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

CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.06}

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.06}

    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/web_061211.html


    Pacers Make Statement With Jackson Action


    Dec. 11, 2006
    Here's the official one-sentence statement, issued earlier today by the club's Public Information Department:

    "The Indiana Pacers announced Monday that guard Stephen Jackson has been suspended for Monday night’s game at Chicago for conduct detrimental to the team during Saturday night’s game at Cleveland."

    Here's the unwritten statement made by that statement:

    The Pacers have run out of patience for behavioral misdeeds.

    When Jackson opted not to go quietly when Rick Carlisle removed him from Saturday night's blowout loss in Cleveland, the coach took immediate action, banishing him to the locker room for the rest of the game. And the franchise stepped forward with its action today.

    "The Pacers have had a good value system in which respect for fans, referees, coaches, players and front office has always existed," said franchise CEO & President Donnie Walsh. "The last couple of years, there has been a breakdown of that in some instances. We're making it clear we won't tolerate anymore breakdowns in that value system."

    No more need be said.

    SIXERS HAVEN'T CALLED, BUT PACERS WOULD LISTEN
    You have to be a little skeptical about allowing sheer e-mail volume to determine the importance of a subject. Every time a major player on another team asks to be traded, the e-mailbox fills up. Even when it was Chris Webber. OK, then it was only one, but even that was pretty surprising.

    So the Allen Iverson saga has attracted plenty of interest around here. It isn't often a true franchise player hits the market, so it's only natural for fans to think wistfully about the possibility of adding a talent of that impact to the roster.

    But where's the reality? Boston, Minnesota, Sacramento and Charlotte are generally believed to be the front-runners in the A.I. derby. Most media reports have mentioned the Pacers only on the fringes, like a player-to-be-named-later.

    In a way, that's what they are. Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.

    And if the former Pacers assistant did call?

    "We'd listen," Walsh said. "He's a great player, period."

    It appears the 76ers are looking for a combination of young players and draft picks and aren't particularly interested in a superstar-for-superstar kind of transaction. It would be a difficult package for any team to assemble, considering Iverson's reported $18 million salary, and so it would be for the Pacers.

    But he is a legitimately great player, a true warrior on the floor, a talent capable of winning games by himself whose main fault is trying to do so too often. As always, however, you must consider the price. And when pondering that particular part of the equation, remember this: Philly isn't about to inherit some other team's problems to solve its own.

    PLAYER OF THE WEEK
    Until Saturday night, this one was gift-wrapped and waiting for none other than Jackson, who was playing his best offensive basketball of the season until lapsing back into his hold temperamental ways. There was, however, one other obvious and deserving candidate. Jeff Foster has taken the team's rebounding issues personally, averaging 11.0 in four games last week and racking up 41 in the last three games (a 13.7 average) while tying his career high of 18 for the sixth time.

    GAME OF THE WEEK
    Beating the best team in the conference by double figures is something worth noting, don't you think? The Pacers avoided the trap of the "first-game-back" with a solid 94-80 defeat of Orlando Wednesday night behind 26 points apiece from Jackson and Al Harrington and Foster's aforementioned 18-rebound effort. The Pacers played energetically and aggressively and snapped a three-game losing streak by putting the defensive clamps on the high-scoring Magic, holding the visitors to 32 points in the second and third quarters while taking control of the game.

    STAT OF THE WEEK
    What is it about the road that has such a dramatic effect on the defense? Less traction on other arena floors? Allergies to down pillows in luxury hotels? Whatever the cause, it must be found and eliminated. The Pacers have allowed opponents averages of 89.9 points and .433 shooting in eight home games, the main reason they're 6-2 at Conseco Fieldhouse. On the road, however, they've yielded averages of 102.8 points and .470 shooting, which explains the 5-9 record and four-game losing streak. It's time for the team to start defending the road court.

    QUOTE OF THE WEEK
    Every once in a while, the ever-so-subtle Carlisle lets slip a gem of wit. Asked about his team's penchant for turnovers, the coach offered up this memorable explanation: "There’s an element of carelessness. There’s an element of good intention with bad results. And sometimes we’re trying to throw the ball through a defender's nose and have it come out his rear-end and go to our teammate. Those are things we have to avoid."
    Word on the street is he doesn't want your money, he only wants to please your ears...
    Bum in Berlin on Myspace
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

    Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/web_061211.html


    Pacers Make Statement With Jackson Action


    Dec. 11, 2006
    Here's the official one-sentence statement, issued earlier today by the club's Public Information Department:

    "The Indiana Pacers announced Monday that guard Stephen Jackson has been suspended for Monday night’s game at Chicago for conduct detrimental to the team during Saturday night’s game at Cleveland."

