out with the win.

    I don't want to get into this thread (other than to say the first point BillS made was 100% right on), but I think this is crazy talk. Ron has a lot of problems (and I like the guy!), but he's not a bully. You can't get there from here unless you already dislike the guy and are looking for ways to make him look bad. Peck's been doing this for a while (and I truly respect Peck).

    EDIT: Bill just posted another great point. Just to clarify, I was talking about his original post.
    Welcome to Pacers Digest! New around here? Here are three tips for making the forum a great place to talk about Pacers basketball.

    • Log in. Even if you want to read instead of post, it's helpful because it lets you:
    • Change your signature options. You can hide all signatures by choosing "Settings" (top right) then "General Settings" (middle left) and unchecking the box "Show Signatures" (in the "Thread Display Options" area).
    • Create an ignore list. I know it may seem unneighborly. But you're here to talk about the Pacers, not argue with someone who's just looking for an argument. Most of the regular users on here make use (at least occasionally) of the "Ignore" feature. Just go to "Settings" -> "Edit Ignore List" and add the names.

    Enjoy your time at PD!

  15. #15
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthem
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Ron has a lot of problems (and I like the guy!), but he's not a bully. You can't get there from here unless you already dislike the guy and are looking for ways to make him look bad.
    you might have just summarized my next post which will probably take a few thousand words in the matter of two sentences...


  16. #16
    Member RWB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,337

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Now translate that to real life & use this example. You are a widget salesman & you are pretty good at it. Then another widget salesman comes to your area & starts selling about the same as you do & then one day he goes ahead of you in the block & starts selling more. You wait as he is coming out of a house after a sale & you run up & wack him over the back of the head.


    Can we change Ron's nickname to Tonya? Ron Artest is now the Tonya Harding of basketball.

  17. #17
    Member Vicious Tyrant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Bloomington
    Age
    46
    Posts
    1,207

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by RWB
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Can we change Ron's nickname to Tonya? Ron Artest is now the Tonya Harding of basketball.


    Ha! ZING!
    "If you ever crawl inside an old hollow log and go to sleep, and while you're in there some guys come and seal up both ends and then put it on a truck and take it to another city, boy, I don't know what to tell you." - Jack Handy

  18. #18
    Tree People to the Core! indygeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cumberland
    Posts
    15,312
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Issue # 5

    This is an on the court issue btw, but in tense games when discipline is called for I don't trust him. I don't for a min. beleive he won't break a play & call his own # when the play is clearly called for someone else.

    If a player out plays him I am always afraid how he will react & I don't mean physical either. I'm talking about shooting dumber shots or making worse choices. Take last seasons game 6 vs. the Pistons. Ron just was being abused by Prince yet he kept forcing it. Eventually as the game ran down he totally abandoned the play sets & ran whatever he wanted to.


    I re-reading this, I was struck by the similarity to my feelings concerning a certain Point Gaurd we have. But I beleive that may deserve it's own thread at another time.
    If you get to thinkiní youíre a person of some influence, try orderiní somebody elseís dog around..

  19. #19
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    damn u peck...this might take me forever....i never would insult u by not putting a great deal of time into my thoughts after u obviously spent so much time with yours-which, once again, i appreciate....and really expected....which is why i asked

    this i do find rather interesting....

    a blurb from Peck in his initial post in this thread


    When I see wrong I can't just close my eyes & put my hands over my ears & go "la la la" I have a bad habit of calling it out.
    a blurb from me in the bonzi thread, and somewhat explaining the basis for this thread...
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...&postcount=125
    im sorry u had a tough day....we all have them....and i mean that sincerely....i dont do for ron what i wouldnt do for u or pretty much any other human being....with maybe the exception of kstat and harmonica if im having a bad day-if i see someone being bashed PERSONALLY i will usually speak up if they are unable to reply themselves....
    interesting i think....coincidental? i think not....ironic, somewhat, that we end up discussing this, when we both contend that we do things, regarding the matter at hand, for somewhat the same reasons...

