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

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

    If you don't have a competent FO that can not only draft talent, but that can draft players that fit well together, a coaching staff that can utilize the talent, then tanking is useless. Thats why the annual bottom feeders stay where they are, and the Spurs and such remain where they are.

    I will say that a team that is run as well as the Spurs for such a long period of time is an anomaly, especially in the NBA. Nomally EVERY team has a few down years (even the Lakers were bad for 2 yeas or so) but the Spurs are an exception to the rule.

    Comment


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

      [QUOTE]
      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      And on top of that, you have to hope you win the draft lottery.
      You don't need to win the draft lottery that's the missing point of people here, for example that year the Pacers went into the famous late season run they were placed 7th/8th in the draft and guess who was there at that position?(EJ) you don't think the Pacers are in a better position with EJ instead of Tyler? what has that last season run done to the Pacers for the present? my guess is nothing.

      And on top of that, you have to hope it's the next Tim Duncan waiting for you.
      It doesn't have to be Duncan to be a successful pick.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by mb221 View Post
        And if San Antonio doesn't win the lottery and have Duncan fall into their laps, and say have to pick #2? They get Keith Van Horn and how many titles?
        They are still smart enough to build a competent team, they are just that good.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          They are still smart enough to build a competent team, they are just that good.
          But in truth there is just no way to know that. Everybody acts like the Spurs have been a super team for all of their tenure in the NBA and nothing could be further from the truth. They have been a super team in the NBA since they drafted what is now widely considered the greatest power forward to ever play. Think about that for a min, they have the greatest player to ever play his position and on top of that in all honesty he is one of the greatest big men to ever play.

          It sure makes it a lot easier to put pieces around that than say journeymen big men.

          No, to me the Spurs are like the Thunder are now, they are not the examples that small market teams can compete on a fair scale. They are the examples that if you strike gold twice in the draft you can compete.

          BTW, I'm not disagreeing that high lottery picks are the way to go but I'm just saying I think the Spurs get a little to much credit as an org. for being a great team without enough of a caveat being said about them landing two top 50 players of all time with the # 1 overall pick.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            But in truth there is just no way to know that. Everybody acts like the Spurs have been a super team for all of their tenure in the NBA and nothing could be further from the truth. They have been a super team in the NBA since they drafted what is now widely considered the greatest power forward to ever play. Think about that for a min, they have the greatest player to ever play his position and on top of that in all honesty he is one of the greatest big men to ever play.

            It sure makes it a lot easier to put pieces around that than say journeymen big men.

            No, to me the Spurs are like the Thunder are now, they are not the examples that small market teams can compete on a fair scale. They are the examples that if you strike gold twice in the draft you can compete.

            BTW, I'm not disagreeing that high lottery picks are the way to go but I'm just saying I think the Spurs get a little to much credit as an org. for being a great team without enough of a caveat being said about them landing two top 50 players of all time with the # 1 overall pick.
            Many teams have drafted all time players and haven't been able to do what the Spurs have been able to do, recent examples Cleveland and Orlando, old examples, Minny and Phoenix, acting like the Spurs just got "lucky" and because of that they became the Spurs is not accurate they were also pretty good at drafting or trading for players that complements that great player they have on their team.

            The part that grinds my gears with people and Pacers fans in general is that as always they use excuses to protect the Pacers front office, they couldn't get Nash, "that is because we are an small market team", we couldn't make trades, "that's because they were not trades available and our FO just doesn't make trades to make trades because they are just too smart", regarding tanking people love to make the excuse that "we don't tank because if we don't get the number one pick we are doomed" or the "if we tank we better get ready to see the Pacers in Vegas or Seattle".

            At the end of the day the Pacers didn't tank and they are still missing pieces to ever compete for a Championship, again what good has those last season runs done to the Pacers? and please don't tell me that winning those last games has created some kind of "winning attitude" that has carry on to the present because it hasn't.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              I don't think things are run poorly either, I just think that the Pacers FO are satisfied to be OK and as competitive person I hate that, they also sold us into the idea of a "better future" five years ago(the famous 3 years plan) and now after five years and another wasted summer where they also wasted their cap space, I just don't see the light of the tunnel of a championship that we were promised few years ago all I see is a second round contending team nothing else.

