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

Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

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

  • Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...S0404/51007007

    Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A
    Indianapolis Star sports reporter Mike Wells answers your questions about the Pacers.

    Answers Posted Dec. 3, 2005

    Question: If Jonathon Bender decides to retire, will he still count against the Pacers salary cap in this and future seasons?

    Answer: If Bender is forced to retire, which would be very unfortunate, he will still get paid because his contract is guaranteed. If an independent doctor determines Bender can no longer play, the Pacers will apply to the league to have what's left of his contract removed for salary cap purposes one year from the date it was determined he couldn't play anymore. The move will also help for luxury tax purposes. (Johnny from Chico, Calif.)


    Question: I agree with you that the return of Jeff Foster will be huge. My question is what about the other centers on the roster. We are getting killed on the boards and the centers don't even play a combined 20 minutes in a game. Even when Pollard starts he seldom plays more than 15 minutes. If they can't rebound then why are they on the roster? (Tom from Muncie. Ind.)

    Answer: I agree with you Tom on your comment about the centers not being able to play a combined 20 minutes a game and help rebound the ball. David Harrison can't stay on the court long enough to contribute because he usually picks up a couple of fouls within 30 seconds of checking into game. Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof. Pollard is a situational center. He won't play unless the Pacers are going against somebody like Shaq or Yao Ming. Depending on how quickly Foster returns to his former self, the Pacers could end up trying to trade Pollard later this season because he's in the final of his contract. O'Neal and Croshere, the team's top rebounders, need Foster to get back into game shape quickly because you're right, the Pacers are getting outrebounded on the glass and it really showed in the Atlanta game when they gave up 24 offensive rebounds to the Hawks.


    Question: Is there anyone that thinks the Pacers struggles are a result of Rick Carlisle? Everyone talks about how he is a great coach, and how he held the team together last year, but do you really think his style fits the Pacers? It seems like they are most suited to be a uptempo team and he is all about slowing them down and calling a play. What do you think? (Brian from Fort Wayne, Ind.)

    Answer: There's no other way to put it: Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching. The Pacers had one of their best games against New Jersey when Carlisle wasn't constantly calling a play every time the court. Anthony Johnson said it best after that game when he said Carlisle "trusts himself more than he trusts us." This team has the players to play uptempo (except against Phoenix). The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game. The ball usually ends up in O'Neal's hands in the post with everybody standing around watching after the initial first cut to the basket by the passer. Playing that style makes the Pacers predictable on offense. The things is, though, that style has allowed Carlisle to be successful as a coach so far. So I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't change his style.


    Question: I'm one of the few Austin Croshere supporters. I've been saying for years that he is underappreciated and that when he is on the floor the team seems to play better. This perception was supported by an analysis published in the Star a season or two ago. I believe that he is getting more of an opportunity to play this season, and that he is playing well. My question is why was Croshere taken out near the end of the Atlanta game. I believe that he would have rebounded the missed free throw, and that the Pacers would have won the game. In fact, it seems like most of the Pacer losses so far this season have been because Croshere was not on the floor near the end of the game. (Kevin from Indianapolis)

    Answer: Croshere's usually not on the court at the end of games for defensive purposes. As good of a rebounder and free throw shooter as he is, Croshere isn't quick enough on defense. You're taking a risk by having him on the court at the end of a close game because you'll probably have to give help, which will leave somebody else open on the court. Despite his defensive problems, Croshere has been one of the Pacers' bright spots this season.


    Question: Is Stephan Jackson a plus or a minus for the Pacers in all respects?
    (Jack from Bloomingdale, Ill.)

    Answer: My problem with Jackson is that you never know which player is going to show up. Some nights he looks like a player that fits in well alongside Jermaine and Artest. Other nights he looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta) and he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept. He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense. I think part of that problem is the loss of Mike Brown to Cleveland. Brown had the ability to relate with the players and keep their head in the game. Brown would often go to the end of the bench and talk to Jackson to keep him focused when he would get upset over an issue.

  • #2
    Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

    Didn't someone here bring up the Mike Brown / SJax comment that Wells just pointed out about how Brown was able to speak to and keep SJax focused last season?
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

      So there are people who think you could turn this team loose and they'd be fine?

      -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


      • #4
        Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

        Hmm I wonder if Mike Wells might just be a bit too candid for some people.
        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

          Originally posted by indygeezer
          Hmm I wonder if Mike Wells might just be a bit too candid for some people.
          Does make you wonder. I imagine he'll be a short timer as he'll likely be able to cash in with a larger market within several years.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

            Wells isn't candid as much as he is an unbiased parrot. I really wonder if he even watches the games. His answers are amazingly superficial.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

              There is a BIG difference between "telling it as it is" and "blowing it out your ear"

              IMO Wells is mostly doing the latter, for one he does not care one iota about facts and for two, even in his opinionated answers he uses what he reads on bulletin boards to underwrite his opinion, but let's tackle this one:

              Originally posted by Will Galen
              Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A

              Question: If Jonathon Bender decides to retire, will he still count against the Pacers salary cap in this and future seasons?

