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

More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

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

  • #16
    Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

    I love Montieth and I don't at all see it as a Walsh lovefest.
    "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

    "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

      Originally posted by Hicks
      Peck without more of an explantion I have to agree with the flock on this one. The article is about Joe Dumars, not Donnie Walsh.

      Have you ever known something because of experiance, yet you can't prove it?

      It's kind of like ones faith in a higher power. It's hard to prove yet you know it's there.

      Well that is the way I feel about this article. I have read the bunny long enough & heard him speak enough times to know that he thinks that Donnie Walsh is the absolutely perfect exec.

      Telling us that the team has been lucky because of durable players, to me, throws the meat to the masses of Indiana that if it weren't for really poor circumstances beyond our control we would be where Detroit is.

      We were a paper champion. On paper we had a great team, in application we had a poorly designed team.

      Anthem nailed it better than anybody has ever nailed anything, IMO.

      You know in retrospect between this post & my thoughts on fans of Artest, I probably should have just stayed off of the digest today.


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

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

        The path the Detroit Pistons have taken to NBA supremacy might be depressing for Indiana Pacers fans, who not so long ago viewed their team as an equal force.

        But it offers hope, too.
        Through insight and fate, Pistons president Joe Dumars has assembled a team that is chasing history.


        --
        Early last season, it appeared Walsh had assembled a team in a similar manner that could compete with the Pistons. The Pacers, remember, dominated Detroit on that fateful night -- Nov. 19, 2004 -- at the Palace of Auburn Hills, when a historic brawl set off events that still reverberate through the franchise.

        But if a championship contender can be built through spare parts and a late first-round draft pick, it can be done again.


        ================================================
        The bunny seems to be saying Dumars and Donnie are both building teams the same way. Donnie just ran into a bit of bad luck but Dumars is proving Donnie's method is the way to go.

        That is how I read what the bunny is saying.

        ----

        BTW... Someone should tell the bunny that there is nothing similar in the way Dumars and Walsh build teams... Their team goals aren't even the same.

        Winning the championship is not Walsh's number 1 goal.


        -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


        • #19
          Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

          That makes some sense, Peck & Bball.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

            Peck, I see your point, but I still think you're reaching quite a bit. It really seems like the only reason DW and the Pacers are even mentioned in this article is so that Montieth has an excuse to write an article about Joe Dumars.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

              Originally posted by Bball
              Winning the championship is not Walsh's number 1 goal.
              Walsh's number 1 goal is to put butts in the seats. Number 2 is winning a championship. He has done the first by (almost) always fielding a team that can compete and has a chance at winning a championship.

              The problem with the "risk-taking" philosophy is one that Walsh knows too well: Indianapolis is a small and very fickle market that will get disinterested very easily if the team aon the floor goes more than a season or two without serious playoff/title aspirations. So if we take too many risks, and they backfire, resulting in a long rebuilding process, we don't have the market to sustain it. Fans will quit coming to the games, will quit watching the games, etc. Revenue will go in the toilet.

              In other words, the Pacers' margin for error in trades and signings is much smaller than that of many other teams.

              Everything Donnie has done up until now has been to avoid our exact current circumstance (looking at entering a rebuilding mode with no championship hopes for at least a couple of years). And, ironically, the reason it finally happened is exactly due to the fact that the team took some major RISKS that did not pay off (examples: trading Dale for J.O. - tho I would argue that it was a good trade, re-signing Bender, holding onto Artest the past two years).

              You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't complain about the current state of the team (the result of some risky moves) and then turn around and blame Donnie for not being aggressive enough. The logic simply doesn't work.

              I disagree strongly with your apparent assessment that Donnie hasnt taken any risks. I find it very ironic that the same people who have b!tched and moaned about us holding onto Artest, trading Dale for J.O. or signing Bender to an extension are the same people who think we need to make more aggressive trades and signings. We've BEEN taking risks (based on overall talent) with this team the past three years in hopes of winning a championship. We lost that gamble, apparently.

              Peck, I ask you this: If holding on to Artest in hopes of a turnaround was NOT a high-stakes gamble in hopes of winning a championship, then what the hell was it? If trading away Dale Davis for Jermaine O'Neal was NOT a high-stakes risk designed to improve the team, then what was it?

              I mean, jeez, look at our draft picks the past 10-20 years. Would you call all of those SAFE moves, or risky ones?

              EDIT: for the record, I do NOT consider myself a Walsh apologist. He's made his share of mistakes. I just think you're holding him to an impossibly high standard.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                Originally posted by rabidpacersfan
                In other words, the Pacers' margin for error in trades and signings is much smaller than that of many other teams.
                At least we are asked to believe that, because to think otherwise would force us to look at the last several years in a different light.

                Actually, I think the truth is that the fans would accept another path as long as there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Indiana fans aren't that fickle. What Walsh is afraid of is totally blowing it and not being able to climb back out of the hole because to do so would be out of his comfort zone (IMHO).

                If you're telling me overall Indiana fans won't follow the team in droves if a team would wallow in lottery land and never do much to rise above it, stand pat, wait, be patient... then I'd be inclined to agree with you. But the counter argument is having management that would take a proactive stance and energize the team and fanbase and move it out of that period and show the fans there's a brighter future ahead...

                Walsh is too conservative and patient. That may work in a small market but it is not written in stone that it is the only way that can work. And Indiana is not "Basketball Siberia"

                -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


                • #23
                  Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                  Peck, it appears to me that you've come to a completely unwarranted conclusion on this Montieth article.


                  Originally posted by Peck
                  Oh this is rich, if he even thinks for a min. that I'm going to buy that Walsh will now become a daredevil risk taker to build the team he has lost his mind. That is the entire fallacy of this article he has written.
                  Most of the forum disagrees that the article was even about Walsh taking risks. In a nutshell the article is pointing out how Dumars has been lucky and Walsh unlucky because of injuries. It does not lead one to think that Walsh is now going to be a daredevil risk taker, as you put it.

                  As for Walsh taking risks, Pacertom pointed out that Walsh does take risks.

                  Originally posted by Pacertom
                  I don't see anything particularly risky, such as trading an all-star named Dale for a unknown youngster named Jermaine (big hit) or a solid veteran named Antonio for a guy named Jonathan who had a good high school all-star game (big miss).Walsh isn't as risk-averse as you claim, and Dumars is not the riverboat gambler.
                  And if what Pacertom pointed out about Walsh taking risks isn't enough, need I mention the name Ron Artest? If Ron wasn't a big risk, what is? If anything Ron proves Walsh is a daredevil risk taker.

                  To me even if your conclusion was dead on it wouldn't make sense. Does a leopard change it's spots? Why would Montieth, or anyone, try to make anyone think a successful man such as Walsh was suddenly going to abandon the way he does business? No one would believe such an article, so Montieth wouldn't bother writing it. Still, that was your conclusion.


                  I also think you are a stubborn man. Most of the forum agrees with you on most of your deductions, as do I. In fact I think you have at time swayed the whole forum to your way of thinking.

                  However, in the face of mounting opposition I think you grasped at a straw when Anthem said this . . .

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  Dumars doesn't try to stockpile talent. He tries to make it fit together.
                  You said . . .

                  Originally posted by Peck
                  Thank you. That was the perfect answer.
                  How so?

                  Anthem is basically saying that Walsh stockpiles talent and Dumars doesn't. That appears to me to be a plus for Walsh and a negative for Dumars.

                  Then he says that Dumars tries to make talent fit together and Walsh doesn't.

                  How wrong can an answer get? Yet people are agreeing that he nailed it.

                  In my estimation Walsh tries to hard to fit talent together. My biggest gripe about Walsh has always been that he hangs on to players too long when it's obvious to everyone else it isn't working. To paraphrase Walsh he wants to see what he has before he trades a player.

                  And Bird just recently said what Walsh has said at times. After the Peja/Ron trade Bird said that there would probably be no more trades because they wanted to see how Peja does with the team. In other words is Peja the missing piece.

                  Walsh has always worked this way and now Bird is at least paying it lip service. If making a trade and then waiting to see how the trade works isn't trying to make talent fit together I don't know what is.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                    I will give Joe the benefit of the doubt. He has built a blue collar club that is much greater than the sum of its parts. This takes a good understanding of personnel issues along with basketball sense. They have great chemistry and just the right combination of skills to get the job done. Their raw skill level individually is not superstar level quality, but that doesn't seem to matter. The Lakers a few years ago had talent pouring off the court. Obviously more talent than the Pistons, but they got blown away. JO and Artest both bring more to the table than any one Piston player, but that doesn't matter if you don't have a good TEAM. That apparently doesn't matter in the Olympics either.

                    I love what Donnie Walsh has done for the Pacers. He has been a great GM....but I think Joe already knew a lesson that Donnie has recently learned. Chemistry is as important as skill. You need BOTH to get it done.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                      Originally posted by Will Galen
                      How so?

                      Anthem is basically saying that Walsh stockpiles talent and Dumars doesn't. That appears to me to be a plus for Walsh and a negative for Dumars.

                      Then he says that Dumars tries to make talent fit together and Walsh doesn't.

                      How wrong can an answer get? Yet people are agreeing that he nailed it.

                      In my estimation Walsh tries to hard to fit talent together. My biggest gripe about Walsh has always been that he hangs on to players too long when it's obvious to everyone else it isn't working. To paraphrase Walsh he wants to see what he has before he trades a player.
                      Man, why drag me into this? You don't want none of this.

                      For the record, I disagree with Peck and Bball on most things Donnie. I think he DOES want a championship and IS willing to risk to get it.

                      That being said, my original statement was (in my ever-humble opinion), both fair and accurate. If you're trying to build a good team, it's fine to stockpile talent. Once you get a contender, though, stockpiling talent is DANGEROUS because it hurts chemistry (by confusing rotations and causing griping over minutes). If the pieces don't fit together, you're still in rebuilding mode. The pieces of this team haven't fit together since 2000. Zeke was no great coach, but the team he was given was an absolute wreck. Carlisle's a good coach who's gotten a raw deal, but he'd still have a better shot to win if he had a roster that makes sense.

                      And Bird just recently said what Walsh has said at times. After the Peja/Ron trade Bird said that there would probably be no more trades because they wanted to see how Peja does with the team. In other words is Peja the missing piece.
                      Right. Except that's obviously not true. Everybody in the world can see Peja's not the missing piece. We have too many redundant pieces that don't fit together, and Peja just makes that worse.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                        Peja isn't a redundant piece. We needed a shooter like him very badly.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                          Originally posted by Hicks
                          Peja isn't a redundant piece. We needed a shooter like him very badly.
                          We definitely need Peja right now for his experience, shooting and simply for depth....but we are a bit heavy at SF....and moving one of them to SG or PF is not the answer. We will need to deal one of them to fill some other holes in the roster.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                            Originally posted by Anthem
                            Man, why drag me into this? You don't want none of this.

                            For the record, I disagree with Peck and Bball on most things Donnie. I think he DOES want a championship and IS willing to risk to get it.

                            That being said, my original statement was (in my ever-humble opinion), both fair and accurate. If you're trying to build a good team, it's fine to stockpile talent. Once you get a contender, though, stockpiling talent is DANGEROUS because it hurts chemistry (by confusing rotations and causing griping over minutes). If the pieces don't fit together, you're still in rebuilding mode. The pieces of this team haven't fit together since 2000. Zeke was no great coach, but the team he was given was an absolute wreck. Carlisle's a good coach who's gotten a raw deal, but he'd still have a better shot to win if he had a roster that makes sense.
                            .
                            As to the first part, DW himself has pretty much confirmed what I and Peck have said in that regard so it isn't all that debatable any longer. Of course DW wants a championship, but it isn't the first priority.

                            As to the second part... You mean you've gotten that all along??? I never would've imagined it! Common ground with Anthem! All these years.... :headshaking:



                            Not only do I agree with that but it was very well said on your part!

                            -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


                            • #29
                              Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                              I don't see why people insist we have too many people at SF... We have Peja and DG. Granted, people are going to look at those players and wish both could start, and in fact I think it would be possible for them both to start and not go for a stereotypical lineup... whether or not they'll do that is another question. My point is, having 2 good players who fit "best" as a SF is not having too many SF's...

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: More love & rays of sunshine from Montieth towards Walsh....

                                Originally posted by Bball
                                As to the second part... You mean you've gotten that all along??? I never would've imagined it! Common ground with Anthem! All these years.... :headshaking:
                                Har Dee Har.

                                I've been saying this for longer than you, my friend. We just have different ideas of what pieces are worth keeping.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X