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

Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

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

  • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

    If JO had the maturity he has now with the skill he had then, then yes a JO/Hibbert combo would be amazing. I really think it is hard to judge, but to dismiss West because he wasn't the skilled specimen that JO is negating too much of the game of basketball itself.

    If skill was so vital then we would have won it all with JO/Artest/SJax. When I think of the Kings I think of Webber and Bibby. But with Vlade they would not been elite. Players like West and Vlade make teams. Players like JO make edited highlight reels.

    And I honestly don't think that JO was dominant on the block.

    Comment


    • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

      Which player would you choose?

      Player A:
      21pts 10rebs 48fg% 2.6blks 2asts 37mpg
      Player B:
      21pts 9rebs 48fg% 1.3blk 2asts 37mpg

      EDIT: I'll also throw in their career averages with the teams they played with through their prime years.
      Player A in 8 seasons:
      18.6pts 9.6rebs 45.8fg% 2.4blks 2asts 35mpg
      Player B in 8 seasons:
      16pts 7.2rebs 49fg% 1blk 2asts 32mpg

      I'll agree that JO was better, but JO in his prime is pretty much DWest in his prime. The differences are minimal and the differences over their prime years as a collective is also 1 made shot and 2 rebounds per game, so not a whole lot there either.
      Last edited by Since86; 12-27-2013, 10:58 AM.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        I view Walsh like Bill Polian. Bill Polian drafted a ton of great players for a long time and won a Super Bowl, but his style eventually got stale and he found himself fired. Like Polian, Walsh was very good for a long time, but he simply lost his touch.

        Walsh's downfall in Indiana started after the ECF loss to the Knicks in 1999. To put it bluntly, he overreacted to it. After watching young and brash players like Camby, Houston, and Spree bulldoze the Pacers, he thought that the wave of the future was young athletic teams as opposed to older veteran teams. Trading Antonio Davis for a draft pick was proof that Walsh no longer had much faith in that team contending for a championship. I don't care if Antonio wanted to start. You simply don't trade away a player that important for a draft pick if you are trying to win a championship. Of course, we all know what happened after the Antonio trade. The Pacers went on to their only NBA Finals appearance and played Shaq. Now I'm not going to sit here and say that Antonio would have made the difference against one of the most dominant players in history at his peak, but it sure as hell wouldn't have hurt. I'm sure the guys on the Pacers wouldn't have complained about Antonio giving them some relief by guarding Shaq. Even though he wouldn't have stopped Shaq, he could have at least helped the other guys stay more fresh on the other end of the court. Just an awful trade for a team that should have still been trying to win the championship.
        The Walsh vs. Polian comparison is a really good one. 90% of all franchises in either league would have loved to have had either guy running the front office but in the end each one failed to completely capitolize on the opportunities at hand. Polian only winning one Super Bowl over 15-years with arguably the best QB in history is under performing and Walsh not finding a way to win one championship during MJ's hiatus, during MJ's last year (where the Bulls were obviously vulnerable) & during the strike year was also disappointing.

        In my mind Walsh's missteps began with an over reation to the loss in the 94 ECF to the Knicks. That 94 team was a younger, just as talented and more balanced version of the Knicks. Walsh spent the next several years chasing offensive players (Jackson, Pierce, Eddie Johnson, Rose, Mullin etc. etc.) and ignored the fact that this team beat people (and could have beat people for years to come) with elite defense & rebounding. By 1998 the team had to out execute and out shoot other teams in order to win. They were no longer built for the playoffs and rebounding & defense were secondary. IMO it cost them trips to the finals in 98 & 99 and maybe even 1995.

        An often overlooked effect of the Davis for Bender trade is that had Davis been on that 2000 team Croshere would have never gotten the minutes he did that season and very likely would not have been given his albatross of a deal. Does Brad Miller stay a Pacer if Croshere isn't riding the bench and earning 8 MIL a year in 04 & 05?

        Comment


        • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

          Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
          If JO had the maturity he has now with the skill he had then, then yes a JO/Hibbert combo would be amazing. I really think it is hard to judge, but to dismiss West because he wasn't the skilled specimen that JO is negating too much of the game of basketball itself.

          If skill was so vital then we would have won it all with JO/Artest/SJax. When I think of the Kings I think of Webber and Bibby. But with Vlade they would not been elite. Players like West and Vlade make teams. Players like JO make edited highlight reels.

