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

Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

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

  • Re: David Aldridge | Iverson can be dealt if right cards played

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Minny's owner has said he will not pay Iverson's salary which will probably not sit well with KG since he just said he wants AI on the Wolves. Watch out KG maybe the next star on the move.

    George Karl said before the Heat game last night that he does not want AI on the Nuggets.

    That leaves us, Bulls, and Celtics as the remaining rumored teams.

    You think Skiles wants Iverson on his team? I highly, highly doubt it. I think the BUlls will hold out and hope KG or Pierce comes available.


    Comment


    • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

      Originally posted by Mourning View Post

      Maybe organically/positionally for the Bulls he would be perfect, but I doubt that Bulls management would like to risk their group of young and talented players on Iverson's attitude and approach to some team things. I could be wrong, but I would understand it from their side with Ben allready beying there and Skiles not beying a "softie" himself.
      I'l also copy my response from the other thread since the Bulls thing is being discussed in both, maybe a merge or a delete on the other one is in order?

      Hinrich's a relatively big PG, Iverson's a small SG. Sure, they'd be mismatched at one of the guard spots against a team like NJ, but hell, everyone's mismatched against NJ, and AI would make them pay at the other end.

      The bulls have trouble scoring, they need someone to take 35 shots a game.

      AI is a tenacious defender and would fit in with Skiles defensive scheme.

      Hinrich and Deng can shoot the three and create space for AI.

      As far as chemistry, winning cures all, and I think that Bulls team would flat out win a lot of games. Sure, Skiles and AI would but heads a little bit, but that's OK as long as they're winning games. There's a chance it could all go to hell for them, but I'll tell you this: no matter how bad things get, AI will always go out and play hard, and if you take that approach to the NBA, you will get wins.

      Perfect fit for Chicago.

      Are we really going to have to spend the next three years going against AI in Chicago and Lebron in Cleveland. I'm a little worried.
      2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

      Comment


      • Wolves: We Can't Afford Iverson

        http://www.twincities.com/mld/twinci...l/16199928.htm


        Wolves: We can't afford Iverson
        Rumors, fueled by Iverson imposter, featured deal here
        From staff reports
        Allen Iverson and the Philadelphia 76ers appear headed toward a bitter parting.

        But Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor said he won't end up in Minnesota, despite a flood of rumors Friday night that said otherwise.

        "No trade," Taylor said during the Wolves' 110-103 victory over Utah on Friday night at Target Center. "It isn't that I don't like him. Just money-wise, it wouldn't work out."

        Speculation heated up the past couple of days about where Iverson could end up. The Wolves were at the top of the list of possible destinations.

        ESPN reporter Jim Gray announced on the air that Iverson told him in a telephone interview Friday that he was heading to Minnesota. He came back on the air soon after to say that he had been "duped," admitting, "I was talking to an imposter."

        Iverson's 11-year career in Philadelphia took another tumultuous turn Friday when the former NBA most valuable player hinted that a trade might be best after the Sixers sent him home and ruled him out of their next two games.

        "As hard as it is to admit, a change may be the best thing for everyone," Iverson said. "I hate admitting that because I love the guys on the team and the city of Philadelphia. I truly wanted to retire a 76er."

        "We'll trade him," Sixers chairman Ed Snider said Friday night. "At a certain point, you have to come to grips with the fact that it's not working. He wants out, and we're ready to accommodate him."

        Snider said Iverson has "probably" played his last game with the Sixers, ending a career that placed him with Julius Erving, Charles Barkley and Wilt Chamberlain among the team's greats.

        "I think it's time for him to move on, for us to move on and find out where everything stands," Snider said. "I really didn't see it coming because Allen says all the right things."

        In a surprising turn of events, Iverson was banished by the club and didn't play Friday against Washington. Team President Billy King said the move was not a suspension and Iverson's future would be re-evaluated after tonight's game at Orlando.

        King and coach Maurice Cheeks said Iverson was sent home because he did not practice on Thursday and left Wednesday's blowout loss at Chicago with back spasms. However, the move to bench their captain comes with Iverson's name swirling in heavy trade rumors.

        King would not say before the Sixers' game against the Wizards whether Iverson had asked for a trade or if he was actively trying to trade the four-time NBA scoring champion. Snider confirmed that Iverson did ask this week to be dealt.

        "Allen was not able to practice yesterday because of the back, and today Mo made a decision not to play him tonight or tomorrow," King said. "We told him to just take the night off and tomorrow."

