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

Artest To Sign With Lakers

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

  • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    What did they win?



    Agree entirely.

    You can't trust Ron, but you can't blame him for his mental defects.

    You do/ must blame management for bringing him in the first place, for extending him, and for unreasonable trade demands that forced him to stay with the franchise for too damn long.

    Looks like you've only been here since January - that's been my position for a long, long time.
    I don't blame management at all for bringing him here in the first place. There was lots of pressure to take a risk to get to the next level, and the upside was far more than the downside at the time.

    For extending him - well, there are those who say that was a major fault of the previous management, those who say it engendered a lot of loyalty in players who otherwise might have gone on to the bigger shows for the same money we were offering. In hindsight it seems easy to say the extension was a bad idea. If we don't extend and he goes on to essentially play like he has in Sacto and Houston, a lot of people curse management for not keeping him.

    For unreasonable trade demands - again, if you trade him for a box of rocks and he is fairly benign in other franchises you are vilified.

    A disaster has to actually happen before people believe you that it is going to happen (guess you know that one, don't you...) Otherwise, you are always slammed for pulling the trigger to early or being cowardly. Heck, with the proof in place there are people calling current management out for not going after Ron.

    It was not as clear cut and easy as people would like to say. As I've said many times before, this situation was the entire reason why the franchise didn't take huge risks in the past and isn't likely to do so again. You end up having to operate in ways you don't like to operate, and the totality of it blows up far worse than you might have imagined.
    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


    • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

      That's fine. You weren't in Chicago when Artest was. I knew what the Pacers were getting and you didn't. After Jordan retired and I moved to Chicago, I'm pretty sure I was the only person in the Tri-State area that cared about the NBA, and the only things to read in the local papers were the bizarre tales of Wacky Ron. You probably also know more about the ins and outs of the Hawks players than I ever did.

      The Bulls were willing to take Jalen's contract and get rid of Brad just to dump Artest's baggage on some fools in their division that thought, "eh, we can handle him."

      Artest's behavior did not change one bit between his time in Chicago and his time in Indiana. He just happened to be on a better team so it was slightly more news-worthy. Then, of course, he showed the entire public in Auburn Hills what it was like to deal with him every single day. Good player. Cheap shot. Remorse. Then all hell breaks loose.

      What I've never understood is this - why didn't the Kings just trade him to LA when everybody knew that is what Ron "wanted"? There was never any risk to the Kings that Ron will help lead the Lakers to success. Its a foregone conclusion. Tick... tick... tick...
      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


      • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

        Originally posted by BillS View Post
        Yeah, I just pushed you off the cliff. It was the ground that killed you.
        Terrible example. His point was there were multiple DECISION MAKERS involved, the ground isn't making a choice but TPTB were.

        How about you bring home a wild tiger and then complain when your house is torn up. After the first mauling and MrsB getting the heck out of there you decide to stick it out a bit longer...and even more destruction and mauling.

        We all blame the tiger when the finger should also be pointed at people that knew they were bringing something risky into their environment.


        Of course this is for the example. Personally I think Ron is far less destructive than that, though I do have to concede to ChiJay that Ron is "moody". I just happen to think it's much less than his rep suggests, and I think he's toned it down a bit.


        OTOH his Michael Jackson tribute rap is pretty awful, some really terrible lyrics.

        Comment


        • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          Keep on believing that - and good luck with it. (I would say you're being very simplistic and naive, ignoring the key distinction I made. But I think I'll just wait for it to implode. Its not like it will hurt my feelings when the Lakers get destroyed...)



          I agree 100% with what you say about Artest and his time here, but I still don't think he'll destroy the Lakers. Kobe's not about to let that clown ruin the last few years of his championship window. If Artest pulls any stunts, they'll punt him to the curb and get along fine.

          The difference between the situation here and the situation in LA is that we were completely dependent on Artest for a successful team while LA isn't. With a somewhat sane Artest, we were able to win 61 games and management felt he was a big reason for that success (and he was). Therefore, they felt like they had to cave to him constantly in hopes that he would straighten out (they were obviously wrong). LA OTOH just won a title without Ron, so it's not like they are depending on him for a deep run. If they have to go on without him, they'll do just fine.

          Comment


          • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Terrible example. His point was there were multiple DECISION MAKERS involved, the ground isn't making a choice but TPTB were.

            How about you bring home a wild tiger and then complain when your house is torn up. After the first mauling and MrsB getting the heck out of there you decide to stick it out a bit longer...and even more destruction and mauling.

            We all blame the tiger when the finger should also be pointed at people that knew they were bringing something risky into their environment.


            Of course this is for the example. Personally I think Ron is far less destructive than that, though I do have to concede to ChiJay that Ron is "moody". I just happen to think it's much less than his rep suggests, and I think he's toned it down a bit.


