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

Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

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

  • #91
    Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    worst extension ever. I've always thought they should have traded him years ago when his value was still high.
    I don't know about that. How about Bender or Tinsley, just to name a couple?

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      ......my impression is that IF this back injury is severe.....then getting a 2nd opinion would likely be to confirm the worst case scenario ( as in season or even career-ending injury ).
      The 2nd opinion may also be for insurance reasons, or an "in advance" preparation for petitioning the league for salary cap relief down the line.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

        Originally posted by Tom White View Post
        I don't know about that. How about Bender or Tinsley, just to name a couple?
        True, so he was the 3rd worst extension ever.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
          The 2nd opinion may also be for insurance reasons, or an "in advance" preparation for petitioning the league for salary cap relief down the line.
          Sadly, this seems like a reasonable conclusion. Good thinking Tom.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            worst extension ever.
            At the time of the extension.....which is the important thing to note.....I think that it's debateable whether this is the "worst extension ever". It's not like we extended Oriene Greene or some 14th string player....TPTB decided to extend a Player that was ( at that time and still is....if he was still playing ) considered a Productive on the Team. If we didn't have all this lowering of the LT threshold over the last 2 years and we had enough room to resign Jack...this wouldn't have been an issue. My whole point is that because it wasn't known that all these things would happen to the LT....it's easier to say that we shouldn't have extended Foster back then.

            On top of that....when TPTB extended Foster....did we even make the trade for Jack yet?

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            I've always thought they should have traded him years ago when his value was still high.
            Unfortunately, I can't disagree with this. If it's true that we could have gotten Capspace and a 1st round pick from the Nuggets a season ago....then we really blew it there.
            Last edited by CableKC; 02-01-2010, 06:18 PM.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              From a Non-Financial POV....I'd hate to see this happen to a Player that has been a very good soldier for the Team for the last couple of years. I'm not going to jump on Bird for giving ( what many perceive to be ) an undeserving Contract or rip on Foster for ( what many perceive ) to being nothing more than a Backup PF Role Player.

              IMHO....complaining about Foster's extension now is like crying over spilled milk....it's unfortunate that it turned out this way...but it's nothing we can change now....so why complain about it....especially if it seemed REASONABLE to do AT THAT TIME.

              Was it a mistake to extend him?

              With hindsight being 20/20, of course we can see now that giving Foster an Extension however many seasons ago seems like a mistake now ( only cuz it did affect our ability to resign Jack )....but at the time ( without knowing that the LT threshold would be significantly lowered ) it seemed reasonable to do so....or at the very least was debateable one way or another.

              I just hope that IF UBs inside sources are somewhat accurate that Foster may ( more then likely ) retire after this season.....that the FO decides to keep him on as a Coaching Assistant....specifically to stay on to help Coach the Big Men like Hibbert, Hansbrough and whoever we draft at the PF/C rotation over the next 2 drafts.

              Debateable? It's been debated to death since it happened. Some have pointed out it was a mistake/blunder from day 1. It's just now come to roost
              how big a blunder Bird made. Believe me I'm not happy that Foster's career might be over, but it isn't like Bird didn't know of Foster's previous back problems b4 get gave Foster the 2 year extension for almost 13 mil.

              The same type of blunder by Bird in picking up Jimmy's team option b4 even seeing how the season would progress has come home to roost with a 16-32, the 5th worst record in the NBA, and a lost team.

              Some didn't need Foster's injury nor watching a pathetic team lose games
              b/c a coach is going to it his way or else to have seen blunders from day 1. They didn't need 20/20 hindsight to know they were mistakes. It was obvious from the beginning and they said so.

              These blunders are costing ownership and the Pacers franchise, and the one responsible for these costly blunders needs to be sent packing! Now b4 there is another blunder by wasting a great draft pick on the wrong player.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                If he's going to LA for a second opinion, he's probably going to Luke Walton's back doctor. Which is my back doctor, Michael Port at D.I.S.C. in Marina Del Rey. If that's the case, he'll be in fantastic hands.
                “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  Debateable? It's been debated to death since it happened. Some have pointed out it was a mistake/blunder from day 1. It's just now come to roost
                  how big a blunder Bird made. Believe me I'm not happy that Foster's career might be over, but it isn't like Bird didn't know of Foster's previous back problems b4 get gave Foster the 2 year extension for almost 13 mil.

