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

Complete Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing

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

    Complete Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing

    This is the complete transcript of a post I made two days ago. This has more information.


    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_...pt_050622.html

    Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing
    July 23, 2005

    Pacers President Larry Bird met with the media for an informal question-and-answer briefing about the Pacers' plans for the June 28 NBA Draft. What follows is a transcript of that session.
    Q: Since you have the No. 17 pick how difficult do you think it will be to get a guy that can contribute?

    A: Well, it’s just not an issue at all because I think there are going to be at least four guys there that I think can make an impact on our team, and that’s all I can ask for.

    Q: Do you have a sense of whether or not this year’s draft is deeper than last year’s?

    A: My feeling about this draft is, you got your main guys like (Andrew) Bogut, (Marvin) Williams and some other ones in the top five or six, but after that, all the guys to me are basically the same, they’re all great players. All the way up to probably 20. There will be some steals in this draft and it’s a little different, there’s no really clear-cut (definition between the players), after I think number five. You could draft a guy at 17 that could be better than the number six pick in the draft.

    Q: Hypothetically, if you had the No. 1 pick who do you like better between Bogut and Williams?

    A: Well, I would take Bogut for our team, but I like Marvin Williams, I’ve seen him play in high school and he’s very talented. Is he ready for this, who knows? But, he’s going to be a good one.

    Q: Do you have a position you’re looking to fill right now?

    A: Not really. I think what I’m hearing now is that there’s a group of four or five guys, most of them are different positions, and I think we’ll get a kid that hopefully after All-Star break, when you put him in the lineup, he’ll be able to do things that a coach wants him to do. I mean, I think he’s really going to help us.

    Q: What is it that makes Bogut unique for this year’s draft?

    A: Well, he can play some center but I don’t know if he’s a real center, it’s according to where he goes. If he goes to Milwaukee he’ll have to play the center position, but he’s very skilled, he can use his left and right hand, he knows how to play, he can pass out of the post, he will be a very solid player.

    Q: Would you be interested in moving up in the draft, or are you still satisfied with the 17th pick?

    A: Well, if we stayed at 17 I would be satisfied because there’s a group of players there that whoever we take there is going to help our team. But we had some calls about moving, trading and moving up, but some of the guys they’re asking for I don’t want to give up on them. So, right now, it seems like there’s a good possibility we’re going to stay there, but if we can get up there and get a player we know can step right in and make a big impact on our team, yeah, we’ll probably try to do that.

    Q: How likely is it that you will pick a European player?

    A: Marko Tomas got out of the draft, who I really liked, he would’ve been probably around 15-20, 22. I really liked him, I’ve seen him play you know for the last two years, some of the big guys I’m not really impressed with, they’ve got a long ways to go. There’s a point guard, (Roko) Ukic I think is his name, very good, a lot of size, he’s still in the draft, but, there’s some good players, but a lot of the best players pulled out.

    Q: Do you feel like the personal time you spent in Europe watching players was wasted since a lot of them have pulled out?

    A: No, not really. I really feel now, the kids, the young kids, the next great group is coming from Russia. And they’re still 17…16, 17, 18 years old. One of them is going to be in the draft this year, I think he’s going to be a tremendous player, (Yaroslav) Korolev. But, you know, it’s going to take time.

    Q: It seems like there’s a lot of talk surrounding the three point-guards that will probably be taken in the top ten, but since this is a very deep point-guard class, do you still think you will be able to get a good one?

    A: There’s no question about it. I mean you’ve got Paul, Williams and Felton and all three of them are very good players. You know I’ve seen some mock drafts where Felton might slip to 10 or 12, but I don’t know if I believe that. I think he’s good enough to be in the top seven or eight players taken. So this is a deep draft for point guards.

    Q: Since you’ve lost your shooting guard in Reggie, what shooting guards are out there that you like?

    A: Marko Tomas. (Francisco) Garcia is in the draft, Marko Tomas, I really like Luther Head which I think can play point guard. There’s a number of players, (Rashad) McCants is out there, a very talented player, but you know it’s just according to who is going to be in that group when we select. I mean, I might take a point guard, I may take a two, I don’t know yet it’s according to who is left.

    Q: How much do you weigh the player’s character when considering them for the draft?

    A: Well, like Rick Carlisle says, ‘we don’t want a bunch of milk drinkers here.’ We’ll take the good with the bad, but I’ve known Rashad for a couple of years, I’ve talked to him, I’ve been in to watch him practice and he’s a very, very talented player, so, we’ll see what happens.

    Q: Are there any really good shooters out there that can come in and stroke it from the perimeter?

