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

Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

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

  • #91
    Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    From what I always understood clearly defined positions like POINT guard and SHOOTING guard didn't come around until about 30 years or so, give or take. Before then, there were guards, forwards, and posts. This is why guys like Jerry West, Big O, etc were good scorers but also averaged high assist numbers as well, or why guys like Elgin Baylor (who was 6-5) was a double double machine. Players tended to just play to having clearly defined "roles"
    2 guards, 2 forwards, 1 center.

    The idea of "point guard", and "power forward" in particular were new in the early 1980s.

    To the topic at hand...

    I don't see how a guy that was never better than third-team all-NBA in a single season is in the top-three of all time. Or even the top-five.

    Due to longevity and a reputation for clutch play over the second half of his career, I can see him in the top-ten, but not much higher than that.

    Mitch may not have lasted 18 years, but nearly everybody would have taken Mitch Richmond in his prime over Reggie in his prime.

    Reggie had sustained 'really-goodness', but did not reach as high of a level as, say, Glen Rice during his Charlotte years.

    And I like Reggie and appreciate all he did for Indiana, but some of these opinions are based on love and not an objective analysis of the position.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
      And I like Reggie and appreciate all he did for Indiana, but some of these opinions are based on love and not an objective analysis of the position.
      How do you explain the 45,000+ voters in the 2008 ESPN poll (a poll neither coinciding with his retirement nor with his HOF induction, so no extra publicity-driven "Reggie love") that placed him solidly in the top 10 all-time at his position? Unless you are (rightfully) criticizing those who have him in the top 3-4. He belongs in the top 10 though.

      http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank...02/versionId/1

      Best career does not equal best peak of career either. David Thompson as a SG and Bernard King as a SF are not up there in the top 5 at their positions for the shining few seasons when they reached that level.

      Final point: regular season awards and regular season performance are only part of the equation, but they are all that goes into all-NBA teams and MVP voting.
      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 09-07-2012, 04:53 PM.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        How do you explain the 45,000+ voters in the 2008 ESPN poll (a poll neither coinciding with his retirement nor with his HOF induction, so no extra publicity-driven "Reggie love") that placed him solidly in the top 10 all-time at his position?

        http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/rank...02/versionId/1
        I'll buy-top ten. But not top-three or top-five. I don't know that I can name ten that had better careers overall, but I can name quite a few that had higher peaks.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          2 guards, 2 forwards, 1 center.

          The idea of "point guard", and "power forward" in particular were new in the early 1980s.

          To the topic at hand...

          I don't see how a guy that was never better than third-team all-NBA in a single season is in the top-three of all time. Or even the top-five.

          Due to longevity and a reputation for clutch play over the second half of his career, I can see him in the top-ten, but not much higher than that.

          Mitch may not have lasted 18 years, but nearly everybody would have taken Mitch Richmond in his prime over Reggie in his prime.

          Reggie had sustained 'really-goodness', but did not reach as high of a level as, say, Glen Rice during his Charlotte years.

          And I like Reggie and appreciate all he did for Indiana, but some of these opinions are based on love and not an objective analysis of the position.
          Uhhhh no. Mitch and Glen, both fine players, never carried a team, accomplished anything remotely close to Reggie in the playoffs, did not sustain as long, and neither is in the Hall. The most defining event to me was Reggie's last game, where the opposing coach called a timeout to give a player a standing ovation. You just don't see that, ever. He was massively respected by his peers in the league, moreso than it would appear by fans. I'll go with the opinion of his peers over dissenters on a messageboard. Reggie in Hall --- Mitch and Glen not. 'Nuff said.

          One season does not a HoF'er make. If that was the case, jermaine O'Neal is a shoo in, since he arguably had one season that was debatably better than any of Reggie's, statistically. Throw Granger in there, too, since he had a higher statistical "peak".

          Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2
          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-07-2012, 07:50 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


          • #95
            Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

            The HOF is about many things, but a few peaks don't get you there. Miller's career had a lot to say, but the fear he struck in opponents at crunch time is why he's in the HOF. His main value was that there wasn't a player who could stop him from getting his shot off. Hit or miss. Reggie is special because of that skill and just how highly valued it is in the important games....which is all that matters in the NBA....

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

              Reggie.
              God.




              Everyone else. **** you, rational thinking. Dude's my hero.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                Uhhhh no. Mitch and Glen, both fine players, never carried a team, accomplished anything remotely close to Reggie in the playoffs, did not sustain as long, and neither is in the Hall. The most defining event to me was Reggie's last game, where the opposing coach called a timeout to give a player a standing ovation. You just don't see that, ever. He was massively respected by his peers in the league, moreso than it would appear by fans. I'll go with the opinion of his peers over dissenters on a messageboard. Reggie in Hall --- Mitch and Glen not. 'Nuff said.