          And I honestly don't think that JO was dominant on the block.
          West,CP3,Chandler and Peja didn't do much either and they are considered by many "team players" or "team chemistry" kind of guys, I believe that this "team chemistry" "team player" thing is overrated.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            West,CP3,Chandler and Peja didn't do much either and they are considered by many "team players" or "team chemistry" kind of guys, I believe that this "team chemistry" "team player" thing is overrated.
            What rating was actually given, to argue that it was OVERrated? If we don't know how much rating someone is giving chemistry, how can we decide if it's underrated, overrated, or rated just right?
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              When it comes to Walsh vs Bird I feel like there is a lot of cherry picking and assumptions made with 0 evidence.
              I don't think that's entirely true.

              From that lengthy pacers.com Bird interview:


              After Donnie left, the first thing I did was trade Jermaine O'Neal. I thought that was huge. Even getting the 17th pick really helped us. I didn't really worry about that. I knew it was going to be difficult. The day that Donnie left, I said, 'This is going to be my biggest challenge, to make all the decisions and get the type of team that I want here. It's going to be tough.' People love to go after individuals they don't think can get the job done. I was no different. You have to be tough and you have to be focused and driven. My goal was to get a team here in Indianapolis that fans could be proud of.

              and...

              No question. There's so many, I don't want to get into them. There's so many. Early on, I was behind Donnie and we talked everything out. But being the sole decision-maker is a whole different ballgame. It's like being an assistant coach and moving up to head coach. But I had a plan and we stuck with it, and it worked. And we got lucky. I ain't going to say I knew we was going to get Roy. The day I walked down to the draft room (in 2010), it was between Ed Davis and Paul George. My owner kept asking me who I was taking, and I was still debating. But when it came down to it, you had to take the young, talented guy with a lot of length. If you watched Paul George in college it was scary, because he shot a lot of air balls, he took a lot of bad shots, he turned the ball over at a high rate. But he's long, athletic, he shot 90 percent from the foul line and he can guard.

              http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/q-and-larry-bird-2013

              -------------------------------------

              The bolded sentences make it pretty reasonable to connect the dots and assume that Bird was basically a "Vice President" to Walsh from 03-08. Bird even labels himself as being an "assistant coach" during that time period. Just like a Vice President of the US gets put in charge of special projects, Bird as the VP of the team oversaw certain aspects of the operation. All accounts say that Saras was his guy. And I think it's fair to assume that the draft was his project since most of the reports at the time always connected him to running the draft. These are the first round picks in the Bird-Walsh era:

              04: Davis Harrison (29). -Didn't workout, but it's hard to get too upset over the last pick in the first round.
              05: Danny Granger (17) - obviously hit that one out of the park.
              06: Shawne Williams (17) - obviously should have taken Rondo, but it's important to point out that aside from Rondo, most of the players taken after Williams were scrubs too.
              07: No first round pick

              By 08, Walsh was gone. Most of the reports said that Bird was in charge of the draft while Walsh was still here, correct? Those three first round picks aren't too bad overall. You can't complain about David Harrison because he was the last pick in the first round. Granger was obviously a home run at 17. Williams was a bust at 17. So in two picks at 17, we hit one out of the park and struck out on the other. I think most teams would take that track record when you're drafting as late as 17.

              Anyway, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that Walsh still was steering the overall direction of the team. You have the quotes from Bird in the above article. You have the fact that Mullin said he only talked to Walsh during the Murphy-Dun trade. When it came to doing trades and keeping certain players, Walsh had the final say. I find it hard to believe that Bird immediately trading JO after Walsh left was just some sort of coincidence. It's clear that Bird never cared for JO too much. OTOH, JO was Walsh's guy. He traded DD for him and later signed him to a huge contract. JO was the centerpiece of Walsh's post-Finals rebuilding efforts. JO was always going to be around as long as Walsh was still here.