    Here's the unwritten statement made by that statement:

    The Pacers have run out of patience for behavioral misdeeds.

    When Jackson opted not to go quietly when Rick Carlisle removed him from Saturday night's blowout loss in Cleveland, the coach took immediate action, banishing him to the locker room for the rest of the game. And the franchise stepped forward with its action today.

    "The Pacers have had a good value system in which respect for fans, referees, coaches, players and front office has always existed," said franchise CEO & President Donnie Walsh. "The last couple of years, there has been a breakdown of that in some instances. We're making it clear we won't tolerate anymore breakdowns in that value system."
    No more need be said.

    SIXERS HAVEN'T CALLED, BUT PACERS WOULD LISTEN
    You have to be a little skeptical about allowing sheer e-mail volume to determine the importance of a subject. Every time a major player on another team asks to be traded, the e-mailbox fills up. Even when it was Chris Webber. OK, then it was only one, but even that was pretty surprising.

    So the Allen Iverson saga has attracted plenty of interest around here. It isn't often a true franchise player hits the market, so it's only natural for fans to think wistfully about the possibility of adding a talent of that impact to the roster.

    But where's the reality? Boston, Minnesota, Sacramento and Charlotte are generally believed to be the front-runners in the A.I. derby. Most media reports have mentioned the Pacers only on the fringes, like a player-to-be-named-later.

    In a way, that's what they are. Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.

    And if the former Pacers assistant did call?

    "We'd listen," Walsh said. "He's a great player, period."

    It appears the 76ers are looking for a combination of young players and draft picks and aren't particularly interested in a superstar-for-superstar kind of transaction. It would be a difficult package for any team to assemble, considering Iverson's reported $18 million salary, and so it would be for the Pacers.

    But he is a legitimately great player, a true warrior on the floor, a talent capable of winning games by himself whose main fault is trying to do so too often. As always, however, you must consider the price. And when pondering that particular part of the equation, remember this: Philly isn't about to inherit some other team's problems to solve its own.

    PLAYER OF THE WEEK
    Until Saturday night, this one was gift-wrapped and waiting for none other than Jackson, who was playing his best offensive basketball of the season until lapsing back into his hold temperamental ways. There was, however, one other obvious and deserving candidate. Jeff Foster has taken the team's rebounding issues personally, averaging 11.0 in four games last week and racking up 41 in the last three games (a 13.7 average) while tying his career high of 18 for the sixth time.

    GAME OF THE WEEK
    Beating the best team in the conference by double figures is something worth noting, don't you think? The Pacers avoided the trap of the "first-game-back" with a solid 94-80 defeat of Orlando Wednesday night behind 26 points apiece from Jackson and Al Harrington and Foster's aforementioned 18-rebound effort. The Pacers played energetically and aggressively and snapped a three-game losing streak by putting the defensive clamps on the high-scoring Magic, holding the visitors to 32 points in the second and third quarters while taking control of the game.

    STAT OF THE WEEK
    What is it about the road that has such a dramatic effect on the defense? Less traction on other arena floors? Allergies to down pillows in luxury hotels? Whatever the cause, it must be found and eliminated. The Pacers have allowed opponents averages of 89.9 points and .433 shooting in eight home games, the main reason they're 6-2 at Conseco Fieldhouse. On the road, however, they've yielded averages of 102.8 points and .470 shooting, which explains the 5-9 record and four-game losing streak. It's time for the team to start defending the road court.

    QUOTE OF THE WEEK
    Every once in a while, the ever-so-subtle Carlisle lets slip a gem of wit. Asked about his team's penchant for turnovers, the coach offered up this memorable explanation: "There’s an element of carelessness. There’s an element of good intention with bad results. And sometimes we’re trying to throw the ball through a defender's nose and have it come out his rear-end and go to our teammate. Those are things we have to avoid."


