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

Bill Simmons - Page 2 - :D

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

    Bill Simmons - Page 2 - :D

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...immons/040617a

    By Bill Simmons
    Page 2

    Lingering questions after the biggest NBA Finals upset in nine years ...


    Q: Wait a second ... nine years? Wasn't it 30 years?


    A: Nope. For whatever reason, everyone keeps overlooking Houston's sweep of Orlando nine years ago, since it sounds more impressive to say things like "The biggest NBA Finals upset in 30 years!" Hakeem and the Rockets were something like 4-to-1 underdogs heading into that series. Believe me. I wagered on them. You don't forget things like that.


    Danny Ainge shows the press the hand he plans on wearing his Pistons championship ring.
    Q: Will Joe Dumars send Danny Ainge a championship ring for facilitating the Rasheed Wallace trade?


    A: And a parade. Danny gets a parade. Just remember, the 'Sheed trade couldn't have happened unless Danny absorbed the last two years of Chucky Atkins' contract. (And yes, Chucky was left unprotected in the expansion draft with a "Pretty please?" sign around his neck.) Danny even agreed to take Lindsay Hunter as well, then waive him so Detroit could pick him right back up. And he made these sacrifices for the chance to add the 25th pick in this year's draft. The 25th pick! Maybe he's planning on drafting someone with two healthy knees, then giving the dude's knee ligaments to Raef LaFrentz.


    So why strengthen a conference rival with someone who EVERYONE KNEW was perfect for them? Danny didn't want Rasheed signing with someone in Boston's division this summer. Swear to God. He even said so. Did you get the memo that the Atlantic Division was more important than the Eastern Conference? Me neither. Also, the Knicks and Nets couldn't have offered Rasheed anything beyond the free-agent exemption this summer. Does the man who invented the phrase "CTC" (for "Cut the check") really seem like the kind of guy who would take a significant pay cut to play for a winning team?


    Put it this way: If the Rasheed trade happened in my fantasy league, we would have gotten together and vetoed it. That's how one-sided it was. The Pistons cleared all their cap fodder AND picked up a starting forward. If that doesn't earn Danny Ainge at least a half-share of the playoff money, I don't know what does.


    Speaking of 'Sheed ...


    Q: How did 'Sheed keep it together for the entire duration of the playoffs? Isn't he completely insane? Did something change? Was Larry Brown electro-shocking him before games?


    A: This was the biggest mystery of the playoffs. How did 'Sheed go from "Creator of CTC" to "Good Soldier On A Title Team" in eight months? It's inexplicable. What about the never-ending barrage of temper tantrums, those SI pictures of his unhappy cell phone calls at charity events, all the comical incidents with referees? How many key Blazers games did he sabotage over the years? Thirty? Forty? And suddenly he was fine? This was like watching Courtney Love fill in for Kelly Ripa, then tape Regis' show for four months without a single incident. I'm still reeling from the whole thing. I can only imagine how Blazers fans feel.


    (One of my favorite subplots of the playoffs was anyone saying that Rasheed is "misunderstood." Let's say you're working on Wall Street. Every two weeks, you flip out on someone and get escorted out of the building. This happens for 10 straight years. You can't help yourself. They keep fining you, you're costing the company money ... doesn't matter. You're a lunatic. Then you change firms and keep it together for four months, just long enough for the new firm to consider signing you to an extension. Well, does that make you "misunderstood," or are you just a lunatic with a convenient on-off switch? I'm going with the latter. I'm cynical that way.)


    Q: What can the Lakers do this summer?


    A: Trade Kobe. It's time. Send him to the Clippers for Maggette, Wilcox and two No. 1s. Send him to the Grizzlies for Miller, Battier, Swift and draft picks. Send him to the Suns for Joe Johnson, Shawn Marion and the No. 7 pick. Send him to Orlando for McGrady. Send him to Boston for Pierce and two No. 1s. Just do something.


    Chauncey as MVP? Hey, Pitino -- we bet you didn't see that one coming.
    Q: Five years from now, where will Chauncey Billups as an NBA Finals MVP rank on the "How the Hell Did That Happen?" Scale?


