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

Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

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

    Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

    Just sharing some reading I've found...

    -Bball
    ----------------

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/scorec...rticleID=35068

    Indiana Pacers 2004 Draft Preview

    (Sports Network) - Indiana fell short of its goal to reach the NBA Finals, as the Pacers were knocked out by the Detroit Pistons in six games in Eastern Conference finals.

    The Pacers do have two All-Stars on their roster, as forwards Jermaine O'Neal and Ron Artest, who was the NBA's Defensive Player of the Year, are in the prime of their careers.

    Al Harrington, who can play power or small forward, gives the Pacers a solid sixth man. Twenty-three-year-old Jonathan Bender is still developing even though he has played five seasons in the league.

    Indiana has its point guard in Jamaal Tinsley, but 38-year-old shooting guard Reggie Miller's best days have passed him by. It is time for the Pacers to replace the 17-year veteran.

    With Jeff Foster as its starting center, Indiana could also try to upgrade its presence in the middle. Foster is more suited to be a backup.

    The Pacers should try to select a guard who Miller can tutor in the final year (s) of his career. Trading up could be a possibility. Bender could be the bait, as there are teams who believe there is still a big upside to the 23- year-old veteran.

    Key Player(s): Ron Artest (forward), Jonathan Bender (forward), Jeff Foster (center), Al Harrington (forward), Reggie Miller (guard), Jermaine O'Neal (forward), Jamaal Tinsley (guard).

    Team Needs: A center, a scoring guard to replace Miller and a backup point guard.

    Draft picks: 1st round (29th overall), 2nd round (58th overall).
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/154542-9462-036.html
    SPORTS LETTERS
    Pacers sorely need to fill void left by Brad Miller


    June 13, 2004


    Larry Bird says changes might be made because the other teams in the division are improving. He says the Pacers need to get bigger and need more outside shooting.

    Looking inside the division, it's easy to see where to improve. Michael Redd, Jamal Crawford, Richard Hamilton and LeBron James like to feast on the Pacers. When the Pacers had Brad Miller you couldn't double team Jermaine O'Neal. Not so now.

    They should send Al Harrington, draft picks and players to Washington for Kwame Brown, a 7-footer who can score and rebound; Juan Dixon, a quick point guard who can score; and Larry Hughes.

    Tom Swanson

    Indianapolis

    By playoff performance, Artest is overrated

    The recent letter calling for Larry Bird to get rid of Austin Croshere and trade Jonathan Bender, Jeff Foster and Jamaal Tinsley "to make the Pacers a serious contender" was ludicrous at best.

    The writer stated that O'Neal and Harrington are not "tough enough" to lead the team to a championship. That's also ludicrous.

    He left out the most over-praised and overrated Pacer in the playoffs, who seemed to have left his leadership and shooting skills back in the locker room. One writer calls Ron Artest the "Pacer least dispensable," but anyone watching the playoffs would have to disagree. Pacers coaches and management say there have to be some personnel changes. Those who stay will also have to make some changes -- in passing, shooting, teamwork skills and attitude.

    Herm Albright

    Indianapolis
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunhera...ts/8885281.htm

    NBA NOTEBOOK

    Pacers coach admits he'll have to do some trading

    By SEAN DEVENEY

    It wasn't exactly news, but ears around the league did perk up when Pacers coach Rick Carlisle admitted last week the team is too loaded with wing players and a trade must be made.

    Small forward Al Harrington, small forward Jonathan Bender of Picayune and shooting guard Fred Jones will be trade bait, and Harrington is the most likely to go. Of equal importance to the Pacers will be whether shooting guard Reggie Miller can be convinced to give up his starting slot to either Jones or Bender.

    Small forward Ron Artest is an option at shooting guard, but he is such an ideal small forward that it would be tough to pull him out of that spot.

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

    I present this one only because of the title. Look closely....

    Lakers gain OT on clutch Bryant shot, beat Pacers to tie series


    By: CHRIS SHERIDAN - Associated Press

    LOS ANGELES -- In a performance that cemented his status as one of the great superstars in NBA history, Kobe Bryant pulled off a most stunning display on the sport's biggest stage.