    It's about d@mn time. Now if they will just do this across the board it will make for a much better season & ultimately a better team.

    By saying across the board I mean no one & I mean NO ONE should be exempt from these rules.

    In fact I would have no problem at all if the team took David Harrison into the office tommorow & said "David, no more. No more looking at the refs. funny, no more complaining about fouls, nothing, nadda, zip. If you do this one more time not only will Rick sit you for the rest of the game, even if it means Rawle Marshall has to play center, but we will then suspend you from the team for one game without pay for conduct detrimental to the team. After that it becomse a 3 game suspension. If you do it again you will be placed on the in-active roster for the rest of the season & you will not play."

    I am glad that TPTB have Rick's back on this, finally.

    I can only imagine how differantly the entire Ron fiasco would have turned out if the team would have done this from day one.

    Ron would have cracked much earlier than he ended up doing & then the team could have sent him packing a long long time ago & he would not have been able to do the long term damage he did to our team.

    Either way, better late to the party than not show up at all. So two thumbs up from this fan on this.

    BTW, I have always wondered what had gotten into Walsh. For all of the faults I list about him I always believed that at least he would field a team that the local fans would be proud of. Somehow some way that went away over the past 6 years.

    Let's hope this is a return those days.


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

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

      Originally posted by Raskolnikov View Post
      "The Pacers have had a good value system in which respect for fans, referees, coaches, players and front office has always existed," said franchise CEO & President Donnie Walsh. "The last couple of years, there has been a breakdown of that in some instances. We're making it clear we won't tolerate anymore breakdowns in that value system."
      Let's hope so.

      Originally posted by Raskolnikov
      Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.
      Shocking

      Originally posted by Raskolnikov
      It appears the 76ers are looking for a combination of young players and draft picks and aren't particularly interested in a superstar-for-superstar kind of transaction. It would be a difficult package for any team to assemble, considering Iverson's reported $18 million salary, and so it would be for the Pacers.
      We just don't have anything they want. No picks next year. No young players. No guys they would want with mid-range contracts to make the deal work (aside from Foster and Daniels). Foster, Daniels, Williams and Harrison is about the best package we could possibly put together, but that's short on making the money work I believe. There's no way they want to do a 4 for 1 or probably even a 3 for 1. My guess is that they will want to include Dalembert's bad contract along with Ivy as well. That's like a $27 million package. We can't give them $27 million in players that they want.

      We have no business in this discussion.

      Originally posted by Raskolnikov
      I would have no problem at all if the team took David Harrison into the office tommorow & said "David, no more. No more looking at the refs. funny, no more complaining about fouls, nothing, nadda, zip. If you do this one more time not only will Rick sit you for the rest of the game, even if it means Rawle Marshall has to play center, but we will then suspend you from the team for one game without pay for conduct detrimental to the team. After that it becomse a 3 game suspension. If you do it again you will be placed on the in-active roster for the rest of the season & you will not play."
      I agree with you to a point about the discipline. But these are grown men we're talking about and this is a professional sports league, not a Catholic school dormitory.

      And since I'm beginning to feel that Harrison is less and less a part of our long-term plans, you also don't want to give the perception to the League that he is a headcase. He's one of our few bargaining chips right now in any trade talks given his size, his contract and his development potential.

      Since I agree with UncleBuck that we've only finished "Phase 1" of our "righting the ship campaign" so far, we're going to need to keep this guy's value as high as possible for the (hopefully) upcoming moves next summer.
      Read my Pacers blog:
      8points9seconds.com

      Follow my twitter:
      @8pts9secs

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

        Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.

        Translation: DW called him.
        You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
        All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

        - Jimmy Buffett

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

          I don't ever remember Ron Artest being disrespectful to an official or to Rick Carlisle. Is that view mistaken? The referee baiting came from Tinsley, Jermaine, and JO. Reggie was notorious early in his career, but mellowed in his final years. Harrison then took the example of JO and company.

          For all his faults, I don't ever remember Ron Artest as being disrespectful to authority.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

            Originally posted by sixthman View Post
            I don't ever remember Ron Artest being disrespectful to an official or to Rick Carlisle. Is that view mistaken? The referee baiting came from Tinsley, Jermaine, and JO. Reggie was notorious early in his career, but mellowed in his final years. Harrison then took the example of JO and company.