    A: Probably somewhere between Brady Anderson belting 50 homers and Toto winning four Grammys. But hey ... it happened. I just think Tayshaun Prince deserved the trophy this time around. Did you ever think you would see Kobe struggle like that? Even when he went 14 for 27 in Game 2, 10 of those makes were circus shots. Do you realize Kobe shot 29 for 86 in the four Lakers losses? That he shot 25 free throws all series? How was Tayshaun not the MVP? The Lakers only had two good players and Detroit shut down one of them. No way the Pistons win without Prince.


    Q: Wait a second ... just two months ago, didn't you write that Detroit passing up Carmelo Anthony because of Prince was like "passing up a free Ferrari because you already own a Miata"?


    A: Um ... yeah.


    Q:The lesson, as always -- .


    A: Right. I'm an idiot.


    Q: Since the Pistons won the title, doesn't that mean they did the right thing with the Darko pick? As it turned out, they didn't need Carmelo, correct?


    A: Well, those are two separate issues. Since Tayshaun wouldn't have developed at the same rate with 'Melo around, they probably wouldn't have won the title with both of them. They needed Prince's defense more than they needed 'Melo's scoring. Maybe 'Melo would have been happy playing 10-to-15 minutes off the bench, maybe not. Who knows? In a roundabout way, Dumars was vindicated by the pick -- he made the assessment that they didn't need help right away, so they could afford to gamble on a project like Darko. And he turned out to be right. So kudos to him.


    At the same time, even the most staunch Detroit supporter has to admit that Darko was an absolute train wreck this season. Every time he entered the game, it was like watching a little kid stumbling onto the field during a family softball game. Oh, no, get him off -- somebody help him off before he gets hit by a line drive! Poor Darko couldn't even get his ears pierced without screwing it up -- hence, the bandages on each earlobe, which may have shattered the Unintentional Comedy Scale as we know it.


    (Note: Just hearing Al Michaels tell the story during Game 5 was probably the highlight of the playoffs for me, right up there with Aretha Franklin's lip-synching and Tom Tolbert predicting that the Lakers would win Game 4, then coming back near the end of the fourth quarter and confidently explaining, "Detroit just has a better team." What? No mention of the fact that he picked the Lakers 90 minutes earlier? And yet, I digress.)


    If they re-did the draft 12 months later, LeBron goes first, Dwyane Wade second, 'Melo third, Chris Bosh fourth ... and Darko either goes fifth or sixth (depending on how you feel about Kirk Hinrich). Darko also doesn't carry half the trade value of someone like 'Melo or Wade. And if Karl Malone's knee hadn't given out, or Jason Kidd's knee had held up, or if Ron Artest didn't swing that elbow at Rip's head near the end of Game 6, maybe this conversation unfolds a little differently.


    But since none of those things happened, and since Detroit ended up winning the championship with what they had -- which is the entire point of having a team -- you can't say they made the wrong choice. You just can't. Sure, the Pistons could have taken Jonathan Lipnicki at No. 2 and probably gotten just as much out of the pick. And J-Lip probably would have been able to pierce his own ears.


    Q: What happened to your "The team with the best player always wins the Finals" theory?


    A: Good question. In this case, the Pistons' defense was more dominant than any single player in the league. Five years from now, when LeBron and Yao are running amok, nobody will be able to win a championship this way. But it works for now.


    Q: Can Bill Davidson buy the Red Sox before October? Can somebody make this happen?


    A: That's been the most common e-mail I've been getting over the past 36 hours. And yes, somebody needs to make this happen. Either that or some sort of a decathlon between Davidson and the guy who owns Smarty Jones.


    Speaking of Davidson, what about Mike Tirico mentioning the Detroit Shock when asking Davidson about his current championship teams? Will the inexplicable pimping of the WNBA ever cease? The least he could have done was to add something sarcastic like, "I also understand that you won your fantasy football league last winter" or "Rumor has it that you had an emotional win over your great-granddaughter in Connect Four last week."


    "Kobe you know I can't give you that call. Didn't you get the memo?"
    Q: You love NBA conspiracies ... what's the best one you heard during the playoffs?


    A: As you know, the officiating was curiously one-sided in the Finals. It reached the point where ABC was afraid to show replays -- like when Rasheed delivered a flying forearm to Devean George in Game 5, sent him flying out of bounds, drew a prolonged whistle from the referee ... and play was mysteriously allowed to continue. What the heck happened there? Thank God for TiVo. And have you ever seen a team set more moving picks in a single series?