  20. #20
    Harmonica
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by foretaz
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    damn u peck...this might take me forever....i never would insult u by not putting a great deal of time into my thoughts after u obviously spent so much time with yours-which, once again, i appreciate....and really expected....which is why i asked

    this i do find rather interesting....

    a blurb from Peck in his initial post in this thread


    "When I see wrong I can't just close my eyes & put my hands over my ears & go "la la la" I have a bad habit of calling it out."

    a blurb from me in the bonzi thread, and somewhat explaining the basis for this thread...

    "im sorry u had a tough day....we all have them....and i mean that sincerely....i dont do for ron what i wouldnt do for u or pretty much any other human being....with maybe the exception of kstat and harmonica if im having a bad day-if i see someone being bashed PERSONALLY i will usually speak up if they are unable to reply themselves...."

    interesting i think....coincidental? i think not....ironic, somewhat, that we end up discussing this, when we both contend that we do things, regarding the matter at hand, for somewhat the same reasons...
    I think there's a big difference between what you two are talking about. See, it's one thing to call someone or something out on an internet forum, and quite another to do so in person, in a real situation. I imagine if Peck were to see Ron in person, he would be quite respectful, if not a little nervous (as evidenced by his reaction to Scot Pollard). In other words, he ain't gonna call Ron out to his face.

    And I can't fathom the situation where I would ever need you to speak up for me. That's simply laughable. Although it must be fun for you to imagine.

  21. #21
    foretaz
    Guest

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by Harmonica
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think there's a big difference between what you two are talking about. See, it's one thing to call someone or something out on an internet forum, and quite another to do so in person, in a real situation. I imagine if Peck were to see Ron in person, he would be quite respectful, if not a little nervous (as evidenced by his reaction to Scot Pollard). In other words, he ain't gonna call Ron out to his face.

    And I can't fathom the situation where I would ever need you to speak up for me. That's simply laughable. Although it must be fun for you to imagine.
    ill assume that because of ur issues with my font, that ur unable to read and comprehend what i write, since its so unprofessional in ur eyes....let me see if i can review for u...though i realize its probably futile because its not in the font and style u deem appropriate...

    i, similar to peck, will come to someones defense if they are being verbally abused or attacked and are not around or available to defend themselves....

    i mentioned if i was having a bad day there might be two exceptions to that....harmonica and kstat....

    based on ur continued snide comments, calculated personal jabs, it seems ur developing a somewhat of a fatal attraction of sorts stalking mentality towards me....which should only further the validity for my refraining to come to ur defense(IF UR NOT AROUND OR UNABLE TO DO SO) if im having a bad day....

    u will forgive me if im not optimistic, at this point, about ur getting it....luckily, for both of us, our lives wont be negatively effected either way...

  22. #22
    Administrator/ The Real Jay ChicagoJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Chicago
    Age
    45
    Posts
    17,000

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Every knows I'm not going to flame you on this topic...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Which bring me to issue # 2.
    There is a segment of us out there that turned against Ron a long time ago. The brawl in the Palace was not a suprise to many of us, it was fullfilment of prophecy that some of us had been saying for a long time.

    (in fairness I will admit that none of us would have ever dreamed possible the amount of damage that he was able to do to the franchise on that night but just weeks before it happened both Jay & myself were saying that he was going to tear the entire franchise down & boy did he ever)

    You see a lot of people are at the stage with Ron now that they say "well let's give him one more chance & if he screws up again I'm done with him". To me, I was at that over a year ago. So last season wasn't a "one more chance issue" it was just "one more thing".

    I'm pretty sure it was two seasons ago that I started getting to the point where I didn't care for him. When he hit AK47 that pretty much disgusted me but didn't put me over the edge, however I was very leary of him from that point on. But when I saw Mel Daniels litterally pushing & shoving him into the locker room after that loss in Boston I knew I was done with him. That was the second time I had seen him go after a fan, the first was at the fieldhouse when he went after our famos blond lady from the front row when he was with the Bulls.

    Ok, again I've gone off-track let me see if I can put this together.

    I was against Ron long before the brawl, in fact I spent the entire last summer doing two things.

