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

A couple questions for the old timers

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

  • #16
    Re: A couple questions for the old timers

    One of the things that really made it tough during the early days of the NBA was what we experienced in the ABA. It was hard to go from being THE TEAM to an also ran. I felt like we were bad during those years but I never felt ashamed or disgusted with the Pacers like I have over the past 5 years. But I have to tell you, I feel a deep sense of sadness for those players who represent the organization well and see nothing but their wheels spinning.
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: A couple questions for the old timers

      Originally posted by ABADays View Post
      What are you talking about - you're only 17 now

      I am NOT 17
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: A couple questions for the old timers

        Originally posted by ABADays View Post
        One of the things that really made it tough during the early days of the NBA was what we experienced in the ABA. It was hard to go from being THE TEAM to an also ran. I felt like we were bad during those years but I never felt ashamed or disgusted with the Pacers like I have over the past 5 years. But I have to tell you, I feel a deep sense of sadness for those players who represent the organization well and see nothing but their wheels spinning.
        Sir, I could not agree more.

        I would much rather have Stuart Gray than David Harrison.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: A couple questions for the old timers

          I have been a Pacers fan all of my life, I was born the same year the Pacers were btw. So sadly I was to young to enjoy the ABA heydays. While I always watched the games with my Grandpa I never really understood them until I was about 9-10 years old so that would have been in 76-77.

          I have had tickets to the Pacers in one form or another since 1985.

          I got to a few games in the early 80's including the night Big Mac returned and also his last game where he hurt his leg.

          The very bad thing for the Pacers during that time frame was that while they were abysmal, the local college basketball scene was flourishing. I.U. was at the top of thier game, Purdue was above average.

          So what happened back then was that the media did about the worse thing they could do to the Pacers. They ignored them.

          Yes I know many people wish they would ignore a lot of what goes on now, but believe, this was the days before TNT's national program or ESPN. The Pacers were on TV maybe 15 times a year on wttv and that was if you were lucky.

          So when you couldn't see the game or if you lived in a spot that didn't always pick up the games on radio the only thing we could get was the box score the next day in the star and later that day you could read about it in the news.

          Ok, sorry don't mean to give you a history leason.

          I'll answer the question.

          The answer is "I don't know".

          While U.B. is correct 20 win seasons were tough to swallow at least the only shame you had to suffer as a fan back then was having people tell you what a loser you were for watching the NBA period when I.U. or one of the other local teams were doing so well.

          But today there is a real and true visceral hatred for the franchise, the likes of which I have never seen.

          I want to say we are better now but the truth is we are 9 and 21 since the beginning of the year. Strething that out of 82 games and you are in the high 20's for wins for the year.

          So I don't know that we can say that we are significantly better than those teams. It feels like we are better but, well....

          Also I'll just talk on a personal note here.

          I never once attended those games and felt ashamed by any of the actions taken by the players. Don't get me wrong I was ashamed at the ball we were playing often, but not once did I have to hold my nose and applaud like I had to do with Artest (until I could not applaud anymore no matter how good he did).

          I liked Herb Williams. Yes, that's right I said it. I liked Herb. Sure he lacked a passion you would want out a player of his caliber but he was a good basketball player and had a very very very long NBA career.

          I loved Clark Kellogg. You want to complain about the knee pains we have today and how bad they are, this guy was a 20 & 10 player and was taken out before he even reached his prime.

          I was never a fan of Stipo's however he never shamed the franchise.

          Ok, I'm going back to giving a history lesson again. I'm sorry.

          In a nutshell I honestly thing right now it's as bad as it has ever been overall.

          But I also beleive that this should be easier to turn around than it was back then. But time will tell.


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

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: A couple questions for the old timers

            OK, being an old timer I do remember a few reasons for all of the ABA teams to struggle after entering the NBA. First thing is a few players had jumped ship and went to existing NBA teams, second it cost the 4 ABA teams a lot of money for the "right" to join the NBA,third the 4 ABA teams were not allowed to participate in the draft for the first 3 years after they joined . This hampered the growth of all 4 teams that joined the league along with no TV revenue they had no money to play in the free agent pool. So to answer the question I feel worse about the team now than then since there were plenty of good reasons for them to be bad, at least back then the team hustled and tried to win,now we have what 3 -4 players that actually try game in and game out! Sorry for the rant since I lurk more than I post but when I saw a question for the old timers I had to answer!
            In Indiana Basketball is not just a game...it's a way of life!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: A couple questions for the old timers

              The other thing that makes it seem worse now is the presence of a second professional team that has been more than moderately successful in the same period the Pacers have choked.