              I disagreed with much of your front office criticisms in recent years, but I agree 100% that this was a giant snoozer of an off-season for the Pacers. We had the opportunity to at least *attempt* to make a splash, but the only improvements we made were changing up the bench a bit. Maybe we succeed in bringing a big name here, maybe we don't. But it would have been nice to have *tried*. This was the year to do it as we won't have that opportunity with cap space in the near future.

              It cannot be denied that several good teams in the East made better improvements to their teams than the Pacers. The world champs got Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis who you know will come in handy with some buckets in the playoffs. The Knicks lost Lin, but Felton, Kidd, and Camby aren't exactly scraps. That team is much more talented than the Pacers. Their only question is chemistry. Boston also made some very nice improvements to their team and if they are healthy, they will be an even better team than the one that almost went to the Finals. The Nets got better with the Johnson deal and if Lopez is healthy all year then they will be tough. The Sixers added freaking Bynum in a steal of a trade. God only knows how deadly he'll be as the focal point of an offense.

              Teams all over the East made far better improvements to their teams than the Pacers did. We will have a tough time winning a playoff series.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                It's about where it's "cool" to live for really rich athletes in their 20s where the majority have grown up in major urban centers. I mean, let's be real here, you can have your pick of places to live in that scenario, why WOULDN'T you pick somewhere like Miami or LA or NYC over Indianapolis or Sacramento or Denver assuming the money's the same regardless of the choice?

                You can probably take LA off that list in about 10 years when California's finances catch up with Greece. When players realize that along with the sunshine and hot women they have to pay 50% of their income in state taxes alone Indiana might start looking better.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Many teams have drafted all time players and haven't been able to do what the Spurs have been able to do, recent examples Cleveland and Orlando, old examples, Minny and Phoenix, acting like the Spurs just got "lucky" and because of that they became the Spurs is not accurate they were also pretty good at drafting or trading for players that complements that great player they have on their team.

                  The part that grinds my gears with people and Pacers fans in general is that as always they use excuses to protect the Pacers front office, they couldn't get Nash, "that is because we are an small market team", we couldn't make trades, "that's because they were not trades available and our FO just doesn't make trades to make trades because they are just too smart", regarding tanking people love to make the excuse that "we don't tank because if we don't get the number one pick we are doomed" or the "if we tank we better get ready to see the Pacers in Vegas or Seattle".

                  At the end of the day the Pacers didn't tank and they are still missing pieces to ever compete for a Championship, again what good has those last season runs done to the Pacers? and please don't tell me that winning those last games has created some kind of "winning attitude" that has carry on to the present because it hasn't.
                  Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote.

                  Tim Duncan is almost universally considered the greatest power forward to ever play the game. While Garnett is an all time great player he is not even considered the 2nd or 3rd best to play the 4 (Malone, Barkley). Same goes with Orlando, Dwight is the greates of this generation he probably is not even considered top 5 in Centers. LeBron has played both the 2 & 3 spot so depending on where you want to put him he may be the 3rd best shooting guards of all time (Jordan, Bryant) and I'm not sure where he would rank at the 3.

                  Not to mention the Spurs did this after already having Robinson on the team.

                  There is no need for a lot of back and forth here because for the most part I agree with you, but I'm just saying you can't discount the fact that they did have Duncan and prior to having Duncan they were never anything other than a very good team (Like the Pacers). As someone said draft Kieth Van Horn and I don't think the Spurs win one title let alone have the decade of excellent play that they have.


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


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

                    Lebron is probably the greatest small forward of all time right this second.


                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      Lebron is probably the greatest small forward of all time right this second.
                      Probably, I'm just going over in my head who are the great 3's of all time. Bird is one of them but probably for both ends of the floor you would have to say LeBron is already.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote.

                        Tim Duncan is almost universally considered the greatest power forward to ever play the game. While Garnett is an all time great player he is not even considered the 2nd or 3rd best to play the 4 (Malone, Barkley). Same goes with Orlando, Dwight is the greates of this generation he probably is not even considered top 5 in Centers. LeBron has played both the 2 & 3 spot so depending on where you want to put him he may be the 3rd best shooting guards of all time (Jordan, Bryant) and I'm not sure where he would rank at the 3.

                        Not to mention the Spurs did this after already having Robinson on the team.