            OTOH his Michael Jackson tribute rap is pretty awful, some really terrible lyrics.
            You're missing the point of the comment, but fine. I could argue that there's no perceived value to me having a tiger in the house, while Ron had (and still seems to have, even according to you) some value to a basketball franchise. Therefore, you're just setting up a straw man extreme example.

            Look, either Ron is a great player who was misunderstood to the point where only the worst front office in the NBA could fail to win a championship with him (I mean, after all, look at all his rings from other teams), or he is a terrible influence ready to blow up at any time and everyone should have known it, including Chicago, Indiana, Sacramento, Houston, and LA. It can't be both.

            The pain was worse because TPTB did not handle the situation the best way it could have been handled. Fine, we've all admitted that (including them). But the situation with JO's salary and JT's pouting in no way excuses Ron's inability to control himself on and off the floor and what it led to. The fact that the FO treated Ron the way we all wish we would be treated is no excuse for him to have essentially stabbed them (and the fans) in the back.

            Anyone who thinks the mass hatred for the Pacers would have taken this long to begin cleaning up if Ron's antics were taken out of the equation - if all we were dealing with were an overpaid but ineffectual "team leader", a pouty PG, and some night club incidents - is fooling themselves. There'd have been backlash, but without the brawl the problems are perceived at a MUCH lower level. Anyone who continues to think that Ron only needed another chance is forgetting how many "another chances" he got - which, of course, was the wrong thing to do then but must be the right thing to do now.

            Yes, there were other factors that made things worse, but Ron not only started the ball rolling, he WAS the ball.
            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


            • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Yes, there were other factors that made things worse, but Ron not only started the ball rolling, he WAS the ball.
              Stated perfectly. Thanks.
              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


              • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Yes, there were other factors that made things worse, but Ron not only started the ball rolling, he WAS the ball.
                Completely false. Whatever ball that was rolling, started long before Ron got here.

                And thats why its preposterous to point the finger at ron for the franchise's demise.

                Did his antics help the situation? Absolutely not. Only aggravated the situation. But the point is, that situation already existed when he got here. There were big problems before he got here and big problems after he left.

                Ron wasnt the problem.

                Reggie even said so.

                But lemme guess, we shouldn't believe Reggie either? Just disregard all facts that dont suit our desire to place the blame where we would like.

                Ron is an easy target and scapegoat. Very easy to just throw all the blame on him.

                Only, for one small thing. Its inaccurate.
                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                Comment


                • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                  I would rather have Ben Wallace in a pacer uniform than Ron. And I can't stand Ben either.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                    Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                    I would rather have Ben Wallace in a pacer uniform than Ron. And I can't stand Ben either.
                    I don't know if I'd go that far. At least with Ron you know on a good day he can still play basketball. On a good day Ben Wallace just takes up space.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                      Originally posted by grace View Post
                      I don't know if I'd go that far. At least with Ron you know on a good day he can still play basketball. On a good day Ben Wallace just takes up space.
                      Do you like holding your breath hoping that Ron doesn't have one of those really awful days? A lot to be said for just taking up space.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                        Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                        Do you like holding your breath hoping that Ron doesn't have one of those really awful days? A lot to be said for just taking up space.
                        Originally posted by grace View Post
                        If you held a gun to my head and told me I had to chose between Ron Artest and Bonzi Wells I'd give serious consideration to having you just shoot me and get it over with.
                        Substitute Ben for Bonzi and it's the same situation as far as I'm concerned.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                          Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                          Completely false. Whatever ball that was rolling, started long before Ron got here.

                          And thats why its preposterous to point the finger at ron for the franchise's demise.

                          -snip-
                          Ron is an easy target and scapegoat. Very easy to just throw all the blame on him.

                          Only, for one small thing. Its inaccurate.
                          Okay, then. Tell us what it was. Because from what I could tell from Chicago, the problems left the Bulls and went down I-65 in February of 2002.

                          Its remarkably accurate. If you don't think so, then add some details. And while I give Ron his share of the blame (hint: a lot), I blame management and his coaches as well - especially since they did nothing to "nip" his antics in the bud and were his enablers. If there was a Jalen-JO problem (which I'm not convinced of, I think it was a Jalen-Isiah problem), then that was fixed in the trade sending Jalen away.

                          By the way, Reggie said, "Ron isn't the only problem." He made it clear that Ron was/is a problem but there were additional ones. He didn't say Ron wasn't a problem at all, so your comment is close to being misleading.

                          Presumably Reggie was talking about Tinsley, because we know Reggie and JO were close and that Reggie was working hard to transition leadership of the team from Jalen to JO. I've always thought he meant SJax, but he wasn't here before Ron arrived so that doesn't help your case and you can't go there. You're pretty much stuck with Tinsley, Foster and Croshere, right? Bender? Zan Tabak? Who?