              Of course, it's most important to look at the circumstances. Bird was hired in 2003. The team had a 61 win 03-04 season, so we obviously didn't have to do much during the year. Then we signed SJax in 2004. I'll be fair and give them 50-50 accountability for that. Of course, we all know that the wheels fell off with the brawl and aftermath. But who was mostly responsible for building that team? Walsh. JO, Artest, and Tinsley were all brought in before Bird was part of the picture. So even if one wants to give Bird blame for 03-08, let's look at what you're blaming him for. You're blaming him as a "co-Chief" for not putting out a fire that he didn't even start. It wasn't an ideal way for one to start their GM career. The team was forced to make constant reactionary moves and take bad contracts to get rid of bad seeds. No, we were never going to be able to see what Bird was made of as GM until he was the clear cut CEO who was 100% accountable for all of the shots. That's what we got starting in 2008, and I don't think it's a coincidence at all that things began to immediately began to get better. Bird was just better suited for the job at that point.
              Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-27-2013, 11:09 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                What rating was actually given, to argue that it was OVERrated? If we don't know how much rating someone is giving chemistry, how can we decide if it's underrated, overrated, or rated just right?
                Yes rating was given go back few pages to see it, west is supposed to be better than JO because his fake "team chemistry" rating is higher than JO's.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Yes rating was given go back few pages to see it, west is supposed to be better than JO because his fake "team chemistry" rating is higher than JO's.
                  I've read the entire thread, and I must have missed it. Can you quote it? I see Peck said that West is a better fit with this team because of team chemistry, but not that he's a better player.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                    There was actually a deeper breakdown on another site that showed JO got his jump shot blocked 6% of the time which was double the league average. Couple his generally mediocre shooting percentage with the blocked shots and it points to some effeciency issues. I'm not a JO hater but always felt that for a guy with his size and athleticism he needed to be more effecient offensively. Especially since he was often considered an MVP level "build your team around this guy" type of talent.
                    Interesting. I'm not trying to defend JO or anything like that. I just don't think that getting your shot blocked is much more important than simply missing a shot. When Roy forces a miss I don't care particularly if he blocked the shot or forced the opponent to give so much arc to the ball that it never had a chance of going in. That's what I was trying to say.

                    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                    Roy has similar issues. He gets his shot blocked even more than JO and also leans toward a historically mediocre FG% for a big man. The difference is that Roy is really our 3rd option offensively and blocked shots numbers aside is IMO a more dependable post defender & rim protector. Certainly part of that is because JO played a lot of his defensive minutes at the 4 vs. the 5.
                    Roy's issue is different. He is getting blocked when he attempts to attack the rim. Roy is not an athletic big that will dunk over people. Other bigs can "outjump" him when he attacks the rim and they can block his shot there. However, he rarely gets blocked when he is posting up which is good since that's Roy's go-to move.

                    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                    As far as Dwight Howard goes. He has issues getting his shot blocked because he has turrible footwork and turrible post-up fundamentals. If he is truly working with McHale like they say he is it will do wonders for his offensive game. I always thought JO had pretty good feet and a pretty good post game but just lacked that "something" that allowed him to finish at a high rate.
                    Yeah, I agree with that. Howard's problem is mostly his footwork at the post. He is doing well in that aspect recently, though.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Yes rating was given go back few pages to see it, west is supposed to be better than JO because his fake "team chemistry" rating is higher than JO's.
                      Major Cold clarified that it's just his opinion. He didn't say that it's the be all end all of this discussion. I'll quote his reply:

                      Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                      From my own opinion. Sorry I should have said that. Even though, within context, it seemed obvious. It is hard to determine the value of chemistry, even though we are seeing the value now.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        I don't think it's a coincidence that when Bird was officially and unquestionably in charge that a JO trade finally happened. He might've wanted out as bad as Bird wanted him out but unlike Walsh there was no way Bird would try and keep him.
                        You're right. It's not a coincidence because the dismantling had already begun by Walsh. By the time Bird was officially the head honcho in 2008, JO, Tinsley, and David Harrison were the only players left that had any real role in the brawl. Not too long after JO was traded , Bird let David Harrison know he wouldn't be re-signed by the Pacers. Finally, to completely separate the team from the Brawl, Tinsley was told not to report to Training Camp and was forced to sit out the entire season. Shawne Williams was also traded to the Dallas Mavericks during the training camp of 2008.