    Anyway, here's the conspiracy theory: With Kobe's trial looming, the NBA wanted the Lakers to make the Finals (for ratings), but didn't want them to actually win the title. And why? Because if Kobe ends up being convicted for whatever reason ... well, wouldn't that be a little awkward? The best player on your league's defending champion now playing for a prison All-Star team? Think about it.


    (And no, I don't believe this one ... I'm just passing it along.)


    Q: In retrospect, what was more annoying -- the voice of Detroit's PA announcer or those "Let's get it started!" ads?


    A: Let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here, let's get it started in here ...


    Na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na NAAAAAH!


    Q: Who was more excited after Game 5, Red Auerbach or Michael Jordan?


    A: Probably Red. You know this Phil Jackson stuff drives him bonkers. With that said, MJ had to be delighted that Kobe struggled so much against the Pistons. Young MJ would have been too physical off the dribble for Prince. Older Wiser MJ would have brought Prince down low, posted him up and introduced him to the fallaway and the drop-step. Either version of MJ would have attacked the basket if the jumpers weren't falling. And if his team was having so much trouble rebounding, do you think MJ would have gone down low and grabbed a few boards? Me, too.


    Put it this way: Either Kobe's bum shoulder was more banged up than anyone realized, or his stock dropped BIG TIME in this series. No way MJ goes that quietly in his prime. No way MJ launches that many ghastly shots. No way MJ wastes a 36-20 effort from Shaq. No way MJ stands around as the Pistons keep grabbing offensive rebounds. It just wouldn't happen. I think we can put a moratorium on the "Kobe vs. MJ" stuff for awhile.


    Q: If one of the ESPNews anchors was swinging a watch during Larry Brown's postgame interviews, could you become hypnotized?


    A: See, these are the things we need to find out. Somebody get Stan Verrett on the phone next time coach Brown is speaking.


    (And no, there's no better way to pass the time in traffic than to talk to yourself in the Larry Brown monotone for 10 straight minutes. I'm very proud of my car right now. It's not heating up at all. I even have the air conditioning on. It's just a credit to the people who made this car. Other cars would be overheating right now. I can't control what people think about this car. I'm just taking it one traffic jam at a time. Now I'm going to count backwards from 10. When I clap my hands, you will wake up from this traffic jam.)


    Q: Are people getting a little carried away with their assessments of some of the Pistons players?


    A: A little. For instance, Al Michaels wondered during Game 5 if anyone has "ever" had a nose for the ball like Ben Wallace. Actually, I can think of about 10 guys in the past 25 years alone. Sorry, Al. Or someone like Billups, a hit-or-miss player, a below-40-percent shooter who looked good against L.A. for the same reason Francis and Parker looked good: The Artist Formerly Known As GP was guarding him. And there have been 20 guys in the past two decades who shot the ball as well or better than Rip Hamilton; they just never played for as good a team.


    Here's the point: All of these guys had weaknesses. Wallace and Prince lucked out because the team didn't need them to shoot. Billups lucked out because the team didn't need him to create shots for other guys. Hamilton lucked out because Prince was around to defend scorers like Jefferson and Kobe. Rasheed lucked out because he could play 20 feet from the basket and not have to worry about rebounding. And so on. Everyone complemented everyone else. That's what made it so much fun.


    Charlie Salinger & Co. are in pre-production for a "Where Are They Now?" show on VH1.
    Q: Out of the relentless ABC promos for their fall lineup, which show looked the most promising?


    A. Probably "Lost," the one where the plane crashes and everyone's stranded on a desert island. I've been waiting for them to make this show for years -- the untapped sexual potential of "Gilligan's Island" was always off the charts. As an added bonus, they gave the guy who played Charlie from "Party of Five" one of the lead roles. They should have just made believe that Charlie was on the actual plane; that would have been much more fun. No, I can't help you guys build a raft ... you don't understand, I have cancer! When are you guys getting that through your sick skulls? I'm very sick! I have cancer!


    Q: What were Phil Jackson's biggest mistakes?


    A: In order ...


    1. Not pulling the plug on Malone sooner. When you can't jump, rebound, defend, shoot or move, there's not much left. On the bright side, he's finally eligible for a multi-year contract from the Knicks.