              This year is also a good year for Indiana college basketball, with 4 teams legitimately looking at some action in the NCAA tournament.

              The HS basketball is no longer the factor it once was. I don't think we quite have to cope with attendances lower than the HS regionals any more.
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                I think it was clearly worse back then. I would not want to go back to the days of the telethon...ever. There was no hope at the time that Indy could hang onto the franchise long term. People thought the market could not support it. It was a scary time to be a hardcore Pacer fan. Scarier than today for sure.

                But some things are very similar. The talent level might be a little better today, but there's not a huge difference with what we can put on the floor due to constant injuries.

                Also, the hope today is the same as it was in the 80's: The Draft or Lottery. Danny Granger came from the draft and is the supposed future of this team. Hopefully he is the Chuck Person of this era...and the next real superstar is on this summer's draft board.

                But some things are different. Now, it's clear the city can support the Pacers if we just play .500 or better ball and stay out of the police reports. BTW, if you think winning only matters, you are not considering the business sector and young families who also buy tickets. The product and reputation does matter.

                BUT, the biggest difference is how the public feels about the Pacers. As one poster said, the public was indifferent in the 80's. Now, they think the Pacers are people that spend most of their time in the city-county building.

                Embarrassment is the best word to describe today's Indiana Pacers. Unknown or unimportant used to be the best word.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                  Originally posted by holmes View Post
                  OK, being an old timer I do remember a few reasons for all of the ABA teams to struggle after entering the NBA. First thing is a few players had jumped ship and went to existing NBA teams, second it cost the 4 ABA teams a lot of money for the "right" to join the NBA,third the 4 ABA teams were not allowed to participate in the draft for the first 3 years after they joined . This hampered the growth of all 4 teams that joined the league along with no TV revenue they had no money to play in the free agent pool. So to answer the question I feel worse about the team now than then since there were plenty of good reasons for them to be bad, at least back then the team hustled and tried to win,now we have what 3 -4 players that actually try game in and game out! Sorry for the rant since I lurk more than I post but when I saw a question for the old timers I had to answer!

                  Post more often.
                  Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                    The big thing for me that's been touched on here is the community reaction to those who admit to being Pacer fans or going to games.

                    In the lean 80s years, I remember being constantly ragged by people here for wearing a Pacers jacket. I mean, at times, it was downright cruel. Only to be harangued about the "great" Boston and LA teams. Of course, tne years later I'm sure all these people had become "fans".

                    I've noticed that the "hate" amongst the local populace is returning. Have to hear the same stuff about how bad we suck PLUS all the off-the-court stuff. So I guess in that regard it's worse now because is like the 80s-type hate plus an extra layer.

                    Anyway, I'm tired of being ridiculed, laughed at, stared at, whatever for being a fan. Of course, I always try to retort. Usually something like, don't come back when we cycle back around to winning again then. But, it's tough to defend right now.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                      Originally posted by Indy View Post
                      Would you say the fan base was more depressed about the Pacers now or back then?
                      Would you say you are more depressed now or back then?

                      Back then the depression was the result of despair, whearas right now the
                      depression (IMO) is the more the result of disgust.

                      Funny how from 1967 until 2004, 37 years, the Pacers managed to not be
                      generally labeled as "thugs", then all of a sudden everyone is throwing that
                      word around.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                        Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                        Post more often.
                        Thanks for the invite geez....I'll try to.
                        In Indiana Basketball is not just a game...it's a way of life!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                          I was born in 1970...and really wasn't too interested in basketball in my youth, which is kind of miraculous growing up in Indiana. I played football and baseball as a kid, but I really didn't get interested in basketball until the 1980's. I played basketball in a league once, but like alot of you, I played constantly at recess and during pickup games with friends. Growing up...I liked the national teams that were marketed. The only "local" team, if you could call it that, that I rooted for growing up was the Cincinnati Reds. I liked the Cowboys for football (there were no Colts for a good chunk of my youth), and based on the sports related clothing of my peers, the Steelers, Bears, and the Bengals were the other teams of interest.