                One season does not a HoF'er make. If that was the case, jermaine O'Neal is a shoo in, since he arguably had one season that was debatably better than any of Reggie's, statistically. Throw Granger in there, too, since he had a higher statistical "peak".

                Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

                I'm not disputing any of that.

                But I'm not putting Reggie in my top-five as I'd absolutely take the 1993 version of Petrovic over any vintage of Reggie, the 1994 version of Sprewell (and probably also the 1999 version of Sprewell) over any vintage of Reggie, the 1996-98 version of Glen Rice over any vintage of Reggie, and the 1996-98 version of Mitch Richmond over any version of Reggie.

                Reggie had a better overall career than every one of them. Probably wouldn't have had a better career than Drazen but we'll never know.

                But during Reggie's peak years of 1994-1998, he was typically around the fourth or fifth best SG in the league. (There was also this Jordan dude playing most of those seasons as well.)

                We're celebrating Reggie's longevity and overall career with his vote into the Hall of Fame. He gave us a lot of memories. Its an interesting situation, because his overall career, due to longevity, means he's remembered more fondly than guys that routinely were better than him -- even at his own peak -- but faded away faster.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                  You'd take those guys because they had 1 statistical year arguably (key word: arguably) better than any of Reggies? I'd never build around any of those guys... none of them were a player you'd "build a team around", whereas Reggie was most certainly the player that Indy built around. He's in a different category than all of those players... it's not even a contest. Once a player is determined to be a true cornerstone of a franchise, capable of withstanding the pressure of anchoring a team for over a decade deep into the playoffs every year, they enter a whole new level. Can you seriously say Glen Rice, Mitch Richmond, SPREWELL, of all people, could legitimately anchor a decade of deep playoff runs? None of those guys are in the Hall and they all retired before Reggie. Their peaks hardly equalled Reggie's best "scoring" years, which arguably weren't even his best overall years, and none of them lasted as long. I don't even know how this is equatable. Stating I'm biased because I'm a Pacer fan is hardly an argument, I watch these games, lol... I know the good players in this league. Statistically, Granger blows Reggie out of the water in a lot of categories, and would I state that he's anywhere close to Reggie's ability? Hell.... no.

                  None of those guys were ever "routinely" better than Reggie... ever. A few had a season here and there where they averaged more points, but not a single one ever lifted their teams into deep playoff runs on his shoulders alone, elevated his game by 5+ ppg and performed as excellent as Reggie in the playoffs --- ever. This is just a silly argument.

                  It's like you have a blinder or bias to Reggie's true value. There are large stretches of games in the playoffs and regular season where it was obvious Reggie was the best player on the floor, for either team, including those guys you mentioned. Just because those guys had 1 season where they mighta topped Reggie in ppg doesn't make them a better overall player. As an example, would I place his 1990 season above his 1998 season, even though he averaged 6 ppg more? I wouldn't. It's not about ppg.

                  Reggie is firmly in that Malone/Stockton/Barkley/Ewing realm of players.... tremendous cornerstone players who had they not peaked during the Jordan years, would have each equally had a chance to win a ring. Glen Rice? Sprewell? What? To even mention the train-wreck that was Sprewell in the same sentence as Reggie is an insult.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-11-2012, 03:45 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


                  • #99
                    Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                    I agree with you Kid. There are players who put up great stats, then there are great players. Usually great players put up great stats, but often good players also put up great stats. That is why I mostly ignore direct statistical comparisons when comparing players. A player like Reggie putting up 18ppg can dominate the game, while a player like Carter can put up 21ppg, and is just another player on the floor who just happens to put up a lot of points.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                      Uhhhh no. Mitch and Glen, both fine players, never carried a team, accomplished anything remotely close to Reggie in the playoffs, did not sustain as long, and neither is in the Hall. The most defining event to me was Reggie's last game, where the opposing coach called a timeout to give a player a standing ovation. You just don't see that, ever. He was massively respected by his peers in the league, moreso than it would appear by fans. I'll go with the opinion of his peers over dissenters on a messageboard. Reggie in Hall --- Mitch and Glen not. 'Nuff said.

                      One season does not a HoF'er make. If that was the case, jermaine O'Neal is a shoo in, since he arguably had one season that was debatably better than any of Reggie's, statistically. Throw Granger in there, too, since he had a higher statistical "peak".

                      Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2
                      Anyone who compares Reggie's regular season performance to any other SG is totally missing what made him a HOFer. The thing that set Reggie apart was his ability to come up big in the playoffs. Reggie averaged 21.1 ppg in the playoffs. Before his role deminished during his last 3 seasons, his average was a gaudy 24 ppg - nearly 5 points more than what he averaged during the regular season!

