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

Back to the 'Glory Days'

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

  • Back to the 'Glory Days'

    I know I don't contribute alot to this board, but I have been around here for a LONG time, albeit alot of lurking, but I am just not as good of a communicator as most. I have enjoyed reading alot of posters on here for a long time, namely UB, K-Stat, Naptown Seth, Newman8r, Anthem, Peck, and of course Hicks (sorry if I left anyone out, everyone on here is great), but I have something on my mind that I need some of you to help me with.

    I have been a huge Pacers fan since about 1983, all through the lean years, the glory years, and now through the lean years again. Back in the 80's, we didn't know how to win but that changed in the early 90's due to Reggie, Rik, the Davis "Brothers", Heywoode, etc. I remember how all of those teams back then electrified this city like some of you young guys, my 10 and 11 year old kids included, could never understand. It really seems to me that Reggie was overwhelmingly the main catalyst for all the good that happened to this franchise for a long time, I really miss those days.

    My question is what will it take for us to get back to those type of city changing, electrifying feelings that we took for granted in Indy for so long? I remember when Reggie was drafted, there wasn't a whole lot of people in this city that were very happy with the selection. It took him a few years to gain the respect of this city but when we got behind him, it was magic. Will Brandon be the one to do this? I remember sitting at Conseco Fieldhouse on draft night last year with my kids when we drafted Bayless and everyone there was so excited. I got home and found out we traded him for Rush and I got on this board and other sites and there were ALOT of people less than thrilled with the trade. This kind of reminds me of the situation with Reggie on draft night all those years ago, although it's a bit different because most people wanted us to draft Steve Alford back then. Can you imagine where we would be now if that would have happened? Probably the FORMER "Indiana" Pacers. Brandon has shown flashes of his potential but I am not sure if he can be the catalyst to make this city embrace the Pacers like Reggie did so many years ago.

    Is there someone in this draft class that could do this for us or am I just hoping for too much? I realize that there is not alot of 'potential' in this year's draft but Reggie didn't start out as a superstar and not many people envisioned him being a superstar back in '87, but he sure was in alot of our minds. I suppose I just need some reassurance that the glory days will return soon.

    Please let me know your thoughts on this subject.

    Thanks,

    Indyhoosier

  • #2
    Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

    Other than Granger, it's too early to tell if any other player on the roster will become an all-star.

    Rush has talent but who knows if he'll prove his doubters wrong like Reggie did.

    Not even going to try to guess who the Pacers will draft. Not many have guessed our past picks right before they were made.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

      Originally posted by Swingman View Post

      Not even going to try to guess who the Pacers will draft. Not many have guessed our past picks right before they were made.
      I understand that, just want to know if there is anyone out there that someone thinks COULD be that catalyst. I know that is impossible to predict, I just really think that there are alot of very smart Pacers fans on here, and I respect their intuition.

      Indyhoosier

      PS, I really don't believe Danny is that city changing catalyst, as good as he is, I could be wrong!!!!
      Last edited by IndyHoosier; 03-01-2009, 01:09 AM. Reason: just adding a thought

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

        To me it is a whole team thing. I haven't been following the Pacers for too long, only since the late 90's when they kept coming again the Bulls.

        For me it takes winning or a clear change in mindset for change. Being a Knicks fan the last few years it has been brutal but it got to the point that I rooted for the Knicks to be the worst team in the league so that changes would be made from the top to the bottom instead of just blaming the players. It is a lot easier now to be a fan of the Knicks with Donnie Walsh and D'Antoni. The mind set of the organization changed and I think that is what needs to happen with the Pacers.

        I don't think Bird is the man to lead the Pacers back to what they were. They need a new mind and fresh ideas to get things rolling again.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

          Those kinds of things are just impossible to predict. The Bulls getting Jordan, the Celtics getting Bird, the Lakers getting Kobe, and the Cavs getting LeBron. I mean, those kinds of players are "sure things," but so was Sam Bowie.

          Getting back to the "Glory Days" is inevitable, however. It's harder to stay down than it is to get back up. A couple of bad seasons means a couple of good draft picks. If those picks turn into good players, then you've gone from a train-wreck to a young, improving team. Then, it's a "simple" matter of having the right coach for the right players at the right time against the right opponents...

          OK, so, real "Glory Days" are hard to come by. But, "Better-Than-Yesterday Days" are almost certain.