        Iverson told a different story. Iverson, whose off-court behavior and coaching clashes often overshadowed his gritty, highlight-reel play, released a statement through agent Leon Rose stating that he told the Sixers he was healthy enough to play.

        Iverson said he was told not to participate in shootaround and instead watched from the sideline. He joined the Sixers in the huddle, then was told by Cheeks not to come to the Wachovia Center.

        "In my entire career, even the doctors haven't been able to tell me not to play," Iverson said. "I've played through injury and illness. I think everyone knows how much I love being out on the court, competing and winning. That's why it was so disheartening to be told that I couldn't play, knowing that I was ready. It hurt even more to be told not to come at all."

        Iverson, who leads the league with a 31.7-point average, left Wednesday night's 121-94 loss at Chicago in the second half, complaining of the spasms, and did not practice Thursday. The Sixers are 5-13, have lost six straight and 13 of 15 overall.

        "This season has been very frustrating for everyone," Iverson said. "We've lost 12 of 14 games and nothing seems to be working. I have expressed my frustration to my teammates, however, I have continued to give 100 percent night in and night out. Apparently, it hasn't been enough to help our team win."

        Even with the Sixers sinking toward another lottery-bound season, Snider said Cheeks and King's jobs were safe.

        Cheeks said he expected Iverson to finish the season in Philadelphia.

        Iverson reportedly was nearly dealt last offseason to Boston.

        This report includes information from the Associated Press.

        Comment


        • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

          The mass merging that just went on makes me look like a retard for posting the same thing 3 times.


          Comment


          • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

            the more and more i think about it the Pacers have a damn good shot at getting AI if the package is right...i just hope for the love of god that Danny Granger isn't in the package *prays*

            realistically i just don't see AI going to Chicago being right, nor do i see him going to the Wolves(as stated in this thread title) nor do i see him going to Denver...I could only see him going to Boston or like ive said in other threads...to a west coast team..which team you ask ? i don't know
            If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
            [/center]
            @thatguyjoe84

            Comment


            • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

              Anybody think Miami and Detroit are making offers for him?


              Comment


              • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                they both could be but i dont see them offering up enough people worth the interest of Philly

                im sure Miami would be offering Walker and Payton in a deal...who wants them ? i know i sure wouldn't. but eh thats just me
                If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
                [/center]
                @thatguyjoe84

                Comment


                • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                  Reading this thread has nearly made my eyes bleed.

                  And please, everyone, just take a deep breath....

                  We are not getting Allen Iverson. WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE CHIPS. It's really, really not even worth discussing. They won't want JO. And Granger is much less coveted by a team that has Igoudala and Carney already at the 3. The Bulls and Cs and Lakers and many other teams all have much, much, much more to offer.


                  As for Iverson....That "we talking about practice" press conference was like five years ago. So aside from this latest trade request (which I see as completely warranted and absolutely uncomparable to Artest for lots of reasons), I really can't think of a single thing that has happened in recent years that leaves any remaining questions about his attitude. He's a 31-year-old adult now, not a punk kid.

                  Also...if you don't think he'd fit in on our squad and don't want him for on-the-court reasons....that's fine. But please don't question his ability to play basketball. It just makes you look foolish.

                  He's coming off a career year in which he averaged 33 points per game on 44.7% shooting. That's Four Four dot Seven Percent.

                  Only seven other guards in the entire League shot better than AI from the floor, while averaging 15+ ppg.

                  Michael Redd 45.0%
                  Kobe 45.0%
                  Joe Johnson 45.3%
                  Ray Allen 45.4%
                  Mike James 46.9%
                  Rip 49.1%
                  Dwyane Wade 49.5%

                  Only James, Rip and Wade can be called better by a significant margin.

                  (By the way, not a single Pacers guard has shot 44.7% from the field since Reggie did so in '01-'02. Redbull is currently at 45.4% for this year, but raise your hand if you expect that to last.)

                  Meanwhile, AI was 8th in assists per game and only averaged 3.4 TOs per game. (Hard to write only there, but that's a good number for him and really not that bad for anyone handling the ball as much as he does. Makes for a 2.3 ***/TO ratio, as well.)

                  A big part of his improved FG% and the other things that came in his career year of 05-06 was that he got to the line a career high 11.5 times per game. This, along with him only shooting 3.1 threes per game (4.5 per the previous year and a 4.1 per career average) shows that he is once again concentrating on getting to the rim like he was 25 years old again.

                  His numbers from 04-05 were not quite as good as last year (42.4% FG), but they were mostly all improvements from his earlier career numbers and do also suggest (along with the game tapes) that this is probably a "too-be-expected" evolution in the approach to the game of a first-ballot Hall of Famer, rather than just a one-year anomaly.