    A: You know all the guys we’ve had in, we’ve had Garcia in, we’ve had Luther Head in, we’ve had a number of guys in and every one of them have shot the ball extremely well. I know Garcia, I’ve seen him play a lot of times. I know Luther Head, everyone knows about Luther and how well he can shoot it. There’s a number of guys out there that can put the ball in the basket.

    Q: Are you geared more towards the backcourt in this draft than the frontcourt?

    A: Well, I can’t say, because things change, it’s according to who is there. We feel we have some areas where we feel we’re getting better in. And, there’s going to be a group of guys there when we select and I think we have it pretty well figured out who is going to be there. And we just got to make the decision on which one we want.

    Q: What skills are you targeting?

    A: Somebody that can help us. Somebody better than what we've got, and we've got some good players.

    Q: Where is Sean May in the draft, do you think he’s slipping?

    A: Well, he could be there when we draft. He’s one of the guys that I’ve got picked out from the group that might be available when we draft, but if there’s a team that really likes him at nine or 10 there’s still going to be another great player there dropping down to us. You know, it’s hard to get all these guys to come in for a workout but, I’m not really big on that since we’ve watched them play so much throughout the year. But, we do like at least for them to come in and sit down and talk with them.

    Q: There has been a trend for the team to take college players, is that a philosophy of the team or just a coincidence?

    A: Well, I mean it’s funny, you look at the guys that have gone to college for a few years and compare them to some of these young kids that are coming out that think they should be playing 40 minutes a game, it’s a little different. And at one time we had two high school players here, they were great guys, had a great work ethic, but you know, they always wanted to play more and do more. Whereas, a guy like James Jones comes in and you don’t have to worry about him. He’ll play whatever role, you know he wants to play all the time but he still accepts the roles that he’s in, so, I always think if you can get a guy or a college player who's been in school for three or four years, I think it’s to your advantage to probably look at him and probably draft him.

    Q: Does that mean you’re more likely to pick a college player in this draft rather than a high school player or a European?

    A: Well, if Gerald Green is there we will take him, but other than that we’ll be looking for someone with great talent and someone who went to college for a few years.

    Q: How do you see Sean May's game projecting to the NBA level. What do you think his strengths and his weaknesses are?

    A: Well, I think he’s got all the tools. I think his ability to rebound, he’s an intelligent player, he’s got great hands, the only problem he may have in this league, but I doubt it, is it won’t be as easy to get his shots off as it was in college, he’ll be contested almost every time, but smart players and good players have the ability to adjust their game and overcome all of that, and I think he is one of those players.

    Q: How dramatically did the players that withdrew affect your plan?

    A: Not at all. Rudy Fernandez, Joe (Ash) has been watching him for years; he’s going to be a very good NBA player in the future but he’s just not strong enough yet. If we had taken a guy like that we would have had to wait two or three years before he was able to come in and help us. Tiago Splitter, he’s another kid, a couple of years in Europe and he’ll be fine. But, it’s just according to what you need I guess, and they’re just not ready yet. In my mind they’re not ready to play here yet, but they’re very talented.

    Q: What are the chances that the guy you’re going to get is going to make the team, let alone help the team?

    A: Oh, he’s going to make the team, we’re confident enough that the guy we’re going to get is not only going to make our team, but is going to play-- even if I have to coach him.

    Q: Where do you see Chris Thomas and Bracey Wright?

    A: I don’t know. You know, we’ve got the 46th pick right now in the second round, will they get there, I don’t know. I know Bracey had great workouts, he played very well in Chicago. Chris Thomas struggled at times, but we’ve seen enough of him to know what he does well. So, it’s really hard to project guys like that. Right now we’re concentrated on the first round and later on this week we’ll start getting in on the second round and we’ll find out where guys will be going.

    Q: Do you think Bracey made a mistake entering the draft early?

    A: No, he made a decision, whether it’s good or bad he’s going to have to live with it. But Bracey’s a good basketball player, I’ve seen him play a number of times, he’s a great kid and you know I wish him well, but he played great in Chicago, he opened a lot of eyes, so that really helped him.

    Q: Are you more comfortable this year in the draft process since you were involved last year?

    A: Well, I’ve been involved in this for a number of years, you know in Boston I went through all this, but you know it’s a long process. There’s a lot of travel, and you see a lot of games, a lot of tapes. But, I’m confident this year we will get a player that can help us and that’s all that you can ask for.

    Q: Is that typical to have the kind of confidence you have from within the team?

    A: Well, with the draft this year, like I said earlier, you got the five or six guys, you know where they’re going to go and from that point on, there to 20, the guy at 20 could be better than the guy at six, so hopefully you can get a guy that you like and when he comes in and he’s able to play for your team, especially a team that’s very strong like ours, that’s nothing but a major plus, it’s awesome and we will get a good player. I’m very confident in that.