                          Quit taking potshots. Fill in the blanks. Bring some substance to the discussion.
                          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


                          • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                            ChicagoJ

                            I'm having a little problem interpreting your posts. So, I'll just come right out and ask. Do you like or dislike Ron?
                            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Artest To Sign With Lakers

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              Okay, then. Tell us what it was. Because from what I could tell from Chicago, the problems left the Bulls and went down I-65 in February of 2002.

                              Its remarkably accurate. If you don't think so, then add some details. And while I give Ron his share of the blame (hint: a lot), I blame management and his coaches as well - especially since they did nothing to "nip" his antics in the bud and were his enablers. If there was a Jalen-JO problem (which I'm not convinced of, I think it was a Jalen-Isiah problem), then that was fixed in the trade sending Jalen away.

                              By the way, Reggie said, "Ron isn't the only problem." He made it clear that Ron was/is a problem but there were additional ones. He didn't say Ron wasn't a problem at all, so your comment is close to being misleading.

                              Presumably Reggie was talking about Tinsley, because we know Reggie and JO were close and that Reggie was working hard to transition leadership of the team from Jalen to JO. I've always thought he meant SJax, but he wasn't here before Ron arrived so that doesn't help your case and you can't go there. You're pretty much stuck with Tinsley, Foster and Croshere, right? Bender? Zan Tabak? Who?

                              Quit taking potshots. Fill in the blanks. Bring some substance to the discussion.
                              Come on now. If anyone is taking potshots, its certainly not me. I was very specific to what I disagree with, and why. I filled in all of the blanks. You are going strawman on me, and there's only one way that can go. Quit moving the goalposts. Your answer to everything seems to be that Ron is bad. He was bad before he got to Indy and he was bad during and after. Now while I think some of that is pretty debateable, Im really trying to avoid that subject because its apparent you, as well as others, feel very strongly about that and you are certainly entitled to.

                              However, what I have stated as being inaccurate and/or incorrect is not really subject to opinion as they are pretty much a matter of facts. And these go to the impact that Ron had on the franchise. More to the point:

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              Ron destroyed our franchise.
                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              Yes, there were other factors that made things worse, but Ron not only started the ball rolling, he WAS the ball.
                              Now first I would say that its very difficult and probably unfair to assign any one person total responsibility for whatever demise took place. But if you insist, Ron simply didn't start it nor is it reasonable to suggest he was responsible. There are a number of others that are far more reasonable to assign such responsibilities. As mentioned, even if you feel like he is the single most devastating thing to happen to the franchise-its simply unreasonable to assign the blame to him as he didn't ask to be here. Someone chose to go out and get him and chose to keep him here for a number of years.

                              Now as you say, you predicted such because you were very familiar with Artest in Chicago. Is it really unreasonable to believe that our franchise experts were not aware of not only what you were but most likely significantly more?

                              So if he did everything you expected him to do based on his past history, how can it be anything remotely resembling his fault? After all, you would say Ron is just being Ron, no? So it would seem the only thing that wouldve satisfied you personally would be for him to turn over this complete new leaf-which youve repeated multiple times there was no way it was ever going to happen.

                              So again-how can the blame or responsibility be cast in his direction? While you may be upset at him not having an epiphany since he was now playing for your favorite team, if anyone was/is in a position to appreciate how he cant be blamed, it should be you.

                              But the conversation did get me thinking a bit as far as what was the 'ball' that did all the damage and when did it happen. So instead of dealing in 'revisionist history' as you and a couple others are tending to do, why don't we just take a stroll down memory lane and analyze what happened to our great franchise and when it happened. Maybe thats what you mean when it comes to wanting substance and adding something to the conversation.

                              In the season of 99-2000 our team finished with a 56-26 record culminating in an NBA finals loss in 6 games to the might Lakers. This ended a 3 year stint with Bird as coach where they won nearly 70% of their games and advanced to the Conference finals the first two years and finally the NBA Finals in the summer of 2000.

                              This, we would all have to agree, would be the pinnacle.

                              So...what happened?

                              Larry Bird resigned as head coach.

                              Rik Smits retired. So did Chris Mullin.

                              Mark Jackson was not retained.

                              Dale Davis was trade for Jermaine Oneal.

                              And on July 20, 2000-a day that probably should live in infamy when it comes to the Pacers franchise- Isiah Thomas was hired as head coach to replace Bird.

                              Aug1, 2000-another day in infamy-the Pacers sign Austin Croshere to a 7 year, 51 million dollar extension and Jalen Rose to a 7 year, 93 million dollar extension. 144 million on two players. The Pacers also signed Reggie and Sam Perkins to much more reasonable contracts.


                              The Pacers finish the 2000-01 season with a 41-41 record and lose in the first round of the playoffs.

                              2001 offseason: Jamaal Tinsley is obtained. Derrick McKey left, Sam Perkins retired.

