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

Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

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

  • #61
    Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

    Originally posted by Mourning View Post




    "But, hey, atleast we went to the play-offs!"


    Btw welcome to the group of fans described as "fans" (this is not aimed at you L.A.)


    Regards,

    Mourning
    OK, I'll admit I'm confused, but I'm willing to learn.

    If I'm understanding your logic correctly, Pacers fans (including myself) who want the Pacers to win and maybe even make it to the Playoffs are not real fans (or are "fans", whatever that means).

    To be a fan (without the quotation marks), I'd have to root for the Pacers to lose? This is the only way I can be a real fan?

    In other words, the true measure of a Pacers fan in our particular circumstance is how much they want the Pacers to lose.

    Even if by rooting for them to lose, they still win, so my rooting for them to lose did nothing to accomplish that result.

    So if they do win any of their remaining 6 games, and even a playoff game, I should be disappointed? To be a real Pacers fan, I mean.

    Please help.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

      Think you got that backwards. Fans want the team to win regardless, "fans" think losing in the short term can benefit the team in the long run.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        Says who? You? He was taken 17th in a draft that's not nearly as deep as this one, and you're saying he's a top 10 to LB with no evidence to support your opinion.

        I continue to find this trend hilarious. When something goes wrong, it's Lb's fault. When something positive happens, it's because of DW.

        Why would you want to give up your pick in this years draft, one touted as the deepest maybe ever, over giving up next year's draft pick in a draft that would have to be mindboggling to be better than '07?

        This team sucks, and it needs to be rebuilt. Rebuilding with talent from the deepest draft in quite sometime looks like a pretty freaking good place to start. Get what you can, without a price. Then start trading.

        Get a lottery pick for free in a draft that's extremely loaded, or give up the 14th pick and get smashed in 4 games just to say you made the playoffs? Hmmmmm, that's a hard choice.

        This team isn't going anywhere without major moves. You could save one trade by drafting a player that you would need to trade for.

        You could get a problem area fixed in the draft, and all you would give up is 2-3wins and a playoff showing. I don't think that's a very big price considering they aren't even close to sniffing .500% and need to trade away half the roster again anyways.
        To address your first remark lets just consider history in management. Who has a proven track record and who doesn't. Who is trying to remove himself from so much responsiblility and who is trying to claim it. Who is the future decision maker and who is the past one. I really don't think its a reach for me to blame LB.

        If you don't think Shawne WIlliams was a drafted to earlier than you must see something alot of other people don't.

        Secondly there is nothing free about this pick. To me alot of people are looking for pawns to fill the void of a king. Great teams aren't built on the best draft in years. Sure we may miss out on a good talent but it won't be Durant and it won't be ODen and those were the only pure breed difference makers I saw this year.

        This years draft would be a good place to start over and I am not opposed of losing the rest of the games for it but lets be real here, the problem isn't the one that can be fixed with a draft or a trade.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

          Originally posted by Y2J View Post
          Why do you think Los Angeles wants to see the Pacers in the playoffs? Do you think he's thinking "Geez....some playoff experience sure would help out our youngsters long-term!" I think not. He's thinking "Geez...inviting my friends over, ordering a pizza, and watching the playoffs sure would be a blast!"

          In order words, he's looking out for his best interest, not the teams.
          I'm calmer now, especially after this exchange with the missus:

          LA: You've got to read this post.

          LA's Wife (reads): That's impossible. You don't have any friends.
          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            Think you got that backwards. Fans want the team to win regardless, "fans" think losing in the short term can benefit the team in the long run.
            No, real Pacers fans root for the Cavs.
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

              With the last win....I officially crossed over from playing for the "pick" to playing for the "playoffs".

              I think that we have won enough games to ensure that we do not have a "10th worst" record in the league and have entered the "Death Valley / No Man's land" area. At this point....we nothing left to play for except for the Playoffs. Once we won our 34th game.....we're not gonna have a bad enough record to get the 10th worst record.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                I'm calmer now, especially after this exchange with the missus:

                LA: You've got to read this post.

                LA's Wife (reads): That's impossible. You don't have any friends.


                Btw JB Kegboy is right about his explanation regarding fan and "fan". Sort of a sarcastic response to some claiming that people holding my, Blue & Gold, Since_86, Y2J and various others opinion can not be considered "real fans" because they don't share the view of making the play-offs, no matter what, this year.

                So, don't feel in the least offended or something .

                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                  Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                  No, real Pacers fans root for the Cavs.
                  Eh, never could warm up to them. I'll probably jump on the Bulls wagon come playoff time.
                  Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                    Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                    Eh, never could warm up to them. I'll probably jump on the Bulls wagon come playoff time.
                    Gotta keep it in the family, eh?