          If we are able to land a top 3 pick, then we've got the solid foundation of a young, improving team. We'll have a good pick this year, top 3 or not, and that's another step in the right direction.

          I hope the next Reggie, Jordan, Bird, LBJ is out there, waiting for us to draft him. The team, and the city needs it. Because, whether we want to believe it or not, someday Peyton Manning will retire, and the Colts will probably be in shambles like the Pacers are now. Hopefully, the Pacers can be ready to step up and carry the city through that.

          --pizza
          It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

            I was never upset with the Bayless trade, Rush while not spectacular has outplayed him this year. Roy looks like a keeper. I expect the Pacers to continue to take 4yr graduates. They are more mature and ready to help. If you can make it through college it's obvious you have some sense. All of the problems we seem to have are players with less than 4 years. Tins graduated (I assume) but he is an exception to this rule.
            "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
            Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

              Originally posted by Newman8r View Post
              I don't think Bird is the man to lead the Pacers back to what they were. They need a new mind and fresh ideas to get things rolling again.
              Why not?

              I think he's handled situations fairly well and the almost trades we've got a wind of, seemed to be good moves. I think he's had a lot to learn over the last few years and he's looking for some "quieter" years, in regards to off-court issues, of course.

              He's got a steady hand as a GM, which I'm sure Donnie talked to him about, but also Bird knows the NBA.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
                Those kinds of things are just impossible to predict. The Bulls getting Jordan, the Celtics getting Bird, the Lakers getting Kobe, and the Cavs getting LeBron. I mean, those kinds of players are "sure things," but so was Sam Bowie.
                Reggie was anything BUT a sure thing coming out of college. I found an old newspaper article from the Lexington Herald-Leader (KY) dated June 24, 1987 that said:
                The Pacers ignored the exhortations of their fans and took Reggie Miller of UCLA. The Pacers are dumb, dumb, dumb. For them, Alford was such an obvious choice that you can't help but wonder if a sort of reverse discrimination might come into play.

                I am not looking for a sure thing. I'm looking for a wild card that can get us to the glory days. I have been thinking that Reggie's time started around the time that he and Starks kind of started the mini rivalry between them with the head butt. That sort of started the Pacers-Knicks rivalry that propelled him and the Pacers to great things.

                Can Danny's mini rivalry with Lebron that started a few weeks ago propel us in that fashion? Especially if we sneak into the playoffs and get a 1st round matchup with Cleveland. Who knows what that would do for the city but it sounds like a good setup to a rivalry to me. Any thoughts on that?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                  Originally posted by me
                  Those kinds of things are just impossible to predict. The Bulls getting Jordan, the Celtics getting Bird, the Lakers getting Kobe, and the Cavs getting LeBron. I mean, those kinds of players are "sure things," but so was Sam Bowie.
                  I didn't say Reggie was, because even though his draft was a little before my time, I knew he was a gamble and defied common logic. But, I get your point that you'd like to see another long-shot make it like Reggie did for us. I would love to see that myself.

                  Danny is a heckuva ball player, but he doesn't seem like the "rivalry" sort. I know the circumstances of the Cavs' game were tense, but I'm sure Danny called LeBron the next day and invited him over for tea. Rivalries just don't seem to be Danny's thing.

                  But, who's to say it can't happen? It'd be nice to see some games worth watching for reasons other than the opponents superstar...

                  --pizza
                  It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                    Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
                    Danny is a heckuva ball player, but he doesn't seem like the "rivalry" sort. I know the circumstances of the Cavs' game were tense, but I'm sure Danny called LeBron the next day and invited him over for tea. Rivalries just don't seem to be Danny's thing.
                    --pizza
                    Just curious as to why you feel like this. Everytime I've watched Danny play this year, it seems like he has that special swagger about him. If you don't give him the respect he deserves, he's going to take over and show you up. He's done it several times this year and it seems like he lives off of big moments.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                      Originally posted by IndyHoosier View Post
                      Reggie was anything BUT a sure thing coming out of college. I found an old newspaper article from the Lexington Herald-Leader (KY) dated June 24, 1987 that said:
                      The Pacers ignored the exhortations of their fans and took Reggie Miller of UCLA. The Pacers are dumb, dumb, dumb. For them, Alford was such an obvious choice that you can't help but wonder if a sort of reverse discrimination might come into play.
                      The legend grows and grows as the years go by.