                              54 games into the season, the Pacers are 26-28 when amidst controversy, alleged team chemistry issues and a general lack of anything positive they decide a massive overhaul is needed in the hopes of turning around a situation that is definitely heading in the wrong direction.

                              On Feb. 19, 2002 Jalen Rose, Norm Richardson and Travis Best are traded to Chicago for Ron Artest, Brad Miller, Ron Mercer, and Kevin Ollie.

                              The Pacers win the last 5 games to finish the season at 42-40 and again lose in the 1st round of the playoffs.

                              They enter the following season(2002-03) with basically the same roster(added fred jones in the draft) they finished the previous season with following the blockbuster trade. Of note, they sign Bender, Artest and Foster to extensions. Bender and Artest sign deals for approx 42 million dollars each. Evidently with a chance to come together a bit they finish a very respectable 48-34, however again are unceremoniously knocked out of the playoffs in the 1st round.

                              In the offseason, the Pacers bring Bird into the basketball operations fold and almost immediately lock up Jermaine Oneal to a max deal worth in excess of 120 million dollars.

                              July 25, 2003 Brad Miller is traded to Sacramento for Scot Pollard because they couldnt afford to pay Miller.

                              And soon thereafter, fire Isiah Thomas-Oneals mentor of sorts-and soon replace him with Rick Carlisle.


                              The team responds by going a league best 61-21 in 2003-2004 and loses in the Eastern conference finals.

                              July 16, 2004- Trade Oneals best buddy Al Harrington to Atlanta for Stephen Jackson.

                              2004-05 Season starts with the team going 7-2...however in that 7th win of the season disaster strikes:

                              November 19, 2004-another day that lives in infamy for Pacers fans-the brawl takes place

                              The Pacers miraculously manage to finish the rest of the season near the .500 mark despite all the suspensions and injuries and make a spirited run in the playoffs seemingly motivated by Reggies impending retirement before they finally lose in the 2nd round.

                              At the end of the season, Reggie does indeed retire as he said he would.

                              July, 2005 Sign draft choice Danny Granger

                              August, 2005 Sign Sarunas Jasikevicius

                              After a tumultuous 9-4 start seemingly marred by numerous chemistry issues and following trade rumors, Artest says he thinks the team would be better off without him and requests a trade-something he later recants and apologizes 4-however the management deemed it was a point of no return and finally:

                              Jan. 25, 2006 Pacers trade Artest to Kings for Peja. The Kings were out of the playoff race at the time of the trade, however, with the addition of Artest they went on a spirited run that took them into the playoffs where they gave the Spurs a run for the money. After the 9-4 start, the Pacers managed to finish at 41-41 and lost in the 1st round of the playoffs. And theyve yet to make the playoffs since.

                              Meanwhile, Artest was traded to Houston where his team-despite losing Yao and Tmac, gave the World Champion Lakers their toughest test. Also of note, since his departure from the Pacers, while certainly not a saint, has not really been a part of any major problems and indeed Houston players said he was a welcome addition and Yao even said something to the effect that he was nothing like he expected-After expressing some concern initially when Ron first joined the Rockets.

                              What does it all mean?

                              We all know the franchise was at a crossroads during the summer of 2000.

                              And I personally think that thats when all the problems really started. Probably with the coddling of Jalen which, in turn, started a dangerous precedent that would come back to haunt them when it came to their dealings with JO, Tinsley, Ron, Harrington, Jackson, etc. They appeared to go into a mode of letting the inmates run the asylum when it seemed they catered to Jalen by hiring Isiah.

                              And if I had to pick one event or person to say it was the beginning of the end, I would say it was the hiring of Zeke. Now Donnie did that. So whos more to blame, him or Zeke? Who knows. But it spiralled downward from there and really the only time we saw something other than subpar basketball and saw any hope was when Ron WAS here.

                              We were a .500 team before he arrived on the scene and have been a sub .500 team since he left. It was only while he was here that we appeared to be something close to where we were at during the late 90's.

                              So, in conclusion, Ron wasnt the ball nor did he get the ball started. It was already in a free fall before he ever hit town. Nor did he destroy the franchise. It was worse before he got here and indeed after he left. Now did Ron make mistakes? Absolutely. Is he a high maintenance player, at best? Absolutely. But lets not attribute things to him that really have very little, if anything, to do with him or are in his control-like him being brought here or all the other mish mash of players that were assembled that made chemistry all but impossible and for a mentally weak person like Artest-far more likely for problems to arise.

                              As for the Reggie comment. That isnt what Reggie said. Not sure if I or anyone else can maybe find a Utube or transcript of the comment, but I know for a fact those were not the words. In fact, I would guess its in the archives on this site.
                              Last edited by cinotimz; 07-08-2009, 11:19 AM.
                              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X