                    Btw, I picked Chicago in the preseason to come out of the East.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                      Originally posted by Mourning View Post


                      Btw JB Kegboy is right about his explanation regarding fan and "fan". Sort of a sarcastic response to some claiming that people holding my, Blue & Gold, Since_86, Y2J and various others opinion can not be considered "real fans" because they don't share the view of making the play-offs, no matter what, this year.

                      So, don't feel in the least offended or something .

                      My bad. Looks like I stuck my nose in the middle of an on-going argument. No offense taken.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                        Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                        Heaven forbid we go two rounds into the playoffs.

                        "Oh Em Gee, If the Pacers start winning, the fans might like it! That's the last thing we want!"

                        Do you think about what you write before you write it?

                        *flame removed* There's no place for your attitude in sports.

                        Furthermore, don't you think that winning could actually IMPROVE the chances of management to change the team - by - you know - raising the value of the current players?

                        If you don't think that management has been both committed to change and active in that commitment, you've been living under a freaking rock.


                        The scenario Naptown painted was one of the Pacers falling into the playoffs by being not quite as bad as the next team. Not of the Pacers getting hot and entering the playoffs on a roll.

                        Then to compound that, he said (paraphrased) maybe we get there and the other team's star player gets injured and we are able to get by that team and into the second round.

                        I'm not interested in that. That doesn't do anything for me nor do I think it's really doing anything positive for the team. There's nothing competitive or encouraging about that scenario at all as far as I'm concerned.

                        Nowhere have I said that the team should intentionally lose so I hope you aren't putting me in that category. I've thought for a while the team should put Tinsley on the bench for several reasons.... put JO there (or severely limit his minutes) while he's injured rather than risk aggrivating one of his existing injuries or creating a new one (especially because I consider a new injury more likely while playing and favoring a good leg, etc.).

                        And then they should use the opportunity to see players like McCleod, Greene, Williams, et al more and more in consistent roles to really see what we have. Try to win with these guys but also try and develop these guys and see who is on a fast track, who is a solid, who is off the tracks.

                        I'll agree that if we do that then we might not be able to scrape up a win or two that we might've otherwise had with JO. I don't think Tinsley matters positively over several games... I think Tinsley actually helps our chances to lose... but that's another topic.

                        IF the young guys and bench guys would get us on a roll then TPTB would have to consider as to what to do for the final few games if we had a playoff spot in our sights. Could we sustain that and enter the playoffs on a roll if we went back to the old rotations?

                        But backing in doesn't appeal to me. Either we enter on a roll or we're wasting everyone's time. Particularly when I know how our front office is when it comes to off season moves and the weight it puts on simply making the playoffs... let alone how they've misjudged the fanbase and not been very proactive with problems no matter how far back you want to look in the Walsh era.

                        And a shiny new marketing campaign isn't going to turn me around either.

                        But I'm not rooting for losses. I'm rooting for good play and hope for the future. But losses don't really sting either at this point. Just making the playoffs doesn't mean anything to me at any point... and making the playoffs in this condition means even less.

                        I only want the team to enter the playoffs playing good basketball. Anything else is a farce. A cruel joke. To enter the playoffs knowing your only chance to advance is if the opposing team's star player gets injured isn't a scenario I want to root for. I'm not that kind of a fan. Now, if we are talking entering the playoffs as the 2nd or maybe 3rd best team then I'd be willing to accept a series win if a better team lost a key player in the playoffs. That would be the breaks of the game and also why you play the games rather than hand out trophies at the end of the regular season. But we're not talking about that type of scenario and this isn't a one game elimination tournament where you can hope to continually advance taking it one game at a time.

                        So to answer your question:
                        Do you think about what you write before you write it?
                        Yes, I do. I may not always get my point across as I sometimes assume others already know my background position based on past posts. And Lord knows I've been accused of repeating myself too much. But I know exactly what I am saying.

                        -Bball
                        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                        ------

                        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                        -John Wooden

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                          I like this last post, Bball. I like it very much, but you're confusing the issue.

                          This will be my last post on this subject, except for some previously promised "rubbing in" when the Pacers win.

                          This entire issue is a jumbled mess because it blends the past with the present.

                          The Past:

                          We put the franchise in the hands of players that were either insane or were not going to get along. Getting out of years of bad choices and the ensuing damage (that by the way started long before Larry Bird) has been the primary goal for coming on 2 seasons. This is called "blowing it up".

                          On 11/19/2004 we had 15 players, including a rookie. Of those players, only 3 vets, one of whom is a perennial all-star, and the then rookie remain.

                          We've even added and dropped players not included in that 15. Davis, Jasikevicous and Harrington are a few of the notables there.

                          Using a quick-glance estimate, over the last 2 years or so, we've dressed over 20 different players that are no longer here. This is what "blowing it up" is, and this is what it feels like.