                      The facts are that Alford was picked number 3 in the 2nd round of the draft so several teams were 'dumb, dumb, dumb' or else the UK Herald Leader of 6-24-87 didn't really have a finger on the pulse of NBA basketball. In 1987, and in the heart of Wildcat country, and in a state without an NBA team, I'm going to bet they didn't have a good feel for NBA basketball.

                      Alford was picked so far after the Pacers took Reggie that it's hard to even say Walsh was brave to go against the IU fans that wanted to see Alford continue his basketball career in Indiana. Clearly, Alford was seen as a questionable NBA talent at best by the league and the Pacers didn't need to take a gamble even if it did have a potential marketing upside. Obviously, that upside would be limited if Alford was relegated to the bench. And obviously again, that is where most NBA people thought he'd be.

                      And not only that, but the one team that might see a backlash from Alford not getting minutes, let alone being cut or traded, would've been Indiana. So taking Alford would've been a gamble on several levels. .

                      Considering Alford's recognition and accomplishments during his college career, and coming off a natl championship, for him to drop as far as he did was very telling about just how little NBA potential that league honchos saw in him.

                      IMHO... that Lexington newspaper clip is a bit misleading because it's focusing on why they think the Pacers should've taken Alford, not what Reggie's projection would be. Plus, as I've tried to show, they were clearly out to lunch on their NBA projections anyway if they thought the Pacers should have taken Alford when they had the advantage even then of hindsight to see that Alford wasn't high on anyone's list... not even the Indiana Pacers...

                      -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


                      • #12
                        Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                        Originally posted by Newman8r View Post

                        I don't think Bird is the man to lead the Pacers back to what they were. They need a new mind and fresh ideas to get things rolling again.


                        I couldn't agree more!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          The legend grows and grows as the years go by.

                          The facts are that Alford was picked number 3 in the 2nd round of the draft so several teams were 'dumb, dumb, dumb' or else the UK Herald Leader of 6-24-87 didn't really have a finger on the pulse of NBA basketball. In 1987, and in the heart of Wildcat country, and in a state without an NBA team, I'm going to bet they didn't have a good feel for NBA basketball.

                          Alford was picked so far after the Pacers took Reggie that it's hard to even say Walsh was brave to go against the IU fans that wanted to see Alford continue his basketball career in Indiana. Clearly, Alford was seen as a questionable NBA talent at best by the league and the Pacers didn't need to take a gamble even if it did have a potential marketing upside. Obviously, that upside would be limited if Alford was relegated to the bench. And obviously again, that is where most NBA people thought he'd be.

                          And not only that, but the one team that might see a backlash from Alford not getting minutes, let alone being cut or traded, would've been Indiana. So taking Alford would've been a gamble on several levels. .

                          Considering Alford's recognition and accomplishments during his college career, and coming off a natl championship, for him to drop as far as he did was very telling about just how little NBA potential that league honchos saw in him.

                          IMHO... that Lexington newspaper clip is a bit misleading because it's focusing on why they think the Pacers should've taken Alford, not what Reggie's projection would be. Plus, as I've tried to show, they were clearly out to lunch on their NBA projections anyway if they thought the Pacers should have taken Alford when they had the advantage even then of hindsight to see that Alford wasn't high on anyone's list... not even the Indiana Pacers...

                          -Bball
                          Agreed. Alford had been talked up locally, but I never considered him as a real possibility at 11. I was mildly surprised he slipped to the second round, but the general consensus was that he was a late first rounder (at best) because no one was confident he could play point in the NBA...or get his shot off.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                            One of the smartest things Reggie did was give several interviews after he was drafted and said he was thrilled about being a Pacer and especially going to play in a state where they appreciated basketball. Reggie was a PR dream for the Pacers and knew exactly how to play to that. You have to remember this happened just a short few years after the NFL Colts selected Daune Bickett also from California in the draft. Anyone remember how that came across? I can't forget seeing Bickett setting there when it was announced he was chosen by Indy in the first round and he has his hand on his forehead shaking his head no. Then he procedes to complain and let's his frustrations out asking why does he have to be forced to go to Indiana.

                            Regg did good right from the start becoming a Hoosier.
                            You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Back to the 'Glory Days'

                              I think with the toothless smile Danny won over a LOT of people in this hard-nosed basketball state. If he is able to keep improving and if he can get some pieces around him, I think he very well could be "the man" for a new generation of Pacer fans.

                              Regarding Bird, the problem I've had with him since his days working in the Celtics FO is that he is really not a very good judge of talent. I think if he is to be successful, he needs to have some help with the selections.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X