    2. Not playing Luke Walton more. So what if you lose some rebounding? Aren't you getting killed on the boards, anyway? And no, I will never, ever, EVER understand the Slava Medvedenko thing. All things considered, he could have been the worst rotation guy on any of the 16 playoff teams. Does he even possess a definable skill? If you replaced him with one of the Klitschko brothers, how long would it take before anyone noticed the difference?


    3. Not going small. Why not spread the floor with shooters (Rush, Fisher, Fox/George and Kobe) and try a little three-ball to open up things for Shaq? They were getting slaughtered on the boards, regardless. Wasn't it worth a shot?


    4. Sticking with Gary Payton. According to my Table Test, GP wasn't just failing to bring anything to the table in the Finals -- he was actually taking things OFF the table. No small feat. Has anyone ever played themselves out of the Hall of Fame before?


    5. Sitting Shaq with two fouls in Game 5. Game over.


    6. Not posting up Kobe against two slender guys (Hamilton and Prince). At the very worst, you're drawing a double-team. What's the point of feeding Kobe 30 feet from the basket? Why give away one of the only advantages you have?


    7. Not being able to stay awake during Game 1.


    (Oh, wait ... he was AWAKE for Game 1? I had no idea!)


    Q: What happened to the art of the postgame championship celebration?


    A: Exactly! Remember the days of players screaming and pouring champagne over each other's heads? Now we're treated to those contrived ceremonies at midcourt, along with enough kids and babies on camera to launch a pre-school. When did this turn into an ABC Family sitcom? Instead of seeing Cedric Maxwell pouring bubbly on Brent Musberger's head, now I get to see Rasheed Wallace's baby burping up milk all over her dad's shoulder. I liked things the old way. I think I speak for everyone here.


    Q: Where does this Pistons team rank against the champs from the past 30 years?


    A: Pretty low. They couldn't win their division. They barely escaped two playoff series. They lucked out by facing the Lakers instead of the Spurs. They didn't have a dominant player, someone who could create his own shot after everything else broke down. In the Finals, they were never favored by more than three points in any game. Along with the '99 Spurs, '94 Rockets, '78 Bullets and '75 Warriors, on paper, they were one of the weakest champions of the past 30 years.


    There's a remote chance -- not impossible, but remote -- that they were a budding juggernaut that came together in these last few weeks, only we were too blinded by the L.A. soap opera to see it. If that's true, the Pistons need to keep it going. They need to roll through the league next season, win 60-plus games and take the East. Anything less and they will always be remembered as another Buster Douglas -- a journeyman performer hitting his potential at the perfect time, against the best possible opponent, then never reaching those same heights again.


    I guess we'll see.


    Bill Simmons is a columnist for Page 2 and ESPN The Magazine.
    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

    Danny Ainge shows the press the hand he plans on wearing his Pistons championship ring.
    Q: Will Joe Dumars send Danny Ainge a championship ring for facilitating the Rasheed Wallace trade?


    A: And a parade. Danny gets a parade. Just remember, the 'Sheed trade couldn't have happened unless Danny absorbed the last two years of Chucky Atkins' contract. (And yes, Chucky was left unprotected in the expansion draft with a "Pretty please?" sign around his neck.) Danny even agreed to take Lindsay Hunter as well, then waive him so Detroit could pick him right back up. And he made these sacrifices for the chance to add the 25th pick in this year's draft. The 25th pick! Maybe he's planning on drafting someone with two healthy knees, then giving the dude's knee ligaments to Raef LaFrentz.


    So why strengthen a conference rival with someone who EVERYONE KNEW was perfect for them? Danny didn't want Rasheed signing with someone in Boston's division this summer. Swear to God. He even said so. Did you get the memo that the Atlantic Division was more important than the Eastern Conference? Me neither. Also, the Knicks and Nets couldn't have offered Rasheed anything beyond the free-agent exemption this summer. Does the man who invented the phrase "CTC" (for "Cut the check") really seem like the kind of guy who would take a significant pay cut to play for a winning team?


    Put it this way: If the Rasheed trade happened in my fantasy league, we would have gotten together and vetoed it. That's how one-sided it was. The Pistons cleared all their cap fodder AND picked up a starting forward. If that doesn't earn Danny Ainge at least a half-share of the playoff money, I don't know what does.