                  The same type of blunder by Bird in picking up Jimmy's team option b4 even seeing how the season would progress has come home to roost with a 16-32, the 5th worst record in the NBA, and a lost team.

                  Some didn't need Foster's injury nor watching a pathetic team lose games
                  b/c a coach is going to it his way or else to have seen blunders from day 1. They didn't need 20/20 hindsight to know they were mistakes. It was obvious from the beginning and they said so.

                  These blunders are costing ownership and the Pacers franchise, and the one responsible for these costly blunders needs to be sent packing! Now b4 there is another blunder by wasting a great draft pick on the wrong player.
                  This "blunder" that you are referring to that was obvious from the beginning that was they even also "said so"......you had sighted 2 examples in your post.....Foster's and JO'Bs extension. Which "blunder" are you referring to?

                  If both...then when did "they" ( and I'm assuming that you are referring to TPTB and not us PD Posters ) say "so"?

                  I don't ever recall TPTB ever saying publically that extending Foster was ever a blunder.

                  Looking 20/20 hindsight....with the LT going higher...with the option not to resign Jack non-existent due to Foster's signing.....and what we all know now...of course, it's easier to say that it was a mistake. But AT THAT TIME.....specifically 2 or 3 seasons ago knowing what was known at that time.......I don't think that it was a huge mistake to extend Foster....to me....despite having some reservations....extending him was somewhat reasonable. Again...AT THAT TIME....I don't think that it was automatically concluded by all that we shouldn't have extended him. I can even admit that at that time.....it obviously wasn't a "slam-dunk" extension that we should have done at all costs.... but I'm pretty sure that extending him was one of the worst moves in Pacers history ( which many of you are portraying it to be ). At worst....it could be considered one of the "worst moves in Pacers History had unforeseen consequences".

                  I barely remember what I said or did last week...so it's entirely possible that my memory is that bad that I don't remember.....but can someone pull up the old "Foster is extended" thread to guage reaction to this at that time? I don't think that it was so badly received that we were calling for someone's head to roll.
                  Last edited by CableKC; 02-01-2010, 06:38 PM.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    This "blunder" that you are referring to that was obvious from the beginning that was they even also "said so"......you had sighted 2 examples in your post.....Foster's and JO'Bs extension. Which "blunder" are you referring to?

                    If both...then when did "they" ( and I'm assuming that you are referring to TPTB and not us PD Posters ) say "so"?

                    Looking 20/20 hindsight....with the LT going higher...with the option not to resign Jack non-existent due to Foster's signing.....and what we all know now...of course, it's easier to say that it was a mistake. But AT THAT TIME.....specifically 2 or 3 seasons ago knowing what was known at that time.......I don't think that it was a huge mistake to extend Foster....to me....despite having some reservations....extending him was somewhat reasonable. Again...AT THAT TIME....I don't think that it was automatically concluded by all that we shouldn't have extended him. I can even admit that at that time.....it obviously wasn't a "slam-dunk" extension that we should have done at all costs.... but I'm pretty sure that extending him was one of the worst moves in Pacers history ( which many of you are portraying it to be ). At worst....it could be considered one of the "worst moves in Pacers History had unforeseen consequences".

                    I barely remember what I said or did last week...so it's entirely possible that my memory is that bad that I don't remember.....but can someone pull up the old "Foster is extended" thread to guage reaction to this at that time? I don't think that it was so badly received that we were calling for someone's head to roll.

                    Both blunders.

                    Posters such as myself said that each, Foster's extension & Jimmy's 4th year, were bad mistakes from day1. Others stuck there head in the sand and said both deserved them. One for loyalty and the other so they wouldn't be a lame duck coach. Like I said those Bird mistakes/blunders have come home to roost now.