                        At least JO never got into any off the court trouble during his time here and he did a lot for the community of Indianapolis. Why there is so much hatred for JO is still baffling to me. He wasn't perfect and he made mistakes (he complained way to much to the officials, IMO) but if you're really looking at the entire situation with a wide angled lens instead of zooming in on one player, it's easy to see that he was given the responsibility to try and lead a bunch of selfish teammates who kept getting into trouble off the court and on the court. While he was doing what he was supposed to do off and on the court, his teammates were:

                        *Missing and arriving late to practices (multiple knuckelheads)
                        *missing team flights (Artest)
                        *getting suspended for bumping Pat Riley, breaking cameras in MSG and pictures at Conseco Fieldhouse (Artest)
                        *getting benched in favor of Kenny Anderson for insubordination (Tinsley)
                        *arguing with the coach during a game and getting benched (Artest, Tinsley, Jackson on different occasions)
                        *hitting Rip Hamilton in the face and earning a flagrant foul during game 6 of the ECF with the game tied at 59-59 and less than four minutes to play - http://www.nba.com/games/20040601/INDDET/recap.html (Artest)
                        *Going into the stands, inciting a riot (JO never left the floor), getting yourself and other players into legal trouble, and ruining a promising season (Artest and Jackson)
                        *Stabbing the team in the back that loyally stood by you by complaining about needing time off to promote an album and then demanding a trade. (Artest)
                        *Were getting into shootouts with thugs outside a strip club (Tinsley and Jackson)
                        *Getting into a spat outside a night club, then at a gas station, and then being chased through downtown while being shot at (Tinsley)
                        *Getting suspended by the team for being arrested on a charge of possession of marijuana and associating with a known murderer at large (Shawne Williams)
                        *Getting suspended by the NBA for marijuana use during the season (Harrison)
                        *Getting suspended by the team for destroying property in the Spurs guest locker room (Harrison)

                        These are just the confirmed incidents that we know happened. Who knows what other types of buffoonery took place that the media never got wind of. I'd love for Reggie Miller to come out with another book about this. I suspect that Tinsley was an instigator in a lot of the beef between Artest and JO and that a lot of his reported sinus infections were really hangovers from a rumored drinking problem but there's not enough evidence to prove it.

                        I was a huge JO supporter and to some degree I still am but trading him and getting Roy Hibbert in the process was a great trade and exactly what the team needed to do. However, I think he was placed in an unenviable position of trying to lead a team full of rogues that refused to be lead.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          So the point goes from how Bird may be would have or maybe wouldn't have even drafted players like Shawne Williams, to how he wouldn't have re-signed them to bigger salaries. Just because Bird hasn't done it, doesn't mean he won't do it. Bird has done a great job, and he's pretty much hit a home run at every opportunity for the past couple seasons he's been in charge, but to try and make the argument that he won't in the future when the situation can very easily change doesn't hold a whole lot of weight.
                          I'm not making the argument Bird won't. I'm making the argument about what Walsh DID.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            I'm not making the argument Bird won't. I'm making the argument about what Walsh DID.
                            It's a little bit deeper than that.

                            Originally posted by Bball View Post
                            Unlike Walsh, Bird has shown a propensity for moving on with players who underperform. Walsh, OTOH, just wrote them a bigger check.
                            That's insinuating that Bird won't re-sign players who have underperformed going forward in the future, like Walsh. If your sole argument is that Walsh did, and we don't know what Bird will do, then that's a unclear way of making that arugment.

                            EDIT: And V, I'm still waiting on that post where someone overvalued chemistry.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              So you are describing not only West but guys like Diaw, Boozer and others, sure JO didn't pass the ball as much and that was probably because he was pretty damn good one on one guy, not many people were able to stop him.

                              Trust me I get the feeling but again if I'm comparing players JO kicks West's a** on everything but passing(note that Im not going to argue stats that one is better from 10feets and the other one is better from 10.5feets).

                              Actually thinking about JO and Hibbert together in their prime would be similar as having Aldridge and Hibbert together in other words one of the best PF/C combos the NBA has ever seen.
                              Actually alot of people were able to stop him which is why he has a below average TS% for a Center. Part of me doesn't blame JO because the coach in large part misused him IMO and by that I mean we used a ton of isolations that were predicatable and easy to double team which was something that JO struggled with. He wasn't affective at passing out of them either but I still think JO never fully developed his game because he should of been a PF and not a Center like the Pacers made him.

                              David West however is used properly to maximize the team overall. He gives the team much needed spacing for the wings and it also allows Hibbert to go one on one. This is more or less me saying that JO chemistry problem had probably less to do with him and more of how the coach was using him that hurt team chemistry as a whole.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Odd Thoughts: Tis the season

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                And V, I'm still waiting on that post where someone overvalued chemistry.
                                Is it really that difficult to browse thru the thread yourself ??

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X