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

ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 6
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
  • #1

    ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

    SPECIAL PREVIEW EDITION
    Can Team Turmoil turn page?

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailyd...anaPreview0607
    ESPN.com





    Team Page | Schedule | Roster | Hollinger Stats
    Where will the Indiana Pacers finish in the Central Division and the Eastern Conference? Get 10 different takes from ESPN's NBA experts.

    ANALYSTCOMMENT
    Greg
    Anthony
    ESPN.com

    		The Pacers are still talented enough to compete for the East title. But the mental baggage they've taken on has never been overcome. Rick Carlisle is regarded as a great coach but is not really known as a disciplinarian, and he's faced with a team that needs exactly that.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 7

    Chris
    Broussard
    ESPN Mag

    		The players' grit and Rick Carlisle's excellent coaching will get them into the playoffs despite another season of nagging injuries. But that's as far as they'll go, and they'll have to consider trading their big salaries and going young.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 7

    Ric
    Bucher
    ESPN Mag

    		As good as Rick Carlisle is, as much promise as Danny Granger has, and as consistently successful as Donnie Walsh has been, I don't see Al Harrington making Indy markedly better than last season. It remains a locker room starving for leadership.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 8

    Chad
    Ford
    ESPN.com

    		This year's East dark horse has great depth, fresh blood and a chip on its shoulder after two disastrous seasons. If things click and coach Rick Carlisle lets loose on the offensive reins a little, they'll surprise people.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 6

    John
    Hollinger
    ESPN.com

    		The many gathering storm clouds are tough to ignore, but the addition of Al Harrington and the weakness of the East should combine to keep them out of the lottery. If Stephen Jackson goes to the lockup, they're deep enough to handle it.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 6

    Scoop
    Jackson
    ESPN.com

    		Have guns, will travel. If they let the drama affect them, they're done. If not, with Al Harrington back, the Pacers could be the East Coast version of the Utah Jazz. Dangerous.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 9

    Tim
    Legler
    ESPN.com

    		You just can't expect them to stay healthy and cohesive for the entire season. O'Neal is one of the NBA's best low-post scorers, when he can play. They have to earn the right to be labeled a contender. We'll see.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 6

    Jim
    O'Brien
    ESPN.com

    		Unfortunately, the distractions continue. But O'Neal and Harrington are a terrific one-two punch and can lead the Pacers deep into the playoffs if Rick Carlisle gets a commitment from the rest.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 6

    Chris
    Sheridan
    ESPN.com

    		Surprised that Stephen Jackson was trigger-happy? Don't count on him or Jamaal Tinsley lasting the season in Indiana. The Pacers added enough depth and talent to make both expendable if they get a starting guard in exchange.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 7

    Marc
    Stein ESPN.com

    		If Al Harrington has a return season like Boris Diaw's debut in Phoenix, like he's been saying, Indy could finish well north of .500. If not, bet on controversies and injuries engulfing Indy again.
    DIVISION RANK: 4 | CONFERENCE RANK: 7


    Average ranks


    		DIVISION: 4 | Standings

    CONFERENCE: 6.9 | Standings

    Lineup Breakdown

    STARTERSANALYSIS
    Jamaal Tinsley
    Point Guard
    6-3 | 183
    		How valuable is a pure point? Not very, if he's in street clothes.
    Stephen Jackson
    Shooting Guard
    6-8 | 218
    		Action Jackson? More like Action Distraction.
    Danny Granger
    Small Forward
    6-9 | 228
    		Rangy second-year man can guard wings and bigs alike.
    Al Harrington
    Power Forward
    6-9 | 245
    		Maybe perfect J.O. sidekick will be energized by return "home."
    Jermaine O'Neal
    Center
    6-11 | 260
    		Wasted in the middle unless Indy actually pushes the Pace.
    Bench: The only sure bet among this young bunch: Rook James White will win the dunk contest. Otherwise, the starters better take their vitamins.



    Hollinger's Player Spotlight

    Sarunas Jasikevicius
    Player Efficiency Rating
    Projected: 12.06
    vs. NBA Avg.: -2.94
    Pacers profiles


    Scouting report: Jasikevicius is an outstanding shooter and a clever operator, knowing how to free himself for his jumper or bait defenders into fouls that produce a near-certain two points. However, he had trouble with NBA defenses that crowded him on the perimeter and gave him little breathing room bringing the ball up court. He'll have to cut the turnovers for his career to gain traction stateside, but the other adjustment will be to the longer 3-point line. Most European players shoot the 3 much better in their second NBA season, and if that's the case Jasikevicius could be well over 40 percent -- which would make up for many of his other ills.
    Jasikevicius is an unimpressive defensive player, but his size (6-4) and smarts somewhat mitigate his lack of quickness and athleticism. Indiana didn't defend notably worse with him on the court and his direct opponents put up average numbers, so he had no visible impact on the end result.
    2006-07 outlook: Despite his tough initiation, Jasikevicius figures to play plenty this year. The trade of Anthony Johnson means Jasikevicius becomes the backup at point guard, while the presence of Jamaal Tinsley means Jasikevicius will be the starter about a month into the season. Although he struggled a year ago and is 30 years old, there's reason to believe Jasikevicius can do better than a year ago. I expect his 3-point numbers to improve, and he may get a better handle on the turnover issue as well. He's a stretch as a long-term starter, but he'd be a very solid backup under the conditions outlined above and could hold down the fort if Tinsley only misses 20 games or so.



    SportsNation Speaks

    The Pacers are a team still rebounding from The Brawl. How to move on? SportsNation looks into the backcourt for some answers.
    Should the Pacers keep Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley?
    41.7% Trade both
    28.4% Trade Jackson, keep Tinsley
    19.0% Keep both
    10.8% Keep Jackson, trade Tinsley • Vote: Pacers in 2006-07



    Ask A Blogger




    What would it take for you to get a tattoo of the Pacers' logo on your chest?
    The Indiana Pacers are by no means "my team," but what can I say; I'm a sucker for fresh logo ink. (I have matching raptor and grizzly bear tats on my quads!)
    So if a bizarro Rick Carlisle gets small-ball to work -- with J.O., Harrington, Granger and whatever backcourt results after the legal system has its way -- the Pacers will run the baffled opposition out of the gym. I'll get a large "P" permanently etched on my chest.
    Well, that, or they could just get me some free "dances" at Indianapolis' finest "gentlemen's club." Either/or really... • J.E. Skeets | thebasketballjones.net



    Coach's Corner


    RICK CARLISLE COACHING FILE
    Experience: 5 years
    Record: 246-164
    Playoffs: 30-32
    NBA titles: 0
    Coach's profile


    This might be the only team outside of New York that is faced with as many challenges off the court as on it.
    The off-court issues add to the pressure Rick Carlisle faces as he attempts to reinvigorate both his team and the fan base.
    Carlisle also has to concoct a strategy that allows for Stephen Jackson to miss a number of games in the event he is suspended. – David Thorpe



    Hollinger's Team Strength

    Depth. Indiana has had as many injuries as any team in basketball the past two seasons, but has made the playoffs in consecutive seasons because of its extraordinary depth.
    That should be the case again this season; the Pacers are at least two deep at every position.
    Point guard is the spot of greatest concern, because Tinsley is injury-prone, Sarunas Jasikevicius struggled a season ago, and Daniels may not be able to handle playing there more than five or 10 minutes a night.
    Things get better as the players get bigger.
    Daniels and Jackson give the team two solid shooting guards, while the club is absolutely loaded up front.
    Granger and Harrington can play either forward spot, Jackson is a capable small forward, and Williams also may be able to contribute there.
    At power forward, no team can match the daunting foursome of Granger, Harrington, Baston and O'Neal, and in the middle, Foster, O'Neal and third-season pro David Harrison insulate the team against foul trouble. • More Hollinger Pacers analysis
    I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

    As long as Jasikevicius is a short version of Kyle Korver (with better assists that is)...then we're good to go?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

      A couple of these guys think the Pacers could surprise people with some luck, and others say the baggage is too much.

      But the key is this. None of them picks the Pacers any better than 6th in the East. Even Anthony, who says the Pacers are "talented enough to compete for the East title," actually picks them 4th in the Central and 7th in the East.

      There are a lot of "glass-half-full" and "glass-half-empty" differences in perspective in these opinions, jsut as there are among PD posters. But whatever your perspective, the Pacers have not gotten better over the summer. We've gotten cheaper and younger. We'll see how long we stay faster. But the problems that plagued us last year are still there.
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

        "Surprised that Stephen Jackson was trigger-happy?"


        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

          How do some of these guys know we're going to be injured a lot this season?
          We're going to be "dangerous", but NOT make the playoffs (9th in conference). Who TF are these guys?
          Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

            Yeah, I was surprised nobody picked us as better than sixth.
            This space for rent.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

              Consistant with the 4th in the conference! ....but no matter how you look at it as far as problems and upside, all but one guy said playoffs!
              'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
              Animal Farm, by George Orwell

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                Wel, it looks like we come into the season with no expectations and no peassure, at least from the "experts". Not too surprising since we have been raising the same questions.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                  Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                  We're going to be "dangerous", but NOT make the playoffs (9th in conference). Who TF are these guys?

                  Not "going to be" dangerous, but "could be dangerous if all goes right." The fact that Scoop Jackson says this and goes on to pick the Pacers 9th suggests he does not believe that all will go right.

                  That would mean no injuries, no disruptions from players' off-court matters, no discord among players, a real transformation to a new, different and effective style of play, and every player playing up to his potential -- which in several players' cases means a potential that has never been seen before in NBA competition. What are the odds of a perfect run of luck?


                  Hey, Knucklehead Warrior, I like what you put in your signature. I'm sitting here three blocks away from Conseco ready to do the same thing. But, I'm not deluded. My 10 x $35 would be insignificant to the Pacers' bottom line.
                  And I won't be here to see the day
                  It all dries up and blows away
                  I'd hang around just to see
                  But they never had much use for me
                  In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                    Um...is anybody else super-psyched about being the dark-horse, surprise team that nobody wants to play? I am. We have such low expectations this year...it's fantastic. I would not want to have Chicago's expectations, for example.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                      Um...is anybody else super-psyched about being the dark-horse,
                      I like the fact that we are the dark horse this season. Last season we were too busy trying to live up to all the hype about how we would win the championship.
                      I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                        Originally posted by indyman37 View Post
                        I like the fact that we are the dark horse this season. Last season we were too busy trying to live up to all the hype about how we would win the championship.
                        Maybe I missed something....but I could have sworn we spent half of last season trying to trade a guy who didn't want to be here and the other half battling continual injuries to our starters, only to be labeled a "dangerous, watch out for them" playoff team that nobody wanted to play before losing in six games to a team that subsequently lost four straight games in the 2nd Round.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:
                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          Maybe I missed something....but I could have sworn we spent half of last season trying to trade a guy who didn't want to be here and the other half battling continual injuries to our starters, only to be labeled a "dangerous, watch out for them" playoff team that nobody wanted to play before losing in six games to a team that subsequently lost four straight games in the 2nd Round.
                          absolutely true...but it's not like the comments on the "title run" we were supposed to have didn't affect us at all.
                          I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                            Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                            As long as Jasikevicius is a short version of Kyle Korver (with better assists that is)...then we're good to go?
                            Kyle Korver is one of the best 3pt shooters in this league. Jasikavicus isnt even close to him, he is miles away from him.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN} interesting pacers season preview

                              Originally posted by indyman37 View Post
                              absolutely true...but it's not like the comments on the "title run" we were supposed to have didn't affect us at all.
                              True...It's not like we were exactly lighting the world on fire even before Ron Ron went all Ron Ron on us.
                              Read my Pacers blog:
                              8points9seconds.com

                              Follow my twitter:
                              @8pts9secs

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 template Next
                              Working...
                              X