              Answer: If Bender is forced to retire, which would be very unfortunate, he will still get paid because his contract is guaranteed. If an independent doctor determines Bender can no longer play, the Pacers will apply to the league to have what's left of his contract removed for salary cap purposes one year from the date it was determined he couldn't play anymore. The move will also help for luxury tax purposes. (Johnny from Chico, Calif.)
              OK I can see it's hard to "know" anything about the CBA, but this one is A more complicated and B plain wrong.
              The application can only be done if a player has played less then 7 games over the past 12 months and will then be (IF given) valid straight away, not one year from then, getting your facts straight seems unimportant here, readin Coon's is obviously to much work for the salart they are paying him.

              Question: I agree with you that the return of Jeff Foster will be huge. My question is what about the other centers on the roster. We are getting killed on the boards and the centers don't even play a combined 20 minutes in a game. Even when Pollard starts he seldom plays more than 15 minutes. If they can't rebound then why are they on the roster? (Tom from Muncie. Ind.)

              Answer: I agree with you Tom on your comment about the centers not being able to play a combined 20 minutes a game and help rebound the ball. David Harrison can't stay on the court long enough to contribute because he usually picks up a couple of fouls within 30 seconds of checking into game. Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof. Pollard is a situational center. He won't play unless the Pacers are going against somebody like Shaq or Yao Ming. Depending on how quickly Foster returns to his former self, the Pacers could end up trying to trade Pollard later this season because he's in the final of his contract. O'Neal and Croshere, the team's top rebounders, need Foster to get back into game shape quickly because you're right, the Pacers are getting outrebounded on the glass and it really showed in the Atlanta game when they gave up 24 offensive rebounds to the Hawks.
              First of all, our "centers" have notoriously not been rebounding machines, excemption for Jeff, Smits was definitely not the best rebounder in the world, but we have guys like JO and Cro and Artest and we have G's that do some rebounding, in general the Pacers used to be a very decent rebounding team, the type of coaching/defense does not help here either, but I highlighted something else; Here (on Hulk) he is simply proving to be to lazy to do a 10 minute job to get his facts straight, let me prove my concept here :

              According to Mr Wells Hulk picks up 5 founs in 30 seconds and does not rebound, so I went to pacers.com and went over the games we played this season to find something I knew was there; david did not foul out this year (reg season) in fact:

              against Magic: 10 min 2 rb 1 pf 6 pts
              aginst Heat(1) 11 min 3 r b5 pf 4 pts
              against 76rs 2 min 0 rb 0 pf 0 pts
              against Heat(2) 12 min 1 rb 4 pf 5 pts
              against nets IL
              against Bucks IL
              against Bobcats 14 min 3 rb 2 pf 5 pts
              against Bobcats 15 min 4 reb 3 pf 1 pts
              against Rockets 12 min 3 rb 4 pf 2 pts
              against Cavs 12 min 3 rb 3 pf 2 pts
              against Hawks 6 min 2 rb 1 pf 0 pts
              against Clippers 11 min 6 reb 2 pf 2 pts
              against Jazz 13 min 6 reb 1 pf 4 pts
              against Suns 11 min 3 reb 2 pf 8 pts

              I can not be so difficult to do this before you drop something that was not even asked.

              Question: Is there anyone that thinks the Pacers struggles are a result of Rick Carlisle? Everyone talks about how he is a great coach, and how he held the team together last year, but do you really think his style fits the Pacers? It seems like they are most suited to be a uptempo team and he is all about slowing them down and calling a play. What do you think? (Brian from Fort Wayne, Ind.)

              Answer: There's no other way to put it: Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching. The Pacers had one of their best games against New Jersey when Carlisle wasn't constantly calling a play every time the court. Anthony Johnson said it best after that game when he said Carlisle "trusts himself more than he trusts us." This team has the players to play uptempo (except against Phoenix). The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game. The ball usually ends up in O'Neal's hands in the post with everybody standing around watching after the initial first cut to the basket by the passer. Playing that style makes the Pacers predictable on offense. The things is, though, that style has allowed Carlisle to be successful as a coach so far. So I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't change his style.
              As the question asked an opinion it got one, you either agree or you dont, not "facts" to be lost here.
              Question: I'm one of the few Austin Croshere supporters. I've been saying for years that he is underappreciated and that when he is on the floor the team seems to play better. This perception was supported by an analysis published in the Star a season or two ago. I believe that he is getting more of an opportunity to play this season, and that he is playing well. My question is why was Croshere taken out near the end of the Atlanta game. I believe that he would have rebounded the missed free throw, and that the Pacers would have won the game. In fact, it seems like most of the Pacer losses so far this season have been because Croshere was not on the floor near the end of the game. (Kevin from Indianapolis)