    Q: Are you surprised that there is a Game 7 being played in the NBA Finals?

    A: Not really. I mean if you look at both teams out there, and you always talk about chemistry and guys not worrying about stats, just playing, you know maybe that’s the reason these two teams are in the Finals. It’s very simple, when you’ve got a team that really comes together and plays as a team and does everything as a team they do it for a reason. And it’s to get to the NBA Finals and have a chance to win the world championship. I’m not surprised by either team. You talk to Detroit and they always say they don’t have any superstars on their team but they have a lot of great players on their team. You look at Tim Duncan, and other than that, they’re a team. And that’s what we’re trying to stress with our guys the last couple of years, that it’s not about stats, if you really want to win the whole thing it’s about playing together and being a team and having the right chemistry.

    Q: Why is there not a lot of talk about trade activity floating around and why is this the period of time when you would be active?

    A: We are active, but I don’t call you up every day and tell you what we’re doing. But it’s one of the busiest times, a lot of work goes on here to try to figure out the draft, if you can move up or if you can move down, and everyone’s trying to get players to make their teams better, but we don’t like to have a lot of our information out there. We’re not trying to hide anything, but if you have two or three players that you really like, if you have to move up to get one of those guys you do that, but right now sitting at No. 17, I know we’re going to get a good player. So you know, why should I sit here and tell you who we want?

    Q: How willing are you to alter the roster as it is now?

    A: I don’t want to give up too much. I like our team, obviously I think we got some needs, we've got to get better in some areas, but I don’t want to give up a good player that’s really helped us out in the last couple of years just to move up four or five spots in the draft. Because I know next year that player will be very valuable to us. And you don’t know how valuable they are until you move 'em and you let 'em go. I think it’s a very important process to just add pieces and make ourselves better. I don’t want to trade away some guys just to move up in the draft and get a guy at 14, when you could have gotten him at 17.

    Q: Last year you made an effort to move up because Al Harrington asked to be traded. Are you not doing that this year since no one has said they want to leave?

    A: Oh there’s a couple that want out of here. Not really, I’m just teasing. Last year was different, I mean Al made it known that he would like to move on, get more playing time and we couldn’t give it to him here. This year it’s a little different our main core, our main group of guys, we like them. Do we have to get better and put better people around them? We’re going to try to do that.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Complete Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing

    Q: How likely is it that you will pick a European player?

    A: Marko Tomas got out of the draft, who I really liked, he would’ve been probably around 15-20, 22. I really liked him, I’ve seen him play you know for the last two years, some of the big guys I’m not really impressed with, they’ve got a long ways to go. There’s a point guard, (Roko) Ukic I think is his name, very good, a lot of size, he’s still in the draft, but, there’s some good players, but a lot of the best players pulled out.
    ...

    Q: Since you’ve lost your shooting guard in Reggie, what shooting guards are out there that you like?

    A: Marko Tomas. (Francisco) Garcia is in the draft, Marko Tomas, I really like Luther Head which I think can play point guard. There’s a number of players, (Rashad) McCants is out there, a very talented player, but you know it’s just according to who is going to be in that group when we select. I mean, I might take a point guard, I may take a two, I don’t know yet it’s according to who is left.
    It's interesting that, after mentioning the fact that Marko Thomas, who he likes, pulled out of the draft, Bird then mentions him again as a SG he likes, even though he's not in the draft.

    Mean anything?
    "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
    -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Complete Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing

      Q: Would you be interested in moving up in the draft, or are you still satisfied with the 17th pick?

      A: Well, if we stayed at 17 I would be satisfied because there’s a group of players there that whoever we take there is going to help our team. But we had some calls about moving, trading and moving up, but some of the guys they’re asking for I don’t want to give up on them. So, right now, it seems like there’s a good possibility we’re going to stay there, but if we can get up there and get a player we know can step right in and make a big impact on our team, yeah, we’ll probably try to do that.
      I think this pretty much says we aren't trading Bender & the 17th. I say Larry Bird will take McCants with the 17th unless someone that is supposed to be taken a lot higher isn't. If McCants and May are gone, he'll take Garcia or possibly Head. 2nd round I'm guessing he'll go for a PG like Nate Robinson or Diener if he can get one at 46 (is that what pick we have). I think it's possible he might go with Bracey if we don't take a SG in the 1st. I'm just really thinking he's going with McCants after this article.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Complete Transcript: Larry Bird’s Pre-Draft Briefing

        Still think they'll take Ike Diogu if he's there, and get rid of Cro. Either him or Garcia.
        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

        ----------------- Reggie Miller

        Comment

        Previous template Next
        Working...
        X