                          For basketball, it also seemed like the national teams garnered more support locally. I remember alot of Celtics and Lakers fans. The first NBA team I rooted for was the Lakers. They had Kareem, Magic, Worthy...they were exciting to watch, and they won. I wasn't at all connected to the ABA Pacers, sadly, but I do remember the NBA days. I had a cousin who didn't like Larry Bird (referred to him as a "flick" for those of you familiar with that term), or I probably would have been a Celtic fan. What I remembered of the Pacers was that they were terrible. They seemed to be basement dwellers, and didn't seem to have a ton of local fan support. I don't remember them getting much media attention at all.

                          IU was very popular, and I became a big fan of theirs in the late 80's. I was at Daytona Beach on Spring Break when Keith Smart hit the winning shot against Syracuse in 1987, and after that, I became a much bigger basketball fan, particularly for IU. It was really the first time I identified a team representing my state doing really well. I wound up entering IU as a freshman one year later.

                          The first time I remember my peers talking about the Pacers was when I heard Clark Kellog's name. People were excited about him, so I was at least aware of him. The first Pacer teams I started really meshing with, and started rooting for were the Chuck Person era Pacers. I started watching all of the games during that era...and became a full fledged fan.

                          The teams that I really started going nuts for were the Reggie Miller/Davis brother/Smits/Mark Jackson teams. Those games against the Knicks were very special. Reggie Miller by far was my favorite player (I loved Dale too), and I just loved the David versus Goliath backdrop. Reggie helped bring pride to the Indiana Pacers, and overnight, it seemed like I started seeing Pacers jerseys everywhere. When the Pacers were getting good, the Colts were not very good, and most of the college teams, while still competitive, weren't as dominant as they had been. The fact that Reggie stayed with the team his entire career, and played at such a high level, particularly in the playoffs, kept me engaged with the team.

                          I never really identified with alot of the new Pacer players that came in afterwards, although I was excited about the prospect of Jermaine O'neal. I knew very little about him, but his talent became evident early in his career. I had alot of hope with the teams that fronted Artest, Miller, and Jackson...because on paper they were very talented, and they were winning lots of games. In reality...they were talented...but just a bad chemitry experiment waiting to blow up...and eventually it did.

                          After Detroit, the Pacers took a crushing right hook, but they were still standing, just wobbly. Reggie retired, and we took a crushing upper cut, and then hit the canvas. Ever since then, we climb to our feet, and then take another blow (Artest trade demands, Off-court fisticuffs, drama with the officials, drug use, firearms, etc.) that sends us to the mat. People went from being proud, to angry, to embarrassed, to numb.

                          During the demise of the Pacers, came the uprising of the Colts. Now the Colts have an aura of milk drinking "Aw Shucks" God fearing individuals who hold doors open and help little old ladies across the street. The Pacers have a reputation of being degenerate thugs. I know people don't like that word, but when I visit Indiana and talk about the Pacers, invariably that word comes out. Neither one of these perceptions are true of course, but perception is reality, and that is what the Pacers are dealing with.

                          I have gone off on a tangent of my history as a fan...which really isn't what you were asking...but I am just trying to describe my perspective. For me, the scenario is probably better today, but only slightly. I think there are plenty of fans like me who could be brought back into the fold (I am still in the fold...but not really engaged as a fan). I would think it would be easier to bring a fairly recent rabid fan into the mix versus somebody who wasn't really interested in the team at all.

                          That being said, the Pacers have a huge job to do. The off court stuff just has to stop, and that probably means more stringent recruiting/scouting. The Pacers organization can't baby sit these guys all day, and nor should they have to. These are grown adults. Talking about it means absolutely nothing, and so far, it has amounted to nothing. Also the fans need something to be excited about...something to give them hope. Winning helps, of course, but it would be nice to rally aroud a young exciting player, or a team of loose ball diving scrappers who tough out wins with talent and guts.

                          I think the key starts with saying goodbye to Jermaine and Jamaal. I think both of these guys still have the potential, particularly Jermaine, to fluorish and have strong careers. I just think both have greener pastures elsewhere, and need a new zip code. The Pacers need to cleanse themselves from the past, and they would have to be bran dead to rehire Harrison. I realize this is easier said then done...because both players have low stock values right now.

                          I am willing to give Shawnee one more chance, but I would keep him on a very short zero tolerance leash. Three strikes, and you are out. He is young, so helpfully a strong mentor could help him start making better decisions.

                          My apologies for the long winded rant.
                          When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winners circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor.
                          -Pat Riley

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                            People went from being proud, to angry, to embarrassed, to numb.

                            Truer words were never spoken.
                            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                              There is one issue here that splits people between saying the 80s or today are worse: hope.