                  But by all means, just continue go ahead and base your opinions about both the ability and the attitude of the best 6' foot or under guy to ever play in the NBA* on things that happened years ago.



                  * (apologies to Bob Cousy and Tiny Archibald)
                  Read my Pacers blog:
                  8points9seconds.com

                  Follow my twitter:

                  @8pts9secs

                  Comment


                  • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                    Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                    Reading this thread has nearly made my eyes bleed.

                    And please, everyone, just take a deep breath....

                    We are not getting Allen Iverson. WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE CHIPS. It's really, really not even worth discussing. They won't want JO. And Granger is much less coveted by a team that has Igoudala and Carney already at the 3. The Bulls and Cs and Lakers and many other teams all have much, much, much more to offer.


                    As for Iverson....That "we talking about practice" press conference was like five years ago. So aside from this latest trade request (which I see as completely warranted and absolutely uncomparable to Artest for lots of reasons), I really can't think of a single thing that has happened in recent years that leaves any remaining questions about his attitude. He's a 31-year-old adult now, not a punk kid.

                    Also...if you don't think he'd fit in on our squad and don't want him for on-the-court reasons....that's fine. But please don't question his ability to play basketball. It just makes you look foolish.

                    He's coming off a career year in which he averaged 33 points per game on 44.7% shooting. That's Four Four dot Seven Percent.

                    Only seven other guards in the entire League shot better than AI from the floor, while averaging 15+ ppg.

                    Michael Redd 45.0%
                    Kobe 45.0%
                    Joe Johnson 45.3%
                    Ray Allen 45.4%
                    Mike James 46.9%
                    Rip 49.1%
                    Dwyane Wade 49.5%

                    Only James, Rip and Wade can be called better by a significant margin.

                    (By the way, not a single Pacers guard has shot 44.7% from the field since Reggie did so in '01-'02. Redbull is currently at 45.4% for this year, but raise your hand if you expect that to last.)

                    Meanwhile, AI was 8th in assists per game and only averaged 3.4 TOs per game. (Hard to write only there, but that's a good number for him and really not that bad for anyone handling the ball as much as he does. Makes for a 2.3 ***/TO ratio, as well.)

                    A big part of his improved FG% and the other things that came in his career year of 05-06 was that he got to the line a career high 11.5 times per game. This, along with him only shooting 3.1 threes per game (4.5 per the previous year and a 4.1 per career average) shows that he is once again concentrating on getting to the rim like he was 25 years old again.

                    His numbers from 04-05 were not quite as good as last year (42.4% FG), but they were mostly all improvements from his earlier career numbers and do also suggest (along with the game tapes) that this is probably a "too-be-expected" evolution in the approach to the game of a first-ballot Hall of Famer, rather than just a one-year anomaly.



                    But by all means, just continue go ahead and base your opinions about both the ability and the attitude of the best 6' foot or under guy to ever play in the NBA* on things that happened years ago.



                    * (apologies to Bob Cousy and Tiny Archibald)




                    great post......very good information

                    Comment


                    • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                      I can't understand all this hating on AI's game. Sure, maybe you don't like his attitude or style or whatever, but there's no doubt he's one of the best guards in the history of basketball.

                      Dude's like 5'10 and he's 3RD ALL-TIME IN CAREER PPG.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                        If I were KG, I would be next to demand a trade. That's ridiculous.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          Reading this thread has nearly made my eyes bleed.

                          And please, everyone, just take a deep breath....

                          We are not getting Allen Iverson. WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE CHIPS. It's really, really not even worth discussing. They won't want JO. And Granger is much less coveted by a team that has Igoudala and Carney already at the 3. The Bulls and Cs and Lakers and many other teams all have much, much, much more to offer.


                          As for Iverson....That "we talking about practice" press conference was like five years ago. So aside from this latest trade request (which I see as completely warranted and absolutely uncomparable to Artest for lots of reasons), I really can't think of a single thing that has happened in recent years that leaves any remaining questions about his attitude. He's a 31-year-old adult now, not a punk kid.

                          Also...if you don't think he'd fit in on our squad and don't want him for on-the-court reasons....that's fine. But please don't question his ability to play basketball. It just makes you look foolish.

                          He's coming off a career year in which he averaged 33 points per game on 44.7% shooting. That's Four Four dot Seven Percent.

                          Only seven other guards in the entire League shot better than AI from the floor, while averaging 15+ ppg.