                      Mitch Richmond never made any noise in the playoffs or in the clutch. A lot of that is due to his poor level of talent around him but his play during the playoffs never matched his during the season production.

                      Tracy McGrady was one of the best regular season SGs of all-time. He couldn't get his teams, even with a 3-1 lead with Orlando or an in his prime Yao Ming and Steve Francis, to the 2nd round.

                      Glenn Rice was a great scorer for about 2-3 years. Ultimately he fizzled out due to injuries even though he was a very good player that torched the Pacers a few times during the 2000 Finals.

                      Reggie was clutch. All of the NBA greats agree. That's what made him famous, hence he is in the Hall of Fame.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                        Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                        Anyone who compares Reggie's regular season performance to any other SG is totally missing what made him a HOFer. The thing that set Reggie apart was his ability to come up big in the playoffs. Reggie averaged 21.1 ppg in the playoffs. Before his role deminished during his last 3 seasons, his average was a gaudy 24 ppg - nearly 5 points more than what he averaged during the regular season!

                        Mitch Richmond never made any noise in the playoffs or in the clutch. A lot of that is due to his poor level of talent around him but his play during the playoffs never matched his during the season production.

                        Tracy McGrady was one of the best regular season SGs of all-time. He couldn't get his teams, even with a 3-1 lead with Orlando or an in his prime Yao Ming and Steve Francis, to the 2nd round.

                        Glenn Rice was a great scorer for about 2-3 years. Ultimately he fizzled out due to injuries even though he was a very good player that torched the Pacers a few times during the 2000 Finals.

                        Reggie was clutch. All of the NBA greats agree. That's what made him famous, hence he is in the Hall of Fame.

                        Right. Reggie won playoff games and series with more regularity than players that were better than him. Those playoff wins were team accomplishments, not individual accomplishments. Just as Russell's championships don't make him a better player than Wilt just because Russell had a better supporting cast of HoFers. Reggie had longevity and playoff wins and thus he's remembered more favorably than players that were better than him. That's why I think top-ten is appopriate but not top-three or top-five.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          Right. Reggie won playoff games and series with more regularity than players that were better than him. Those playoff wins were team accomplishments, not individual accomplishments. Just as Russell's championships don't make him a better player than Wilt just because Russell had a better supporting cast of HoFers. Reggie had longevity and playoff wins and thus he's remembered more favorably than players that were better than him. That's why I think top-ten is appopriate but not top-three or top-five.
                          As long as you're not putting Mitch Richmond or Glen Rice ahead of Reggie, I agree. BTW, Reggie was the leading scorer on the 1996 Olympics team playing ahead of Mitch.

                          I'll also add one more caveat. I remember at least a dozen games where Smits and McKey were no-shows and Reggie had to dig them out of holes. So while playoff wins is a team accomplishment, Reggie was the one that hit a record 320 3-pointers during the playoffs that propelled the Pacers to many of those close wins.
                          Last edited by naptownmenace; 09-12-2012, 05:16 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                            Right. I'm using them as examples of many players that had higher peaks, but less longevity, than Reggie. Their careers weren't better because they faded faster, but if Reggie faded just as fast as they did we wouldn't be having conversations about Reggie in the Hall either.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • Re: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                              Right. I'm using them as examples of many players that had higher peaks, but less longevity, than Reggie. Their careers weren't better because they faded faster, but if Reggie faded just as fast as they did we wouldn't be having conversations about Reggie in the Hall either.
                              Disagree. He played 18 years, even if you cut it short 6 whole years he still played 12 years and MOST of his huge playoff performances happened within that time span. I'm just not buying your argument at all man, lol... And you're selling him short on his actual longevity, which in of itself is impressive. He didn't make it into the Hall because he played 18 years. You really seem to have forgotten what this guy did. Go YouTube the man, and take a trip down memory lane, he was a beast of a player for a looooong time.
                              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: Where does Reggie Miller rank in your opinion on the all time shooting guard list?

                                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                                Right. Reggie won playoff games and series with more regularity than players that were better than him.
                                This just makes no sense. If he was regularly winning playoff games over a span of a decade and a half over all these "better" players, do you really start to believe he was "worse" than the players he's beating regularly? It's not like Reggie's teams remained static during his run. His team changed constantly, and Reggie was ALWAYS the face/leader of that team, going up against the likes of Jordan and not being embarrassed at all. He wasn't "worse" than those guys. He was.... better. He made his teams better, he willed them to be better. He was almost like Peyton, where the level of work he put in, the professionalism, the example he set... set the tone for the entire team. Every player on his teams had their best years when they played with him. Every one. They all went off and generally had worse production. And at the end of the game, he was so damn good, that he could say "alright guys, we got here together, now give me the ball and I'll show you how to win this thing" and he did it.

                                You're just not going anywhere with this argument, he was an all-time great player, whether you think it or not.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X