                              Looking back at the late 70s/early 80s, there certainly wasn't a lot of optimism. In hindsight, we climbed out of the hole. We certainly don't have the benefit of hindsight for the current situation. At the time, I think the older era was every bit is bad or worse than today.

                              Apart from the financial distress/lack of league revenue dollars due to the merger conditions, look at the players we missed out on:

                              -Dantley: traded away.
                              -English: traded away to get an aging McGinnis to return with the hope that he could sell tickets.
                              -Bird: couldn't afford to draft him a year early like Boston, as we needed help immediately, so we took Rick Robey at 4. Boston took Bird at 6, waited a year to sign him, and the rest is history.
                              -In 82/83, Houston absolutely tanked, going 4-29 at the end of the year. They won the rights (coin toss) to Sampson, while we had the worst record in the East.
                              -In 83/84, Houston again won the toss. We traded our pick anyway to Portland, who bombed with Sam Bowie. Had we kept it and lost the toss, we would have picked Jordan. We were high on Stipo at the time and wouldn't have taken Bowie. Had we won the toss, we probably would have picked Olajuwon and traded Stipo to upgrade the backcourt.
                              -Losing out on Ewing when it was down to us and the Knicks in the summer of 85.

                              Drafting in hindisght is 20/20, but the thing is, all of the picks I mentioned were pretty obvious selections from a team need and a talent standpoint. We missed the boat on 7 Hall of Fame-caliber players and one guy (Sampson) who looked great early on in his career in less than 10 years. It was almost comical.

                              There wasn't a lot of hope that the Pacers could ever figure things out based upon 8 years of history. With the situation now, at least we seemed to know what we were doing just a few years ago. The similarity I see is that we pulled some desperate moves in the past that hurt us for financial reasons. Now we're pulling similarly desperate moves for character issues.

                              -

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: A couple questions for the old timers

                                Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
                                There is one issue here that splits people between saying the 80s or today are worse: hope.

                                Looking back at the late 70s/early 80s, there certainly wasn't a lot of optimism. In hindsight, we climbed out of the hole. We certainly don't have the benefit of hindsight for the current situation. At the time, I think the older era was every bit is bad or worse than today.

                                Apart from the financial distress/lack of league revenue dollars due to the merger conditions, look at the players we missed out on:

                                -Dantley: traded away.
                                -English: traded away to get an aging McGinnis to return with the hope that he could sell tickets.
                                -Bird: couldn't afford to draft him a year early like Boston, as we needed help immediately, so we took Rick Robey at 4. Boston took Bird at 6, waited a year to sign him, and the rest is history.
                                -In 82/83, Houston absolutely tanked, going 4-29 at the end of the year. They won the rights (coin toss) to Sampson, while we had the worst record in the East.
                                -In 83/84, Houston again won the toss. We traded our pick anyway to Portland, who bombed with Sam Bowie. Had we kept it and lost the toss, we would have picked Jordan. We were high on Stipo at the time and wouldn't have taken Bowie. Had we won the toss, we probably would have picked Olajuwon and traded Stipo to upgrade the backcourt.
                                -Losing out on Ewing when it was down to us and the Knicks in the summer of 85.

                                Drafting in hindisght is 20/20, but the thing is, all of the picks I mentioned were pretty obvious selections from a team need and a talent standpoint. We missed the boat on 7 Hall of Fame-caliber players and one guy (Sampson) who looked great early on in his career in less than 10 years. It was almost comical.

                                There wasn't a lot of hope that the Pacers could ever figure things out based upon 8 years of history. With the situation now, at least we seemed to know what we were doing just a few years ago. The similarity I see is that we pulled some desperate moves in the past that hurt us for financial reasons. Now we're pulling similarly desperate moves for character issues.

                                -
                                Excellent, excellent point. Think of it this way. The pacers traded away their first round draft pick for Tom Owens - a draft pick we could have used on Michael Jordan. (a trade like that a franchise never recovers from - ever) And of course all the other players the Pacers missed out on back then - as you mention. Players that became alltime greats. of sort of like we traded Lebron James for David Harrison.

                                I always sort of chuckle to myself when some of you youngins complain about recent trades or recent draft picks, - if you look back at what was done in the late 70's and early 80's - it was amazingly bad.

                                Oh, and I don't believe anyone has mentioned terrible owners from back then. Sam Nassi was a terrible owner - spent no money and was looking to sell the team.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X