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

Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

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

  • #31
    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    This is well written and I thanked it, but (as you might expect) I disagree with a number of points:

    - I think we will have at least one if not 2 new starters within 2 years.

    - I think we're only taking some time to see where this team develops with a full training camp and season behind it - making moves before you know what you really have is at some point just guesswork.

    - We see the message coming from Pritchard and Vogel, not just Donnie, but of course it is always "Donnie's express goal"

    - I fail to understand how, when the quality of our bench definitely affected our ability to hold leads in the playoffs and therefore we made some moves to improve the bench, that is not addressing something we needed to do to make the team better. Why is it only changes to the starting lineup that make the team better?

    I still feel like much of the idea that we won't make any more moves comes from three places: Donnie's reputation for not making moves, the team not making moves this summer for various fan favorite FAs or trade targets, and the assumption that Herb Simon won't spend money.

    Toward the first point - please remember that Donnie's reputation was really NOT that he made NO moves, it was that he got the team to a certain point AS A CONTENDER and then failed to make the final big move. He made lots of moves - many of them very unexpected and involving major components of the team - prior to the point when the Pacers were in the ECFs nearly every year. He was then criticized for tweaking things rather than trying for one big thing that would put the team over the top. After the Finals year, the next bold moves blew up in his face, but he MADE them. He was hoist with his own lingering concept of how things should work between teams and players, but it was NOT that he made NO major moves involving starters.

    The second point is purely my opinion, there's not much to base it on other than the fact that people claim we really did nothing this offseason when we did a lot - just not what they wanted.

    The third point seems a bit overwrought. We're going to be over the cap and up toward the LT. If Herb wanted to be Donald Sterling I think we wouldn't be spending anywhere near that much. Herb doesn't strike me as a wishy-washy guy - if he wanted to not spend money we would not spend it, period. We spent the money, we just didn't spend it in a way some people felt was advantageous.
    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


    • #32
      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

      A well reasoned post and it would explain most small market teams who are not fortunate enough to have a super star fall into their lap ala OKC........

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

        Originally posted by billbradley View Post
        Are you assuming a deal won't be made?
        But if we hit the trade deadline first in our division and 2nd in the East, why would we make a deal?

        I think West, Hibbert and PG could come back better and we can compete next year. The only hole I see is Tyler.
        Tyler is of no significan consequence. Many people keep thinking that everyone will come back better. The only one who may be slightly better is PG. The rest of them you see what you are going to get. That is why I think they will slip a notch or two or three because the stood pat with their starters while others in the East improved..... I think they will be fighting for the sixth seed barring major injuries to the teams above them and the Pacers themselves. Last year was magic and it is not likely to be duplicated.....

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

          That was not a hard prediction to do, good post though, as we know the Pacers are known for keeping their players until they are so hurt that they can't move so I expect West to be re-signed for 3 or 4 more years and then the year after that I expect Danny to be re-signed for another 3 or 4 years, Hill and Hibbert have 5 years left in their contracts and Paul George will get an extension for sure, so like you said I don't expect the Pacers to win anything in the next five years.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            This is well written and I thanked it, but (as you might expect) I disagree with a number of points:

            - I think we will have at least one if not 2 new starters within 2 years.

            - I think we're only taking some time to see where this team develops with a full training camp and season behind it - making moves before you know what you really have is at some point just guesswork.

            - We see the message coming from Pritchard and Vogel, not just Donnie, but of course it is always "Donnie's express goal"

            - I fail to understand how, when the quality of our bench definitely affected our ability to hold leads in the playoffs and therefore we made some moves to improve the bench, that is not addressing something we needed to do to make the team better. Why is it only changes to the starting lineup that make the team better?

            I still feel like much of the idea that we won't make any more moves comes from three places: Donnie's reputation for not making moves, the team not making moves this summer for various fan favorite FAs or trade targets, and the assumption that Herb Simon won't spend money.

            Toward the first point - please remember that Donnie's reputation was really NOT that he made NO moves, it was that he got the team to a certain point AS A CONTENDER and then failed to make the final big move. He made lots of moves - many of them very unexpected and involving major components of the team - prior to the point when the Pacers were in the ECFs nearly every year. He was then criticized for tweaking things rather than trying for one big thing that would put the team over the top. After the Finals year, the next bold moves blew up in his face, but he MADE them. He was hoist with his own lingering concept of how things should work between teams and players, but it was NOT that he made NO major moves involving starters.

