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.
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
-
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss the old Pacers Digest where you could visit and receive a lot of really good basketball info and engage in some meaningful conversations instead of all of the current "hate" threads that seem to exist.
I would rather be the hammer than the nailComment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I grew up a Pacers fan because of watching Reggie in the playoffs. Obviously miss that.
Being the class of the East, debating whether or not they could win the Finals.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss Reggie.......
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss pinstripes representing both class and excellence as well as a world class franchise in a sport besides baseball. To me, the move away from the pinstripes never felt right somehow, but in fact it must have actually been, because that is exactly when the Pacers stopped being the same franchise it had been for years prior to that.
I miss teeth rattling defense played by guys who left everything they had on the floor, and when they failed to do that, were called out for it by both players and coaches alike.
I miss a time when the phrase "In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!" actually meant something, even outside Indiana.
I miss fundamentally sound teams that had the ability to be explosive as needed, and clutch performances that came not just from Reggie but other guys at crucial times as well just enough times so that the opponents never 100% knew what play to think was coming or where it might come from.
Ultimately, I guess I miss the essence of the Pacers from the Reggie era, and fear we might not see that again.
How depressing...
Happy New Year?
Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
The old style basketball. This "run up the court, shoot a three" offense is a pain to watch.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss seeing our team completely dominate every other team except the best of the best. When I used to watch the games, I wasn't hoping for a win, that was given. I was excited about how badly they were going to destroy whomever they faced.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
Not having to get laughed at when I say I am a pacers fan.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss being a good defensive team... getting timely turnovers and stops when they needed it.
I miss having savvy/wily veterans who might not have been the most athletic, but they were extremely fundamentally sound, did their jobs, were smart, understood offensive flow, passed the ball well, knew when to pass and when to take the shot, knew how to draw fouls, and knew how to hit their foul shots almost automatically, and they shot from the field with much better form, more accuracy and consistency.Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 01-01-2010, 07:45 PM.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I still don't feel comfortable wearing the gear. Honestly, I feel like I'm wearing a leisure suit...Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
Seriously though, it's a lot easier to put the Purdue cap on these days...particularly since they are undefeated and just spanked the #6 team in the NCAA.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss being happy about going to watch my favorite team play.
I miss liking our coach.
I miss recognizing some type of actual game plan, style or substitution pattern.
I miss looking down the road and still being optimistic.
I miss being able to complain about incompetence without the complain police telling me how I should feel."Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss national articles about the Pacers like this one from a little over 10 years ago. We were 22-10, on a good run, 1st year in Conseco, getting ready to make it to the Finals, and the team was on the verge of being blown up by a coaching change and losing some key players. It's hard to believe this was a decade ago!
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2...6-27410647_ITM
Fighting age, uncertainty, Pacers may finally win it all.
The Sporting News| January 17, 2000 | D'Alessandro, Dave
Ads by Google
Indiana Pacers Game
NBA Gift: Buy 4 Games & Get a Roy Hibbert or Brandon Rush Autograph!
TicketMaster.com/Indiana-Pacers
The hottest team in the league outside of El-Lay is a team with no future. Maybe that sounds melodramatic, but there's no kinder or gentler way to put it.
Even the Pacers themselves acknowledge this to be true.
But instead of feeling sorry for themselves, instead of fading quietly into the domain of has-beens, Indiana players seem to have adopted a don't-give-a-damn attitude.
It has resulted in a remarkable stretch of basketball: They came out of last weekend winners of 15 of their last 18, and no matter how long this trend continues, no matter how much space they put between themselves and the rest of the Eastern Conference, the Pacers know they cannot be taken seriously unless they continue to play through the distractions they are facing.
Start with age. Mark Jackson and Reggie Miller are 34-year-old free agents. Rik Smits is 33 and probably in his last season. Sam Perkins is 38. Even 30-year-old Dale Davis has asked to be traded if the team doesn't give him an extension. They are the club's nucleus, and team president Donnie Walsh has not committed to re-signing any of them.
That creates a great deal of uncertainty--even more than Larry Bird's lame-duck status. Yes, the Pacers are playing beautifully fight now. And it could lead to an NBA title, or it could lead to another postseason flameout, followed by a very emotional bust-up.
It keeps coming up, yet it has had no noticeable effect on the product Jackson, for one, continues to question why management hasn't rewarded its veterans for reaching the conference finals four limes in the last six years. Even if they plan to rebuild, the point guard said, they should do it gradually.
"If any team is considering rebuilding, you'd better throw in a mixture of good veterans to help facilitate the development of the young players while keeping the team competitive and worth the fans supporting," Jackson said. "I believe that the composition we have fight now is a good one.