            For all his faults, I don't ever remember Ron Artest as being disrespectful to authority.

            ?????????????

            I can't even speak

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

              DW was quoted on ESPN.com as saying something to the effect of "If we did talk, I wouldn't tell you."

              He never tells.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                Originally posted by sixthman View Post
                I don't ever remember Ron Artest being disrespectful to an official or to Rick Carlisle. Is that view mistaken? The referee baiting came from Tinsley, Jermaine, and JO. Reggie was notorious early in his career, but mellowed in his final years. Harrison then took the example of JO and company.

                For all his faults, I don't ever remember Ron Artest as being disrespectful to authority.
                Ron never *****ed to the refs. He would get a T every now and then but who doesnt.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                  Originally posted by Doug View Post
                  Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.

                  Translation: DW called him.

                  Haha, that was my first thought.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                    Originally posted by Phildog View Post
                    ?????????????

                    I can't even speak
                    Ron did NOT get techs for arguing with refs. I think every single tech he got was for flagrant fouls.

                    He also apparently was very good about following authority in the sense of doing what the coach asked. Ron got plenty of benchings directly from Rick and as far as I recall he always followed them up with a good outing.

                    Even when he asked for the trade he was respectful in how he spoke about Rick, ie, "good guy, I just don't get his system, I'm not a good match here, etc".

                    Ron is a headcase for sure and a big pain in the butt to deal with, but it's more from a flaky angle than a mean-spirited/confrontation with authority one. I was 100% behind trading him when it came time, but that was only because I realized his motivation was his own touches and that he was rather selfish underneath it all.


                    Jack, JO and Tinsley were the "ref baiters". Jack has drastically improved that. JO I think has really improved as well. Tins is about the same (he just got one vs CLE).

                    Since I agree with UncleBuck that we've only finished "Phase 1" of our "righting the ship campaign" so far, we're going to need to keep this guy's value as high as possible for the (hopefully) upcoming moves next summer.
                    Maybe, but another way to fix the ship is to just get in there and make repairs to the parts you have. A lot of times that's more economical. For all the talk of trades as some magic cure, you are trading players with known reps and have no guarantee about the performance of the player you are getting in return.

                    It's not like when they traded for Jackson everyone was saying "well we all know that Jackson can't control his emotions and lets his game come and go all night long". At the time DW needed to turn a good but not great SF into a good but not great SG, and he did that.

                    The other stuff came as a "bonus". The Pacers GOT INTO THIS SITUATION VIA TRADES. Something to keep in mind.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                      You learn from your peers... its always been like that. Jax never caused a problem in San Antonio or Atlanta (as far as we know). I believe RA rubbed off on him a little, IMHO.
                      "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                      Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                        I think Carlisle brings out the worst in people. I never heard of any attitude problems, effort problems, trade demands, not getting enough touches, substitution problems, line-up change problems, players not knowing their role problems, fans calling for the heads of players, fans calling for the heads of TPTB, fans wanting to just blow it all up, assistant coaches taking the fall, players being punished or really the need (outside of Artest showing some serious lack of maturity a few times under Isiah) before he came here.
                        I'm in these bands
                        The Humans
                        Dr. Goldfoot
                        The Bar Brawlers
                        ME

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                          Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot
                          I think Carlisle brings out the worst in people. I never heard of any attitude problems, effort problems, trade demands, not getting enough touches, substitution problems, line-up change problems, players not knowing their role problems, fans calling for the heads of players, fans calling for the heads of TPTB, fans wanting to just blow it all up, assistant coaches taking the fall, players being punished or really the need (outside of Artest showing some serious lack of maturity a few times under Isiah) before he came here.
                          All of that started with the Artest era (no I'm not blaming Ron). There seemed to develope a Jock kissing attitude amongst many around here.
                          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: CIW: Pacers Make Statement With Jackson, Sixers Haven't Called {Pacers.com 12.11.

                            Originally Posted by Raskolnikov
                            Franchise CEO and President Donnie Walsh said he hasn't been contacted by 76ers General Manager Billy King about Iverson.

                            While this is a true statement, Donnie didn't say whether he had contacted Billy. We all know how sneaky DW can be.
                            "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                            Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                            Comment

                            Previous template Next
                            Working...
                            X