            The second point is purely my opinion, there's not much to base it on other than the fact that people claim we really did nothing this offseason when we did a lot - just not what they wanted.

            The third point seems a bit overwrought. We're going to be over the cap and up toward the LT. If Herb wanted to be Donald Sterling I think we wouldn't be spending anywhere near that much. Herb doesn't strike me as a wishy-washy guy - if he wanted to not spend money we would not spend it, period. We spent the money, we just didn't spend it in a way some people felt was advantageous.
            Honestly my prediction on what Kevin and Donnie plan to do is based on what they have said in the media. Obviously you have gotten a completely different perspective on what they want to do. It makes a lot of sense and has me doubting my thoughts on the whole matter. (The fact that you predict possibly two new starters absolutely blows my mind. I guess I could have completely misread Kevin and Donnie)

            I mean, based on history I know Donnie's made moves. He traded for Derrick McKey, he landed Mark Jackson twice, he got Mullin, he traded Antonio Davis (at his request) etc.

            What has me worried, and maybe I've completely read the wrong, is I think they believe the bench is all that needs improving. It's not that I believe the "only way you can improve" is by changing the starting lineup, it's just I feel that starting lineup is flawed in such a way that no bench can overcompensate for the starting lineups errors. If that makes sense.

            I love the moves this offseason by the way. Love the pickup of Green, love the pickup of DJ and Mahinmi.
            Last edited by mattie; 08-16-2012, 10:31 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

              Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
              And if you want me to be really honest, the Pacers will probably never win a Championship. Why? Because we are now playing in a league where if you aren't a big market team no one cares. Mix that with the fact that our front office refuses to lose(which is good and bad) and we don't have a shot. Even if we did luck out and land a superstar in a draft(which wouldn't be for a while if ever), he probably would just pull a LeBron, Dwight, Deron, Paul, ect who couldn't win Championships with their original teams.

              So why am I a Pacers fan? Because I have some masochist type of loyalty to the teams I love and I love the Indiana Pacers. And if that day ever comes, where we by some miracle and against all odds do win the Championship, it will be that much sweeter. To say we stuck with them through everything only to finally see them come out on top. That's the dream, hopefully we all get it someday. Realistically, I don't see it happening though.

              Bingo!!! The small market teams are nothing but a minor league feeder system for the big market teams. The Pacers only made on run to the finals in their history. It is not likely to happen again....

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                I don't care if the Pacers win a Championship. So many people refer to the team as "we" but if they win, I don't get a share of the money or a trophy or any credit for the victories. I'm a basketball fan and the Pacers are the pro franchise in my city, which is great because it means I get to see pro hoops a lot. To that end, what I need the Pacers to do in exchange for my money is present a good product. The 2011/2012 team was a good product and it looks like a good product should be on the court for several years to come. I'm going to enjoy that while I can.


                Name-calling signature removed

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                  "Not likely to happen again", lol.... your perspective continues to make me chuckle internally, Blu. Your optimism springs eternal.
                  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


                  • #39
                    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    (The fact that you predict possibly two new starters absolutely blows my mind. I guess I could have completely misread Kevin and Donnie)
                    I did say within 2 years. I don't think we'll have a new starter this year, but I could definitely see not retaining West or trading either West or Hill. I really don't think anyone sees Hill as the permanent PG, just as the one for THIS season.

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    What has me worried, and maybe I've completely read the wrong, is I think they believe the bench is all that needs improving. It's not that I believe the "only way you can improve" is by changing the starting lineup, it's just I feel that starting lineup is flawed in such a way that no bench can overcompensate for the starting lineups errors. If that makes sense.
                    I think people get impatient and believe that if the priority was to improve the bench FIRST it somehow means that the ONLY priority was to improve the bench. To be honest, you get a lot more bang for the buck improving the bench - you'll end up overpaying a starter anyway so you'd better have a real good idea that the starter is exactly who you need. After all, if you get a top level starter and still go in the toilet every time he sits you aren't going to do much better than you did without him.
                    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


                    • #40
                      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      I mean, based on history I know Donnie's made moves. He traded for Derrick McKey, he landed Mark Jackson twice, he got Mullin, he traded Antonio Davis (at his request) etc.
                      What about acquiring Jalen Rose, Ron Artest, Brad Miller?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                        Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                        Bingo!!! The small market teams are nothing but a minor league feeder system for the big market teams. The Pacers only made on run to the finals in their history. It is not likely to happen again....
                        Really? Wow. That'll prove to be about as accurate as the people in the 80's saying the Pacers would never be anything but a bottom feeder in the NBA.
                        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


                        • #42
                          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          I did say within 2 years. I don't think we'll have a new starter this year, but I could definitely see not retaining West or trading either West or Hill. I really don't think anyone sees Hill as the permanent PG, just as the one for THIS season.



