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

RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

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

  • #31
    Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

    Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
    I'm going to ask this, and I'm not trying to be a smartass. What's the difference between Jalen Rose and Reggie Miller? A few clutch shots? Scoring is both of their strengths. They are both mediocre defenders at best. Reggie shinned best when he had a strong supporting cast, but when the team itself wasn't that strong, Reggie still put up solid numbers....Sounds just like Jalen....

    Reggie and Jalen got the furthest in their careers when they were both fed off of each other, and a strong cast of role players. Reggie seemed to have a bit more luck being placed with a stronger cast of teammates than Jalen did, but outside of a few clutch shots......they are pretty much the same.
    Reggie would have done all of what he did in his career without Jalen also. He did it before Jalen, when Jalen was here and after Jalen left.

    A few clutch shots. There is a lot more than just a few shots that Reggie did. There is alot more to basketball than just athletic talent (Fab Five?). You have to buy into the concept of playing within a system. For a team to succeed you need your best players to play team ball. Jalen never has and never will get that concept. He is a perpetual whiny *** pouter. He was so full of himself on the basketball court constantly breaking the coaches plays, pulling up whenever he wanted to, passing when there is 2 secs left in the shot clock, whining to the refrees, etc,etc.

    Donnie dodged one there and got lucky to get Brad and Ronnie for Jalen. What was Krauss thinking?

    What Reggie did for this team, JUST THIS YEAR, after 11/19 happened is enough. Reggie, along with the coaching staff, put this team on his back, did not allow them to quit, etc, etc. Jalen can't even imagine doing what Reggie has done for this franchise/lockerroom, and we are not even on the court yet.

    I am no Sassan but comparing Jalen to Reggie and saying what is the difference is a bit ridiculous.
    ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

      Originally posted by pacerwaala
      Reggie would have done all of what he did in his career without Jalen also. He did it before Jalen, when Jalen was here and after Jalen left.

      A few clutch shots. There is a lot more than just a few shots that Reggie did. There is alot more to basketball than just athletic talent (Fab Five?). You have to buy into the concept of playing within a system. For a team to succeed you need your best players to play team ball. Jalen never has and never will get that concept. He is a perpetual whiny *** pouter. He was so full of himself on the basketball court constantly breaking the coaches plays, pulling up whenever he wanted to, passing when there is 2 secs left in the shot clock, whining to the refrees, etc,etc.

      Donnie dodged one there and got lucky to get Brad and Ronnie for Jalen. What was Krauss thinking?

      What Reggie did for this team, JUST THIS YEAR, after 11/19 happened is enough. Reggie, along with the coaching staff, put this team on his back, did not allow them to quit, etc, etc. Jalen can't even imagine doing what Reggie has done for this franchise/lockerroom, and we are not even on the court yet.

      I am no Sassan but comparing Jalen to Reggie and saying what is the difference is a bit ridiculous.

      I wasn't comparing their success. No Question that Reggie has had a superior career.

      I was comparing their style. Honestly, what is the difference between Reggie's game and Jalen's? Scoring is their clear strength, and they both played mediocre defense. They're both scorers, and if you compare their scoring ability in their primes, it's about equal.

      I wasn't trying to compare their importance to this franchise, because obviously their is no comparison.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

        Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
        I wasn't comparing their success. No Question that Reggie has had a superior career.

        I was comparing their style. Honestly, what is the difference between Reggie's game and Jalen's? Scoring is their clear strength, and they both played mediocre defense. They're both scorers, and if you compare their scoring ability in their primes, it's about equal.

        I wasn't trying to compare their importance to this franchise, because obviously their is no comparison.
        so since reggie never signed anything near a max contract, then u should maybe reconsider ur bashing of reggies contracts then, right?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

          Originally posted by Unclebuck
          Peck's taking cheap shots at me on his way out of town

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

            Originally posted by foretaz
            so since reggie never signed anything near a max contract, then u should maybe reconsider ur bashing of reggies contracts then, right?

            Reggie wouldnt have gotten anything close anywhere else to the 6 mil a season 3 year deal we signed him to in 2003.

            Lots of teams would have payed Rose a high amount in 2000.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

              Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
              Reggie wouldnt have gotten anything close anywhere else to the 6 mil a season 3 year deal we signed him to in 2003.

              Lots of teams would have payed Rose a high amount in 2000.
              and u dont think reggie couldve gotten more than 3 years/36 million on the open market then???

              better yet you dont think he couldve gotten more than 5 years and 54 million??? considering teams couldve paid him around 5 years and 80 million doesnt seem too far out of line....allan houston got 6 years and 100 million...

              based on everything, it seems to me when people ***** about reggies contract next season, they dont get it.....

              he played the last 5 seasons for about 54 million....thats hardly out of line....especially for someone who doesnt seem to have much of a problem with jalen 'the cancer' rose's contract...

              if reggie miller wouldve gone 'brad miller' on our ***, he couldve left a long time ago for a lot more money....