              Answer: Croshere's usually not on the court at the end of games for defensive purposes. As good of a rebounder and free throw shooter as he is, Croshere isn't quick enough on defense. You're taking a risk by having him on the court at the end of a close game because you'll probably have to give help, which will leave somebody else open on the court. Despite his defensive problems, Croshere has been one of the Pacers' bright spots this season.
              This could've easily been tied in with the question above, burt again it is an opinion, not facts.

              Question: Is Stephan Jackson a plus or a minus for the Pacers in all respects?
              (Jack from Bloomingdale, Ill.)

              Answer: My problem with Jackson is that you never know which player is going to show up. Some nights he looks like a player that fits in well alongside Jermaine and Artest. Other nights he looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta) and he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept. He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense. I think part of that problem is the loss of Mike Brown to Cleveland. Brown had the ability to relate with the players and keep their head in the game. Brown would often go to the end of the bench and talk to Jackson to keep him focused when he would get upset over an issue.
              This answer defies an answer, he simplu doesn't answer the question, given the opportunity to give an opinion on something perhaps slightly controversial, he goes to an answer that any secretary could've typed out.

              In short, I think he is a serious downgrade over MM, no matter what.
              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                You guys take what he says way too seriously. He's giving his opinion.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                  I much prefer Wells to Montieth.


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

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                    I agree with Able. Wells answers questions that most of the regulars on here could answer better. Montieth was a homer, but I like that. I like keeping the dirt away from the public. I don't think beat writers should lie for the team though.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                      Are you guys kidding? Wells is way better than MM. I don't care so much if he's always right. At least he's willing to make some critical comments.

                      IMO, the following several statements in this article by Wells would never have been provided by Montieth:

                      "Harrison needs to learn to quit getting offensive fouls and to stay on his feet because the slightest pump fake sends him jumping toward the roof.

                      "Carlisle is a micromanager when it comes to coaching.

                      "The constant play calling disrupts the flow of the game.

                      "Other nights [Jax} looks like he's the one hurting the team chemistry (the Nov. 25 game against Atlanta)

                      "he's more worried about improving his individual stats than playing within the team concept.

                      "He has a tendency to take bad shots in the offense.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                        What's the point of his being critical if there is no substance?
                        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                          being critical is ok, stating incorrect matters is plain stupid, certainly if you make a living writing.

                          He does the first based on the latter, which makes him a bad writer/journalist.
                          So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                          If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                          Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                            Originally posted by Will Galen
                            I agree with Able. Wells answers questions that most of the regulars on here could answer better. Montieth was a homer, but I like that. I like keeping the dirt away from the public. I don't think beat writers should lie for the team though.
                            And if I were reading Pacers.com I would agree with you 100%. In fact if I were Walsh I would be p!ssed if ever a negative word were uttered on that site.

                            However since I'm supposed to be reading a local newspaper that is for the most part supposed to be neutral then no, I don't think I want cheerleading from a Q & A session.

                            Now Able is dead on that he has to try & match his opinions with the facts on hand but it's up to the writer to maintain some form of neutrality.

                            BTW, for the record I don't think he should just bash the team either. I just want it called straight down the middle.


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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Mike Wells: Pacers Q&A 12-03-05

                              Originally posted by able
                              OK I can see it's hard to "know" anything about the CBA, but this one is A more complicated and B plain wrong.
                              The application can only be done if a player has played less then 7 games over the past 12 months and will then be (IF given) valid straight away, not one year from then, getting your facts straight seems unimportant here, readin Coon's is obviously to much work for the salart they are paying him.
                              ???

                              From: http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#53

                              There is one exception whereby a player can continue to receive his salary, but the salary is not included in the team's team salary. This is when a player is forced to retire for medical reasons and a league-appointed physician confirms that he is medically unfit to continue playing. There is a waiting period of one year following the injury or illness before a team can apply for this salary cap relief. If the waiting period expires mid-season (on any date prior to the last day of the regular season), then the player's entire salary for that season is removed from the team's team salary. For example, in March 2003 the Knicks were allowed to remove Luc Longley's entire 2002-03 salary from their books (and since the luxury tax is based on the team salary as of the last day of the regular season, the Knicks avoided paying any tax on Longley's salary). This provision can also be used when a player dies while under contract.
                              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X