"What better shooting guard to practice with and learn from than Reggie? Dale also can teach defense and rebounding, and I can share my backcourt knowledge, too. Sam Perkins, Chris Mullin and Derrick McKey--those veterans also have wisdom to offer."
Somehow, he overlooks the fact that these six would take up half the roster and roughly $30 million in cap space. It's not good business. Unless, of course, they finally win a title this year. Walsh can table these tough decisions for when that time comes, but until then, Jackson admits the players are disappointed they haven't all received contractual rewards. In fact, he has interpreted management's inaction as a tacit suggestion they're not expected to compete for a title this season.
"I think it's good what (Utah owner) Larry Miller did for Karl Malone, John Stockton and Jeff Hornacek," Jackson said. "He knows that Karl probably won't play out his new contract until he's 40 or olden But it was his way of rewarding loyalty and production. And I believe that when an organization does that, good things will happen to it."
Or, they'll be saddled with cap-busting, long-term deals that will curtail their rebuilding program for years and years.
Meanwhile, perhaps the Pacers should be satisfied that management doesn't want to tinker any further. Walsh, one of the sagest heads in the business, does not act impulsively. That Antonio Davis-Jonathan Bender deal last summer--still don't get it--was the most dramatic move he has made in his long and successful career.
And even though that move hasn't paid any dividends yet, Walsh and Bird merely have to point out that there has been just enough contribution from the younger group (Travis Best, Jalen Rose, Al Harrington and Austin Croshere) to give Indy a formidable mix. Enough to satisfy the coach, anyway.
"I don't feel a need to do anything," Bird said last week. "We're playing well."
Much of the Pacers' future is in Bird's hands, but he hasn't decided what he'll do next year. He admits the idea of directing basketball operations appeals to him on some days and not on others. He could pick his own successor. He could make his own decisions on the major free agents (Rose among them). As of now, that could be the only incentive the Pacers have to continue their run under a lame-duck coach.
A month ago, they were 7-7 and there was persistent doubt--even some debate--that Walsh's rebuilding hadn't taken a more radical form. Now, at 22-10 through Saturday, they're talking the talk again. They were two wins from The Finals last year, but in retrospect, we all learned they were a team built to defeat the Patrick Ewing Knicks. Against the Marcus Camby Knicks, they were hopelessly overmatched in terms of athleticism up front, and they didn't deserve the title shot, regardless of Jess Kersey's brainlock in Game 3.
Had they advanced past the Knicks, it was very possible the Pacers would have won the title, because they would have had some very favorable matchups and circumstances against San Antonio--plenty of big bodies to draw fouls on the Twin Towers, an overwhelming physical mismatch at point guard, a chance for Reggie to show his skill on the biggest stage of all and a matchup nightmare in Rose, to name a few.
The Pacers knew it. They still know it. Now it's all woulda, shoulda, coulda. Now they're not competing against the Knicks or Spurs. They're competing against a perception that their time has passed, and they've convinced themselves their own management is against them.
"As long as we continue to move the ball and play with effort, we have a chance to win the whole thing," Rose says. "The cream always rises to the top. We have guys who have been around and know what to do on a nightly basis. When the playoffs come we have as good a chance as anybody else."
Don't doubt it. Have you reviewed the teams in the East lately? If everything breaks fight, Walsh and Bird may have more difficult choices than they originally had thought.
TSN's Power Poll
Rk. Team W-L
1. LA. Lakers 29-5
2. Portland 25-8
3. Indiana 22-10
4. Utah 22-10
5. San Antonio 23-12
6 Miami 21-11
7. Seattle 20-13
8. New York 20-13
9. Sacramento 18-12
10. Phoenix 19-13
11. Toronto 18-14
12. Philadelphia 19-15
13. Charlotte 18-15
14. Detroit 18-15
15. Milwaukee 19-15
16. Minnesota 16-14
17. Denver 17-15
18. Orlando 16-18
19. Boston 14-18
20. New Jersey 13-20
21 Cleveland 14-19
22. Atlanta 12-21
23. Dallas 10-23
24. Houston 10-23
25. Washington 11-23
26. L.A. Clippers 10-22
27. Vancouver 8-24
28. Golden State 6-26
29. Chicago 5-26
Team Comment
LA. Lakers Kobe and Shaq are enough to fill up anyone. Who
needs that side of Rice?
Portland With all their stars, Blazers' player of the week
was Bonzi Wells.
Indiana Reggie is hitting on all cylinders, including
(gasp!) defense.
Utah Malone's elbows are finally starting to heat up.
So is the Jazz.
San Antonio Even with their struggles, the Spurs still can rely
on twin towers for wins.