    1. B*tching that Brad Miller was traded.
    2. B*tching that Ron Artest was not.

    I guess I just want you to know that because I don't want you to think I'm just pileing on after a bad incident.
    This is clearly where a small, vocal minority of us are. Call us the "prophets" if you want, we see something we totally disagree with and feel responsibility to get the word out. If Peck's "Issue #1" did not exist, there wouldn't be hundreds of threads on here solely devoted to Ron Artest. I don't start threads about him, and most of the other Hateroid drinkers don't start threads on him. Oh, we'll finish them all right, but we're generally not starting the discussion.

    For our newer posters, here's a thread about Ron in which the very last post was prior to the brawl. And 5.5 of the 7 pages were before training camp.

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ead.php?t=6211

    And I don't think the link in Peck's first post is any good, so here's the text of the article.

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/forums/s...ead.php?t=7085

    I can't speak for all the Haterade sippers, but the brawl has very little to do with why I want Ron Artest traded.

    Issue # 3.

    He's a great talent. Hell he may be the best player the Pacers have ever had but, IMO, it doesn't matter how good you are if you & your team mates & coach's cannot get along.

    There is a lot of back story's that are well known on here (I'm not sure if you've heard them yet or not?) about Ron & Jermaine. But there are also story's of Ron & Rick that don't always get mentioned as much as they should.

    Before last season Jermaine made a comment in the Star about having to dedicate more time to Ron to make him feel part of the team (read: babysit Ron) & how differant team members were taking turns with Ron. I'm sorry but the guy brings the team down when it becomes necassary to do that. I don't care who the player is. If it was Jordan or if it was Magic, nobody would be worth the entire team trying to make sure they were happy & content.

    Anytime Ron doesn't get his way he either goes public with his thoughts about how he doesn't know if he wants to play here or not (like he did on two occasions Carlisle first season) or he somehow gets a migraine.

    Well the star fessed up about covering up for Ron during last seasons playoffs when Kravits outed Montieth for this & I'm not sure that isn't why Mark doesn't cover the Pacers on the beat anymore. I'm not saying it is but it wouldn't suprise me either.

    I digress.

    Ron has faked issues before about headaches when he doesn't feel as though the offense goes through him enough.
    And in Chicago, Ron faked injuries to his finger. KC Johnson also does an "Ask the expert" column. I don't read it very often but I was checking it out late in the Tim Floyd era because I like to laugh at the Bulls any time I can.

    A reader asked KC Johnson when Ron's finger injury would heal. KC's response was, "About the time he and Tim Floyd work out thier differences."

    This is why I was openly questioning Ron's finger injury right after the all-star game last season, and if you dig around you just might find some bizarre twists to that story, too.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,660

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Peck Ė

    As one of the remaining Artest fans, Iíd say that I agree with everything youíve stated. I like what Artest can bring to a basketball court, and especially what his very diverse skills mean to our team. But, like you, I also despise some of his antics.

    The only issue you point out that I take exception to is #4.

    Issue # 4Ö

    Ron Artest can contribute to a title or to a great team, but he is not the end all be all of a team. If we cannot win a title without Ron Artest then there are serious flaws to our team. As has been pointed out by other posters, teams have won titles without Ron Artest being a member of that team.
    [I]

    On the surface, certainly this statement is accurate. I only wish it were that simple. But itís much more complex than that. Win a title without Artest? Sure, but how long will it take to re-fit the team to compensate his loss? And will the re-fitted team ever experience the window of opportunity that appears to be at hand right now?

    I believe your real point is basically a statement that no one player is more important than the team. And I respect that. But let me purse your words as written.

    GMs fit teams together, much like you and I assemble the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. A little bit of post play here, a couple of decent perimeter shooters there, a decent ball-handler/distributor, a lock-down defender over there. Maybe another guy that throws mean picks out on the floor. The individual pieces are rarely be-all, end-all players (as you would state), but together they do a decent job of compensating for each otherís weaknesses.

    The trouble is that, since each piece of the puzzle is unique in its own right, contributing its own set of skills to the mix, to maintain proper balance among the pieces, you find that you must also exchange some of the other pieces once you exchange the first piece.