                          Michael Redd 45.0%
                          Kobe 45.0%
                          Joe Johnson 45.3%
                          Ray Allen 45.4%
                          Mike James 46.9%
                          Rip 49.1%
                          Dwyane Wade 49.5%

                          Only James, Rip and Wade can be called better by a significant margin.

                          (By the way, not a single Pacers guard has shot 44.7% from the field since Reggie did so in '01-'02. Redbull is currently at 45.4% for this year, but raise your hand if you expect that to last.)

                          Meanwhile, AI was 8th in assists per game and only averaged 3.4 TOs per game. (Hard to write only there, but that's a good number for him and really not that bad for anyone handling the ball as much as he does. Makes for a 2.3 ***/TO ratio, as well.)

                          A big part of his improved FG% and the other things that came in his career year of 05-06 was that he got to the line a career high 11.5 times per game. This, along with him only shooting 3.1 threes per game (4.5 per the previous year and a 4.1 per career average) shows that he is once again concentrating on getting to the rim like he was 25 years old again.

                          His numbers from 04-05 were not quite as good as last year (42.4% FG), but they were mostly all improvements from his earlier career numbers and do also suggest (along with the game tapes) that this is probably a "too-be-expected" evolution in the approach to the game of a first-ballot Hall of Famer, rather than just a one-year anomaly.



                          But by all means, just continue go ahead and base your opinions about both the ability and the attitude of the best 6' foot or under guy to ever play in the NBA* on things that happened years ago.



                          * (apologies to Bob Cousy and Tiny Archibald)
                          I suspect the 76'ers owners have been around to see all you have quoted above. Guess what? It looks they can't wait to ship him out. I think there might be a reason for that.
                          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                            Originally posted by indy0731 View Post
                            Anybody think Miami and Detroit are making offers for him?
                            For Miami....that's what they need....yet another player that needs the ball to be in his hand to be effective. The rest of the team would be standing around watching Shaq, Wade and AI shoot the ball.

                            I think that he would fit better in Detroit.....with Flip's offense. We know that the Big 4 ( Chauncey, Rip, Prince and Sheed ) aren't going.....so I don't know where he would play...or what pieces they would give up to acquire him.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                              Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                              I suspect the 76'ers owners have been around to see all you have quoted above. Guess what? It looks they can't wait to ship him out. I think there might be a reason for that.
                              Really? They can't wait to ship him out? Then why didn't they do it sooner if he is such a pain? Why did it have to come to him going to them behind closed doors and asking for a trade before anything was done? That statement is laughable at best.

                              Shade, I believe we could see KG ask for a trade very soon. He came out and said he would like to have Iverson on the Wolves and then within the day, the owner rebukes. Basically saying we don't give two ****s what KG wants we aren't paying for AI and we aren't interested in giving KG that other star he desperately needs and deserves. To me this is the justifiable reason KG has been waiting for to ask out of Minny.


                              Comment


                              • Re: Vecsey: Iverson demands to be traded (mentions Pacers)

                                Originally posted by ABADays View Post
                                I suspect the 76'ers owners have been around to see all you have quoted above. Guess what? It looks they can't wait to ship him out. I think there might be a reason for that.
                                It's because the only thing they have on their roster are two 30+ guys making close to $40 million (one who can barely walk) and a bunch of bad-to-promising young players. By the time the young'ns are ready, the other guys will be past their prime.

                                And they could have traded Ivy this summer if they wanted to anyway. They decided to keep him. By most accounts, they had a good offer from Boston that they turned down. They clearly were not incredibly eager to trade four months ago.

                                Now he told them he wants to leave (behind closed doors and with a lot more dignity than most anyone else who has recently asked to be moved I might add). So they have responded by saying "Okay" now that their hand has been forced. There is no evidence to say that they are now thrilled to get rid of their local icon and franchise player coming off a career year. But they are willingly doing so at his request and probably for the betterment of their franchise's future ability to compete for a Title (he is 31 and all). They may also be doing so out of respect to said local icon, if you'll also allow me a conjecture equally unfounded by facts.

                                Whether or not AI's asking for a trade was appropriate is another debate, but from the "practice" press conference until the other day, there are very few cases (that I'm aware of) that can be used to suggest that AI has acted as anything but a complete and utter professional, and as someone that everyone on his roster looks up to as a historically great player and the leader of the Philadelphia 76ers. His behavior on Team USA was also highly regarded by many who considered him as the only person that gave 100% effort in Athens, for those of you into patriotism.
                                Read my Pacers blog:
                                8points9seconds.com

                                Follow my twitter:

                                @8pts9secs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X