Miami If team is looking for point guard insurance,
trouble could be looming.
Seattle Patterson is hustling again after a bit of pouting
and a trip to the bench.
New York Houston's asserting himself; Ewing seems to be
accepting his (small) role.
Sacramento Williams' recklessness is starting to catch up to
him at times.
Phoenix Hardaway's return should make an immediate impact.
Toronto Oakley's shot is falling, but Carter may be tiring.
Philadelphia Healthy Ratliff could be a pick-me-up. So can
Iverson, whenever he wants.
Charlotte Silas says it best: Contenders with Eddie,
mediocre without him.
Detroit Hill has turned into a machine, putting the team
on his back.
Milwaukee Traylor, Thomas for Ike Austin? Johnson isn't a
center, but neither is Ike.
Minnesota Now starting, Sealy is making the most of his
opportunity.
Denver Van Exel is very streaky, but when he's on, lookout.
Orlando Crashing back to earth as defensive specialist
Armstrong struggles on D.
Boston Pitino abandons full-court pressure for man-to-man
... Celts lose to Bulls.
New Jersey Just when they learn how to win again, Nets hear
Williams may not return.
Cleveland Can anyone explain Sura's resurgence?
Atlanta If this keeps up, Wilkens may want to keep the
"flu."
Dallas Even Mailman haters would root for him in a
steel-cage match with Nellie.
Houston The talent seems to be in place to win games--it's
just not happening.
Washington Team isn't as bad as two losses to Bulls would
indicate. But it's close.
L.A. Clippers Taylor rips Olowokandi, but Mo could be the one on
his way out.
Vancouver Dickerson is becoming a first-rate scorer; Bibby
is getting him the ball.
Golden State Reality: The Warriors aren't that good, regardless
of who's coaching them.
Chicago Playing the Wizards can increase anyone's
confidence.
Through last Saturday's games. TSN's Power Poll is determined by TSN editors. Comments by Stephen Siegel.
RELATED ARTICLE: inside dish
Dennis Rodman appeared on The Tonight Show recently to invite himself back to L.A., and Phil Jackson refused to rule it out. "As far as philosophically whether I'd want him or whether this team is ready, we're not ready yet," Jackson said. Added former Bulls teammate Ron Harper, "If we do bring him in, he'd have to do what we do as a team-he couldn't go off and do his own thing." Hmm. Sounds like a plan.... The Nets' Jayson Williams, who had hoped to be practicing last week, has had his comeback pushed back another six-to-eight weeks while he strengthens his leg.... It's our understanding the coach (Rudy Tomjanovich) and the league (represented by Rod Thorn) wanted Vince Carter on the Olympic team, but the selection committee favored Ray Allen. Carter and Allen Iverson took their snubs like champs. Said Carter, "If I can get over it, everyone else should, too. Yes, it's a chance of a lifetime. But I'm young, there's an Olympics four years from now. I'll never say that's a bad decision because Ray Allen is a great player." ... Tim Hardaway is practicing again, but Pat Riley admits the Heat may have to search for a replacement before the February 24 trading deadline.... One example of the league's absurd growth: The value of the Dallas franchise--in the process of being transferred from Ross Perot Jr. to Internet businessman Mark Cuban-has increased from $110 million to $280 million in just four years.... Just a week after ripping his teammates for their loser mentality, J.R. Rider says he wants to re-sign with Atlanta. The Hawks, who have suspended him twice and now acknowledge privately that Rider has submarined every rebuilding plan they once had, have not yet discussed a new contract with him.... Cleveland's Zydrunas Ilgauskas is running drills again and expects to start scrimmaging by January 24. He hasn't had pain in his foot in a month.... An Eastern G.M., who knows David Falk better than any human would want, gave us his take on the Glen Rice sweepstakes: "I don't think the Lakers are unhappy with him or necessarily want to trade him-it would be stupid to break up a team that looks like the front runner right now. But obviously, they don't want to pay him the max ($86 million). So all of this is just button-pushing by Falk, just to mix it up, to find somebody who is willing to pay him that max. But you have to ask yourself: Who in the league can afford it? Especially with escrow coming? I don't think anyone can, frankly, and that includes the Knicks and Miami. No matter how deep your owners' pockets are, you have to proceed very cautiously and stay under (the cap) right now until you see how it all shakes out."
Dave D'Alessandro covers the NBA for the Newark (N.J.) Star-Ledger. E-mail him at daved@sportingnews.com.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
I miss being able to rub it in my childhood friend's faces that I am still a Pacer's fan good or bad.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
Winning.Comment
-
Re: What do you miss most?
The yellow paint
Comment
Tweet
Comment