    Bryant tied the game with a 3-pointer with 2.1 seconds left in regulation and helped the Los Angeles Lakers pull away for good at the start of overtime in their 99-91 victory against the Detroit Pistons in Game 2 of the NBA Finals on Tuesday night.

    "It's probably the biggest shot I've hit in my career, period," Bryant said.

    Seconds from facing a 2-0 deficit with the series headed to Detroit, the Lakers evened it at a game apiece behind Bryant's 33 points and seven assists.

    "It's all about rising to the challenge," Bryant said. "High stakes. I know I can rise to that."

    The teams will go at it again Thursday night, each having earned a greater level of respect for their opponent. The Lakers now realize more than ever that the Pistons are anything but a pushover, while Detroit now knows that no victory is ever secure when the ball can end up in Bryant's hands for the biggest shot of the game.

    "It's a challenge," Bryant said. "A dogfight. No one said it was going to be easy. We look forward to going up there."

    Shaquille O'Neal added 29 points for the Lakers, six of them coming in the extra period as Los Angeles improved to 7-0 in overtime games during the regular season and postseason.

    One of those victories came on the final night of the regular season at Portland when Bryant hit a buzzer-beating 3-pointer to force overtime, then won it at the end of the extra period with another 3 to give the Lakers the Pacific Division title.

    This time, things looked fairly hopeless for the Lakers as they trailed by six points with less than 40 seconds left in regulation. But O'Neal converted a three-point play and Chauncey Billups missed a runner for Detroit, giving the Lakers a last shot.

    "Well, we always believe Kobe can make miracle shots even when things are not going well for him," coach Phil Jackson said. "That was a great shot."

    Naturally, the ball went to No. 8. And naturally, Bryant drilled it.

    "That's why he's so special," Pistons coach Larry Brown said.

    After hitting the shot over the outstretched hand of old high school rival Richard Hamilton, Bryant ran back to the bench to chest-bump teammate Devean George as Detroit called timeout to set up a last shot.

    "Shaq gave me a great down pick," Bryant said. "I had Richard on me, and I just tried to gather my balance and knock it down."

    Rasheed Wallace let Tayshaun Prince's inbounds pass slip through his hands, and the clock expired without the Pistons attempting a final shot.

    The momentum was squarely on the Lakers' side by then, and Los Angeles outscored Detroit 10-2 in the extra period to even the series.

    Bryant began the extra period by feeding O'Neal for a dunk, but he then picked up his fifth foul with 4:18 left. Did it matter? Not a bit.

    Bryant scored on a drive, fed O'Neal for a 4-footer and scored on a driving bank shot for a 97-91 lead.

    The capper came when Luke Walton, a surprise contributor in the first half and at the end, sent an alley-oop pass to O'Neal for a dunk.

    Detroit shot just 1-for-9 in overtime, ruining a performance that seemed so promising as regulation wound down.

    Billups scored 27 and Richard Hamilton 26 for the Pistons.

    The difference-maker in the first half was Walton, a rookie who didn't even get off the bench in Game 1.

    Besides making all three of his shots and grabbing three rebounds, Walton had five assists. Two of them came on passes to Bryant to begin a 15-6 run to close the half that gave the Lakers a 44-36 lead.

    Los Angeles was able to sustain a comfortable margin through the early part of the third quarter, in large part because the Lakers' own sloppiness was matched by Detroit's. After Jackson berated Payton as he walked off the court during a timeout, Bryant came out and hit a 22-foot jumper for a 54-43 lead.

    Detroit began chipping away by going at the Lakers' two aging superstars, Rasheed Wallace taking on Karl Malone and Billups going at Payton. Both Los Angeles players began making mental mistakes on offense, too.

    Getting 16 points in the quarter from Billups and eight from Rasheed Wallace, Detroit pulled within one point late in the quarter and trailed 68-66 entering the fourth.

    Walton didn't get off the bench in the second half until after Detroit scored the first basket of the fourth quarter to tie it, and the Pistons pulled ahead on a 3-pointer by Lindsey Hunter as Jackson went with a lineup of Walton, Kareem Rush, Brian Cook, Derek Fisher and O'Neal.

    O'Neal took a pass from Walton and plowed into Ben Wallace with 6:17 left, picking up his fifth foul and heading to the bench. A give-and-go layup by Hamilton off a pass from Rasheed Wallace was followed by an airball by Bryant, and Rasheed Wallace then fed Ben Wallace for a reverse layup and an 81-77 lead.