                          I think people get impatient and believe that if the priority was to improve the bench FIRST it somehow means that the ONLY priority was to improve the bench. To be honest, you get a lot more bang for the buck improving the bench - you'll end up overpaying a starter anyway so you'd better have a real good idea that the starter is exactly who you need. After all, if you get a top level starter and still go in the toilet every time he sits you aren't going to do much better than you did without him.
                          True.

                          They could definitely pull the trigger on Horford, and then hypothetically he ends up marginally better than West only we're stuck with his contract.

                          And you're definitely right. Some of it is based on what they have said in the media, but definitely there is some impatience thinking they have no intentions on making any other moves. As I said before, I wouldn't say a word or be worried a bit if I had some indication they want to make necessary improvements.

                          I'll tell you this much: If I heard tomorrow "sources" heard Kevin was talking to Atlanta, I wouldn't say another word. That'd be enough for me.

                          Edit - I never doubted Larry by the way. He always seemed to be clear about the future of the team so it was easy for me to buy in to what he's doing. I'm not even saying he did a good job either way. I just completely bought into his competency I guess you could say.
                          Last edited by mattie; 08-16-2012, 11:05 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                            What is the point of posts like this? Just curious. To establish what? You ultimately feel there is no hope? Okay, whatev. Why root for a team if you honestly feel this way? This is along the same lines as reading most of OlBlu's posts... just no hope at all.

                            Pacers: "We've improved drastically over the last two years, we have new management, young promising talent, a stud young coach --- therefore, I have substantial reason to believe we've plateau'd and we'll never change or improve beyond our current state at all and it's basically downhill from here."
                            Colts: "We just spent a decade being awesome, our old regime wore out, our new regime looks really promising, we're cleaning out the bad contracts, we just landed the single most highly rated player in history, and surrounded him with amazing young talents --- therefore, I have substantial reason to believe we're going to suck bad not only this year, but at least a decade hereafter."

                            Logical.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-16-2012, 11:09 AM.
                            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


                            • #44
                              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                              What is the point of posts like this? Just curious. To establish what? You ultimately feel there is no hope? Okay, whatev. Why root for a team if you honestly feel this way? This is the same lines as reading most of OlBlu's post... just no hope at all.

                              Pacers: "We've improved drastically over the last two years, we have new management --- therefore, I have substantial reason to believe we've plateau'd and we'll never change or improve beyond our current state at all and it's basically downhill from here."
                              Colts: "We just spent a decade being awesome, our old regime wore out, our new regime looks really promising, we're cleaning out the bad contracts, we just landed the single most highly rated player in history, and surrounded him with amazing young talents --- therefore, I have substantial reason to believe we're going to suck bad not only this year, but at least a decade hereafter."

                              Logical.
                              I thought I was clear in the original post. I'm very happy and excited about the coming seasons. I'm not down or disappointed. I was just suggesting, and predicting, based off of our front offices comments what I felt the direction of the franchise was.

                              4 years ago Larry gave us a clear plan. I could be completely wrong, but I felt Donnie gave us a plan that suggested little improvement.

                              Every year that Larry said "we need to improve" was all I ever needed. That's it. I guess I'm wrong, but I gathered Kevin/Donnie want minor improvements to the bench.

                              The point of the thread? For everyone to prove how wrong I am so I can get excited about future moves.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                                How many consecutive years did Atlanta trot out Joe Johnson, Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, and Al Horford? Since 2007 when Horford entered the league right?

                                It is uncommon but certainly not unprecedented and does seem to be the path we're heading towards.
                                Why does it seem the Pacers have chosen that path? Our starting 5 has changed every year for the past 3 years including this upcoming season.

                                With our two best players, Granger is locked in for two more seasons, West one. The Hawks were committed to JJ and Smith for almost 30 million a year when they started their playoff runs.

                                It's just not the same situation as the Hawks.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X