    So true, so true, so true.

    I don't know how Bird can ever speak to Ainge again. Ainge owes Bird something really big

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

      And no, there's no better way to pass the time in traffic than to talk to yourself in the Larry Brown monotone for 10 straight minutes. I'm very proud of my car right now. It's not heating up at all. I even have the air conditioning on. It's just a credit to the people who made this car. Other cars would be overheating right now. I can't control what people think about this car. I'm just taking it one traffic jam at a time

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

        I don't agree with Bill Simmons on alot of stuff, but he's got to be the funniest sport writer I've ever read.
        "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

          Watch Bird sign Mark Blount away from Boston.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

            I LOVED the GP comment: "HAs anyone ever played themselves out of the Hall-of-Fame before?"
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

              Reading Kstat's endorsement of Darko for next season elsewhere just moments earlier this really made me laugh:

              At the same time, even the most staunch Detroit supporter has to admit that Darko was an absolute train wreck this season. Every time he entered the game, it was like watching a little kid stumbling onto the field during a family softball game. Oh, no, get him off -- somebody help him off before he gets hit by a line drive! Poor Darko couldn't even get his ears pierced without screwing it up -- hence, the bandages on each earlobe, which may have shattered the Unintentional Comedy Scale as we know it.

              I'm sorry Kstat but your ringing endorsement reminded me too much of the Bender Bandwagoners that have been rolling along for 5 years now (losing riders along the way tho).

              Darko may or may not be the next big thing but a contributor next season? I dunno... I hope you are right tho. Well... no I don't....

              -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

              • #8
                Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

                Q: Where does this Pistons team rank against the champs from the past 30 years?


                A: Pretty low. They couldn't win their division. They barely escaped two playoff series. They lucked out by facing the Lakers instead of the Spurs. They didn't have a dominant player, someone who could create his own shot after everything else broke down. In the Finals, they were never favored by more than three points in any game. Along with the '99 Spurs, '94 Rockets, '78 Bullets and '75 Warriors, on paper, they were one of the weakest champions of the past 30 years.


                There's a remote chance -- not impossible, but remote -- that they were a budding juggernaut that came together in these last few weeks, only we were too blinded by the L.A. soap opera to see it. If that's true, the Pistons need to keep it going. They need to roll through the league next season, win 60-plus games and take the East. Anything less and they will always be remembered as another Buster Douglas -- a journeyman performer hitting his potential at the perfect time, against the best possible opponent, then never reaching those same heights again.


                I guess we'll see.


                Bill Simmons is a columnist for Page 2 and ESPN The Magazine.

                Intresting commentary Who said the East was gonna get respect
                Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

                  Reading Kstat's endorsement of Darko for next season elsewhere just moments earlier this really made me laugh:

                  At the same time, even the most staunch Detroit supporter has to admit that Darko was an absolute train wreck this season. Every time he entered the game, it was like watching a little kid stumbling onto the field during a family softball game. Oh, no, get him off -- somebody help him off before he gets hit by a line drive! Poor Darko couldn't even get his ears pierced without screwing it up -- hence, the bandages on each earlobe, which may have shattered the Unintentional Comedy Scale as we know it.

                  I'm sorry Kstat but your ringing endorsement reminded me too much of the Bender Bandwagoners that have been rolling along for 5 years now (losing riders along the way tho).

                  Darko may or may not be the next big thing but a contributor next season? I dunno... I hope you are right tho. Well... no I don't....

                  -Bball
                  Hey, at least Simmons was nice enough not to mention Darko's broken hand.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

                    I don't know how Bird can ever speak to Ainge again. Ainge owes Bird something really big
                    Paul Pierce for Al and Scot?

                    Paul Pierce and Chris Mihm for Al, Austin, and Primoz?

                    Paul Pierce for Al, Scott, and Fred?

                    I can think of lots of ways Danny can make it up to Larry. :-)
                    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                    - Jimmy Buffett

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

                      Bill Simmons is always a good read.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Bill Simmons - Page 2 -

                        Put it this way: If the Rasheed trade happened in my fantasy league, we would have gotten together and vetoed it. That's how one-sided it was. ...
                        "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                        - Benjamin Franklin

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X