                          The Future:

                          We all understand the predicament the team is in. If we win more regular season games, we could play a few more games in the playoffs but we could lose a "free" chance at a young talent. If we lose more games, we are in the odd situation of gaining a benefit: we get a pick.

                          For the sake of argument, let's take a philosophical stance that the future is only about CHOICES (i.e. ACTIONS). Just for now, let's forget how we feel and only deal with what we DO.

                          Again, let's not talk about what you want. Let?s talk about what you DO. This is why "rooting to lose" rubs me the wrong way like crazy. What is the ACTION of rooting for a team to lose? How do you ACT that way and not expect to get called out for it?

                          But hey, it's not all about cheering and jeering. A lot of the participants in this forum love to hand out free advise to the players, coaches and management. Rather than taking actions ourselves, this is where we recommend others take action.

                          Once again we are faced with a choice. What actions do we recommend to the management when faced with this pick situation? Do we recommend rolling up our sleeves and working hard to find a way to win? Before you answer, consider the converse. What ACTIONS do you recommend to achieve the desired 10th pick prize?

                          And here we are, the worst possible sin in sports at any level. Intentionally throwing a game in order to achieve a "reward" outside of the game.

                          So, to tie things up: in the end I could care less about what you would like to have happen using your "inside" voice. But on the outside our words and actions have consequences.

                          Imagine that you are explaining the situation to a 5 year old child. What lesson do you want to teach this young mind? That losing is desirable as long as you get a reward later? Or that we play games to exercise our minds, our bodies and our WILL? The harder we work and the harder we try, the better we become.

                          Watching men fight through adversity and put up their best efforts will never be a waste of my time.
                          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                            Eh, never could warm up to them. I'll probably jump on the Bulls wagon come playoff time.
                            Wizards?
                            STARBURY

                            08 and Beyond

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                              Not making the playoffs would be a considerable blow the reputation of this team and it's management, especially Larry Bird. Imagine the headlines if the Pacers aren't playing in the playoffs. Look at what the playoffs did to Anthony Johnson's value or for that matter Marquis Daniels.
                              I'm in these bands
                              The Humans
                              Dr. Goldfoot
                              The Bar Brawlers
                              ME

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Is anyone still thinking "tank?"

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                To address your first remark lets just consider history in management. Who has a proven track record and who doesn't. Who is trying to remove himself from so much responsiblility and who is trying to claim it. Who is the future decision maker and who is the past one. I really don't think its a reach for me to blame LB.
                                So who gets the credit for drafting Danny? Oh, must be DW since it's a positive even though LB was in the office.

                                So who gets the credit for getting a TE from the Hornets for Peja? Oh, must be DW since it's a positive even though LB was in the office.

                                I have yet to read anything saying drafting Shawne was LB's call, or drafting Danny was LW, or anything else for that matter. Sorry, but I think it's highly laughable that Larry is behind every bad decision, and Donnie is behind everything that's good. That's just absurd to think.

                                If LB kept screwing things up, why does he continue to make decisions, or even better, why does he still have a freaking job? Or do you think Donnie likes watching this organization run into the ground while he still has the power to change it?

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                If you don't think Shawne WIlliams was a drafted to earlier than you must see something alot of other people don't.
                                Whether I think he was drafted too high or not is irrelevant.

                                Fact: He wasn't a top ten pick.
                                Fact: This years draft is by far more loaded than last years.

                                Why in the world would you say he, or a player of his caliber, would be taken over bigger prospects in such a deep draft? You must have inside information that Larry is running this years draft huh?

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Secondly there is nothing free about this pick. To me alot of people are looking for pawns to fill the void of a king. Great teams aren't built on the best draft in years. Sure we may miss out on a good talent but it won't be Durant and it won't be ODen and those were the only pure breed difference makers I saw this year.

                                This years draft would be a good place to start over and I am not opposed of losing the rest of the games for it but lets be real here, the problem isn't the one that can be fixed with a draft or a trade.
                                Where has ANYONE said they would be fixed by just a draft? Every post I've made in this discussion has mentioned other trades. Obviously the draft isn't a solve all. But I'm sure I've already said it once, but it's a pretty damn good place to start.

                                Also, how is it not free? They don't have to give up any players for it, nor cash. The only thing it will cost is a couple more L's and a streak that to me, doesn't mean a whole lot. Who freaking cares if we make the playoffs until the end of time? Mediocrity isn't a trait I like having, nor a trait I want my teams to have. When do teams get banners? When they actually accomplish something. Personally, I think the East should only get 6 teams in the playoffs tops, because it's a joke such bad teams have the opportunity to continue playing.

                                I would much rather give up a pick in a worse draft, then give up a pick in a draft that has the possibility of being the deepest ever.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X