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                Originally posted by foretaz
                and u dont think reggie couldve gotten more than 3 years/36 million on the open market then???

                better yet you dont think he couldve gotten more than 5 years and 54 million??? considering teams couldve paid him around 5 years and 80 million doesnt seem too far out of line....allan houston got 6 years and 100 million...

                based on everything, it seems to me when people ***** about reggies contract next season, they dont get it.....

                he played the last 5 seasons for about 54 million....thats hardly out of line....especially for someone who doesnt seem to have much of a problem with jalen 'the cancer' rose's contract...

                if reggie miller wouldve gone 'brad miller' on our ***, he couldve left a long time ago for a lot more money....

                Reggie turned 35 in the summer of 2000. I don't know if many teams would have signed a 35 year old to something that was more than 12 million a year for more than 3 years.

                Allan Houston got his money at the age of 30. MAJOR difference between age 30 and 35. Not many GM's would take the risk of signing a player to something more than 3 years at age 35. It doesn't matter how good you are, or how good of shape you are in. Too many things can happen to a player in their late 30's.

                Reggie flirted with New York in 1996. New York went with the younger Allan Houston.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                  Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
                  Reggie turned 35 in the summer of 2000. I don't know if many teams would have signed a 35 year old to something that was more than 12 million a year for more than 3 years.

                  Allan Houston got his money at the age of 30. MAJOR difference between age 30 and 35. Not many GM's would take the risk of signing a player to something more than 3 years at age 35. It doesn't matter how good you are, or how good of shape you are in. Too many things can happen to a player in their late 30's.

                  Reggie flirted with New York in 1996. New York went with the younger Allan Houston.
                  u know some times i wish u would make up ur mind....u flip flop more than a pancake at waffle house....

                  in another thread recently u said the only way the pacers got to the finals in 2000, was that reggie put the team on his shoulders and willed them to the finals.....yet that same guy couldnt get an average contract that summer????? croshere can get 56 million for 7 years, jalen can get a max contract, but reggie couldnt have gotten the same as those guys???? what are u smoking my young friend????

                  then u like to talk about how jo isnt worthy of a max contract and yada yada yada, but then ur on here talking bout how worthy jalen is and how much hes disrespected????

                  jalen is a cancer who has had problems everywhere hes ever went....only larry bird was able to keep him in check, and god knows what might have happened if bird wouldve stayed around....

                  hes not the first cancer to get a max contract....and i applaud donnie for making the right business move in giving it to him instead of letting him walk...and then turning around and dumping his sorry a$$ the first chance he got-let alone for artest and miller....

                  jalen epitomizes whats wrong with the nba....a guy with alot of talent who puts forth very little effort and is a problem child everywhere he goes....a gross underachiever.....i can probably cant on one hand the number of games hes played defense....and for someone of his ability, thats close to being criminal....

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                    say what you will about Jalen, but he was the best playoff performer on the 2000 team, night in and night out.

                    That said, that Jalen hasn't been heard from since....

                    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


                    • #40
                      Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                      Originally posted by Kstat
                      say what you will about Jalen, but he was the best playoff performer on the 2000 team, night in and night out.

                      That said, that Jalen hasn't been heard from since....

                      care to expand on that?
                      I will help you with some stats.


                      Name G MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
                      +--------------------+---+----+----+----+---+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+---+---+---+---+----+
                      Reggie Miller 22 40.5 7.9 17.5 2.6 6.7 5.5 5.9 0.4 2.0 2.4 2.7 1.0 0.5 1.3 1.7 24.0
                      Jalen Rose 23 41.9 7.4 17.0 1.3 3.0 4.7 5.8 0.4 4.0 4.4 3.4 0.7 0.5 2.2 3.1 20.8

                      Stats are a different thing. Who put that team on its back int he playoffs in hte Milwaukee, PHI, NYK series is beyond obvious.


                      Jalen Rose will and always be about contracts. That was a contract year and that is the reason he tried. Also, you can have great offensive numbers and do nothing else on and off the court.

                      If you are just trying to stir up this thread like a sports talk radio host, I have fallen prey.
                      ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                        Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
                        Reggie wouldnt have gotten anything close anywhere else to the 6 mil a season 3 year deal we signed him to in 2003.

                        Lots of teams would have payed Rose a high amount in 2000.

                        I would have let them back then. But we got Ronnie for having signed Jalen. So it worked out.


                        The following is from a previous post of mine but is very relevant here -

                        Also, for those of you who think Reggie is overpaid, I don't think so. 5 million for an average of 13 points with the potential to make game winning or game altering shots is pretty normal. He is good for team chemistry and brings a lot of intangibles. He might be taking some minutes away from Freddie but he is not overpaid.

                        Also, none of the contracts that Reggie signed were bloated
                        Reggie signed the following

                        1 - rookie contract (I don't know how much)
                        2 - 1990-1996 - 7 years, 18 million
                        3 - 1996-2000 - 4 years, 36 million (This was after the NY heroics and there were some tough negotiations - He took the Pacers to the NBA finals during the last year of this contract)
                        4 - 2000-2003 - 3 years, 36 million
                        5 - 2003-2006 - 3 years, 17.5 million (this might end up being a 2 year 12 mil)

                        So we have signed him for 18 years 110 million. There is inflation, market value at the time and all but for all the excitement he has given that is a bargain. All his contracts were earned in my IMHO. He never got the 7 year bloated contracts that Juan Howard and Jalen Rose got for 1 good season - of for that matter Allan Houston.
                        ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                          Originally posted by Kstat
                          say what you will about Jalen, but he was the best playoff performer on the 2000 team, night in and night out.
                          Or not.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                            Originally posted by foretaz
                            u know some times i wish u would make up ur mind....u flip flop more than a pancake at waffle house....

                            in another thread recently u said the only way the pacers got to the finals in 2000, was that reggie put the team on his shoulders and willed them to the finals.....yet that same guy couldnt get an average contract that summer????? croshere can get 56 million for 7 years, jalen can get a max contract, but reggie couldnt have gotten the same as those guys???? what are u smoking my young friend????

                            then u like to talk about how jo isnt worthy of a max contract and yada yada yada, but then ur on here talking bout how worthy jalen is and how much hes disrespected????

                            jalen is a cancer who has had problems everywhere hes ever went....only larry bird was able to keep him in check, and god knows what might have happened if bird wouldve stayed around....

                            hes not the first cancer to get a max contract....and i applaud donnie for making the right business move in giving it to him instead of letting him walk...and then turning around and dumping his sorry a$$ the first chance he got-let alone for artest and miller....

                            jalen epitomizes whats wrong with the nba....a guy with alot of talent who puts forth very little effort and is a problem child everywhere he goes....a gross underachiever.....i can probably cant on one hand the number of games hes played defense....and for someone of his ability, thats close to being criminal....

                            "flip more than pancakes in a waffle house:".....I've never heard that one before.

                            Reggie did put the team on his back in 2000. When did I say he didn't? Reggie laid it all on the line in must win games.

                            All I meant was, Jalen played consistantly in every game in 2000. He came up big for us. I've stated onthis thread that I agree with Walsh's decision to trade Jalen, because the Pacers got a steal(then turned around and pulled a lopsided trade a year later with Brad).

                            Yes, Jalen was overpaid, but his game never depreciated. He was always the same player, and still is.

                            And I agree 100% with the Pacers signing JO. He would have bolted to SA if the Pacers didnt offer him that contract. All I'm saying is, don't you think that the Pacers expect JO to lead the Pacers to the finals? If JO doesn't, I'd think the Pacers management would be disappointed. JO himself has stated numerous times that he wants to win a title for the Pacers.

                            Have you heard of something called age? If you haven't, I'll explain it to you. You see, Reggie was turning 35 in the summer of 2000, while Croshere was just 25, and Jalen was 27.

                            You don't sign 35 year old players to 7 year deals. Period.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                              Originally posted by PacerFanAdam
                              "flip more than pancakes in a waffle house:".....I've never heard that one before.

                              Reggie did put the team on his back in 2000. When did I say he didn't? Reggie laid it all on the line in must win games.

                              All I meant was, Jalen played consistantly in every game in 2000. He came up big for us.
                              I wonder if the fact that Walsh had already decided he was breaking up the 99-2000 team (and had already started on it) acted as a motivator to push Miller et al to take the team farther than ever before... even tho it had been decided that they had 'peaked'?


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

                              ------

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

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: RealGM - The Ten Worst Free-Agent Signings of the Past Decade

                                Originally posted by Bball
                                I wonder if the fact that Walsh had already decided he was breaking up the 99-2000 team (and had already started on it) acted as a motivator to push Miller et al to take the team farther than ever before... even tho it had been decided that they had 'peaked'?


                                -Bball

                                Oh, definitely.

                                There was a quote by Miller I remember after game 5 against Milwaukee, a reporter asked him something along the lines of "did you want to go out there and win this for coach Bird, since this could have been his last game?"

                                Miller responded with something like: "No, I did this for myself, this could have been my last game too."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X