                        There is no need for a lot of back and forth here because for the most part I agree with you, but I'm just saying you can't discount the fact that they did have Duncan and prior to having Duncan they were never anything other than a very good team (Like the Pacers). As someone said draft Kieth Van Horn and I don't think the Spurs win one title let alone have the decade of excellent play that they have.
                        Yeah but do you think Duncan without all those rings gets to get called "the best power forward of all times"? if SA doesn't put a great team around him I don't think he gets called that.

                        I also expect Howard and Lebron to be at least top five of all times in something.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          Yeah but do you think Duncan without all those rings gets to get called "the best power forward of all times"? if SA doesn't put a great team around him I don't think he gets called that.

                          I also expect Howard and Lebron to be at least top five of all times in something.
                          LeBron for sure but it's going to be very hard for Dwight to get up there.

                          Wilt
                          Shaq
                          Hakeem
                          Russell
                          Robinson
                          Ewing

                          That's six right there that I don't think he will be better than.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            LeBron for sure but it's going to be very hard for Dwight to get up there.

                            Wilt
                            Shaq
                            Hakeem
                            Russell
                            Robinson
                            Jabbar
                            Ewing

                            That's right 7 there that I don't think he will be better than.
                            Fixed

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              I disagreed with much of your front office criticisms in recent years, but I agree 100% that this was a giant snoozer of an off-season for the Pacers. We had the opportunity to at least *attempt* to make a splash, but the only improvements we made were changing up the bench a bit. Maybe we succeed in bringing a big name here, maybe we don't. But it would have been nice to have *tried*. This was the year to do it as we won't have that opportunity with cap space in the near future.

                              It cannot be denied that several good teams in the East made better improvements to their teams than the Pacers. The world champs got Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis who you know will come in handy with some buckets in the playoffs. The Knicks lost Lin, but Felton, Kidd, and Camby aren't exactly scraps. That team is much more talented than the Pacers. Their only question is chemistry. Boston also made some very nice improvements to their team and if they are healthy, they will be an even better team than the one that almost went to the Finals. The Nets got better with the Johnson deal and if Lopez is healthy all year then they will be tough. The Sixers added freaking Bynum in a steal of a trade. God only knows how deadly he'll be as the focal point of an offense.

                              Teams all over the East made far better improvements to their teams than the Pacers did. We will have a tough time winning a playoff series.
                              I don't see New Yorks moves as an improvement. Lin is much more effective than Kidd or Felton (who was incredibly terrible last season) and though Camby is a good backup center he's pushing 40.

                              Philly improved, but they did lose their leading scorer and best defender and playmaker, alot rides on huge improvements to Holiday and Turner.

                              Boston is better, no doubt, but they have questions too regarding age. Nets will be a decent team, we'll see how good in the long run, they don't have a very good front court, especially defensively, but improved for sure.

                              The East has improved, but the Pacers should be better on the bench and due to West being healthy all year long, not to mention refinements and leaps in PG and Hibberts games. Though the East is better, it isn't like we've been leapfrogged imo. What was true last season is still true. Miami is better than we are, and i'd take Boston over us, for at least next season. Anyone else in the East though? I think we can give a series to, and, stand at least a 50/50 chance of beating in the playoffs.
                              Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                                I disagreed with much of your front office criticisms in recent years, but I agree 100% that this was a giant snoozer of an off-season for the Pacers. We had the opportunity to at least *attempt* to make a splash, but the only improvements we made were changing up the bench a bit. Maybe we succeed in bringing a big name here, maybe we don't. But it would have been nice to have *tried*. This was the year to do it as we won't have that opportunity with cap space in the near future.

                                It cannot be denied that several good teams in the East made better improvements to their teams than the Pacers. The world champs got Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis who you know will come in handy with some buckets in the playoffs. The Knicks lost Lin, but Felton, Kidd, and Camby aren't exactly scraps. That team is much more talented than the Pacers. Their only question is chemistry. Boston also made some very nice improvements to their team and if they are healthy, they will be an even better team than the one that almost went to the Finals. The Nets got better with the Johnson deal and if Lopez is healthy all year then they will be tough. The Sixers added freaking Bynum in a steal of a trade. God only knows how deadly he'll be as the focal point of an offense.

                                Teams all over the East made far better improvements to their teams than the Pacers did. We will have a tough time winning a playoff series.
                                What makes certain posters so certain that the Pacers didbt Try to make a big splash? There were countless number of FA who we were linked to being interested in. But even so, just because something isn't made public doesn't mean we didn't necessarily make an attempt to sign someone.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X