                    You can put lipstick on a pig to make it look better, but in the end it's still a pig. Both were major blunders that's costing this franchise, and no one can deny it if they take there head out of the sand. And the one to blame for those blunders is Bird.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                      Originally posted by purdue101 View Post
                      I like Jeff as a player and person, but that 2 yr extension before last season was flat out ridiculous.

                      At last years TDL, Jeff would have had a ton of value as an expiring defensive big man who was healthy (74 games last year). No doubt we could have gotten another expiring and late pick or prospect. Bird killed his value by extending him 2 more seasons before the season even began. Now we're stuck eating 6 million this season and next for a guy with no value.

                      I highly doubt he retires at 33 too. Why would he? He doesn't have to move or alter his lifestyle. He can show up on time for 7 months and make 6 million. It would be flat out stupid to walk from that gravy train.
                      That's kinda what kills this story of Jeff needing back surgery for me, as well. And please, don't get me wrong. I think Jeff Foster's a very nice servicable B/U Center who has been very under appreciated for what he does, but I never did understand why Bird gave him a contract extension knowing full well he had back problems that hadn't been properly treated prior to the extension. It's one thing to get him into surgery and then see what he can do afterwards and then, if productive, extend his contract. But it's another to grant the extension, know he has physical problems that limit his ability and then get him into surgery. That's just plain doing business backwards to me.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                        Totally called this a while back.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                          I don't know about that. How about Bender or Tinsley, just to name a couple?
                          exactly, those 2 are much worse.
                          anyway, as a pacer fan, i have come to expect the worst every time when it comes to anything like injuries or illness.
                          i wouldn't be surprised if he is done. i kind of expect it with our luck. hell, i wouldn't be shocked if tyler was done too while were at it.
                          i said this a few years ago in another thread when someone spoke of the pacers having bad karma.
                          i don't know much about karma but, i do know about luck. the pacers have 2 kinds: bad and none at all.
                          it really seems like we never can catch any breaks... ever.
                          Last edited by clownskull; 02-03-2010, 04:33 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                            Originally posted by clownskull View Post
                            exactly, those 2 are much worse.
                            anyway, as a pacer fan, i have come to expect the worst every time when it comes to anything like injuries or illness.
                            i wouldn't be surprised if he is done. i kind of expect it with our luck. hell, i wouldn't be shocked if tyler was done too while were at it.
                            i said this a few years ago in another thread when someone spoke of the pacers having bad karma.
                            i don't know much about karma but, i do know about luck. the pacers have 2 kinds: bad and none at all.
                            it really seems like we never can catch any breaks... ever.
                            I don't know about ever. I would say getting Danny Granger at 17 was definitely a break. Ironically, the only reason he dropped that far was because of injury concerns.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                              ok, getting granger was a break. and yes it was due to injury concerns. although he has of course been injured all year and i doubt he will get healthy this year.
                              so when we do get a break, it seems really like it is more of a tease.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Jeff Foster update (02/01/10: Out for the season; back surgery)

                                I have some inside information on Jeff but it may not be 100% correct due to the fact that Jeff is a human being and he might change his decision,but as of right now i am confident that he will be retiring after this season. He has had these back problems for several years and it has really been taking a toll on how he feels during the game. He has gone to LA to get a second opinion so there still might be a glimmer of hope for him playing, however it might be the Pacers sending him there to make sure that if he does retire it is due to health issues so he can get the money back from his contract when he retires. I also believe that if he does come back, there is no way that he will be traded. If you can remember, when the Pacers drafted Jeff, Larry Bird was part of the Pacers then. He really liked Jeff and he has always been one of Birds' more favorite players. The Pacers will not trade Jeff because once again Bird is in the front office and regardless of contracts and cap space, he will not trade Jeff because he has become one of the faces of the Pacers franchise and loved by almost all the fans. To go along with that, Jeff has said that he would love to retire as a Pacer and he would be honored to retire as a Pacer. He doesnt want to be anywhere else. As far as him being a coach when he retires, i believe it is very likely. He knows the game very well and he has basically been a coach already for the younger guys of the Pacers. I would not be surprised to see him in the front office of the Pacers if not coaching when he retires.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X