    Detroit traded baskets with the Lakers on the next two possessions, and a missed 3 by Bryant was followed by two free throws by Hamilton for an 87-82 lead with 1:19 left. Notes:@ Jackson's girlfriend, Jeannie Buss (daughter of Lakers owner Jerry Buss) went on a local radio program Monday and said she was 95 percent certain Jackson would return to coach the team next season. "She freelanced on it," Jackson said.

    http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004...2_376_8_04.txt
    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
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

    All I know is I think we could get some questions answered come draft day, questions regarding this teams makeup. [Possiable rumors of Harrington being dangled for a top pick, god I hope not though.]

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

      They should send Al Harrington, draft picks and players to Washington for Kwame Brown, a 7-footer who can score and rebound; Juan Dixon, a quick point guard who can score; and Larry Hughes.
      What do you all think of this?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

        They should send Al Harrington, draft picks and players to Washington for Kwame Brown, a 7-footer who can score and rebound; Juan Dixon, a quick point guard who can score; and Larry Hughes.
        What do you all think of this?
        If they'll trade all that for Harrington, I say do it, but I seriously doubt it. All it would take for me for Harrington is Hughes and Etan Thomas; I think he'd make a better fit than Kwame.
        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

        ----------------- Reggie Miller

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

          They should send Al Harrington, draft picks and players to Washington for Kwame Brown, a 7-footer who can score and rebound; Juan Dixon, a quick point guard who can score; and Larry Hughes.
          What do you all think of this?
          I don't like it.

          Brown is like JO.

          Dixon is a 6'3 shooting guard and not a point guard. I believe he was left for the Bobcats to take.

          Hughes just isn't a player I like that much.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

            I think they'd part easier with Thomas than Kwame anyway.

            Thomas and Hughes [or Dixon, I suppose. I doubt all three] for Al and #29. I'd do it.
            Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

              Why the hell would we want J.O. light? Brown will be a good player but not really any better than Jermaine & you just can't have two of those players on the same team.

              However Etan Thomas

              but that still doesn't answer the shooting guard question.


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

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                If the PAcers are going to trade with Washington, how about

                Indiana trades:
                Al Harrington
                Anthony Johnson

                Washington trades:
                Brendan Haywoode
                Larry Hughes

                Do you think that Washington would make this trade?


                C. Neil Milton

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                  If the PAcers are going to trade with Washington, how about

                  Indiana trades:
                  Al Harrington
                  Anthony Johnson

                  Washington trades:
                  Brendan Haywoode
                  Larry Hughes

                  Do you think that Washington would make this trade?


                  C. Neil Milton
                  I've got a hunch that Washington might trade Larry Hughes for anybody with a pulse. I know I don't want him on the court, keeping the ball from the rest of our players. I think Washington has 'buyer's remorse'.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                    trading al for brown and dixon would be a great deal.

                    just think of what this team would look like with the second comming of JO

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                      I disagree with what the first writer said. I think Jeff is much better suited being a starter. Otherwise he has to fight to "earn" his minutes and will end up overplaying and collecting fouls.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                        I kinda like Hughes. He can be selfish, but he's got a good shot and can create off the dribble. I also seem to remember Donnie being interested in him back when the Warriors were trading him....

                        Kwame is going to be quite a player, I'd be surprised if the Wiz let him go very easily. He had a lot of good games last season. Sure, we already have JO, but who better to back up JO than.... JO? Well, the light version, as Peck put it. Won't happen, but it'd be interesting

                        I'd love to get Thomas, or maybe Haywood.
                        Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                          I like Jeff alot.

                          BUT

                          What does it say when your starting center barely gets in the deciding game(s) of the ECF?
                          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                            I like Jeff alot.

                            BUT

                            What does it say when your starting center barely gets in the deciding game(s) of the ECF?
                            It says we were playing small because it worked better against the opponent. I don't view it as a "slam" of Jeff at all.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers.. What Others Are Saying

                              I like Jeff alot.

                              BUT

                              What does it say when your starting center barely gets in the deciding game(s) of the ECF?
                              It says Rik is in foul trouble ... oops, wrong year ...
                              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

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X