    Does this make sense? Iím not saying that the Pacers are the best example of synergy that Iíve ever experienced, but they are ďsynergisticĒ none the less.

    Itís pretty obvious the problem that Bird and Walsh face. How can they replace Artestís man-on and team defensive abilities, his ability to post-up, his physical strength, his competitive edge, his shooting, hisÖ Well you get it. Your remove all that from the lineup in a single player, plug in a new player, and other pieces of the puzzle would most likely have to be exchanged to take up the slack.

    So what should Bird and Walsh do? Begin the retro-fit? Or do they roll the dice until the trade deadline next season to see how things are going, perhaps posturing the Pacers for a title run?

    Thatís really a tough decision, isnít it? You dump Artest, exchange a couple of more pieces and maybe your window of opportunity closes. You keep Artest, he possibly implodes again, and youíre basically dekcuf.

    On the one hand, if they can keep the wheels on Artestís wagon, Bird and Walsh know ďwhat they haveĒÖ a contender. They get rid of Artest and maybe another player or two, and donít really know for certain how the new pieces will mesh and what the end product will be.

    Which do you consider to be the greater risk? Because, I sure as hell donít know. I can only go by Larryís ongoing praise of Artest. But then again, is it genuine or posturing for equal value in a trade? I donít know.

  24. #24
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,857

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by beast23
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    On the surface, certainly this statement is accurate. I only wish it were that simple. But itís much more complex than that. Win a title without Artest? Sure, but how long will it take to re-fit the team to compensate his loss? And will the re-fitted team ever experience the window of opportunity that appears to be at hand right now?

    I believe your real point is basically a statement that no one player is more important than the team. And I respect that. But let me purse your words as written.

    GMs fit teams together, much like you and I assemble the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. A little bit of post play here, a couple of decent perimeter shooters there, a decent ball-handler/distributor, a lock-down defender over there. Maybe another guy that throws mean picks out on the floor. The individual pieces are rarely be-all, end-all players (as you would state), but together they do a decent job of compensating for each otherís weaknesses.

    The trouble is that, since each piece of the puzzle is unique in its own right, contributing its own set of skills to the mix, to maintain proper balance among the pieces, you find that you must also exchange some of the other pieces once you exchange the first piece.

    Does this make sense? Iím not saying that the Pacers are the best example of synergy that Iíve ever experienced, but they are ďsynergisticĒ none the less.

    Itís pretty obvious the problem that Bird and Walsh face. How can they replace Artestís man-on and team defensive abilities, his ability to post-up, his physical strength, his competitive edge, his shooting, hisÖ Well you get it. Your remove all that from the lineup in a single player, plug in a new player, and other pieces of the puzzle would most likely have to be exchanged to take up the slack.

    So what should Bird and Walsh do? Begin the retro-fit? Or do they roll the dice until the trade deadline next season to see how things are going, perhaps posturing the Pacers for a title run?

    Thatís really a tough decision, isnít it? You dump Artest, exchange a couple of more pieces and maybe your window of opportunity closes. You keep Artest, he possibly implodes again, and youíre basically dekcuf.

    On the one hand, if they can keep the wheels on Artestís wagon, Bird and Walsh know ďwhat they haveĒÖ a contender. They get rid of Artest and maybe another player or two, and donít really know for certain how the new pieces will mesh and what the end product will be.

    Which do you consider to be the greater risk? Because, I sure as hell donít know. I can only go by Larryís ongoing praise of Artest. But then again, is it genuine or posturing for equal value in a trade? I donít know.


    That is just a great, great post. I think we can all agree that the Pacers are faced with a tough decision, and when you consider that Artest trade value is so low, anyone even the biggest Artest "hater" must admit that it is at the very least a tough decision.

  25. #25
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,893

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: An answer for Fortaz......

    Quote Originally Posted by beast23
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ...snipping content...
    I nominate that to be made a sticky entry under a separate thread without comments allowed as the single best explanation of how most (not all) of us who "support" Ron feel.

    I grant that there are the Ron Jockers, but I think beast23's post best reflects the majority of those who have not completely written Ron off.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •